Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1920-03-06
Making Ruthless Arrests

INDIGNATION has been aroused in COM
1 munit! after community the unwar-
ranted arrest of supposed violators OF the
prohibition laws. This indignation does not
proceed solely from those who have been
caught within the dragnet or whose property
has been seized. 1t proceeds from sources
not even remotely associated with the il
legal manufacture sale consumption Of
outlawed beverages.
The practice against which the most vio-
lent resentment is felt is that Of arrcsting
supposed voators of the law without the
formality OF swearing out warrants. To do
this as every lawyer and most laymen know.
is contrary to the accepted rule OF juris
prudence. Warrants should be taken out
before and not after the arrests are made.
There is no authority Of law for the ar
rest of any person on mere suspicion, the
seizure OF private property as evidence of
crime without warrants issued by a duly
authorized agency Of the law II a distiler
or bootlegger or a blockade runner should
be caught red-harded by the agents Of the
government; il he should be found actually
committing an overt act. OF course, his ar
rest could and should be made i'll the alb
sencc of Il warrant. The same rule in this
particular applies as to Il policeman who
rests man in the act Of committing murder
or OF making away with stolen goods.
But TO carry on carefully organized raids
against individuals, to mako wholesale ar
rests and to effect the seizure of valuable
private property withuu' first arming them
selves with warrant IS a sort OF campaign
ing by prohibition ~ mt. which is not only
unlawful, but which will increase the vol
ume of reaction nov felt against the whole
prohibition movement
Senator knutc Nelson. chairman Of the
Senate Judiciary Committee and joint author
Of the prohibition enforcement act, has laid
down the rule regarding unwarranted ar
rests in clear AMI forcclul fashion. Neither
the prohibition law nor any other that
know Of" the veteran legislator says gives
any ono authority to arrest OH suspicion and
without warrant. 1t is everywhere rccog-
niHcd III Jurisprudence that only in an cmcr-
gcncy. when officer OF the law secs a
crime committed or about to be committed,
rs there justification for arrest without the
swearing out OF warrant. And when such
an arrest is made the warrant must be
promptly obtained to hold the prisoner.
The illustration is this" the Senator
added: IF you, as q marshal, constable or
policeman. sec man about to commit muir
dor. you do not have TO wait for Il warrant
to arrest him. You may arrest and get the
warrant afterward at the station house. But
If you are going to arrest on suspicion that
Il man has committed Il crime, you must
have warrant before you take him into
custody. ! know of nothing in the prohibit
ton law or any other statute authorizing
tho Selling Of a man on suspicion that he
is violating the law unless YOU have IL war
rant and charge has been preferred"
1t might be stated ia this connection that
Internal Revenue Com missioner Ropor takes
the same general view of the law, and while
his iield agents disroEarting this rule,
tho policy OF tho government is in direct limo
with the Interpretation which Senator Nelson
md othcr authorities have given. Mr.. Roper
ONES il to his own adminst ration to require
hi agents in tho field to adhere rigidly to
the law