The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-07-27

pFiVatG homes or NtoDiie CiNiLcus a discharge.
 In his letter dlsmlssing Austin, Governor Kilby stated that he is compelled to take that action for the preservation of discipline among state officers, The following Is the complete letter of dismissal;
 Letter of Dismissal
 MT. c, W Austin, Chief Law En-
 forcement officer;
 Dear Sir: On the morning of July 22 l read in the morning papers of the searching of the homes of MT. A. r. Bush and MT. Henry Hall in the city of Mobile, by officers of the law enforcement department. immedi- ately sent for you and the attorney general.
 Upon calling your attention to the publication, you said substantial ly as follows;
 "'When ] read the paper this morning I immediately put in call for the Mobile men, had about concluded that we had better lot them go, but I thought | would see you before taking such action. l have warned them against such thing as this.
 You were then directed to send telegrams to Mobile suspending the officers engaged in the raids and directing them to report to Moht- gomery immediately.
 II then addressed to you letter instructine you in the event the re- norts concerning the invasion or these homes were found to be true to discharge the men who were en- gagged in making the raids
 The report signed by A w. crow and verified by G. A. Campbell and C. D. Moates and your two letters or Julv z3. one transmitting the report and the other replying to my letter of July 23 are before me.
 Report Misleading
 svrhe report of the officers is more in the nature of a defense of their right to search the homes than to throw light on the details or the searching It is indefinite ana mls- leading in many respects. Your let ter transmitting the report Is largeiy of the same character, indefinite ana misleading.
 q am writing this to you after having had an interview with eacn of the officers separately OH SIdIe dh IQiloN
 "These officers had reliable in formation that beer was being manp factured in all the above nam ee homes
 You do not give the source Of thf information. You call no names. My investigation discloses the fact tha' the information you indorsed a. reliable was given by woman. hei husband. and her daughter imme' diately after the searching or theiI home and the finding of wine, beer and apparatus for making beer IT their possession.
 Should Have Investigated
 Tt is clear in my mind from my investigation of the three officers that the information given by tht three apprehended persons was giver in anager and under circumstances which should have caused the off cers to investigate the cahracter ol the people accused before making raids on their homes. reasonable investigation would have shown tha' neither of these men was guilty ol any conduct which would even creatt the fantest suspicion that he hac manufactured or sold prohlpltee liquors or had any connection witt the illegal traffic in liauor.
 No one should object to the searcl of the home of either rich or poor prominent of obscure if that homo l has forfeited its privacy by being criminally used so as to menace the | public welfare but the fact that the owner might be wealthy or promi- l nent, poor or obscure does not Justits 1 it's search until exhaustive investiga' | ton discloses that 1t is necessary tt the protection of the public. | You say that after making thu search the officers found that thei information was well founded in tha both of the searched homes con l tained prohibited liquors and othe l evidence such as empty beer bottles l etc,
 4Is 1t possible that you, the chic | law enforcement officer of the state | thinks two bottles of beer found il ! one home and six bottles of black 1 berry wine found in the other fur nshed a foundation for the chargi I that beer was being manufactures l in those homes?
 "rhe statement of MT, Crow read | in part as follows.
 ".We rang the door bell which wa answered by young lady. We ex plained to her our mission. She in l vited us in, etc.
 | You accepted that statement.
 A Child of Ten
 My investigation disclosed tia the young lady was child o i' years of age, alone in the hou5e
 ITO speak Of a little girl of ID as young lady indicates an unmts- takable purpose on the pat or MT l Crow to mislead you. To ex,lain sucf .t | Ia cbI and t( accept her invitations ts enter the ! house and then to proceed to searct l was outrageous, ana vet you, after | making your investigation, approve | the action of the offeAders-
 | The remainder q your letter IS I an argument to sustain your conten ] tion that the search of the homes ol l the people under conditions similar te the cases in question is proper l function of yolr department and tha your contention should prevail Th' 1 law creating your department speci- | flcally provides that the work of thu { department shall be conducted 'un | der the direction of the governor. 1 This disagreement as to the proper 1 functions of the department of law ! enforcement renders effective co ! operation between this office and thu 1 department impossible with you a the chief law enforcement officer 1 For that reason alone I should fee justified in removing you, but ther is another reason for your remova 1 which perhaps is of even greater i'm |, ,portance. namely, insuborciination. | Declined to Dismiss Men
 T directed you, upon one condition | only to discharge the men engage, lin the raids at Mobile. That condition was met by your investigation, bu you flatly refused to obey my orders announcing your determination in tn following words:
 ".I therefore decline to dismis these men from service or he part.