Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-02-03
Louis E. Haag Not at Prison;
None Here KnOJUs Where He Is
NOTICE FROM
ATLANTA PEN
STOPS PAPER
Indianapolis Authorities Have
No Record of Parole
Being Granted.
NOT ADDRESS, 1T SAYS

Louis E. Haag, who was sentenced
last June by the Federal Court to
spend eighteen months in the
United States prison is no longer at
the Atlanta penitentiary, according
a report made to the Times today by
the United States postal authorities.
Where Louis E. Haag is and why
he is not serving the sentence i'm
posed by Judge A. B. Anderson for
conspiracy to transport liquor Tile
gally into the state Of Indiana is a
subject of much conjecture in In
dianapolis.
Federal authorities in Indianapolis
have not been apprised Of his release
from prison.
Michael J. Ryan, counsel for him in
the Federal and State courts, declared
that he did not know anything about
his release.
Inquiry at his stores in Indianapolis
brought the reply that he was not there.
The only indmation Of an explanation
Of his failure to be at the Federal
prison came from a close friend OF the
family, who declared that Haag expect
ed to be paroled by the prison board
at the earliest possible moment
ENTERED AT PRISON
JULY 81 1920.
Louis and julius Haag were entered
at the Federal prison at Atlanta, July 81,
to serve eighteen months sentence. They
became eligible to parole Feb. 1, 1921 and
the first intimation publicly received in
this city Of their release came in the form
of the following notice to the Times,
pOstmarked Atlanta, Ca, Feb. 1, 1921, at
7 p. m:
The Indianapolis Daily Times ad-
dressed to Louis E. Haag, P. o. Box
No. 1888, Atlanta, Ga, should be dis
continued. he is no longer at this
address. Respectfully, z. G. HOplkin.
correspondence clerk.
Federal authorities have not been in
formed that either of the Haags have
been paroled or that the Federal pardon
hoard intended to grant them clemency.
Both Judge Anderson and United States
( District Attorney Frederick Van Nuys
/ expressed surprise at the notice received
by the Times from the prison authors
ties.
The Haags were sentenced by Judge
Anderson on June 3d. 1920. In addition
to the eighteen months in prison they
were fined $4,000 each. The total fnes
and costs assessed against both amount
to S21, 1887. none Of which has been paid.
RECEIVES HINT OF
CLEMENCY EFFORT.
Early in July Mr.. Van Nuys received
a hint that an effort was being made to
get the punishment lifted from the
Haags even before they began serving
their time. On July 10, Mr. Van Nuys
said, a letter protesting against any
clemency was sent to the attorney gen.
eral at Washington. On October Mr..
Van Nuys received q letter from the at
torney generals office stating that ths
Haags had applied for a parole and ask
ing for further particulars in the case.
lengthy statement of the conspiracy to
violate the Reed amendment On which
the Haags were convicted and q vigoT-
Gus protest against any reduction OF the
fine or prison sentence of each was sent
to the attorney general on Nov. 20. Mr..
Van Nuys said.
II am greatly surprised to learn that
the Haags may have been parOled, be-
cause I have had absolutely no notice
that paroles have been granted" said
Mr.. Van Nuys.
CUSTOM USUALLY
OBSERVED SET OUT.
1t is customary for the Department Of
Justice to notify the district attorney
when clemency is about to be granted a
prisoner prosecuted by him.
When the Haags return to indianapolis
they will face sentences of thirty days
on the State Penal Farm and fines OF
$500 each and costs, assessed by a jury
in Marion County Criminal Court on
Oct %, 1919. The jury found them
guilty of operating a blind tiger In a
case presided over by Judge VIII NJ.
Sparks of Rush Circuit Court
An appeal from this conviction was
taken to the Supreme Court Of Indiana
December, 1919, but was dismissed Oct
., 1920. According to Prosecuting A3-
torney William P. Evans this automat-
ically made 1t legally necessary that the
Haags be committed to the Indiana State
Farm to serve the thirty day sentence
There will be no recommendation for
a parole from this office" he said.
RELATIVE IN ROLE
OF FORECAsTER.
More than a month ago a rela tive Of
the Haags in this city announced that
they would be released from the Federal
prison the first of February, but refused
to divulge the source of information.
Attempts to verify the report through
Federal officers revealed that an appeal
for a parole made by the Haags had not
been handled in the usual manner by the
Department of Justice but that a special
agent had been sent to Indianapolis to
interview citizens relative to the petition
and to make a special report on the char
acter of the Haags.
This special report was sent directly
to the Department of Justice and so far
IS is known was never submitted to any
official of the Government in Indiana