Evening star., 1922-04-02
ENFORCING PROHIBITION:
COSTAND RESULTS SHOWN
What People Are Getting in Way Of Con-
victionsfor Many Millions Appropriated
to Make Country Dry.
BY WILL r. KENNEDY.

forcement show in the way OF
actual convictions, fines paid
and men and women behind the
bars? What does the balance sheet
show? With the prohibition en-
forcement law in operation for more
than two years. and with appropria-
tions for this branch of the federal
service pending, the American people,
through their representatives in Con-
gress, want to know what they are
getting for the money in the way OF
real enforcement.
They have seen moving pictures
spectacular raids, the breaking up
of stills and the seizure of large
quantities of liquor by federal agents,
the dumping of contraband beverages
into sewers, etc. They are beginning
to wonder how much is "grandstand
play" as it has been called in Con-
gress. and how many persons out OF
the many thousands violating the law
are brought to the bar of justice and
actually punished.
COST OF PROHIBITION
IN ACTUAL CASH.
First on the balance sheet must
be written what prohibition has cost
the federal government. For the last
two years before the attempted en-
forcement of prohibition-that Is. be-
fore the prohibition amendment was
passed. Uncle Sam received in cold
cash nearly a half a billion dollars
a year in revenue on the manufacture
of liquors. In the fiscal year 1918 it
was s126. 200, 900 on fermented liquors
and s317.500.00O on spirits, or a total
of s443,5O0.O00. In 1919 it was $11s.-
100000 on fermented liquors and
S365,000,000 on spirits, total OF
s4S3,O0O,000. So much for loss of
revenue.
Now as regards the direct cost. The
appropriations to date on account OF
enforcement of the national prohibi-
ton act total s26.s5o.00o in the fol-
lowing acts: National prohibition act,
which became law October 2s. 1919,
S2,1Oo000; legislative, executive and
judicial appropriation act approved
May 20, 1920. $4.5o0.0oe; sundry civh
act, approved June 5. 1920. $1.oo9.00O;
second deficiency act, approved March
6, 1920, s1,O0o,o00; legislative. execu-
tive and judicial appropriation act.
approved March 8, 1921. $7,500.000
first deficiency act, 1921. approved
March 1, s1.4o0.000; second deficiency
act, 1921, approved June 1S. 100000;
Treasury Department appropriation
act, approved February II. 1922 {for
the fiscal year 1929, $s,250.00o.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
HAD LARGE LUMP SUM.
Besides that the Department of
Justice during the present fiscal year
had lump sum appropriation of ST.
100000 for enforcement of laws, and
out of that about 100000 was used
in 1921 and 1922 for prohibition en-
forcement The Justice Department
appropriation bill now pending in
Congress carries specific appropria-
tions of 100000 and sl5o.ooo. a total
Of $35O.0O0. for prohibition enforce
ment work and in addition to this it
is possible to use some also from
other funds allowed the Department
of Justice.
Still further. it must be remem-
bered tnat the entire court machinery
of the country is available for pro-
hibition litigation. and that the Gus
toms service and the coast guard do
a great deal Of prohibition enforce
ment work that does not show in the
appropriation figures.
FACTS AS TO CONVICTIONS
NOT UP TO DATE.
In comparison with this tremendous
cost, the statistics available at the
Department of Justice. showing what
has actually been done in punish
ment of offenders. are decidedly
meager and not up to date. The only
reliable figures are for the last fiscal
year-that is, up to July 1, 1921
which show 1898 civil cases and 29,114
criminal cases commenced, with 622
civil and 21,297 criminal cases termi-
mated. The judgments in the civil
cases totaled $64,735 and the fines in
the criminal cases $3,360.29s.
This pretty closely corresponds with
the statement made by Mrs. Mabel
Walker, assistant. attorney general
in charge of prohibition enforcement.
before the appropriations committee.
She said: I'm the fiscal year 1921
there was collected in civil cases and
fines arising under the national pro-
hibition act, s3,425.035. but there are
now pending over $4,000 national pro-
hibition act cases. as nearly as can
be approximated-fourt times as great
a number as were pending at the
same time year ago. If a specialist
handles them and they are prosecuted
vigorously" Mrs. Willebrandt pre-
diets, 'the revenue to the United
States Treasury from these sources
can easily be trebled at least out OF
pending cases."
The records of the Department Of
Justice shows court procedure started
in cases by months since June last, as
follows: June. 1886: July. 1.04s; Au-
gust, T60; September, 2.23s; October.
2,1ss; November. 3.044; December,
2,so1; January. 2.o75. and February,
1852. 1t is explained that the falling
of last summer was because the
courts were not in session and that
the drop in February Of this year is
because the returns are not complete,
from the district attorney.
LACK OF COOPERATION