, 1922-12-07

basic judicial organization. to meet
the auEmented work which has re-
suited from the ev~er-iLcreasinE com
plexity OF government was suggest.
ed by Attorney General nauEherty n
hts annau report. rad public here
today. on h operations % the de
partment o. Justice. Noting tina. So.
712 criminal cases were begun in the
lHst fiscal year. the report declared
the point was being approached
where a revampinE OF the machinery
uHed in this work Is Inevitable
Adoption Of come method by which
the government could retain alter.
neys who have special knowledge OF
government matters In addition 10
legal training was one % the several
suggestions advanced by Mr.. DauEa.
erty. The recently enacted iegisia.
ton providing additional Judges
should help the situation. he said, but
probably VIII not entirely remedy Il.
The failure Of local selt-goven-
ment in pas OF the country. .ths
report said. results IN the misistenee
Of the cit,zo'is Of those communities
tina. the federal government perform
AAa AAAtAAAlA III WHICH NhE AFEIA k0Nf
eminent has failed. and frequently IN
matters where there is concurrent
jurisdiction between the state and
federal government It Is difficult to
establish a poiiey as 10 the extent to
which the federal government should
take jurisdiction. This Is peculiarly
true Of offenses arising under -he fed.
ersl reserve act. the narcotic act, tho
volstead act. IND the postal frauds
act. There has been an effort on
the part OF this division during this
fiscal year 70 have the United States
attorneys sne the state prosecuting
attorneys meet from time to time Tor
tho purpose OF cooperation. Evidence
Of the benefits Of these meetings is
overwhelming.
The existing procedure for the re.
movai os a defendant to tho ~jurisiic-
tion where TIE crime was committed
IS unduly cumbersome and results in
unjustlfied delay and injustice. Under
such procedure h trial is frequently
delayed from one to .wo years."
Announcement was made in tho re
port OF the desire Of the department
TO return or 10 recommend for re
turn" all property seized under he
trading with the enemy act in eases
where the owners come within the
enabling section paragraph ar of
the act.
THE question in almost all Of these
CASEY Mr.. Daughery reported, is
either Of title or Of citizenship. For
instance, tho Allen Property Custo-
dian has seized n now holds the
property Of estates. which r quite
complicated. by reason OF the rights
Of United States citizens, alleged TO
Ilnve been acquired subsequent OF the
war. oftentlmes the question be-
comes one OF the validity Of an as
slgnmen. or the acquisition Of title
prior to the war. and in this connec-
ton II is exceedingly difficult At
times TO distinguish between the pre-
war ownership OF h claimant and a
simple claim or Indebtedness, and 1t
is then necessary TO have h ques-
fion submitted 10 the courts.
at has alsb been necessary to send
REPRESENTATIVES of the department %
Ilurope to secure evidence from those
familiar with certain cases. Tn evil
dence was material In the cons dera-
tlon and trial of these cases AMI IN
tins determination of CERTAIN claims
SO that a fair and impartial hearing
could be given to citizens n claim
rnts. In fact. t was usually at the
reques. OF litigants n claimants
that these representatives were sent
abroad, and while such Investigations
and the taking OF such evidence serv'
ed TO accommodate claimants, 1t like
wise protected the government in the
administration of the trusts created
over these properties
at may be expected that the fu-
ture viii sec any number Of interpre-
tatlons by the courts of the provis'
ions of section . and of the question
as TO whether the litigant is a proper
party claimant under this section.
frhe questions OF law arising are
many. and while In general. It may
be said that the provisions of sec
ton Q do not conflict. Il must be
recognized that there exist some e1-
ceedlngly close questions as to which
of the provisions OF section 9 control
in certain cases. The greater ma
5ority of the presidents established
nv the courts during the past year
have been favorable to the govern
ment."
The report made no comment on
the railroad injunction case and mere
~ noted the legal situation arising out
- fho nrnhf6fffOU