New Britain herald., 1923-07-28
SAY DRY LAW WAR
 BY ARMY IS WRONG
Govt. Legal Experts Claim It Is
 Against Law

Washington, July 2S.-Legal ex perts of the government Investigating the legality of using the army and navy to aid in the enforcement oi prohibition are convinced that exist ing law is squarely against such use and that the traditions and senti' ments of the American people are opposed to such a practice.
 An opinion on the subject has been prepared by Mrs. Mabel Walker Willebrandt, assistant attorney gen. eral, in charge of prohibition mat ters, and on President Harding's re- turn Attorney General Daugherty will discuss the opinion with him. Sec retary Denby has already asserted that it is doubtful if precedents exist tor such use of the military and naval forces, and It is said that MT Daugherty takes the same ground.
 The legal experts have found that one of the earliest pronouncements on the subject was the declaration of James Madison in The Federalist that "the Constitution does not gay standing army should be called out to eexcute the laws. The militia ought to be called out to suppress smugglers. Ought this to be, desired If riot should happen the militia are proper to quell 1t, to prevent resort to another. mode" .... ....
 Tn the midst of the Civil war, con gress enacted the following law, which Is now a part of the criminal code: -.... .-...
 Every officer of the arm yor navy, or other person in the civil, military or naval service of the United States who orders, brings, keeps or has un- der his authority to control any troops or armed men at any place where general or special election is held in any state unless enemies of the United States shall be fined not more than s5,o00 and imprisoned not more than five years" ..
 The so-called anti-posse comitatus act which was first contained in the army appropriation act of June IS, 1878 provided that:
 From and after passage of this act 1t shall not be lawful to employ any part of the army of the United States as posse comitatus or other wise. for the purpose of executing the laws except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be ex- pressly authorized by the Constit 2 ton or by an act of congress. And any person wilfully violating the pro- vision of this section shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor and on con- Viction thereof shall be punished by fines not exceeding s1o,oo0 or impris- onment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment"
 During the debate on the measure 1t was declared that the American spirit would not tolerate the possl- bility of employing the army for the execution of the law" Quotations were read from the recommendations of General Halleck as follows:
 Tt may be proper to remark in this place that I have been assured by federal civil officers that the use Of troops in executing judicial pro- cess and enforcing the revenue and other civil laws, seems to increase rather than diminish the necessity of resorting to such force in civil mat ters. xxx It is therefore oues- ton well worthy of consid eration whether the military in civil matters should not be limited to a few well denned cases, such as riots and insur- rections, which cannot be suppressed py local and state authorities"