Evening star., 1926-12-01

imagine a prosecution for fraud by
S.ate officials where the identical act
complained of would give grounds for
Federal prosecution for using the
mails with intent to defraud. ANY act
which is an offense against both a law
Of the United States and law of a
State constitutes two offenses. That
seems to be the view of the Supreme
Court. 1t is IL view in which most
persons will see coincidence between
the law and common sense" Recog-
nizing that 'for law-enforcing pur.
ernment are two separate sovereign
ties" the Grand Rapids Press sug
gests that "counterfeiters have long
been subject to punishment by each
for the same act, which constitutes
two separate offenses. There is a
clear distinction" continues the Press.
between act and 'offense.' OF course,
in practice. this privilege of double
punishment Is seldom applied-per-
haps not applied enough. At any rate,
whether any great use of the double
Jeopardy power is contemplated or
not, it is a good thing to have il
standing ready for emergencies"
Voicing a very different opinion
widely held, the St. Paul Pioneer
Press declares that plainly America
was changing more things than 1t was
aware when it adopted the eighteenth
amendment. The prohibition amend
ment has put certain degree Of
doubt on all the bill of rights, espe-
cially the guaranty against unlawful
searches and seizures" continues the
when the Constitution was framed
that the Federal Government would
take responsibility for preserving
peace and public order locally, which
was left to the States"
The New York Times advises that
'the vets in the next Congress should
press legislation prohibiting Federal
prosecution for any act for which pun
ishment has been imposed under State
prohibition laws. Meanwhile" adds
the Times, each fresh reminder Of
,ow much liberty has been thrown
way in an attempt to repeal custom
and to enact the morality Of the Anti
Saloon League is helpful for the re-
turn of common sense and something
at least of earlier freedom"
xx
1.-THE Jurisdiction of State and Ma
ton. which so often has resulted in a
| farce, appears in this case to result
in an iniquity." asserts the Milwaukee
1 Journal. while the view held by the
St. Louis Post-Dispatch is that 'the
people have only one defense against
such an outrage. and that Is to repeal
one Of the laws placing them In double
| jeopardy" The Chattanooga Times
remarks that "one wonders what the
old-time patriots who refused to accept
the Constitution until these guaran-
ties in the bill Of rights were adopted
would be saying to this latterday
4, project of Furnishing citizens twice for
| the same offense-the offense that in
their day was not an offense but per
haps virtue"
| Quoting from the reasoning in favor
of the two prosecutions, the Trenton
| Evening Times feels that this to
the layman appears to be hair.split-
ting" while the Asheville Times sug.
gests that 'in effect this must strike
the convicted defendant as double
jeopardy with a vengeance. rsRArd.
less of the distinctions drawn by the
courts" The Roanoke World. News,
admitting that ut may be good law"
I insists that at is not a practice in
accordance with fundamental princi-
pies. with the intention Of the trainers
of the Constitution or the bill of rights
or with sound public policy"
The Philadelphia Public Ledger
holds that while "the courts may not
see any double jeopardy in a double
prosecution. the public may. and the
= elimination Of State laws will be the
simplest way OF preventing it,"