Evening star., 1927-04-01
NEW PROHIBITION
LAW IS IN EFFECT
Large Number of Employees
Dropped, But Local Offices
Have No Changes.

The nationwide machinery for eir.
forcing prohibition today was set UP
on an entirely different alignment as
the new law reorganizing authority
and establishing bureau of prohibit
ton went into effect, with Roy A..
Haynes, as acting prohibition COM
missioner" A large number of per-
sons, including lawyers, prohibition
agents, and clerks in various cities
were dropped from the rolls, but the
headquarters here in Washington and
the local prohibition enforcement out
fit shifted over with no designations
or dismissals.
The Bureau of Customs, with Ernest
w, Camp as acting commissioner,
also was made effective under terms
of the new law. The customs organi-
zation, which had been under civil
service and continued under the same
personnel, with virtually no changes.
attracted much less public attention,
however, than the alterations in the
prohibition unit. Assistant Secretary
of the Treasury Andrews remained in
complete charge of both new bureaus.
Doubts Need of New Law?
At the same time 1t became known
that Mrs. Mabel Walker Willebrandt,
Assistant Attorney General, in charge
of prohibition prosecution, in outlining
her views on the legal phases of the
new law has expressed much doubt
as to the necessity for such a law and
has warned that the shifts in author
ity might in the future hold posi-
bility of HARM
Mrs. Willebrandt's opinion, it was
learned. had been expressed to Sena-
tors who had inquired concerning the
legal phases Of the bill when it was
pending. Transfer of authority from
the commissioner Of internal revenue
to the Secretary OF the Treasury was
part Of the bill singled out by Mrs.
Willebrandt for serious consideration.
In her estimation that paragraph
she said. ''is such an unknown guam
tity in the bill that 1t might cause an
evasion of centralized authority which
in my Judgment would be inimical to
proper law enforcement. do not
mean by that to say that it would be
inimical to law enforcement under the
present Secretary of the Treasury.
Fears for Future.
II feel quite certain he would cen.
tralize his authority in one man in
his organization, but If at a future
time there should be any Secretary of
the Treasury whose real desire it was
to evade or defeat prohibition enforce
ment without making it appear that
he was trying to do so, know of no
means better suited to that end than
the power II. r. 1929 gives him to
chop up responsibility into many diff.
ferent sections Of his organization"
Mrs. Willebrandt, continuing her
discussion OF the problem of responsi.
bility. said:
II understand the sole purpose of
the bill Is to centralize authority, and
l fail to see where any legislation to
do that is needed, as at the present
time the law places sole responsibility
in the Commissioner of Internal Re.
venue. Some Of the drys do not like
Commissioner Blair. This legislation
looks to me much like an effort to
lefsislate about personalities. That. in
my mind, is never a juStifiable posi-
ton for lawyers or legislators to take
/ certainly see no benefit from the
bill in its present form, and can see
in it the possibility OF harm.
Would Amend Statute.
AS have a number of times said
publicly. do not think we need any
more laws to enforce prohibition. The
national prohibition act as it stands
should be amended to increase the
possible penalties that Judge may,
Il ne deems necessary. administer for
~ n