Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1928-08-31
The Harland Renort.

! Elimination of mandatory jail sem
! fences for third offense speeding, first
offense driving while intoxicated and
second of1ense reckless driving are
recommended by Traffic Director
William H. Harland in his first annual
report. In making these radical
recommendations MIR. Harland is
actuated by two motives. to secure more
convictions in traffic cases and to re-
move the inequity of a compulsory jail
sentence for a motoriSt convicted of
minor speeding three times during his
lifetime AS the regulation stands at
present a driver may be arrested on
three occasions in a period of twenty
years for speeding. yet on the third
offense the judge is compelled to send
him to Jail. Mr. Harland recommends
that the third offense speeding should
be confined to period of one year and
that the courts be given discretion IN
the severity of sentences for first
offense of driving while intoxicated, and
second offenSe of reckless driving.
In respect to the failure to secure
convictions under the present system,
MIR. Harlsnd says:
Owing to the compulsory jail sem
fences for convictions of driving while
intoxicated and second offcnse reckless
driving nearly all offenders arrested on
these charges ask for jury trial and en-
perience has shown that it Is difilcult
to secure convictions on account of
the compulsory Jail sentence. 1t is be-
iieved that the ends of justice would be
served If heavy fines were imposed for
the first offense and permits Cancelled,
as now provided by law. and that the
present maximum penalty apply only
10 repeaters.
In cases where no one is injured and
only the question of automobile speed
is involved. a time limit should GER
tainly be put on offenses. Mr.. Harland
will doubtless find hearty public support
for this recommendation. Whether the
limit should be placed at one year is
moot question and one that will have
to be thoroughly thrashed out by traff1c
authorities and the courts. 1t is patent
however, that there can be no fairness
in falling a man for exceeding the speed
limit by two or three miles on three
occasions over long period of time.
Mr.. Harlsnd's other recommendations
will probably evoke some difference of
opinion. washingtonians have suffered
too much at the hands Of reckless and
drunken drivers to look unanimously
with favor upon plan to lessen the
penalties for grave motor offenses, The
courts, however. have shown a COM
mendable attitude in their handling of
fragrant traffic cases during the past
few months, and regardless Of whether
Director Harlsnds recommendations
are put into effect no mercy Is likely
TO be shown TO those who are placed in
dock for violations of the major reguIa-
tons.
Naturally, the reason back of the
recommendations. to secure greater
number OF convictions. will have decided
weight in the consideration OF the
problem Convictions even on lesser
penalties are much more TO be desired
than acquittals because the maximum
penalties. In the opinion Of the judge
or jury. are too severe. Neither public
nor jury desires jail sentence for the
first ofTense of driving while drunk II
the tipsy motorist Is involved In no
accident, but is arrested for staggering
from his automobile as he parks at the
curb. Neither is there any desire for a
compulsory Jail sentence for the second
offense reckless driving II no damage
has been done In either case. There
will be no disagreement that In cases
such as these heavy fine and revoca-
ton OF permit will suffice.
In none OF MT Harland's recon-
nendstioBs Is ne attempting TO make
the way easier for the yioiator Of Tegu-
lations The public should clearly
understand this phase OF the report. He
| Is, however. attempting to wipe out
/ incquities In the traffic code, to fine tho
man Who heretofore has gotten of en-
/ tirely because Of sympathy and To serve
| best the ends OF justice In the National
/ Capital,
L. L..