Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-01-23

Suggested special powers for United
States commissioners In disposinR of
casual and slight" attractions Of the
prohibition law are widely debated.
The charge that these powers would
interfere with the right Of trial by jury
Is rejected in many comments.
Reorganization Of the courts" warns
the Richmond News Leader, "shouid
not be legal revolution. If this be
avoided, we viii welcome q change
OF emphasis from the teeth to the
brains OF the law. The possible bene-
ntS OF temperance to the human race
are too great to be lost through lazy
failure to do the obvious thing" The
general advice Of the News Leader Is
that "a legal system that has stood In
It's essentials, for nearly q thousand
years, Suncing for the needs of an
ever-increasing Anglo-Saxon world.
must not be strapped overnight In order
70 enforce q law that may be transit
tory"
More vigorous is the contention of
the Denver Post that "the people Of
the United States look to their legis-
lative body to provide the enforcement
improvements asked by the Executive. {"
That paper adds: "Simplification Of
the mode Of prosecuting criminal cases
IN Federal courts is necessary, not
only for better enforcement of prohibi-
ton, but IN the interests of justice gen.
srauy. The courts now are hampered
by too much red tape. Under the
present system, every offender must
await indictment. No matter II he
wants TO plead guilty, his plea can't be
accepted until his case has been con-
sidered by q grand jury. That Is
ridiculous and time-killing procedure. !"
I'VE may expect" suggested the
Adrian Telegram" to hear congreSsion-
al orators picturtng such q process as
the wrecking Of the Constitution and
dire step that win drag US downward
INTO enslavement and .oppreSsion-de-
spite the fact that the offender, after
conviction before the commissioners.
would stu be allowed to have q new
trial before jury II he demanded it."
\ \ \ \
mr.. Understands statement In re-
ply to critics Of the proposal to deal
summarily with casual and slight in
fractions OF the prohibition law" saws
the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin.
serves two useful purposes. At once IL
clarifies the suggestion for coping with
the congestion Of the Federal courts
by minor prosecutions, and It reminds
the public that the former Attorney
General, who is chairman Of the COM
mission, and several of his colleagues
are able constitutional LAWYERS.
Chairman Wickersham will be sustained
oy every one who gives . second thought
70 the preliminary report in his denial
that the commission proposed to take
from any defendant the constitutional
right OF trial by jury. The rulings of
the United States Supreme Court recog-
nlSe that petty cases, either at common
law or under statutes, are triable with
out indictment or jury. The proposal
70 Try mlsdemeanants and minor Of
lenders before commissioner, with a
reservation Of the right of trial by fury,
II demanded, virtually assimilates Fed
eral practice with that of many States.
Elimination Of the grand fury
process and what amounts to waiver OF
Jury trial promise to be most effective
means OF relieving the congestion OF the
Federal courts and adding to the EN-
cheney OF all law enforcement, without
injury TO the rights, constitutional or
other, OF any individual"
We can have, what we have long
needed" advises the worcester Evening
Gazette. "a distinction In law cor.
responding to the distinction made by
public opinion, between organized VIC.
lators OF the law who corrupt ofIlcials.
employ gunner and wax wealthy
through crime. and those petty offend-
erS who are Of no more Importance
than the type which ordinarily figures
IN Police Court" The Baltimore sun
argGes: Since the Federal Govern
ment has decided 70 concern itself with
slight and casual offenses, formerly
left 70 the States, IL Is dificult TO see
any objection to this use Of commits
Stoners Is committing magistrates. with