Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-01-26
OFFICIALS AGING
DRY LAW PUZZLE.
Attention Drawn to Spirited
Controversy Over Transfer
of Prohibition Unit.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

The controversy going on Just now
over the transfer of the prohibition
unit from the Treasury Department
to the Department of Justice is some
thing Of a puzzle. The drys want the
transfer because they say it will COM
bine in one department the duties OF
detection and prosecution. Secretary
Mellon has no objection to the change.
Yet the whole thing is a subject Of
inquiry because of the belief that some
thing more fundamental is involved
than a mere administrative change
The suspicion is growing that the drys
believe they can rid the Department
Of Justice OF political influence more
effectively than they could any other
department. As a matter of fact. the
Attorney General has conceded that he
is having trouble in getting the right
kind of men for the ONCE of United
States attorney.
Senator BOrah's Criticism.
Senator Borah of Idaho has criti-
machinery of the Government. In
asmuch as most United States at
torneys are recommended for office by
members of Congress, the Department
CT Justice finds 1t difficult to keen
out political influence.
1t sometimes happens that a United
States attorney having broad discre-
ttonary powers is approached by local
poIltlcal bosses who in turn are i'm
portant factors in keeping a member
OF Congress or Senator in Office.
In the series of articles written nv
Mrs. Mabel Walker Willebrandt recent
ly she spoke of the difficulty of enforce
ment of prohibition on account of
politics. She has been invited to
testify before the House committee on
expenditures in the executive DEPART
ments and it is expected that she win
be questioned closely as to why the
transfer from the Treasury Department
to the Department of Justice is being
proposed.
Mrs. Willebrandt Free Agent.
Had Mrs. Willebrandt stayed in the
Government service she would have
had charge of the entire prohibition
machinery. Now that she is out of
ONCE she is free to criticize the meth
DDS pursued. 1t is doubtful, however,
whether she will volunteer any COM
ments because it is known that there
was considerable friction from time to
time between the Treasury and the De-
partment of Justice when she was in
charge. The general complaint was that
the prohibition agents did not get
adequate evidence or did not get their
cases In such shape where conviction
could be obtained In many of the
instances where cases were dropped by
the Department of Justice criticism
was leveled at United States attorneys,
who, however, were not to blame be-
cause the evidence was not suficient.
The argument now is that by plac-
ing the prohibition unit in the Depart
ment of Justice better trained men win
be found. Theoretically the advantages
OF the combination have been stressed.
but there are opponents who believe
that the very existence of seperate
bureaus In different departments
operates as a check against abuse of
power.
President May Be Consulted.
Certainly with prohibition enforce
ment concentrated in single depart
ment the Attorney General and his
STAN viii bear complete responsibility
and the Attorney General In turn win
require the political cooperation of
the President himself In order to resist
the pressure that comes from local
political chieftainS whenever "tne
higher ups" behind the rum trafRc get
into trouble. In the getting of evidence.
however, the Department Of Justice will
be handicapped III the future as the
Treasury Department has been in the
past by the lack of aid from local police,
who, in turn, are subject to political
influence, either through mayors or
political bosses. Congress is very likely
to transfer the whole responsibility to
the Department of Justice, but not
until after there has been q debate
and a very interesting one-on what
are the weaknesses of the present
enforcement machinery.