Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-08-29

the Federal district courts Is not uni
versal. In many districts there is little
or no congestion. In some the calendar
is well crowded, but no worse than are
the calendars in many of the State
courts; and serious congestion exists In
only few districts, generally those that
contain large centers of population, like
New YORK City. There should be some
means Of relieving the judges of the
district courts of the many violations
Of lesser importance that they now must
deal with.
Jury Lists Made Carefully.
And speaking of courts, let me inter-
polate the remark that one of the most
gratifying developments in recent years
is the care with which jury lists are
made in many courts, State as well as
Federal, the reluctance OF judges to eX-
cuse jurors from service except for valid
reasons, and, above ALL the increasing
willingness on the part of the subStan-
tial men and women of the community
to take their share Of governmental re-
SponSibility by serving on the Jury.
But must return to the subject. We
now have our machine set up and in
operation-the bureau and its admin
istrators and agents and investigators;
the court and its judges, and the United
States attorneys and their assistants.
1t seems q rather formidable force
about 1,750 agents and Investigators, 81
United States attorneys and their as
sistants and about / trial judges. But
tt i, magnitude Of the task makes this
force pitifully inadequate. When the
1,750 agents and the 81 prosecuting
officers are distributed over an area
like ours, located among 123, 900 900 in
habitants-one agent to every 10000
the utter imposSibility OF making en-
forcement effective by that means alone
is at once apparent. No one ever meant,
and no one now expects, that enforce
ment should devolve upon the Federal
Government alone.
The eighteenth amendment Is unique,
In that it is q cooperative enterprise.
1t in terms prohibits the manufacture
and sale of intoxicating liquor, and
thereupon 1t declares that the Cangre )
and the several States shall have Goa
current power TO enforce this article by
appropriate legislation. With respect to
other matters Of government, the power
lies in the National or In the States, in
one or the other, but not in both. Here
power Is given to both. Each may enact
and enforce its own laws against traffic
in liquor. I am not going to advance
arguments, legal or otherwise, why it is
N
share of the burden of enforcement
except only to say that 1t looks to me
as though each Of the At States that
ratified the eighteenth amendment, and
so helped to put 1t into the Constitu-
ton, ought to act like good neighbors
to the rest Of the country and aid in
its enforcement as long as 1t remains
there. That such was their intention
Is clear from the fact that very soon
after the ratification Of the amendme-t
every State In tn Union had an en-
forcement act Of its own. All but i've
still have them.
States Have Machinery.
And the States have the machinery
ready to do the work. According to the
1920 census, there were about 10000
State peace ofi1cers-narshals, con-
stables, sherifTS and policemen. The
number Is probably near 175, 900 now,
as compared with q force Of 1,750 agents
in the Bureau Of Prohibition. When
ever repeat that number I marvel that
so few men should have accomplished
so much. To grind the grist carried TO
them by these State peace officers there
are more than $500 State and county
trial judges, not including justices of
the peace, OF whom there are no doubt
many thousands, as compared with the
ITO Federal trial judges. There is but
one prohibition agent to every 100 State
! peace officers. There is one Federal
trial judge to every 10 State and county
! judges, not to mention the thousands OF
| justices of the peace who have jurisdic-
ton to try minor criminal cases.
Nearly all of the States have their
own enforcement laws, some OF them