Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-02-09

Years of agitation over the coal and
| iron police of Pennsylvania have re-
| suited in action by Gov Pinchot, under
| legislation enacted in previous ad-
ministration, which is a subject of COM
| ment in and out Of the State. There
| is agreement that police power should
| not be exercised under private au-
thority, but the needs Of the mining
| districts are conceded. The governor
plan to have public control, but to re-
quire the companies to pay the cost, Is
| a subject of debate.
Two measures passed by the LegiS-
1 lature of 1929 are viewed by the Phila-
delphia Evening Bulletin as leading up
| to the present situation. That paper
quotes former Gov. Fisher as having
stated that naither the MuSmanno bill
| nor the Mansfield bill met with his
views on the limitation that should be
placed on industrial policemen" but
that the latter measure, which was &C.
cepted, made it possible for "the curb
on abuse of power by these private
police in State uniform to be applied by
the regulatory board" set up by the
measure. Pointing out that agitation
against this body of police was one Of
the issues On which Gov. Pinchot took
definite stand in his campaign
through the mining districts, pledging
his efforts for the abolition of private
control over such police and the sub
Stitution of a system of State police,
with expense of maintenance borne by
the private. interests served" the Bull
letin concludes that "the mining prop
critics need adequate police protection,
which neither the existing State police
organization nor local police can pro-
vide" 1t emphasizes Gov. Fishers
promise that she would accomplish de-
sired restraints by the exercise of
executive power and the provision that,
If such regulation was not effective, he
could summary remove any or all of
the force"
THE system has been source of
controversy in the State for more than
go years." says the Pittsburgh Post
Gazette, believing that 'the public is
in no mood to accept further make
shifts on the subject" The Post
Gazette refers to the Musmanno bill,
which would have restricted the jur1s-
diction of the industrial police to the
property of their private employers, and
voices the judgment as to that measure:
ut seems to come closest to q fair So
luton of the problem. There is no
disposition to deny the companies the
right to protect their property by what
ever number of guards or watchmen
they may deem necessary, but there is
a vast difference between q guard who
can take effective action only on the
company's property and a police officer
with a rowing commission, who can
make arrests anywhere The Pitts
burgh paper offers the comment on
Gov. Pinchot's plan, with the doubt
that 1t would stand the test of con-
stitutionality" and emphasizing the
provision that it would compel the
companies desiring the service of the
police to reimburse the State for their
salaries. The men commissioned on
this basis would not have the same Sc
curity In their jobs that the regular
State trooper enjoys. They could hardly
be expected to forget the fact that they
might have to look elsewhere for a
livelihood If the companies involved
became dissatisfied and stopped paying
their salaries. The control which would
be exercised by reason of this arrange
ment would be less direct than under
the existing system, and to that extent