Evening star., 1935-05-01

assistant, but that, at the present
time, according to Mr.. Garnett's own
admission, he regards the work so
lightly that he has turned 1t over to
a police officer, who is performing
clerical duties in his Office, and who
is not q member Of the bar Is. T. p.
279). The subcommittee does not con-
slider this to be proper method OF
enforcing the non-support statute.
8. Wrong on procedure in bad
check cases.-It IS the established
practice in the District Of Columbia
to conduct prosecutions under the
bad-check law by way Of information
in the Police Court, and the fol-
lowing Is q further indication Of Mr.
Garnetts lack of familiarity with
local practice and procedure:
@. You do not indict for bad checks
do you, sir?
Mr.. Garnett-Oh, yes: we do indict
for bad checks.
@. You do indict for bad checks?
Mr.. Garnett-Yes.
@. Under the bad-check law?
Mr.. Garnett-Yes: If the amount
involved is enough to be felony.
Q. What is the statutory amount'
Mr.. Garnett-ss5 Is. T. p. 28O).
Mr.. Garnett-I have never prose-
cuted a bad-check case In my life.
@. You are familiar with the bad
check statute, are you not?
Mr.. Garnett-Oh, not particularly
familiar; I am not familiar with all
the criminal laws In effect in the Dis
trict of Columbia Is. T. p. 28D.
Bad-Check Law.
The so-called "bad-check law" Is
contained in the act Of July !, 1922
(42 Stat. 800. C. 273), and Is found
in the Code of the District Of Colum-
bia, complete to March 4, 1929, on
page 81, section 264:
ANY person within the District oi
Columbia who, with intent to de-
fraud, shall make, draw, utter, or de-
liver any check, draft, or order fol
the payment Of money upon any bank
or other depository, knowing at the
time of such making, drawing, utter
ing. or delivering that the maker oil
drawer has not sufficient funds in OF
credit with such bank or other de-
pository for the payment of such
check, draft, or order in full upor
its presentation, shall be guilty of 6
misdemeanor and punishable by i'm
prisonment for not more than one
year, or be fined not more than 81 ,000
or both"
10. Not familiar with criminal law
@. What crimes are not sub
ject to probation in the District o!
Columbia felonies?
Mr.. Garnett-I think murder and
treason. If there are any others,
do not know. Committee counsel Is
more familiar with the criminal laws
in the District than am .. IS
T. p. 300)
II. Does not know what house
breaking statute covers.
@. When you speak of housebreak-
ing, sir, perhaps the committee would
be interested in knowing just what
our HOUSEKEEPING statute covers.
Mr.. Garnett-Now. you would have
to give me the statute. You are more
familiar with that than I am, am
sure. IS. T. p. 301)
IL. Only three gambling convictions
out of "A cases.
@. Well. now, you say there were
81 indictments and % ignoramuses
In gambling cases?
Mr.. Garnett-Yes, sir.
@. That makes a total Of "a cases
presented to the grand jury?
Mr.. Garnet-That Is right.
@. And out of that group there
have been three convictions aftel
trial?
Mr.. Garnett-Yes, sir.
@. Five = pleas of guilty?
Mr.. Garnett-That is right, twt
verdicts of not guilty.
@. So that there have been three
actual cases won out Of IA?
Mr.. Garnett-By trial by jury: yes
Is. T. p. 322, 323)
13. Gamblers under bond gambl
while awaiting trial.
@. These gamblers that are await