Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1936-01-26

permits ofiicials Gin close pursuit Of q
person" to arrest him In another State
The ofilcer may then take the accused
before a Judge Of the State Of appre-
hension. If the Judge declares the
arrest lawful, the person may be re-
turned to the State In which the crime
was committed.
2. The uniform act on interstate
extradition, setting up complete pro-
cedure for extradition Of criminals
from one State to another, including
hearing by the examiner of the State
Of extradition.
8. The Indiana Illinois draft of an
act for supervision of out-of-State
PAROLES and probationers Qndorsed
4. The uniform act on removal of
witnesses from one State to another.
not more than 1000 miles distant
(approved).
The commission also made two rec
concentrations on which specific legis-
lation was not suggested.
l. Establishment OF bureaus Of
criminal Identification in every State.
2. Fingerprinting Of all persons
who obtain motor vehicle registration
certificates and drivers licenses.
In a report prepared by Henry w.
Toll, executive director of the Coun-
Gil Of State Governments, it Is pointed
out that extradition is only one as
pect of the interstate crime problem.
State Boundaries Protection.
Mr.. Toll says, in part: 1.-THE spec
tacular movements of the Dillinger
gang and of the followers of Alvin
Karpis demonstrate that State bound
aries are useful protection against ap-
prehension as we'll as against appear
ance before court. 1t is evident
that interstate police action is nee
essary. Criminals naturally discover
legal loopholes, and thus increase the
Before interstate compacts broke up
the practice they used boundary
waters, such as the Hudson River and
Lake Michigan, to evade apprehen-
sion. In this motor age, paved high
ways are proving even more helpful
than waterways to the fugitive from
justice"
Eight crime compacts-all dealing
with jurisdiction over territorial wa
ters-have been approved by Con-
gress. Only four, however, have been
put into force by State legislative
action. Mr.. Toll observes that, since
Congress rarely disapproves an inter-
state compact, it can be said that the
major difficulty against anti-crime
agreements hitherto has been the
obtaining of State action.
The Ashurst-Summers act. passed
by Congress in June. 1884, empowered
interstate agreements for Cooper
alive effort and mutual assistance in
the prevention Of crime and in the
enforcement Of their respective laws
and policies, and to establish such
agencies, joint or otherwise. as they
may deem desirable for making eff
fective such agreements and COM
pacts."
However, last year, with the exoep-
ton Of the Central State Parole Con-
ference. there was no agency ready
10 ADVANCE a compact designed to
unity State action against crime. New
ertheless, eight States-Kansas, Colo
RADIO, Indiana. Michigan, Minnesota.
New Mexico. Oregon and South Da-
kota-enacted legislation bearing on
the subject.
These laws varied widely. South
Dakota, for instance. passed a meas
ure which would permit officers of
other States full police powers within
its borders on a reciprocal basis. Sew
eral States authorized their Governors
OF special commissioners to enter into
compacts without requiring subse-
quent ratification by the Legislatures.
In New Mexico the attorney general
was appointed as a commissioner to
negotiate compacts which required
ratification by the Legislature. In
diana adopted compact for super
vision Of paroles, at the same time
authorizing the Governor to enter
into compacts
The Ohio Legislature set I'D a COM
mission of Is members to tackle all