Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1953-03-12
The McInerney Case

f1lgnly improper agreement, STAT
ing in part, "the fact remains that the
action taken by Department of Justice
official (the writer) to prevent the FBI
from investigating police brutality
cases in New York City was highly i'm
proper" This same allegation is re-
peated in an editorial entitled, "By
Any Name, 1t Was Wrong" in the
March 8, 1858, issue of The Sunday
Star with the qualification that the
FB1 was temporarily" barred from
investigating such cases.
That the editorial conclusions are
clearly wrong as to the improperly of
the procedure involved and based upon
misinformation may be readily eStab-
lished by reference to the repeated
statements of policy on this subject by
the six Attorneys General, including
Mr.. McGranery, since the civil rights
section was established in 1899. That
policy is to defer Federal investigation
and prosecution if there is probability
of local action. The most recent state
ment Of that policy is contained in the
Attorney Generals annual report for
1852, published on January 10, 1858:
In addition to the primary RESPONSE
bility of supervising and directing the
prosecution of violations of the civil
rights statutes, the section has con-
tinued it's policy of adjusting threat
ened deprivations of civil rights and
violations of Federal statutes with local
authorities wherever possible and of
deferring prosecution where the local
authorities take prompt remedial
action"
For an understanding of the delicate
and difficult problem, brief reference
should be made to the Federal juris-
diction aspect of the matter.
If local law enforcement officer
assaults or kills person while in
custody, the only jurisdiction the Fed
eral Government can exercise is through
the so-called Civil Rights Statute of
the 1870s, which makes it a INSIDE
meanor for any one, acting under color
of law, willfully to deprive a person of
Federal right.
Furthermore, it has been judicially
stated that the practical question is
whether the States should be relieved
from responsibility to bring their law
officers to book for acts of brutality
by allowing prosecutions in the Federal
courts for a relatively minor offense
carrying short sentence.
Since the creation of the civil rights
section, the Department of Justice has
attempted to solve the delicate prob
lens involved in accordance with the
foregoing limitations. Federal prosecu-
ton alone was never considered
solution. Far more important than the
number of State officials prosecuted
has been the program of education and
persuasion which has been continuously
carried on by the department to bring
about an increased sense of RESPONSE
bility in this entire field on the local
level.
Shortly after the civil rights section
in the Department of Justice was for
mally established in January, 1899,
Assistant Attorney General Brien Nc
Mahon, in explaining it's operation,
advised congressional subcommittee:
Il have worked out technique for
getting in touch with the Mayors of
cities in friendly way, or having the
district attorneys do that. We had a
recent case in Chicago and we had
one in Philadelphia also and by CO.
operating with the Mayors and calling
certain conditions to their attention,
we got excellent cooperation and ulti-
mately satisfactory results"
Informal consultation and collabora-
ton between Federal and State officials
have been successful in a great number
of cases and have demonstrated that
permanent results may be obtained by
such an approach. AS indicated, it
has always been the practice to hold
in allegiance Federal action, including
investigation when there is a reason
able likelihood of local action. In
hundreds and perhaps thousands of
such cases, the FBI investigation and
Federal prosecution have been deferred
or obviated entirely.
All United States attorneys have been
and still are operating under standing
instructions which read, in part, as
follows: "You are directed to employ
every facility available to your Offices
to secure the cooperation of State and
local officials to prevent and rectify
situations constituting a threat to the
federally secured civil rights. :"
A review of the Attorney Generals
annual reports will disclose the con-
tinuous existence of this policy.
The conclusion is unacceptable that it
has always been the policy and purpose
of the departments program in the
field of civil rights to encourage local
action and responsibility in preventing
and Furnishing essentially local viola
tons rather than introduce remote
Federal authority into local duties. -"
This is wise and salutary policy, in
my opinion, and no Attorney General
has ever departed from it. Thousands
of informal overtures and conferences
between department and local officials
have been held for the purpose of
achieving this end. The conference
held in New York City on July II, 1852,
between departmental and New York
City Police Department officials was
just another such meeting.
James M. McInerney.