Five & Ten Trouble

Having finished shadowboxing, the House Judiciary Committee last week was confronted with a tangible, important Prohibition problem. For weeks its members have been struggling with the legislative recommendations of the Wickersham Commission (TIME, Jan. 20). Particularly hard to deal with was the plan to empower U. S. commissioners to try minor Prohibition violations, to relieve congested district courts. To do this it was first necessary to define "minor and casual" offenses and remove them from the severe penalties of the Jones ("Five & Ten") Law.

To this end a bill was drafted which created a category of minor Prohibition offenses--single sales in small quantities by casual 'leggers. Such offenders, tried by commissioners, would receive a maximum penalty of six months in jail or a $500 fine.

Last week Attorney General William DeWitt Mitchell rushed to the defense of the Jones Law, vigorously opposed any such change in the classification of liquor violations. He pointed out the "inexactness of definition" in the House bill, explained that "a 'single sale' includes a barrel as well as a pint," warned that such a divison of Prohibition offenses would make it doubly hard for the U. S. to prosecute under the Jones Law. He feared that the effect of such a bill would be to reduce the whole scale of Prohibition penalties. Wrote he:

"Sufficient time has not elapsed to determine the efficacy of the increased penalties [in the Jones Law] and no change should be made until it ppears that they are ineffective. . . . It is apparent that for all practical purposes the Jones Law will be emasculated [by this bill] and the purpose that led to its enactment defeated."

Mr. Mitchell's potent objection to this bill--without which, it was conceded, machinery for juryless liquor trials can hardly be set up--served to squash the chances of any immediate legislation carrying out this prime recommendation of the Wickersham Commission. The Attorney General had strongly supported the Wickersham proposal when, as a theory, it was first presented. Now. when it was being shaped up into a legislative reality, he apparently saw its larger implications.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.