Transfer Talk

It was no pleasure last week for Secretary of the Treasury Andrew William Mellon to drive to the Capitol and recommend, before the House Committee on Executive Expenditures, the transfer of Prohibition enforcement from his department to the Department of Justice. What was painful to him was not the prospect of parting with Prohibition--he had had nine years of it--but the instinctive discomfort of a shy man appearing before a Congressional committee on a controversial question.

Thirty minutes later as he drove down Capitol Hill he was feeling very much better because he had not only talked transfer effectively but, more important, had successfully withstood the hectoring of Wets who sought to evoke his personal opinion on Prohibition.

Carefully Mr. Mellon sat down in the witness chair, at his elbow Assistant Secretary Lowman, behind him Prohibition Commissioner James Maurice Doran. Before the Committee was the enforcement transfer bill written by Dry Representative William Williamson of Rapid City, S. Dak. (Coolidge 1927 summer resort), homesteader, rural editor, lawyer, title abstractor. Major issue of the transfer is: where to put industrial alcohol control? The Williamson bill weasles this question, provides for joint control by the Treasury and Justice Departments.

Secretary Mellon put down his small thin cigar, unfolded a paper, read in a small voice:

". . . Placing Prohibition enforcement in the [Treasury's] Bureau of Internal Revenue was an illogical choice. . . . Prohibition is unrelated to the duties of the Treasury Department. . . . There is no reason why the Treasury should issue permits for the manufacture of industrial alcohol. It is equally clear that these duties do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice. . . . [But] since they are now being performed by the Treasury, there is no adequate reason for removing them, unless it can be shown that they logically belong elsewhere. . . . I recommend the enactment of the proposed legislation."

Mr. Mellon picked up his tiny cigar, puffed it nervously. He would have liked to depart at that point. But Congressmen do not often get a chance to cross-question the Secretary of the Treasury and when they do they make the most of it.

Question: Was the Bureau of Prohibition under your direction efficient?

Mellon: It doesn't seem to me to be a question of efficiency. It is a question of legislation before us.

Question: Do you think your bureau did everything possible to enforce the law?

Mellon: We have made every effort to carry out our responsibility.

Question: Do you believe, then, the Prohibition Law can be enforced?

Mellon: Prohibition is a very controversial subject. It is not a matter of my personal opinion at all.

Assistant Attorney General Youngquist in charge of Prohibition was unable to tell why responsibility for alcohol permits was to be divided between the Justice and Treasury departments. Attorney General Mitchell appeared, blanketed the Williamson Bill with his approval, opposed administration by his department of industrial alcohol, promised lawful law enforcement. From another source he made known that under him no more wires would be tapped to secure evidence, even though the Supreme Court had sanctioned this practice. Declared the Justice Department's Chief Inspector J. Edgar Hoover:

"We have a very definite rule that any employe engaged in wiretapping will be dismissed. While it may not be illegal, I think it is unethical."

But District Attorney Mitchell had other more interesting things to say last week, things which amazed even professional Drys. In a private letter which he made public without revealing the name of the addressee, he declared that it would hereafter be his resolute intention to refuse appointments as U. S. Attorneys, Assistant U. S. Attorneys or U. S. Marshals to men who touched drink or even so much as disbelieved in the Prohibition act. Said he: "I believe that no man who makes a practice of drinking intoxicating liquor, or who has definite or pronounced views in opposition to Prohibition, belongs, during this Administration, in any past having directly to do with the prosecution of cases under the national Prohibition act."

Nor was this all--he stated that his agents were already confidentially inquiring into the liquor habits and attitude of numerous applicants for these offices. The Mitchell announcement started a controversial din in the Prohibition corridors.

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