About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

7 Fed. Juror 1 (1936)

handle is hein.journals/fjbfgj7 and id is 1 raw text is: January, 1936 Publication of The Federal Grand Jury Associaon Southern District of New York Vol. VII No. 1 TRADITION, NECESSITY, AND THE CRIME PROBLEM It has always been assumed in this country that crime is a local problem, something which is peculiarly within the jurisdiction of the various local authorities. Indeed, at one time it was contended that the criminal law was entirely outside of the powers conferred upon the Federal govern- ment by the Constitution. Although this view was rejected many years ago, the Federal government still plays only a small part in the detec- tion, apprehension, and prosecution of criminals, confining its activities to a comparatively limited field. The major part of the crimes com- mitted are still regarded as being exclusively within local jurisdiction. Whatever the reason for this view or assumption as a matter of consti- tutional or political theory, until quite recently it made no difference practically speaking. Crime was actu- ally local. Now, however, the situation has changed. Crime is no longer local. Improved methods of transportation and communication, the prevalence of crimes with interstate ramifica- tions (such as racketeering and kid- napping), the existence of powerful, highly organized groups of criminals, have all made the crime problem much broader. Today it is not enough to have an efficient crime-fighting or- ganization in State A, since the criminal may quickly escape into State B, or the crime might have been directed by someone whose headquarters are in State B. Drive the criminals out of New York City; - they will center somewhere else and continue their activities from that place. The solution of the crime problem in New York City will thus create a crime problem in another place. The problem is no longer one which can be approached from numer- ous local points of view; nor can it be met by thousands of county authori- ties. The problem is national and must be treated as such. That this is the only proper or effective approach is clearly shown by the results accom- plished by the Federal authorities since their entry into the field of crime suppression two or three years ago when, as a result of the investi- gation conducted by the United States Senate's Sub-Committee on Racket- eering, headed by Senator Royal S. Copeland, statutes were enacted giv- ing them broader authority than they had had. We are constantly hearing about the accomplishments of other coun- tries in suppressing crime. Statistics of the crime rates abroad are con- stantly being compared with the statistics for the United States. The question is constantly being asked, if they can do it, why can't the United States? A part of the answer may be provided by differences in geographi- cal, social and business conditions - but only a small part. The answer in large part can be found in the fact that in the United States alone, are the state line and the county line emphasized to such an extent that crime is regarded as a predomni- nantly local matter. A complete solution of the crime problem will not be realized until the traditional approach to it as a local problem has been overcome. For this a constitutional amendment will undoubtedly be necessary. But before any such amendment will be possible, traditional methods of thought, complete adherence to the traditional States-Rights Doctrine will have to become less rigid than they are today. Such a change, however, does notiinvolve or necessi- tate a complete abrogation of the States-Rights Doctrine. It involves a change only in connection with the question of enforcing the criminal law. But, even for this change, the country is probably not yet ready. The change will be possible only when public opinion is so thoroughly aroused that adherence to a tradi- tional theory will be outweighed by a realization of the serious conse- quences which would otherwise result. Although public interest in the ques- tion of crime suppression is much more alive today than previously. such realization has not yet been reached. The storm of comment aroused by Colpnel Lindbergh's dra- matic departure from the United States will have to be multiplied, many more prominent persons will undoubtedly seek safety in other countries before the country at large will be sufficiently awakened to the necessity of taking the suggested step. But so long as criminals have at their disposal all of the agencies by which national business and inter- course are made easy and fast, the necessity of meeting their activities with one unified force and system for crime suppression will continue to be present. In the meantime, an intermediate step may be taken, centralization and unification may be accomplished on a statewide basis. The myriad of local or county jurisdictions into which the various states are subdivided for purposes of detecting and prosecuting criminals may be eliminated. Placing complete power and responsibility in the hands of forty-eight authorities would be a tremendous improvement over the present division of both among thousands of local autbori- (Continued aum page 7)

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most