Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

GENERAL STATEMENT

The purpose of this bill is to increase the punishment for second and subsequent offenses against the narcotic laws. The evidence presented to the Judiciary Committee by the Treasury Department indicates that the sentences meted out to repeated offenders against the narcotic laws are, in general, unsatisfactory. Although in some judicial districts there has been a tendency to increase the length of the sentences given persons who have previously been convicted of violations of the narcotic laws, in the majority of districts there has been scarcely any such increase, and the increase has not always been consistent with the number of prior convictions. The committee is informed by the Treasury Department that the average sentence imposed throughout the country for narcotic violations is about 18 months. With this comparatively light sentence, the violator, with good behavior, may be released in less than 15 months, or paroled after 6 months. It is the purpose of H. R. 6283 to provide for increased punishment for such habitual offenders in accordance with the number of previous convictions.

Studies of the problem of narcotic control made by the Treasury Department indicate the need for this legislation. Those studies show that a large percentage of persons convicted for narcotic violations are habitual offenders. Thus, a survey of 754 convictions over a period of several months revealed that 300, or 40 percent, of the persons convicted were previous offenders against the narcotic laws. Of these, 146 had been convicted of a narcotic violation on one prior occasion, 73 had been convicted twice, 42 three times, 19 four times, and 20 five or more times. Similar studies of 605 narcotic convictions in the State of Illinois revealed that 121 were second offenders against the narcotic laws and 66 were third offenders, while the records of 798 narcotic violators in Texas showed that 179 had two or more previous narcotic convictions.

The studies by the Treasury Department further indicate that narcotic offenders as a group are responsible for a large number of criminal offenses of every nature and have a high percentage of previous convictions for other crimes as well as those involving narcotics. A survey of the records of 946 narcotic violators revealed that they had committed, in addition to 1,887 narcotic violations, other offenses consisting of 545 felonies and 458 misdemeanors. A similar study of 5,000 narcotic violators in the northeastern section of the country showed that they had committed a total of 16,500 violations of all laws, most of them felonies. This tendency of the narcotic violators as a group to become habitual offenders against the criminal laws in general is also shown by the uniform crime report of the Department of Justice. That report, based upon a study of the general prison population of the country, states that 64.3 percent of the narcotic violators had previous convictions for all offenses, while the general average of the prison population was only 55 percent.

It is evident from the above facts that the habitual violator of the narcotic laws presents a very serious problem in the control of crime, and that existing methods of enforcement, so far as they concern the punishment meted out to such violators, has not been sufficiently drastic on the whole to check their activities. The present narcotic laws do not provide for the increase of the punishment of violators by reason of previous convictions. The Harrison Act prescribes a

maximum penalty of $10,000 or 5 years, or both, and the Narcotic Drug Import and Export Act a maximum of $5,000 or 10 years, or both. The size of the penalty depends in both instances upon the nature of the offense, but the fact of prior conviction is not made an element in either case.

It is believed that H. R. 6283, through its provisions for the increase of the punishment of habitual offenders against the narcotic laws, will not only deter the commission of offenses against such laws, but also by removing such offenders from contact with society will prevent the spread of the narcotic habit and reduce materially the number of criminal offenses of other kinds.

This bill has been recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury approved by the Attorney General, and is in accord with the program of the President.

ANALYSIS OF BILL

Section 1 of H. R. 6283, provides for a fine of not more than $5,000 and imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, in the discretion of the court, upon conviction of a second offense against the narcotic laws.

Section 2 provides for a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both, in the discretion of the court, upon conviction of a third or subsequent offense against the narcotic laws.

These provisions impose no mandatory minimum sentence and the bill is, therefore, sufficiently flexible to permit latitude of treatment in individual cases at the discretion of the court.

Section 3 prescribes the exclusive method by which previous convictions are to be brought to the attention of the court. This method is by the filing of an information after the conviction of the defendant for the offense charged in the pending case, and either before or after sentence in that case The information will allege the fact and number of previous convictions and the defendant will be given an opportunity to plead to the information. If a plea of not guilty is made by the defendant to the information, or he fails to answer thereto, a jury is to be empaneled and a trial had solely upon the issue of the fact and number of previous convictions as alleged in the information. If, upon this trial, the jury finds that the defendant has been convicted of previous violations, the increased penalties prescribed in sections 1 and 2 may be imposed by the court. These increased penalties may be imposed despite the fact that sentence has already been made in the pending case, and any time served by the defendant under that sentence is to be deducted from the increased sentence imposed.

This provision for a separate hearing, being exclusive, will protect the innocent by preventing the introduction at the principal trial of prejudicial evidence regarding previous convictions, except, of course, as existing rules of evidence permit the introduction of such evidence for other purposes.

There is attached hereto and made a part of this report the following communication addressed to the Speaker of the House by the

Secretary of the Treasury recommending the enactment of this proposed legislation:

The SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

MARCH 31, 1937.

SIR: I am transmitting to you herewith a draft of a proposed bill the purpose of which is to prescribe and to increase the punishment of second, third, and subsequent offenders against the narcotic laws and request that it be presented to the House of Representatives.

The experience of the enforcement agencies in respect to the punishment of repeated offenders against these laws to suppress illegal traffic in narcotic drugs has not been entirely satisfactory. The treatment accorded this class of violators in the courts is not uniform nor has it been sufficiently drastic on the whole to check their activities. The harmful results to society of this hateful business are such as to warrant, in my opinon, the meting out to such offenders of heavier penalties than has been the case in the past.

The proposed legislation, it is believed, will aid materially in suppressing this traffic. It has been drawn so as to be sufficiently flexible in application from the viewpoint of enforcement, while at the same time providing sufficient safeguards to protect the innocent.

This legislation is in accord with the program of the President.

Very truly yours,

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

LEAVE OF ABSENCE TO SETTLERS OF HOMESTEAD LANDS DURING YEAR 1937

JUNE 28, 1937.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. MOTT, from the Committee on the Public Lands, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 2888]

The Committee on the Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2888) granting a leave of absence to homestead settlers during the year 1937, after careful consideration, report favorably thereon with the recommendation that the bill do pass.

Facts concerning the proposed legislation are set forth in the report of the Secretary of the Interior, which report is herein below set forth.

Hon. RENÉ L. DEROUEN,

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
Washington, May 18, 1987.

Chairman, Committee on the Public Lands,

House of Representatives.

MY DEAR MR. DEROUEN: I have received your letter of February 5, with which you enclosed a copy of H. R. 2888, a bill granting a leave of absence to settlers of homestead lands during the year 1937.

The bill proposes to authorize the granting of a leave of absence during the year 1937 to any homestead settler or entryman who, because of economic conditions, finds it necessary to leave his homestead to seek employment in order to obtain the necessaries of life for himself or family, or to provide for the education of his children. The bill further provides that homestead entrymen of ceded Indian lands be given the benefits thereof, but they shall not be entitled to extension of time for payment of any installment of purchase price of the land, unless they pay interest in advance at the rate of 4 percent per annum on the principal of any unpaid purchase price from the date when such payment became due to and inclusive of the date of the expiration of the period of relief granted thereunder. The same relief is intended to be granted by this act as has been granted by the acts of May 21, 1934 (48 Stat. 787), for the years 1932, 1933, and 1934, May 22, 1935 (49 Stat. 286), for the year 1935, and April 20, 1936 (49 Stat. 1235), for the year 1936. Under the provisos to said acts, the time for the payment of the Installments which were due and payable on homestead entries on ceded Indian lands was extended to December 31, 1936, upon the payment of interest in advance £t the rate of 4 percent per annum.

If this legislation is to be enacted, I suggest that the words "or purchaser" be nserted after the word "entryman" in section 2, line 20, page 2, and that the

word "on", same line, be changed to "of". This will enable purchasers to enjoy the benefits of the extension provided for in said section.

I have no objection to the granting of the relief proposed to homesteaders and entrymen on public lands, but I am opposed to the granting of further extensions of time to entrymen and purchasers of ceded or opened Indian lands unless some provision is made for payment to the Indians of indebtedness now delinquent and long past due. To this end I recommended, in the original draft of the report on S. 189, that the bill be amended by adding thereto the following additional sections:

"SEC. 3. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated an amount equal to the amount of the unpaid balance of principal and interest which the Secretary of the Interior may find to be due on homestead and other entries or purchases on opened lands of the Coeur d'Alene, Cheyenne River, Colville, Fort Berthold, Fort Peck, Pine Ridge, Rosebud, Shoshone, and Standing Rock Reservations, and the Chippewa lands in Minnesota opened in accordance with the Act of January 14, 1889 (25 Stat. L. 642), on the date of the enactment of this Act, less an amount equal to the amount of payments made on such homestead entries after the enactment of this Act and before the appropriation herein authorized has been made. Such an amount, when appropriated, shall be placed to the credit of the Indian tribes of such reservations in the Treasury of the United States, and shall be available upon the recommendation of the Indian tribe or tribes concerned for making permanent improvements on lands of the Indians, including the development of irrigation and the granting of aid to individual Indians in establishing permanent homes, and for the purchase of lands on said reservations from individual Indians or from white owners, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, and under such regulations as he may prescribe. Title to any lands so purchased shall be taken in the name of the United States in trust for the respective Indian tribes and such lands shall not be allowed in severalty.

SEC. 4. The provisions of this Act shall in no way affect the liability of entrymen or purchasers on such opened lands in the said Indian reservations to complete payments on their entires. Any payments made by said homesteaders after the appropriation authorized by this Act has been made shall be covered into the general fund of the Treasury of the United States. If any entry or purchase shall be relinquished or canceled, on which the United States shall have advanced payments to the Indians of the reservation involved, said payments shall be reimbursed to the United States out of any funds on deposit in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the said Indians.

"SEC. 5. Any homestead entryman or purchaser of ceded Indian land, who is delinquent in the payment of the purchase money or interest, or both, due on the land embraced in his entry, entries, purchase, or purchases, and who is unable to make payment thereof in accordance with existing laws, shall be accorded the privilege of relinquishing any subdivision, or subdivisions, as shown on the approved plat, of his entry, entries, purchase, or purchases, so that the purchase money paid on the whole of such entry, entries, purchase, or purchases, will be sufficient to complete payment on the lands retained, which retained lands shal be in reasonably compact form. Relinquishments heretofore made may be accepted under the provisions of this section."

I further recommended that the title to the bili be amended to read as follows: "To grant relief to homesteaders and purchasers of public and ceded Indian lands and to authorize advance of amounts due on delinquent homestead entries on certain Indian reservations."

Sections 3 and 4 are identical with S. 188, introduced January 6, 1937, except that Fort Totten has been eliminated and Coeur d'Alene added as one of the reservations to which these sections will apply. The records of the General Land Office fail to show that there are any pending undisposed-of entries or purchases at Fort Totten. There is one delinquent entry at Coeur d'Alene. A similar bill failed of enactment last year after passing the Senate and after receiving favorable consideration by the House Committee on Indian Affairs. Section 5 is a new section designed to meet a situation brought about by a decision of the Comptroller General dated April 24, 1936 (A. 73196), holding that payments upon one entry of public land may not, upon relinquishment or cancelation of a portion or the whole of such entry, be credited upon another and different entry either by the same or a different entryman. Section 5 will supply the authority found lacking by the Comptroller General. If enacted, it will enable purchasers unable otherwise to complete payments on their entries to realize some benefit from the moneys already invested. It will also enable them to consolidate their holdings into a more compact form, thus avoiding ownership of scattered tracts too small for economic use.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »