1st Session No. 531 AMEND THE PENAL CODE OF THE CANAL ZONE FEBRUARY 17, 1932.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed Mr. LEA, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 7519] The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7519) to amend the Penal Code of the Canal Zone, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it pass. The bill has the approval of the President and the Secretary of War, as will appear by the letter berewith. Hon. SAM RAYBURN, WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, January 28, 1932. Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. RAYBURN: The receipt is acknowledged of a letter from Hon. Clarence F. Lea, dated January 15, 1932, inclosing, and requesting on behalf of your committee a report upon, certain bills for the revision of the laws of the Canal Zone introduced by him, including bill H. R. 7519 entitled "A bill to amend the penal code of the Canal Zone." This is one of the proposals made for the revision of the laws of the Canal Zone recommended by me in letter to the President dated June 5, 1930, and in conformity with the provisions of the act of May 17, 1928 (45 Stat. 596), entitled 'An act to revise and codify the laws of the Canal Zone" forwarded by him to the Congress with his message of June 9, 1930. The message and report submitted therewith were printed as House Document No. 460, Seventy-first Congress, second session. The scope and effect of this proposal are set forth on pages 7 to 11 of Document No. 460. Subsequent to the submission of the recommendations included in that document, it became evident that certain changes were desirable before final action was taken on the Penal Code. The changes suggested were recommended in my letter to the President of December 1, 1930, which was forwarded by him to the Congress with his message of December 4, 1930, and included in House Document No. 675, Seventy-first Congress, third session. One additional amendment, the elimination of a proposed amendment, was recommended in my letter to you of December 7, 1931. That recommendation was followed when the bill under consideration was introduced in the House. Two of the general purposes of the amendments are to make certain the place of imprisonment and to fix in sections defining particular offenses the maximum punishment only. Certain sections defining offenses not previously defined have been added for the most part from the Penal Code of California, original source of the Canal Zone Penal Code, and in certain of the sections the punishment has been increased. In House Report No. 2828, Seventy-first Congress, third session, to accompany H. R. 16555, will be found the sections of the Penal Code of the Canal Zone that are amended or repealed, with the proposed amendments thereto indicated. Section 7, found on page 14 of Report No. 2828, should be eliminated, as no change is proposed to that section. It is suggested that the number of section 4a, page 2, line 1, of the bill might be changed to section 4, as the original section 4 has been eliminated from consideration. The early consideration and passage of the legislation proposed for the Canal Zone are recommended. Sincerely yours, PATRICK J. HURLEY, During the Seventy-first Congress this bill was referred to the Attorney General, whose comment thereon was as follows: DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Hon. JAMES S. PARKER, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I refer further to your letter of the 4th ultimo, with which you transmitted H. R. 14062 for such comment as I might desire to make. This is a bill to amend the Penal Code of the Canal Zone. Nothing has been found therein which is of particular interest to this department, and I therefore have no comment to make on it. Respectfully, WILLIAM D. MITCHELL, Attorney General. This is one of the codes of the Canal Zone included in the general revision and codification that has been authorized by the Congress. After a general statement on the subject, this bill will be specifically considered. GENERAL STATEMENT By the law of April 28, 1904, the President was authorized to exercise all military, civil, and judicial power for the government of the Canal Zone until the expiration of the Fifty-eighth Congress. Accordingly he issued the Executive order of May 9, 1904, which provided among other things for legislative power in the Isthmian Canal Commission. The legislative power was exercised by the commission until March 4, 1905; and under it 24 acts or laws of a temporary nature were passed providing, among others, for a local executive, a judiciary, sanitation and health, municipal government, a penal code and a code of criminal procedure, expropriation of property, and the administration of estates. All of this legislation was supposed to be temporary in nature, and none of it was carefully repared; yet parts of it, notably the two criminal codes, are still in effect and use in the Canal Zone. Civil relations have continued to be governed by the Civil Code of Panama and Colombia, in effect in 1904. From March 4, 1905, until August 24, 1912, legislative powers for the Canal Zone were exercised by the President, who approved various ordinances of the commission, and also issued Executive orders. Several ordinances and Execut ve orders were issued after Au ust 24, 1912, but the courts have held these to have no sanction so far as their penal provisions are concerned. In this period, or March 22, 1907, the President authorized a code of civil procedure, also for temporary use. The Panama Canal act was passed on August 24, 1912, and in it was the following provision: That all laws, orders, regulations, and ordinances adopted and promulgated in the Canal Zone by order of the President for the government and sanitation of the Canal Zone, and the construction of the Panama Canal are hereby ratified and confirmed as valid and binding until Congress shall otherwise provide. This ratified the laws then in effect, and placed the legislative power in Congress. At present, therefore, there is no local legislature for the Canal Zone, that authority being in Congress only. Three amendments have been made to the Panama Canal act: (1) August 21, 1916, providing certain police powers; (2) September 21, 1922, extending and defining the jurisdiction of the courts, amending certain penal laws, and providing a divorce law; (3) December 29, 1926, amending the laws governing the courts, providing an action for death by wrongful act, relating to marriages, escheat, and the settlement of estates. Most pronounced of the changing conditions in the Canal Zone was that relating to the population itself. From 1904 to 1912 no less than 20 villages, in abited largely by Colombians or Panamanians, existed in the Canal Zone, and in the rural sections were hundreds of small farms also occupied by natives. Between 1912 and 1914 all of these were moved from the Canal Zone. Thus the native population which was accustomed to the old laws of civil relations disappeared from the Zone, and there r mained only Ameri ans and West In ans, people accustomed to the common-law system. All of the laws made for the Canal Zone were admittedly temporary in nature, and at all times the courts have found difficulty in interpreting them and fitting them to rapidly Ianging conditions. As early as 1910 the supreme court of the Canal Zone declared that the civil code must be interpreted by common-law principles (King Ching Chong v. Wing Chong, 2. C. Z. 25), and this decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1919 (Panama Railroad v. Bosse 249 U. S. 41). In the act of April 6, 1914, Congress, having in mind the new conditions, authorized the employment of a special attorney in connection with the acquisition of privately owned lands in the Canal Zone and "in connection with the codification of the Canal Zone laws." But the land settlements used all the time of this attorney (Judge Frank Feuille) and only a start had been made on the codification when he resigned from his position in 1920. May 17, 1928, the following act of Congress was approved by the President: [PUBLIC NO. 413-70TH CONGRESS] AN ACT To revise and codify the laws of the Canal Zone Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President be, and is hereby, authorized to have all of the laws now in force in the Canal Zone revised and codified, and when such revision and codification has been completed to report the same to Congress for its approval. SEC. 2. In order to carry out the purpose of this act as early as practicable, the President is authorized to employ such persons skilled in the codification of laws as he may deem necessary and to fix their compensation; he may call upon the judge of the district court of the Canal Zone and the district attorney thereof for such assistance as they can render, and the said judge and district attorney are hereby authorized to render such assistance as they can in the performance of such duties. The President is also further authorized to employ such members of the district bar of the Canal Zone and such clerks, stenographers, and other assistants as he may deem necessary for the proper and early completion of such work and to fix their compensation. SEC. 3. As soon as a proper code of all the laws now in force in the Canal Zone shall have been prepared, the President is authorized to report the same to Congress with his recommendation; and the President is further authorized to report with such code such changes in the laws now in force in the Canal Zone as he deems necessary or wise for the proper administration of justice therein and the proper maintenance and operation of the Panama Canal. SEC. 4. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of not more than $25,000 to be used by the President for the payment of salaries of persons employed, for necessary travel and other expenses of such employees, going to and from the Canal Zone, and while in the Canal Zone, engaged in the performance of such duties, and for necessary printing, books, stationery, and other expenditures incidental to the performance of such work. Approved, May 17, 1928. The President placed the supervision of the revision under the Governor of the Panama Canal. For convenience in handling the work it was decided to prepare the revision first, and then, after the Congress had approved this, to codify the laws, and present the code to Congress with the assurance that it contained no new legislation. This method has been followed. The results are presented in 26 bills, H. R. 7498 to H. R. 7523, inclusive. The work of preparing the laws for revision and codification was placed in the hands of Mr. Paul A. Bentz, a lawyer with eight years' experience in such work with the West Publishing Co., of St. Paul, who was recommended by that company. He spent 15 months in the Canal Zone on the revision. After Congress has approved the revision, Mr. Bentz will proceed with the codification. After all the material had been collected it was revised carefully by a committee composed of United States district judge for the Canal Zone, J. J. Lenihan, District Attorney C. J. Riley, and Mr. Bentz. It was then submitted by the governor to a committee composed of eight men in the canal administration whom he considered best qualified to review it. Six of these men were qualified in the law, one was a naval officer versed in navigation laws and rules, and the eighth was an Army officer familiar with government administration. After this committee of 8 had considered the various projects they were returned to the revision committee of 3, by whom they were reconsidered. The final report of the revision committee of 3 was submitted by the governor to the President, who in turn submitted it to the Secretary of War and the Attorney General. After they had acted upon the revision, the projects embraced therein were sent to the Congress by the President June 9, 1930. The message was referred to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce and was printed in House Document 460 of the Seventy-first Congress, second session. Hon. E. E. Denison, chairman at that time, of the Subcommittee on Panama Canal Affairs, had interested himself in the matter from the passing of the authorization law in 1928. After he had studied the proposals carefully, they were introduced into the Congress as 26 different bills in practically the same form as at present before the House. The bills were referred to this committee. Meanwhile the President, in a message of December 4, 1930 (Doc. 675, 71st Cong., 3d sess.), recommended a few changes. The bills and the changes recommended by the President were subjected to careful study by the subcommittee, and, after approval by the committee as a whole, were reported out, with a recommendation that they pass, on February 21, 1931. Exigencies of legislation prevented their approval by the Seventy-first Congress. The Metal Trades Council of the Canal Zone, representing a majority of the American citizens in the canal employ, has studied the proposals. It has made 17 distinct recommendations dealing with the following subjects: (1 and 2) Administrative supervision of the courts; (3) bill of rights; (4) grand jury system; (5) preliminary hearings; (6) informations and warrants under oath; (7) extension of right of appeal to United States Circuit Court of Appeals; (8) employees living outside the Canal Zone to be within jurisdiction of the Canal Zone district court; (9) liability of vehicles in public service for hire; (10) probation |