HV5oao Dtu Cau>^ OKI a HV 5090 .M4 W5 Copy 1 Harold D. WILSOM on. Dry Laws and WPdifidans flKlTtll(i!OA'irO®MAIL/@\ IP>y[i(LO©lKlll!Bg 33 Newbury St VcerrtJ/ Boston. Mass. HAROLD DAVID WILSON was born in Cawk^r City, Kansas, in 1884, spent his ea-rly youth in Shel- burne Falls, Massachus,etts, lost his mother at the age of twelve, at fourteen was earning his own way through High School and later through Tufts Col- lege, has had some years experience a^s a reporter, editor and publisher, is a Veteran of the World War (Aviation Corps), after his honorable discharge as a First Lieutenant A. S. A. (Air Service Aeronatics) was prominently identified with the Soldiers' and Sailors' Employment Bureau, Boston Common, was head of the Victory Liberty Loan Military Speak- ers for New England, Chairman of the American Legion (Massachusetts) Speakers' Bureau in 1919, and State Reg-istrar^qf Vital Statistics for two 5'ea.rs prior to appointment to . Massachusetts Prohibition Department, acceptance of-latter position can hardly be construed as a promotion, but rather as a sacri- fice in behalf of the Cause. Dry Laws and Wet Politicians I BY Harold D. Wilson Copyright 1922 by HAROLD D. WILSON Somerv-ille, Mass. INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHERS 33 NEWBURY STREET BOSTON MASS. ^J^^^ v^ DEDICATED to my wife, Mary Burroughs Wilson and our two sons David Burroughs and Weston Perry Wilson Fathers and mothers ! The fight is on ! You can- not be slackers when the heahh and future happiness of your children is at stake. If we stand steadfast on Prohibition Law Enforce- ment, the youth of this generation will never know the many temptations and pitfalls of the liquor nuisance. S', Ov^ MAR 1 3 1922 ©CU681180 'vxv: Mrs. Harold D. Wilson, and two sons David and Weston Photos by J. R Pardy & Co., Boston HAROLD DAVID WILSON Table of Contents Mrs. Harold D. Wilson and sons Harold D. Wilson, the author A Typical Still Cartoon Pages 3 4 8 6, 7, 165 and 167 Chapter I Removed for Over-Zealousness II The Quincy House Raid III Ignorance Sublime IV Have Our Courts Broken Down? V Facts on Prohibition VI Publicity— It Made and It Unmade VII Over the Top VIII How to Enforce Dry Laws IX Wet Politicians' Wet Records X Outwitting the Bootlegger XI Hypocrisy of Wet Politicians XII Dry Agents XIII Carrie-Nationing Stills XIV Pretext for My Removal XV My Alleged Insubordination XVI Gunning for the Big Fellows XVII Snappy Editorials Me Pages 9-15 16-27 28-37 38-48 49-60 61-71 72-85 86-95 96-104 105-111 112-119 120-123 129-137 138-146 147-153 154160 161-158 REMOVED FOR OVER ZEALOUSNESS— BY WHOM— AND FOR WHAT REASON? Chapter I. Fired. By whom and for what purpose? These questions have been asked on every hand since my removal as Chief Prohibition Enforcement Officer in Massachusetts. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, David H. Blair, of Washington accused me of being indiscreet and temperamentally unfit. Al- though a few short days prior to my discharge, he not only offered but urged me to accept a better position in the Prohibition Unit with the proviso that I must work elsewhere than in Massachusetts. Federal Prohibition Commissioner, Roy A. Haynes, in his statement conceded I was one of the best en- forcement officials in the country, but added that I was sometimes unduly energetic, and too indiscreet. He was also, very anxious to keep me in the service, provided I would work outside of Massachusetts. The logical inference is that I was too energetic and too indiscreet for the Old Bay State, but just the type of enforcement official for any other State in the U. S. A. In other words, satisfactory to the de- partment heads in Washington, but not satisfactory to certain powerful interests in Massachusetts. The following editorial published in the Boston Traveler, on January 23, 1922, is worth reading in connection with my alleged over zealousness: TOO ZEALOUS It is very evident that Harold D. Wilson has been too zealous in the enforcement of prohibition. He has made his superior officer in the district uncomfortable. He has made certain citizens uncomfortable. He has made Senator Lodge and certain representatives un- comfortable, directly or indirectly. So he was called on DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS the carpet and told he might choose between retiring from the job or retiring from the Boston district. What are the charges against this young man specifi- cally? Not that he has neglected to do his duty, but that he has done it too thoroughly. He is said to lack tact, discretion, the ability to get along with his fellow officers. Doubtless this is true. Still the question arises , "What is a prohibition enforcement officer hired for?" Must he be a model of affability, a good mixer, a person half-hearted in the performance of duty? Or is it just possible that the so-called failure of prohibi- tion to prohibit, is due to the employment of agents better adapted by nature to making friends than to making enemies? Wilson is able to make enemies. He is willing to make enemies. He has made enemies. IThe point which the Congressmen may have overlooked is that the public servant who is not afraid to make enemies also makes friends, immense numbers of them. "Removed for over zealousness in the performance of duty" is a sign that can scarcely be written over any man's head without forcing the query, "By whom, — and by what right?" The Senior Senator, Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge, is quoted as saying he was not interested, and he would wash his hands of the whole affair. History has in- cluded many hand washers, including Pontius Pilate, none of whom have proven particularly successful. Such trivial matters as law enforcement in the Old Bay State are of no consequence to the Senior Sen- ator. Why should he worry about prohibition law enforcement while such well known wet leaders as Charley Innes, Samuel Winslow, et al, are happy and contented. The purport of Congressman Samuel E. Winslow's statement was that he did not know Mr. Wilson, which was probably the truth in as much as Mr. Wilson, never attended any wet banquets except in the capacity of a raider. No statement has been obtained from Mr. Charles H. Innes, famous G. O. P. boss, custodian of liquors at governors' banquets, etc., although it is reported on the very best of authority that during the recent 10 REMOVED FOR OVER ZEALOUSNESS Potter-Wilson controversy in Washington, Mr. Innes was registered in a Washington hotel, not far from Prohibition Headquarters. Undoubtedly Mr. Innes approves of my dismissal or such action never would have been sanctioned. It is also safe to assume that the Governor, Channing H. Cox, is pleased at my summary dis- charge, otherwise he might have interested himself in my retention. The slightest activity on his part backed up by the thousands of other endorsements I received, would have undoubtedly saved the day. But why should he worry, as long as his ardent sup- porter of many years, Charley Innes, is happy? Certainly future G. O. P. love feasts will be safer, if not drier. Lieut. Gov. Alvan T. Fuller has been quoted as attributing my discharge to the raiding of the Gov- ernors' banquet at the Quincy House. The Lieuten- ant Governor is a prohibitionist by conviction and not by policy. He has an excellent reputation for veracity, but a mighty poor record for covering up political rot. In other words, Hon. Alvan T. Fuller has long been a thorn in the flesh of Senator Lodge, and other G. O. P. leaders, because he has been prone to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth, on any and all occasions. Cozy politics require cozy tactics. No man in the Charles Innes-Senator Lodge school is supposed to speak until he receives instructions. The Lieutenant Governor is a successful business man, in fact he has proven very able and far seeing in the business world, but in politics, he is too indiscreet, too out spoken and too independent. He will never do as a politican, although many think he possesses the necessary requisites for a statesman. Hon. Robert M. Washburn, than whom there is none more sarcastic in the whole wide world, has been reported as disapproving of my dismissal. Bob, however, is reported to be very unruly. He has 11 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS had the nerve to enter politics and still persist in do- ing his own thinking, a most unusual breach of discipline, and something that will undoubtedly pre- vent his further elevation in the political world. I might go on and name a multitude of politicians, near politicians, dry leaders and others who have been quoted on one side of the fence or the other. But why persist in this line, especially since I am getting somewhat off my subject of "fired, by whom, and for what purpose." The following letter is an exact copy of my dis- charge received from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, David H. Blair. This letter was preceded by a telegram to the same effect, received late Friday evening, January 27th. TREASURY DEPARTMENT Washington, Jan. 27, 1922. Mr. Harold D. Wilson, c|o Federal Prohibition Director, Boston, Mass. Sir, You are hereby removed from the position of Head, Field Force for the State of Massachusetts for the Good of the Service, effective at the close of business January 27th, 1922. Respectfully, DAVID H. BLAIR, Commissioner. My discharge was dated January 27th, approved on the 30th, and received by me on February first. My pay, however, stopped on the 27th, and I had to complete whatever official business was absolutely necessary on Saturday, the 28th, and Monday the 30th at my own expense. In addition to the telegram and letter already men- tioned, Commissioner Blair, kindly informed the Washington Newspaper Correspondents that he had decided after reading a number of news dispatches, that I was too indiscreet, too insubordinate, and too temperamental for retention in the service. He was 12 REMOVED FOR OVER ZEALOUSNESS even so heartless as to withdraw his offer to give me a better position outside of Massachusetts, which I had positively refused to accept. If a man is indiscreet who not only insists but persists, in the face of opposition, in enforcing the law he is sworn to uphold, than I am quite willing to be listed as indiscreet. If a man is insubordinate who persists in doing the work he is paid to do (an unpardonable si.i in a federal office holder) whether his superiors want action or not, then I suppose I was insubordinate. No one has attempted to gainsay, however, that I was energetic and industrious and no one has indi- cated the slightest suspicion that the men who dic- tated the policy of my superior wanted action or suspected my superior of undue activity. If a man is temperamentally unfit who knows only one law which is alike for all men — who can see no difference between the rich and the poor man, a governor and a Polack in the matter of liability for violating k constitutional law — who is such an un- sophisticated ignoramus that he believes the laws should be enforced from the Top Down rather than from the Bottom Part Way Up, then I am as tem- peramental as a prima donna, and am proud of it. The following extract from an editorial in the Springfield Republican, January 22, 1922, is pertin- ent relative to my indiscretions: "DRY" WILSON AND HIS JOB A first class prohibition enforcement officer this Mr. Harper from Washington may be, who has been ordered into Massachusetts to do "field work". But what is to happen to Mr. Wilson the man on the job. Wilson is the issue, so events have decreed. Why is it necessary to remove him, or to transfer him in view of the fact that he is now reputed to be the most aggressive and efficient prohibition enforcement officer in the state? "Dry" Wilson^s friends will not be denied a satisfac- tory explanation. He may have been indiscreet in some Df his utterances; perhaps he has not shown deference enough to his superiors in office. He may be hard to 18 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS g«t on with. But the stubborn fact remains that he put teeth into the law and made it bite. Isn't that the kind of enforcement officer the law needs? Before the end of the chapter, which has not been reached quite yet, the Washington authorities must justi- fy their course in separating from his job a man who had put the job on the map in a way to make a lot of Massachusetts* politicians wriggle like worms on a hot shovel. There is not the slightest doubt in my mind, or in the mind of Mr. Average Man, who was responsible for my discharge. The Washington department heads cannot be held accountable. Federal Commissioner Haynes has ad- mitted to me and to some of the newspapers in Washington that the matter of my retention in the service was beyond his control. He referred inter- viewers to Senator Lodge, and Commissioner Blair. Reference to some of the newspapers of January 20 and 21st will bear me out in this statement. Commissioner Blair may be a fine fellow, but he has made little impression in Washington or in the country at large relative to his independence. He is a typical federal office holder. He is neither too aggressive, nor too eager for unusual accomplish- ment. He does as he is told with alacrity and dis- patch, without the undue exercise of gray matter. In the Massachusetts situation he was told quite forcibly by someone, and that someone was certainly a Massachusetts man, and not an individual hailing from the State of Oregon or some other remote part of the U. S. A. what to do — how to do it, and when to do it. It makes no difference whether Senator Lodge sent directly to Commissioner Blair or wheth- er he acted through some of his lieutenants, such as Congressman Winslow or Charley Innes. The re- sponsibility is his. He was in somewhat the same position as the old Roman Emperors who sealed the fate of the Gladiators with thumbs down or thumbs up. The Senator chose thumbs down and in so doing 14 REMOVED FOR OVER ZEALOUSNESS he ran true to form in his opposition to prohibition. I shall deal with his consistently wet record in a later chapter, but simply wish to make it clear at this point that he was the one man in Washington with the power to either wash his hands while I was railroaded or give the slightest sign of approval and keep me in the service. In justice to the Senator, it may be said that he was illy advised by Charley Innes, Congressmen Winslow and Tinkham, and others closest to him, but it is barely possible that it might be better for prohibition law enforcement in Massachusetts if the Senior Senator was more attentive to the suggestions of such dry Congressmen as Dallinger, Underbill and Rogers and less receptive to the suggestions of tho3C who are recognized as wets. The real key to the situation is summed up in the following brief statement which sets forth the exact information I received at the Washington Railroad Station, on my last pilgrimage to Washington. My inf ormatif>n, breifly, was as follows, and was received from two gentlemen in whom I have explicit confidence "Your goose is cooked., You may accept a transfer to another state or get out of the service. You are rid- ing certain interests so persistently and so unrelentingly that you must be removed from the Massachusetts Field. Your activities are creating opposition that will prove accumulative and consequently prove dangerous in the Fall. If you are forcibly removed, there will be a spasm of protest, back home and then all will be for- gotten long before the fall election." My theory and the theory of many other prohibi- tionists in this state is that Senator Lodge, Gov. Cox and others who apparently deem the wet vote essential to their success are entitled to all of these votes, but that they are deserving and will get mighty few of the church or dry vote. DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS THE QUINCY HOUSE RAID Chapter 11. On Tuesday, December 20, 1921, I returned to my office in the Old South Building, at 7:30 in the eve- ning, after leading a successful raid on the Rossmore Hotel, Boston, Mass. I found one of my agents and a private citizen, whom I had known in a friendly way as one interested in prohibition enforcement, await- ing my return. The citizen said to me : "Wilson, do you know what is going on in the Quincy House tonight?" He had an air of suppressed excitement. I immediately smelled the smoke of battle and asked him to tell his story. "Well," said he," about all the Republican leaders of Massachusetts are down there at a dinner to Gov- ernor Cox, lapping up booze like a bunch of ward healers at an old time *night before\ They are all decked out with red tags and nearly every one sport- ing a tag has about four drinks under his belt. They are so drunk that if you tie a red necktie in your but- tonhole, you will easily get by the doorkeeper." I reached for the telephone, then paused: "Do you really mean it", I asked. "Are all the big G. O. P. guns present ?" "True as I stand here", said the man. "Ask your own agent when he returns. He is down to the Quincy House investigating." I then learned that my informant had brought the information to the office sometime before and that one of my agents was personally investigating his as- sertions. Agent William H. McCray rushed into the room at this point in breathless excitement and cried : "Chief the lid's off in the Quincy House. All the Republican politicians in the State are crammed in- to a swell young barroom trying to see who can last the longest. It is a regular old time drinking ca- rousal." 1$ THE QUINCY HOUSE RAID "Did anyone see you down theref", I inquired, fear- ful lest he had given away the tip. "Not a soul, so far as I know", he replied. "All right", said I, "how many agents do we need?" "All we can scare up. It is the gayest bunch of booze fighters I ever saw in my life. We will surely get into trouble if we hit that place tonight." "Never mind the trouble", I said, "the politicians have no more right in this matter than anyone else." I did some deep thinking for a few minutes. In a flash I foresaw all the sickening and farcical court proceedings which were later to be paraded before the public eye. For a moment, it seemed to me a poignant tragedy that practically all the political leaders of the Republican party, my own party, should be gathered together in a public place openly flouting the Constitution of the United States. I was so disgusted at this monumental hypocrisy that nothing could have stood in the way of my raid- ing that banquet. I could see clearly, however, that such a raid meant the beginning of the end for me as Prohibition Chief. *'Boys," I said, turning to my two agents, "it probably means your jobs. Are you with me?*' "You bet," they cried enthusiastically, "let's go." I knew that every conceivable technicality would be resorted to by the parties involved to get the case thrown out of court, so I resolved to get a search warrant at any cost, if there was any conceivable way in which to do so. For a moment, I was wor- ried, for I realized that the United States Commis- sioner, William A. Hayes, the Mr. Pickwick of the Federal Building, would never issue a search war- rant for a raid on a Republican party. Then it oc- curred to me that Commissioner Hayes was not sitting at that time and that I might apply to Comr missioner William S. Nelson, whom I knew as a fair and always impartial watch-dog of the law. 17 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS I grabbed the telephone and called Commissioner Nelson's home. He was not there. His family could not tell me where he was. I told them that it was a matter of life and death and that I must locate him. They replied that the Commissioner was quite fond of bowling-, and that he might possibly be found at the City Club. The next two hours were the most hectic of my seven months' administration as enforcement agent. I seized my hat and coat and hurried to the City Club. Luck seemed to be against me. The Commis- sioner had been bowling but had left the Club less than ten minutes before my arrival. I drove to his office on State street. There was a man present in the office but he did not know where the Commis- sioner had gone. I returned to my own office and began jingling the telephone again. I called his home, the City Club, and his office in rotation, but without results. I left word for him to call me if he should return to any of these places. I also tried to locate one of the Assistant United States Attor- neys, but without success. By 9:30 I became so disgusted and discouraged with the prospects of obtaining a Federal warrant that I went to the Police Headquarters at Pember- ton Square to see Captain Reardon, whom I had found to be a mighty accommodating friend. I told the Captain that I was very anxious to secure a State warrant in order to raid a big political party. He told me that I was "out of luck", as there was no way of obtaining an emergency warrant at that time of the night. I then told the Captain that I was going through with the raid any way, warrant or no warrant. While my unfailing policy had always been to re- spect the Constitutional guarantee against undue search and seizure, in this case it seemed to me that public officials in whom the great people of Massa- chusetts had placed their most sacred trust, and who 1% THE QUINCY HOUSE RAID in return were openly breaking tne Constitution, de- served no protection from the Constitution. I de- cided that I would be an opportunist in this case, go to the Quincy House, look around for myself and see if there was not some legal way in which to interrupt this Bacchanalian outlawry. I was just about to leave when Captain Reardon's telephone rang. The Captain turned the call over to me, and the excited voice of my agent, Peter Sul- livan, greeted me. * 'Commissioner Nelson has arrived home and will see you immediately." **Goodbye/' I yelled, slamming down the receiver, and grabbing my hat. The Commissioner lived in the Back Bay, but at that time of the night the streets were almost empty and my automobile made short work of the trip. I picked up Mr. Nelson and drove him to the Federal Building. We entered his office and made an unsuccessful search for a warrant form. The Commissioner then went to the office of an Assistant United States At- torney, called the janitor, entered the room, took a search warrant from its accustomed place, and re- turned to his own office. He filled out the blank, sigfned it, and handed it to me. With regard to the obtaining of this warrant, I wish to interrupt my narrative long enough to make a reply to the charge, made later, that the United States Attorney's office was raided by Wilson. In fact, most of the papers came out with flaring head- lines "WILSON STAGED TWO RAIDS— ONE ON THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE OTHER ON THE G. O. P. POLITICIANS AT THE QUINCY HOUSE." The facts are exactly as I have related. There was no "raid" or second-story work in the District At- torney's Office. This was an inspired charge, foment- ed by the corporeal outpost of the "wets" in Con- gress, George Holden Tinkham. 19 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS A few days after the Quincy House raid, Congress- man Tinkham blew into the Federal Building, and breathed the germs of his Anti-Volstead temper about the corridors. United Stntes Attorney Robert O. Harris caught the fever. Judge Harris is a pliable, accommodat- ing, harmless sort of official who lends dignity to his office because he looks as if he were a hard working man. Of course, all the genuine work is supposed to be done by his assistants. When Congressman Tinkham came along with a tomahawk sharpened for Wilson's scalp, Judge Harris picked it up and feebly tried to wield it. With the puny bluster of which he is capable, he an- nounced that he was "indignant" because his office had been "broken into." He was quoted as saying that he did not believe in such spectacular law en- forcement as raids on G. O. P. banquets, and that his office should have been consulted. The Judge hap- pened to be in Washington at the time of the raid, and the natural inference from newspaper articles attributed to him was that the sanctity of the Quincy House G. O. P. liquor-lubricating party never would have been violated if he had been in Boston. The fact is that law enforcement officials can not afford to wait for "stop-and-go^* signals from Judge Harris before getting busy. My custom is to move by the minute. To return to the raid, Commissioner Nelson's war- rant was my red tag **ticket" to the Quincy House banquet. I hurried out of the Federal Building, and on Devonshire Street picked up six of my agents who had been hastily gathered together by one of my assistant deputies, Sullivan. I instructed the men to scatter and meet me in the alley-way which leads from Cornhill into Brattle Street. Five minutes later, about 10.^5 P. M., we gathered at the appointed place. I selected two agents and started with them for the hotel door. My purpose 20 THE QUINCY HOUSE RAID was to reconnoiter before "pulling" the party, in or- der to ascertain for my own satisfaction the source of supply. I had only to enter the lobby to know that the trail was extremely hot. The lobby was heavy with the odors of hard liquor. I have been a teetotaler all my Hfe and I do not beleive that my nostrils d,xj any more sensitive to the smell of whiskey than those of any other person. Just how any man with normal senses could have walked through the lobby of the Quincy House that night without suspecting what was going on upstairs is a mystery to me. I am sure no one in the lobby recognized me. We strolled leisurely across to the stairway and went up one flight. From the end of a long corridor there came muffled echoes of laughter and hilarity. I passed two side corridors and then turned into a long corridor leading directly to a closed door. I might add at this time that I did not know where the liquor was being dispensed, but was able to go straight to it following the odor and the noise. I fouhd the door to the sanctum, dedicated to the God of Bacchus, locked. Guarding this door, in the role of sentry, was ex-Senator Charles H. Innes, no- torious Ward Seven boss, long Czar of the G. O. P. City machine and reputed in be an intimate friend of Governor Channing H. Cox and Senator Henry Cabot Lodge. Mr. Innes knows me well but for some reason which I shall not attempt to analyze, he failed to recognize me. **How do you get in," I inquired. "Knock on the door and they will let you in," he replied. I knocked once, then twice, and the door was opened. . There was too much noise coming from the inside for anyone to have heard the first knock. Al- though the red tag was the symbol entitling the hold- er to an unlimited number of drinks, those in charge of the private dining-room were apparently so far ■..'.:. v:..- 21 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS gone that they could not tell whether my agents and I possessed red tags or wore bathing suits. The first thing which greeted my eyes was a drunken politician stretched out on the floor near the wall. And I may anticipate my story by saying that this poor fellow who gave silent testimonial to the effectiveness of the 'White Horse';' kick, remained blissfully ignorant of the somewhat agitated proceed- ings which went on later. The private dining room was some forty feet in length and possibly half as wide. It was furnished with a piano and two long tables tastily covered with long white tablecloths and some three or four hun- dred glasses of all kinds, all either empty or emptied. Behind the booze laden bar or tables were stationed two bartenders with the usual white coat and apron. Within easy reach of the dispensers of liquors were six galvanized washtubs filled with cocktails and some six peach baskets filled with "White Horse" whiskey. Nobody paid any attention to my agents or to me. Over in one comer the pianist was pounding out wild jazz, and two men who had clearly sipped the sweet nectar of the Innes-G. O. P. cocktails were outdoing each other in a vocal discord contest. The white- coated barkeepers were pattering here and there, clinking glasses, crunching ice and mixing up more drinks. I walkd up to the tables, picked up a par- tially emptied bottle, and smelled of it. There was no question as to its alcoholic content. One smell was sufficient, and judging by the appearance and antics of some of the assembled "red tag" gentlemen, one drink would have been more than sufficient. One of the bartenders looked at me innocently, and asked "What will you have?" I did not answer, but walked around behind the bar and inspected the paraphernalia behind the scenes. The bartenders appeared much amused at my ac- 22 THE QUINCY HOUSE RAID tions and up to this time no one else had paid any attention. At this point one of the saturnalian revellers stepped up to the table and asked for an- other cocktail. I stepped between the bartender and the thirsty "law and order" disciple, and said **This has gone far enough. No more booze will be served tonight." "How come?" said the other fellow indignantly, "Have a heart. Can't you see my red tag. I was told the sky was the limit. I demand another drink." I then announced myself as Wilson, the Prohibi- tion Chief. I shall never forget the look of helpless dismay that came over this man*s face. He was stunned. "Oh, Charlie," he said, turning to some of the other men in an unbelieving way, "what do you know about this. Wilson's with us." The jazz music in the corner ended in a crashing discord and the "red tag" champions of law and or- der, many of them in various stages of intoxication, crowded about me. I ordered my two agents to gather up the whiskey bottles and the carafes of gin cocktails, and place them in a corner. Most of the guests were too stupified to do anything but watch operations with an air of amazement. So much liquor had found its way into their stomachs that it took some time for the real purport of the raid to percolate into their befuddled brains. I placed two of my agents as guards over the contraband, and started out to get my other men. I had no sooner reached the corridor when I was surrounded by poli- ticians importuning me to "quit and forget it." They tried to stop me by putting their arms around me and begged me in the name of the G. O. P, to stop. Charley Innes, the outpost of the whiskey sanctum, had partially recovered his poise, and led the assault of the repentant ones who deprecated my efforts to prove law and order or law enforcement applied 23 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS equally to Republican politicians and to striking policemen. **Wilson," said he, "you are killing yourself poli- tically. Don't do itj'* "What has politics to do with law enforcement," I inquired. And he answered : "Why, you are raiding the Gov- ernor's banquet. You will ruin your own party. We will never stand for this. You are cutting your own throat." I do not know what else they said to me or what else I said in reply. There was such an uproar of talking, threatening and bickering that I was im- mensely relieved when I had run the gauntlet of the politicians assembled in the corridor and was allowed to pass on to the hotel lobby. I had no sooner passed out of sight than the same politicians rushed into the private dining room and informed my agents that Wilson had been fixed up, and that he had gone home. The agents were ad- vised to quietly beat it, as they had raided a big G. O. P. banquet. My men refused to leave, however, asserting that they would not believe Wilson had been fixed until they brought him back in a coffin. I immediately summonsed the other agents, placed three on guard at the doors and took one man and entered the main dining room on the first floor without announcing myself. I am pleased to state that I did not discover any evidence that would lead me to be- lieve liquor hsd been served in that room, although I saw plenty of evidence that some of the men present had drank considerable more than they knew how to handle. Calling another agent into the main dining room I left two to watch proceedings, while I took the other two agents and went back to the private dining room. In the meanwhile, a large number of the banquet- ers had found the strain of political speeches too boresome, and had come up in search of liquid refresh- 24 THE QUINCY HOUSE RAID ment. When I arrived I found fifty or more *'red tagged'* men crowded into the room, talking and whispering in small groups. More of the revellers from down stairs kept rushing to the bar room as news of the raid spread, until fully a hundred "red tagged" politicians had clearly convicted themselves of full knowledge of the disgraceful orgy upstairs. I then learned from the agents who had been guard- ing the liquor another interesting fact, namely, the affair was entirely legal. The boozing politicians had a permit from the State Director of Prohibition, my immediate superior, and the Director himself, Mr. Elmer C. Potter, was a guest at the banquet. This phase of the situation will be covered in the next chapter. Then, without further ado, I directed the seizure of all the liquor and a part of the paraphernalia which had been used in the room. This was later loaded into an automobile and taken to my office in the Old South Building. Thirty-six carafes of gin cocktails were found, sixteen of which had been emptied, and four bottles filled with "White Horse" whiskey. Apparently, some twenty bottles of "White Horse" had been emptied prior to the break- ing up of the festivities. While we were packing up the "White Horse", and cocktail carafes, there was a great deal of talking and fatherly advice for Wilson. Many of the men urged me to call off my agents, and they would see to it that I was well cared for. One of the men who did a great deal of talking, but said little, was Robert J. Bottomley, Charley Innes' chief messenger boy, •I'ld at one time a most enthusiastic, -ven if unsuc- cessful, candidate for Attorney General. It is to Mr. Bottomley's credit, or discredit, as you may choose to take it, that he did a great deal of laughing and took the affair as a huge joke. I recognized a large number of other men, but to parade their names before the public would be vicious 25 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS and wholly uncalled-for. I have no doubt that many of the yotmger politicians were stampeded into this affair by the mass action resulting from the imwis« and lawless actions of false political leaders. I will say, however, that while the dry agents were packing up the bottles and decanters, an employee of the hotel rushed in with a hurry-up order for a bottle of "White Horse" whiskey for a Judge of the Superior Court of Massachusetts. The Judge*s name was mentioned quite distinctly and is known to several of my agents. When we returned downstairs with our spoils, the banquet to the Governor had broken up. Some of those who had gone upstairs for a drink had returned to the banquet hall to spread the awful news. My agents later repeated to me some of the husky, whis- pered messages which they heard passed on by offi- cials at the head table. "Did you hear the news," said one high State official. "Wilson has raided the bar upstairs." "What," returned his neighbor, "you're crazy." The news apparently spread like wildfire and the banquet promptly broke up in a decidedly chilly at- p:csphere. As we passed through the lobby, hun- dreds of men were hurrying out. And there is no finer commentary on the whole disgraceful affair than the frantic endeavors on the following day bv men who were erroneously reported as being present to get newspaper publicity to the effect that they were not at the banquet. The argument as to my f oolhardiness in raiding the Governor's banquet was discussed quite vehemently by a number of well-known "pols/* when I was mak- ing my get-away from the hotel. "You won't last a week," said one. "I will give you just ^ivf; days before you get the grand bounce." "Why," said I? "Because you have brought disgrace on the Re- THE QUINCY HOUSE RAID publican party," said he, "and the big fellows will not stand for it." These politicians were still talking when I broke away and returned to my office in the Old South Building. It has been said that I staged this raid for spectacular rjffect, but if I had wanted to be sensa- tional I could have made the affair much more dis- agreeable. If the Governor and other leading G. O. P. politi- cians have been quoted correctly, I raided so quietly that they did not even know that I had come and gone. If I had seen fit to make a thorough search under the tables and in other places in the main din- ing-room,which I had a perfect right to do with my search warrant, the affair would have been spectacu- lar enough to satisfy the most fastidious. Unfortun- ately, some people never know when they have been treated decently. I have been told by many leading politicians that I should have given the Governor and the other red tagged gentlement twenty minutes warning before raiding. If I had done so the publicity attending the Quincy House G. O. P. drinking contest would have been still more sensational and injurious to the party. Prohibition would have indeed been a farce. I never warned the small fry when raiding, what manner of justice would have been served if the wealthier and more influential culprits were allowed sufficient time in which to make a get away. It is such law enforcement methods that lead to anarchism and general discontent. 27 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS IGNORANCE SUBLIME Chapter III. One phase of the Quincy House Raid that I will treat in this chapter is the charge that it was inspired by personal spite, or because of a spirit of vengeance against my immediate superior, Prohibition Director Elmer C. Potter. I did not know that Mr. Potter was present at this particular banquet or that he had issued a permit for the transportation of liquors to the Quincy House. As a matter of fact, as already stated in a previous chapter, I did not know that there was to be a Republican banquet until 7:30 P. M. on the night of the raid. I was more surprised when I learned that a permit had been issued for the transportation of the liquor used at this dis- graceful Constitution-breaking event than any of my agents. In fact, when the matter was first brought to my attention, I refused to pay any attention, hot believing that such a thing could be possible. Finally, one of my agents insisted that I look at the permit. I have two affidavits in my possession at the present time to bear out the truth of this statement. The day following the Quincy House raid and for that matter every day since that historical and hys- terical evening, I have been charged with staging the raid because of the so-called '* Wilson-Potter" feud." This statement is as absurd and false as the other mouthings of the lawless politicians who sought some excuse for their own connection with this outrage- ous desecration of the Constitution and the sacred trusts of their constituents. There is a definite psychology in the stories which linked me in a "spite-feud" with Mr. Potter. When a man is guilty, he immediately seeks to avert sus- picion by pointing his finger at another, and saying: "Look you, look you, I am not guilty. There is the guilty man." That is the reason the politicians have IGNORANCE SUBLIME sought to atone for their own shortcomings by trying to represent Wilson as a "spite-fiend." If the men who thus dragged the Constitution in the filth of the gutter are to be permitted to remain in control of the Republican party, what faith, I ask, can we have in Massachusetts? I did know, of course, that Governor Cox was pres- ent and hat he was the guest of honor, but did not know that it was to be the occasion for announcing his candidacy for a second term. It would not have maae any difference, however, if I had known this fact. I did not give the question of any effect the raid might have upon his re-election any considera- tion. I was a law enforcement officer and I knew the law was being violated. My duty was plain. Party affiliations or friendships or sympathy for any par- ticular public official had nothing to do with the affair. It was said that the raid was inspired to ruin Gov- ernor Cox politically. My tip did not come from a politician, and if the affair had been a political frame- up more care would have been taken to see that it was actually carried through to a satisfactory con- clusion. It was only chance that brought me back to my office that night. The men working with me at the Rossmore Hotel, the place raided about 5 :30 o'clock on the evening of the Quincy House banquet were unable to continue with me f ^ • another raid, and so I returned to my office for additional help. If my plans had not miscued, I would have been in another city during the G. O. P. love-feast. Practical politicians who are trying to frame a governor or an entire political party do not trust to chance. Their plans are well laid and executed with precision. If His Excellency, the Governor, Channing H. Coxj was betrayed on the evening of December 20, 1921, it was by his most intimate friend and closest SO DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS political henchman, the Hon. Charles H. Innes. Either Innes betrayed the Governor or His Excel- lency was cognizant or favored the second floor booze party, there is no other alternative. Granting the worst, that is, admitting for the sake of argument, that I knew the State Director was pres- ent at the banquet, and that he had issued a permit for said banquet, and that I was gunning for the political scalp of Governor Channing H. Cox, my personal motive, whether good or bad, could not in any way clear the gentlemen who were present or had knowledge of the disgraceful drinking debauchery staged in an upstairs chamber. Most of the bootleggers captured during my regime as Chief Enforcement Officer were captured through some spite tip trom a former accomplice. Most criminals, as a matter of fact, are caught through leaks from their most intimate pals. Every bootlegger and every "wet" politician in the State was gunning for my scalp and, in fact, many of the "wet" politicians are still looking for some technicality on which to hang me. If I had stubbed my toe as Prohibition Chief and been framed by some "near'' statesman, whose booze joint I had raided, how much sympathy would I have received ? The way of the transgressor is hard. The safest road is the straight and narrow way, so aptly de- scribed in the Bible. I have absolutely no sympathy for Governor Cox. He was a voluntary guest at the Quincy House ban- quet. It was staged in his honor, and certainly any of his wishes relative to the dispensing of liquor on the second floor or anywhere else in the hotel would have been respected. He was in the hands of his most intimate friends. Ernest J. Goulston, host of the evening, was his ad- vertising manager during his campaign for the Gov- ernorship, and according to Mr. Goulston's own ad- 30 IGNORANCE SUBLIME mission, has known the Governor intimately for years. I wish to state at this point that I do not agree with the Anti-Saloon League's statement in which Mr. Goulston's motives in staging the Quincy House banquet are impeached. The League officials assert the affair was a huge advertising scheme to boost the new cafeteria in the Quincy House. I do not believe that such a state- ment is in accordance with the facts. Mr. Goulston, (however I may differ from him on the liquor question and on politics in general), is not that type of man. I have talked with a number of newspaper men who know him intimately and are doing business with him practically every day. They all agree that Ern- est J. Goulston is a typical "go-through" advertis- ing man, and that when he manages a banquet, or any other party, he puts on the best that money will buy. Few, cognizant of the facts relative to the Quincy House banquet, will gainsay that from a joy-produc- ing, stonhach-satisfying standpoint, the famous "White Horse" revelry was a glorious success. Mr. Elmer C. Potter, who issued the permit, ad- mits that he is a close friend of the Governor, al- though the Governor has not admitted any particular intimacy on his part. Mr. Harold G. Kern, the holder of the permit, is a very close friend of Mr. Goulston, in fact, he is re- ported as being associated with him in his advertising business. Certainly, Mr. Kern was not a willing partner to any frame-up on his Excellency, the Gov- ernor. Last, but not least, the Honorable Charles H. Innes, outside guardian at the portals of "wet" bliss, was not a party to the betrayal of his last ace in the political game. Charley Innes and Governor Cox hail from the same ward. Mr. Innes was the Governor's most ar dent sponsor when he was first elected to the Com- 91 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS mon Council, and then later when he was elected to the House of Representatives, and subsequently pro- moted to the Speakership. He was still his staunch supporter when Speaker Cox was elected Lieutenant- Governor, and then in 1920 Governor of the great Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Charley Innes* political history is quite interesting. He was a member of the Common Council in 1896. the next year was elected to the Legislature, and later served two terms in the Senate. Mr. Innes is credit- ed with being more of a political Czar in his own ward than Martin Lamasney the Mahatma of Ward Five. Certainly, he has been more successful in de- livering the votes of his ward. He is the Disraeli of Republican State politics. The following picture of Mr. Innes by the "practical painter,^ a writer for a Boston newspaper, eighteen years ago, is interesting. According to this writer, "Mr. Innes and his follow- ers are very practical, very practical. They slay their enemies, high and low, in both parties and at any time, and those who think they can carry Ward Ten without the aid of Mr. Innes are usually doomed to a regrettable awakening.** In view of the close and cordial association of Governor Cox, Charley Innes, and Ernest J. Goul- ston, it is extremely difficult to believe that the Gov- ernor was absolutely without knowledge of the G. O. P. liquor "love-feast** on the second floor of the Quincy House on the evening of the famous raid. His statement, given out the day following the raid, does not sound as well as many he has since is- sued at Christian Endeavor and other Church func- tions. According to practically every newspaper in Boston, he was quoted on December 21st as follows : *T saw nothing out of the way at the dinner, and I hope that Mr. Wilson felt he was performing his duty and that he had no other purpose. It is the duty of every officer to enforce the law, and I hope it will always be done." 82 IGNORANCE SUBLIME What does his Excellency mean by "he hopes Mr. Wilson felt he was performing his duty?" How did the Governor feel? Mr. Wilson's emotions are of little consequence or the motive that prompted the raid. What the people of Massachusetts were inter- ested in at that time, and what they are still interest- ed in, is whether or not the Governor of this great Commonwealth was a part and parcel of this dis- graceful Constitution-flouting affair. In view of the above weak-kneed statement and the fact that the Governor has still failed to repudiate the active managers of the "second floor bar room", it is going to be difHcult to convince the dry forces of Massachusetts that he was entirely innocent. When Mr. Cox repudiates Charles H. Innes and Charles disowns the Governor, black will be white, and the bona fide dry forces of Massachusetts will admit that his Excellency is dry from conviction rather than from urgent, imperative necessity. I am not prepared to state that the Governor speaks one way and drinks another, but I have no hesitation in asserting that his "dry" votes have been from policy rather than from conviction, and with such an ardeat "wetV as Charley Innes for an adviser, the pressure of policy, in some instances, must have been mighty strong. Governor Cox is a congenial, likeable man. He is termed as a good fellow among men. No one could ever picture him as an outstanding figure, urging the public to awaken to its responsibilities and opportun- ities. He is, like many other hand-picked machine- made candidates, absolutely safe. If he was not amiable, pliable and amenable to party discipline he could never have received the endorsement and whole hearted support of the grand High Mogul of the G. O. P. councils, Hon. Charles H. Innes. When the boys have a good time, the Governor is a happy member of the party ; when a funeral is to be attend- ed, possibly the burial of "John Barleycorn*" he is as DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS as sober faced as the most sober. When it is necessary to cover party discrepancies with a smoke screen, he is a very forceful champion of law and order. When the boys want a side show and drunk- en debauchery in conjimction with a Republican love- feast he lacks the moral courage to say NO. I honestly believe that the Governor was victim- ized by those in charge of the liquor dispensary at the Quincy House, December 20, because advantage was taken of his well-known good nature, and easy going methods, but I can not sympathize with him in his inability to raise a restrictive hand when certain wet politicians would jeopardize not only his own political future, but that of the party which has en- trusted him its leadership. I believe we are face to face with times when strong men, men of genuine, action-producing convictions are needed. Men who can say NO with as much compelling decisiveness as they can give the order to "go forward*' when in the right. Other statements issued the day following the Quincy House raid are well worth consideration. PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT DIRECTOR POTTER— **If Mr. Wilson believed the law was be- ing violated, it was his duty to take such steps as he saw fit. SECRETARY OF STATE FREDERIC W. COOK — "I had absolutely no knowledge that liquor was being served, and certainly saw none at the din- ner. The first I learned that liquor had been served was when I saw Mr. Wilson as I was leaving the 5iotel. I disapprove of its having been there. It was a violation of the law. I believe it is the duty of public officials to enforce the law, and they should set an example by refraining from all violations of it." LIEUT. GOV. ALVAN T. FULLER— "I have nothing to say at present." STATE TREASURER JAMES JACKSON— "I S4 IGNORANCE SUBLIME saw no liquor, I got no liquor — ^but I got there late." The "if" in Mr. Potter's statement is rather die- concerting. Is it possible that the prohibition di- rector in Massachusetts had some doubt as to whether the law was being violated? It would seem from this statement, that he was still in doubt on the day immediately following the raid, Wednesday, but by Saturday of the same week, he had been thorough- ly convinced that the law was violated. Perhaps some '*wet pol" advised a revised statement Leastwise, his statement that he would have raided the place himself, if he had known what was going on, would lead even the most unsophisticated to be- lieve he had seen the light. No man could possibly take exception to the masterly statement of the Hon. Frederic W. Cook. Mr. Cook is every inch a statesman and is an honor to the party which has made him Secretary of the Commonwealth. I met Mr. Cook on two different occasions outside the Quincy House on the evening of the raid during my search for the U. S. Commis- sioner, and know that his knowledge of the banquet must have been very limited. The statement of the State Treasurer, Mr. Jackson, is rather illuminating even if he was a bit hard on some who would plead complete ignorance of the whole affair. Why did the Lieut. Gov., Alvan T. Fuller, refrain from making a statement? I have it from the ve.y best of authority, that he did give a statement to at least one newspaper reporter which he retracted be- fore publication. It has been suggested that since the Lieutenant Governor has such an excellent record for outspoken veracity, regardless of whom he hits and such a poor reputation for amenability to the political recipe of covering up any party mistakes, his statement would have admitted too much knowledge of what was actually going on in the up- stairs chamber, and thus have been misinterpreted S5 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS by his political enemies, as an attempt to make poli- tical capital out of the misfortune of other G. O. P. leaders. An amusing incident relative to the Quincy House raid is the fact that the Lieutenant Governor severely criticized me, that very afternoon for not having raided a certain big public banquet he had at- tended at which booze was served very indiscrimin- ately. He said that prohibition was a farce, as long as the big fellows could drink with impunity. I in- formed him that the banquet he mentioned was staged by a Foreign Delegation in America for the Peace Conference, and that if I had attempted to raid such a place the political framers and technically trained lawyers would have proven that whatever liquor was served belonged to the foreign delegation. I believe the Lieutenant Governor was correct. Mr. Fuller, like many other respectable law-loving public officials has been a victim of the false standard of political hypocrisy, established and maintained by such men as Charley Innes, who claim to be the staunchest supporters of the Republican party, and yet for a little personal stomach satisfaction jeopar- dize the welfare of the entire G. O. P. organization, to attend parties where liquor was served openly ir even surreptiously that sooner or later I would raid such a party when he was present. As luck would have it I raided the Quincy House, at which he was present, that very night. The Lieutenant Governor did not give me any inkling on the afternoon of the twentieth, that there was to be a party at the Quincy House, and I imagine he was as much surprised as any other public official when I descended upon the place. I shall not enter into any discussion whether all the guests in the Quincy House knew of the pri- vate booze room on the second floor, or not for it is of little consequence, as I believe the majority of the Republican notables present were victims of a vicious system, and like Lieutenant Governor Fuller depre- 36 IGNORAKCE SUBLIME cated the condition but were at a loss how to rectify the hypocrisy without being grievously misundcr- stood by the public. I did something that had to be done, and if my motives have been misunderstood and maliciously maligned it is of no moment provided I have succeeded in knocking a cer- tain amount of hypocrisy out of high places. I do not condemn the rank and file of the Republican leaders who were present at the Quincy House banquet, but I do condemn Governor Channing H. Cox for his weak-kneed statement, his great per- sonal intimacy with those who staged the constitu- tion defying liquor dispensary on the second floor and his persistent refusal to in any way repudiate certain wet parasites who are a dead load to the Re- publican party. Governor Cox was the key to the whole situation. He was the one man who could have stood up with an emphatic NO, and have re- ceived the unanimous endorsement of all the law lov- ing citizens in Massachusetts. If Lieutenant Gov- ernor Fulled, Frank Allen, President of the Senate or a number of other estimable gentlemen who were present had attempted to sound the death knell of drunken debaucheries in side-rooms at public func- tions, their clarion call to duty would have been mis- interpreted, and the finger of scorn would have been turned upon them as politicial ingrates; aspirants to the governorship over the prostrate, mud-spattered form of Channing H. Cox. In this event, the Gov- ernor would have been pictured as the innocent vic- tim of malicious machinations n the part of an am- bitious unscrupulous politician. It fell to my lot to be the temporary champion of genuine law enforcement from the Top Down rather than from the Bottom Part Way Up and as a conse- quence, I have been suspected of every conceivable motive, except the correct one of impartial law en- forcement by a clique of booze-loving, law-defying, near statesmen. 87 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS HAVE OUR COURTS BROKEN DOWN? Chapter IV. "Have our courts broken down?" is a serious ques- tion and one that should not be dealt with lightly. For a long time it has been considered almost hi^h treason to even infer a judge was wrong or possibly subservient to some corporate interests, but when confronted with the plain, cold truth someone must call a spade a spade. We have many fine judges in Massachusetts, men of the very highest personal integrity, and of up- right moral character. On the other hand we have a few judges who are decidedly immoral and equally biased in their decisions. While I do not advocate the election of judges some feasible way must be found to rid the bench of undesirable characters. Our system of appointing judges for life, and thus making them absolutely in- dependent of public hysteria and political coercion is beautiful in theory but not always practical in opera- tion. If the judges were selected for their ability and unswerving fidelity to the public trust, there would be no question as to the merit of our present system, but when they are often selected by cheap, hand-picked, machine-made politicians who kow-tow to every special interest, and feed the public on un- adulterated bunkum, polished off with highfalutin , seemingly endless phraseology, there is serious ques- tion if occasionally selections as judges are not of the same inferior interest-serving, public-be-damned variety. I am sorry to state that we have a few judges on the bench who drink to excess in absolute violation of the Constitutional law of the land, some who gam- ble more persistently and perniciously than the gam- blers who daily come before them for a sentence teeming with hypocrisy, and some whose immoral 88 HAVE OUR COURTS BROKEN DOWN? relations do not tend to breed respect for law and decency. It is a weird mockery, a travesty on justice to ex- pect an impartial, intelligent, legally-sound decision from such wanton violators of both the laws of God and of man, A way must be found to remove such men and to select their successors from the best and most honorable legal men of the nation. The remedy is simple, elect men to the governor- ship who will be governed only by the dictation f their own conscience and select men for judges of the very highest legal ability and spotless character. The opponents of prohibition law enforcement are always harping on the hypocrisy attending the adop- tion of the Eighteenth Amendment and its enforce- ment. The hypocrisy is all to be found with those who are trying to nullify the law. As Prohibition Chief, I did not find it necessary to raid the homes of church people, whatever their creed, and when I found an out-and-out-Christian gentleman on the bench as j^dge, I found no lack of interest or co- operation on his part relative to the conviction and punishment of law violators. Where I found hypocrisy was in the high officials or judges who surreptitiously imbibe their booze in private and in public make a grand-stand play of enforcing the law with minor offenders while secret- ly striving to nullify all statutory provisions apply- ing to the more influential violators. The attorney who advises a client on the best way in which to circumvent a law, defends him when he is apprehended, and collects both ways, is the neari-'c thing to a hypocrite and a parasite on the face of the earth. Some of our lawyers live on such business and are a disgrace to their profession. I am glad that we have many, however, who will not stoop to such practice. It is a joke to arrest a bootlegger for peddling his poisonous, man-killing liquors and have a judge free 29 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS him on some far-fetched technicality, or impose a minimum fine. What does a man care for a paltry fine when he s so degraded that he will sell moonshine loaded with wood alcohol, fusel oil, and other deadly ingredients? He marks the fine off to profit and loss and resimi?s operations the next day. Then the "wets" scream **the law cannot be en- forced. It breeds anarchy." Of course, it cannot be enforced effectively on a system of picayune fines. Neither could the law on stealing automobiles or safe- breaking be enforced if the thieves were never fined more than five to ten per cent of the value of their plunder. There are districts in Massachusetts where is is al- most impossible to secure a search warrant because of the open hostility of the presiding judge, and if perchance a warrant is obtained it is next to impos- sible to secure a conviction. If both the warrant and the conviction are obtained through good luck and hard fighting the fine is so inconsequential that the whole proceeding is farcical. Under the Federal law, the mere possession of liquor is prima facie evidence for a conviction. The burden of proof rests with the possessor and not with the Government. Under our present State laws, or rather lack of laws, it is not illegal to pos- sess an unlimited amount of liquor or to transport same at will throughout the Commonwealth or even to set up a liquor distillery in your home or place of business. The need of a State law conforming to the liquor laws is imperative. The only way in which a conviction can be ob- tained in a State court is to prove that the possessor of the liquor is keeping and exposing for saU. Sometimes it is very difficult to prove an actual sale, although the available circumstancial evidence may be sufficient to convict a man of murder. For ex- ample, a citizen, or I should say an alien, fur it is 40 HAVE OUR COURTS BROKEN DOWN? very seldom that citizens engage in the indefensible liquor traffic, starts in the wholesale manufacture of liquor. He sets up a distillery which is capable of an output of twenty or more gallons of moonshine a day. No man, however large his circle of acquaint- ances, could drink any such quantity of whiskey. Consequently, the natural inference is that he is mak- ing it for commercial purposes. Most of the judges in Massachusetts will convict such a man on circum- stantial evidence on the ground that he is not making his liquor to dump down the sink, and obviously must be keeping and exposing his product for sah^ I have been to judges in Boston and nearby cities who have refused to issue a search warrant when the place to be searched was reeking with the odor and filth of a distillery ; places where the other tenants of a house complained that booze was being made on such a large scale that their health was being under- mined by the foul and noxious fumes. I have had complaint from distracted wives and mothers about places selling such vile, brutalizing concoctions that the women feared for the safety of their children and their homes. When these poor discouraged heart- broken, mothers or wives dared not come before these judges, or in some cases when they did appear, no cognizance was taken of their pitiful cases. I have known of dives apparently so thoroughly protected by a certain class of judges that a search warrant could not be obtained on actual evidence of a sale. It is generally possible to find a legal techni- cality in any law if the presiding justice is so dis- posed. In other cases, the search warrant was issued so grudgingly and with so much hesitation that the **hell-ketchen", or "man wrecking" dispensary was tipped off long before it could be raided. It is because of this attitude on the part of some judges and the fact that a few are sitting on the bench who are clearly mentally and physically in- competent, that I advocate some change in our 41 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS method of selecting judges. My idea of the immu- tabiHty of our courts has been radically changed by some of my farcical and disgusting experiences as a Prohibition Chief. The greatest single stumbling-block to prohibition in Massachusetts is United States Commissioner William H. Hayes, the Mr. Pickwick of the Boston Federal Building. He has freely admitted on num- erous occasions that he has absolutely no use for the Volstead Act, or any of its provisions, and his actions in court are consistently in accord with his expressed opinions. Search warrants are obtained with the ut- most difficulty and when cases are brought before him, it is generally the Federal prohibition agents who are tried rather than the defendants. Few ques- tions are asked of the defendants, while agents are put through a most strenuous and sarcastic third de- gree. He has been so abusive to Boston policemen appearing before him as witnesses, that it is practi- cally impossible to get a Boston patrolman to appear in his court. Many violators of the liquor laws ap- parently do not deem an attorney necessary in the court of Commissioner Hayes. This is not the case, however, before such United States Commissioners as Goodspeed of New Bedford, Fletcher of Worces- ter, Rice of Springfield, and Wood of Pittsfield, and as a matter of fact, it is not a common practice in any court. When a man is arrested for a law vio- lation, his first act of self preservation is to rush to an attorney for legal advice. Attorneys trying liquor rasc5. in the Federal Building at Boston before any other U. S. Commissioner invariably continue them until Mr. Hayes is sitting. In the famous Quinc}'- House raid trial, the first legal skirmish on the part of the defendants was to take the case away from United States Commissioner Nelson so that it might be tried before Commissioner Hayes. This move was unsuccessful and as a consequence one of the defendants was. held for the grand jury. 42 HAVE OUR COURTS BROKEN DOWN? Cases were thrown out of court by the Commis- sioner on the merest techr xalities, and whenever it was a case of veracity, between an agent and a boot- legger, the latter's statement appeared to carry great- er weight. I have a number of affidavits in my pos- session showing some very unusual decisions or an- tics on the part of the Commissioner. In one case, after filling out a search warrant he deliberately read the address and the name of the premises to be searched in a sufficiently loud voice for a number of bootleggers to overhear. It is needless to say that this raid was unsuccess- ful. Another affidavit relates how the Commission- er allowed a well-known liquor attorney to examine a search warrant for a Lowell hotel, prior to giving same to the agent. When the raid was staged a few hours later, the proprietor met us with a smile, with the remark "You are too late, boys." Another affidavit describes a hearing before the Commissioner in which eveiy effort was apparently made to mkke a public spectacle out of the agents handling the case. At the close of the hearing, when the Commissioner, as usual, was about to dis- charge the defendant, a special United States Assist- ant Attorney told him that he must either decide that two of my agents were absolute liars or find the de- fendant guilty. The defendant was discharged, the obvious inference being thai the agents were liars i.i the Commissioner's opinion. I have a number of affidavits in which Mr. Hayes has publicly reprimanded agents for what he termed *Merelections of duty,** said breeches of "Hell Kitch- en** ethics being founded on the false assertions of bar room derelicts. The same affidavits recite in- stances in which he has advised in open court before bar proprietors and their ever present degenerate, bleary-eyed, rum-soaked, gin-guzzling hangers-on, the use of force on the sligthest miscue in proprieties of law. It was of no consequence whether said er- 48 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS rors in judgment were technical or unintentional. One agent was roundly abused and the men attack- ing him were freed because said agent, when set up- on in a bar room, failed to state that he was a Fed- eral officer. The agent had testified in court that he announced his identity, but in as much as the "bums" attacking bim had testified to the contrary, the agent*s testimony was not competent. A typical illustration of the well-nigh im- possibility of obtaining a search warrant in some instances is the Pine Grove Inn case of the summer of 1921, and the statement which I am about to make regarding this affair is backed up by an affidavit signed by two of my agents and myself. On October 7, 1921, I drove a party consisting of two of my agents and two reputable ladies to the Pine Grove Inn in Marlboro at about ten o'clock in the evening. Fearing that I might be recognized because of the rather unusual publicity that I had re- ceived, I remained in the automobile while my agents and the ladies entered the Inn. They took a window table where I could clearly watch the proceedings. After obtaining the confidence of their waiter, they succeeded in securing drinks of liquor at the table and also a half pint for their supposed consumption on the way home. With this absolute evidence that the Pine Grove Inn was illegally trafficking in liquor at that time, I went to United States Commission \- Hayes and requested a search warrant for the fol- lowing evening (Saturday). The Commissioner positively refused to issue such a warrant after he found out that neither my agents nor myself knew the name of the waiter making the sale or whether or not the proprietor actually saw said sale, require- ments impossible of fulfillment without arousing the suspicionof the proprietor. I was so determined to get the Pine Grove Inn after the refusal of the Com- missioner to give me a warrant, that I went directly to the warrant clerk in the City of Marlboro and ob- 44 HAVE OUR COURTS BROKEN DOWN? tained a state "ticket". Armed with this warrant, and assisted by the police of Marlboro, the Inn was raided and sufficient evidence obtained for a convic- tion in the State Court, a much more difficult pro- ceeding than under the Federal law. I might men- tion numerous other instances, but it is hardly neces- sary. What I am trying to prove is the hypocrisy of the "wet" interests when they assert that the prohibitory law cannot be enforced while doing every thing in their power to prevent even a reasonable trial. It can and will be enforced when the public is brought to a realization of the many inexcusable obstacles placed in the way of those actually striving to en- force the law. Conditions in other U. S. Commissioners' Districts in Massachusetts are in direct contrast to the Boston situation. It was a pleasure to work with such com- missioners as Alexander Goodspeed of New Bedford, and John L. Rice of Springfield. Both of these men are exceptionally well posted in the legal technique of their offices and carry out their duties as if they felt some personal responsibility in the conviction and punishment of liquor violators. The honor of our courts is safe in the hands of such men, and if the country \ h favored with judges and commis- sioners of this type, there would be no occasion for anyone to advocate the recall or election of judges. The same is true of Commissioners Fletcher of Wor- cester and Wood of Pittsfield. Certain events on the night of the Quincy House raid were not included in the two preceeding chap- ters as th :y y tre reserved for consideration in co*i- nection with the long and — up to the time of the printing of this book — unfinished court battle to have the raid case thrown out of Court. At th': time I raided the winery of the Republican revellers, one Harold G. Kern submitted to me a permit purporting to give him the right to transport 45 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS five cases of gin and two cases of whiskey from his residence in West Roxbury to his winter residence, room 46, Quincy House. This permit bore the hu }- ber stamp of Elmer C. Potter, State Prohibition Di- rector, and appeared to be proper in every respect except that it had been issued for an apparently very improper purpose. The mockery and inconsistency of a system that makes possible the flashing of a legal permit in the face of an officer trying to perform his sworn duty is too disgusting for comment. An inexperienced agent might well have retreated, convinced that h**. was making an illegal raid. I do not excuse the State Director for issuing this permit and going to the same banquet. He passed it off with the remark that it was simply routine business. That is the trouble with his office; there is too much routine business and too little personal supervision. The State Director may be absolutely blameless, like unto his Excellence the Governor, since both are reputed to be so easy going that such trivialities as Constitutional law-breaking do not ruffie the serenity of their happy lives. Blissful ignorance may be sublime in those charged with no public trust, but it does not appeal to the great mass of the people, who demand action and plenty of it in their paid officials. The Quincy House permit was the arch-camou- flage of a group of scheming politicians who deal solely in camouflage. To hear some of the politi- cians talk one would almost be led to believe that they considered this particular permit to have been legally issued and properly used, but to the unsophis- ticated, unschooled in the ways of the "wet" politi- cian, it is difficult to understand how liquor could be dispensed upon such a wholesale basis without violating both the spirit and the letter of the Vol- stead Act. The wholesale scale of distribution, the 46 HAVE OUR COURTS BROKEN DOWN? utter disregard of the usual methods of precaution, and the indignant amazement of those responsible for establishing a liquor-dispensary in connection with the G. O. P. *'love feast" isexcellent evidence that full protection was expected. To the average lay mind, the fight to set aside the search warrant used in this raid is the worst kind of hypocrisy. After finding such an abundance of liquor and every evidence that the Constitutional law of the land had been utterly disregarded, it is hard to understand the process of reasoning that would hold those responsible guiltless, if some legal techni- cality could be raised setting aside the search war- rant. The warrant used in this particular raid was issued in good faith and served absolutely in accord- ance with law. If by any chance the warrant is eventually set aside through the employment of high-class attorneys and the use of far-fetched legal technicalities, it will be a greater blow to law and order than if a thousand of the minor culprits unable financially to employ such an array of legal talent should escape punishment after staging a similar fracas. No one has attempted to gainsay that an unusual amount of liquor was seized in this famous raid. No one can gainsay that many of the "red tagged" guests were decidedly under the influence of liquor, or that the law was freely violated by those who par- ticipated. The only question raised to date is wheth- er or not the search warrant was technically legal. If the G. O. P. legal talent is able to prove through subterranean channels that the warrant was not made absolutely according to Hoyle, that some features of punctuation were not in the best form, or that all the ethereal exigencies were not fulfilled, my raid on the Quincy House will be called illegal and any evidence seized kept out of the court records. In view of the fact that every reader of a news- paper in Massachusetts knows exactly what trans- 47 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS pired in the Quincy House that night, it seems abso- lutely absurd and the height of hypocrisy to resort to the subterfuge of a legal smoke-screen in the hope that some of the people may be sufficiently gullible to hold those participating guiltless. A contemptible feature of this disgraceful de- bauchery is the fact that those responsible did not even take a sporting chance. They not only violated the Constitutional law of the land with impunity, but felt comparatively safe in doing so. In other words, they stacked the cards with a legal, if absolutely in- defensible, permit for the transportation of their liquor, invited the supposedly responsible head of the prohibition department, and than drank and ca- roused with the utmost abandon. Most men admire a "game sport*', that is, an in- dividual who takes a real sporting chance, but no one has any use for the "dead beat*' who plays a sure thing. Thanks to the unswerving fidelity of United States Commissioner William S. Nelson, Harold G. Kern, the pe-^^t holder and acknowledged owner of the Q^'ncy . Guse liquor, has been held for the Grand Jury. "The Vvhite Horse" whiskey served at the Quincy House raici vvas of 1921 vintage, not 1918 as sworn to in the Ke:*n affidavit requesting a transportation permit. This ought to lead to a government charge of perjury. It is also safe to assume that the gin was acquired after the passage of the prohibition amendment rather than before, although I have no definite proof to back up this assertion other than the fact that Kern is a very young man, so young in fact that he was under age when he claimed to have had legal possession of the Quincy House liquor in 1918. 48 FACTS ON PROHIBITION FACTS AND FIGURES ON PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT Chapter V. In spite of the many court handicaps described in the preceding chapter, the persistent propaganda of the liquor interests and the pernicious influence of "wet" politicians who talk for public consumption, and drink for stomach consumption, prohibition has accomplished a tremendous amount of good. The favorable attitude of many large employers of labor is one of the best testimonials as to the stabilizing and man power conserving qualities of prohibition. Wayne B. Wheeler has said that the 18th Amend- ment is the greatest single piece of constructive leg- islation ever written by the hand of man. Every signpost raised by the prohibition laws on the high- way of human progress points clearly ahead to bet- ter things if the passer will but see it. The only trouble with the prohibition laws is that a portion of the people refuse to see the good and try to dress a sacred ideal in the garb and vestments of Satan. Let's face the truth. There is a persistent, malig- nant propaganda against prohibition — a cancerous germ in the body politic, nourished on the tainted money of the brewer and distiller and by the preju- dices of thousands who are unwilling to give up something for the common good. With many it is just plain stomach selfishness. The wet propagandist is sly and astute. He ig- nores the good and parades before our eyes only the bad things which in many instances are temporary and incidental. If it be shown that drunkenness ar- rests have increased from 1920 to 1921, he magnifies this, disregarding the fact that arrests for drunken- ness are still far below the records of pre-prohibition days. If it be the fortune of the prohibition officials to turn up an immense illicit distillery or to uncover a widespread smuggling plot, the wet theorist imme- 49 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS diately accepts these things as evidence that more liquor is being consumed than ever before in the history of the United States. The problems of enforcement will be considered in a later chapter, but I would like to pause here, for a moment, to brand this argument as a vicious un- truth. It is ridiculous to suppose that any illicit traffic, under the very noses of an enforcement staff trained and sworn to prosecute it, can support an organization comparing even remotely with the great rum octopus which wound its tentacles about the limbs of the body politic and crushed out the life of thousands in pre-prohibition days. The old sluice- ways of the brewer and distiller, which poured their output of alcohol into every alley and corner saloon as regularly as the clock ticked away seconds in the life of the Nation, are closed for all time. In their places have sprung up scattered streams, fed by the rum runner and the backwoods distiller. This lawless traffic can never equal a small part of the organized system which prevailed under the old plan of Government regulation and taxation. There are certain definite things that prohibition has accomplished that may not be gainsaid. In the first place it has eliminated for all time the saloon and the brass rail, once the most insidious in- fluences in American life. The saloon, corrupter of morals and robber of the poor, has been buried in a tomb so strongly buttressed that even the wicked axes and battering ram of the wet propagandist will forever be turned aside by its bastions. In the heighth of the wet era there were nearly six hundred licensed saloons and nearly 1000 licensed places of all kinds in the city of Boston. Within the past two years 75% of these have dried up like desert oases in an August drouth. The specter of the bartender has almost faded from the picture of American life. Today only a few outposts of the bygone era are to be found on the streets of Bos- 50 FACTS ON PROHIBITION ton. Since the licensing of saloons was blotted out by the Volstead standard of one-half of one per cent, there are no accurate figures as to the numbers of bars which continue to do business in Boston; but my experience as enforcement agent has convinced me that less than one-fourth of them have survived. These places exist for the ostensible purpose of selling near-beer but many of them still cater to the outraged appetite of the drinker of something of the "hard*' variety. The liquor is sold in small quan- tities and at tremendous prices. The eye of the bar- tender is ever watchful for the unwelcome appear- ance of a Federal agent. Each surreptitious move is a part of a well-conceived scheme for eluding the agent who may take him unawares. The second convincing result of prohibition is the reduction in the number of arrests for drunkenness, not only in Massachusetts, but throughout the United States. A glance at the following table, covering the ar- rests for drunkenness in 1917 and 1921 in the thir- teen Massachusetts cities which were wet in 1917, brings but one conclusion: ARRESTS FOR DRUNKENNESS MASSACHUSETTS CITIES WET IN 1917. 1915 1920 Popula- Popula- Arrests tion tion 1917 1921 Boston 745,439 748,060 72,897 30,409 Chelsea 43,426 43,184 1,885 979 Chicopee 30,138 36,214 780 223 Gloucester 24,478 22,947 776 185 Holyoke 60,816 60,203 1,652 598 Lawrence 90,257 94,270 2,962 1,860 Lowell 107,978 112.759 4,375 1,833 Marlboro 15,250 15,028 351 67 New Bedford 109,568 121,217 2,427 1,167 Northampton 21,654 21,957 558 122 51 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS Pittsfield 39,607 41,763 1,996 361 Springfield 102,971 129,614 2,622 8&+ Worcester 162,967 179,754 7,257 2,981 Every city having open saloons in 1917 had more arrests that year than in either 1920 or 1921 the two prohibition years and with two exceptions the 1920 and 1921 arrests added together do not equal the arrests for the last year under license, 1917. One may foolishly inquire why drunkenness was not wholy eliminated. Drunkenness will not completely pass imtil the cause of dnmkenness has been ruthlessly wiped from the surface of the United States, not until an outraged public has risen up in wrath to demand genuine enforcement and a new generation with new ideals and contempt for old traditions of evil has grown up to supersede the present. The "wets" have made much capital over the fact that there has been an increase in the number of arrests for drunkenness during the past year over the first year of Constitutional prohibition. This is not such an alarming feature of the enforcement prob- lem as the foes of prohibition would have us believe; and for two reasons, first because the number of drunks is far lower than in the days of the saloon, secondly, because it results from a definite and antici- pated phase in the enforcement of the dry laws. The schemes of the rum-runner and bootlegger were not conceived over night. They were the re- sults of weeks and months of plotting and devising. The opening period of forbearance was inevitably to be followed by the growth of an illicit traffic. A period of reconstruction must inevitably follow the enactment of this legislation even as a long and not yet completed period of reconstruction followed the granting of equal rights to the black man. The illicit trafficker, with the encouragement of a vociferous minority and of many public officials has found how to evade the law. 62 FACTS ON PROHIBITION The bootlegging problem, then, is not a problem of prohibition, but a problem of reconstruction. Patronage of the bootlegger is the waning expres- sion of opinion by the minority who are unwilling to accept the will of the majority. It will decrease progressively as the public — and especially the East, for prohibition is solidly established in the South and Central West — become more accustomed to the dry laws and AS THE DRINKER BECOMES MORE AND MORE CONSCIOUS OF THE DAN- GER THAT LURKS IN EVERY DROP OF ILLICIT WHISKEY. Another point that bears directly upon the question of the recent increase in arrests. More drunkenness is not an evidence that more liquor is being drunk; it is simply an added proof of the poisonous char- acter of bootlegged whiskey. This statement is based on positive evidence produced during my ex- perience as Chief Enforcement Agent. The man who once got drunk on three drinks, can now get ^runk on one. Some of the whiskey I have seized would make the Statue of Liberty tipsy. Expert gagers of the Revenue Department who carefully tested and analyzed various brands of gin and whiskey seized during the late months of 1921 were amazed that the human stomach could hold such stuff even for the space of five minutes. Bootlegged whiskey comes from two main sources, illegal distilling and smuggling.; The whiskey dis- tilled in the slum, on the farms and in the remote place of New England is made one day and sold the next, whereas whiskey, for even legitimate use, is unfit to drink unless it has been aged. The dollar- chasing traffic of the rum-maker is too profitable for him to age his product. It is sold to the unsuspect- ing drinker with all of the wood alcohol, fusel oil and other poisonous ingredients that poisen the sys- tem and deaden the vitals. Liqour smuggled across the border from Canada is almost equally new and 53 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS dangerous. The so called "White Horse" whiskey- seized in the Quincy House raid was of such a char- acter that it could not fail to result in a drunken carousal. I have been told by persons who were present prior to my arrival — and who were invited (I was not) — that a single large drink "put under" some of the guests. The best advice that I can give to the public is this: every man who takes a drink of liquor which he did not personally buy before June 1, 1919, is do- ing so at the risk of his health. Every man who drinks indiscriminately liquor sold by the bootlegger is digging his own grave just as surely as if the pick and shovel were in his hands. If men could once visit some of the foul places in which the vile stuff is made they would quake with shame that it had ever touched their lips. I have seen stills turning out scores of gallons a day from out houses, slaughter houses and piggeries reeking with filth and the stale odors of dirt and dung. I have arrested guardians of stills so filthy in their persons that one would involuntarily shun them on the sidewalk; yet these man handled their product carelessly, doubtless drank from the open containers and cared nothing if the liquor came in contact with their persons. This is the sort of liquor that is being sold today to the habitual drinker in New England and in every city where the bootlegging traffiic thrives. This is the vile stuff for which men pay 50 cents and a dol- lar per swallow. And this is the product which is keeping the police busy dragging men from the gut- ters into the lower courts. A trafHc of this kind can have only a fleeting evist- ence. It will reap its harvest of broken bodies and souls, but wiser men and women will desert it. Whatever else may be argued from figures, they show that drunkenness has decreased in volume since 1917. What is true of Boston and Massachu- 54 FACTS ON PROHIBITION setts is equally true of other cities and states through- out the nation, except in sections which had pre- viously enjoyed State-wide prohibition. A survey of the forty-eight States completed by the New York World after two years of prohibition indicated a greatly reduced number of drunkenness arrests throughout the nation. In many cases the totals have been reduced two-third from the year 1916. Chicago, one of the outstanding exceptions, is the most notorious crime city in the country under its present administration and there has been no genuine attempt at enforcement there. Greater New York, with its nearly 10,000,000 resi- dents, has been the most noteworthy battle-ground of the "wets" and *'drys". In that great metropolitan area, covering Newaik, Jersey City and Hoboken as well as New York City, drunk arrests have been re- duced more than one-half. The third definite achievement of prohibition is a social one. It is to be noted in improved conditions in the homes of the poor which are unanimously re- ported by social workers and others having to do with the administration of charities. The phonograph has replaced the empty bottle; ordinary home com- forts have found their way into families which be- fore had known only want and privation. Herbert C. Parsons, Deputy Probation Commis- sioner of Massachusetts furnishes one of the most convincing testimonials on the results of prohibition : "The reports of our probation officers who visit in the home are distinctly favorable as to the better conditions of the homes. Their opinions as to the benefits of prohibition are nearly unanimous. "We think that this altered condition is directly reflected in the recent decline in juvenile delinquency, which has been most marked. The juvenile probation officers attribute it to the same cause. While our figures include only the cases placed on probation, these may be taken as a gage of all juvenile cases. 55 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS During 1921 in Massachusetts fewer children under twelve years of age were placed on probation than in any previous year. This is a remarkable fact because of recent years the number had been increas- ing due to the large uses of the juvenile court." Regarding the drunkenness cases, which have al- ready been alluded to, Mr. Parsons stated: "The recent increase in the volume of drunkenness may be ascribed to any or all of several causes. The character of the liquor is such that the drunken man now taken to the station house goes very fast after his first one or two drinks and is a pitiable figure. The moderate drinker who occasionally stepped over the line and became tipsy on the streets has practi- cally disappeared. I am inclined to think that so far as Boston is concerned, at least, the police are now more thorough-going and alert." The decline in juvenile delinquency in Massachu- setts is shown by the following figures: \ Male Female Totals 1915 - 3,202 154 3,356 1916 3,441 187 3,628 1917 4,322 215 4,537 1918 5,008 258 5,266 1919 4,989 292 5,281 1920 3,989 285 4,274 1921 4,127 294 4,421 The decline in the total probation cases throughout the State is shown by the following official figures : 1915 27,994 1916 28,953 1917 - 30,588 1918 - 24,017 ■ 1919 -. 24,537 1920 18,209 1921 23,845 From these facts one may venture far afield into the realm of speculation. Consider records of in- creasing bank deposits. In 1916 total deposits in 56 FACTS ON PROHIBITION National banks in this country were $10,877,087,000; in 1921 $15,142,331,000, or nearly 40 per cent greater. According to records^ of the United States Treasury Department deposits in State banks of all classes were, for 1916, $23,499,471,000; for 1921, $23,516,- 468,000, or approximately the same despite a year of acknowledged depression and unemployment. Figures of this sort may be exposed to the con- tention that other causes may have contribute! to the condition. But if so, the same reply may be made to one of the most insidious attacks against prohibition, namely, hat it is responsible for the crime wave of 1921. What part prohibition may have played in contributing to a wave of criminal activity and gen- eral disregard of law is a matter of conjecture. Crime waves have always followed in the wake of the lowering of moral standards that attends a great war and, it may well be argued, are the natural accom- paniment of an era of great world disorder and mal- content. Chargers of this kind are the weapon of the wet propagandist, the ever-watchful enemy of prohibition and of all that waits on human progress. The propagandist is working twenty-four hours a day. He is a vulture perched upon a precipice, who poun- ces upon every element of wrong and discontent to tear it to pieces before the public gaze. But the odor of the carcass is the odor which the vulture gives to it. His arguments are specious. Prohibition is costly,* he says; therefore no amount of good can make it right; prohibition makes crime though no one can prove it ; prohibition brings corrupt influen- ces to bear on public officials ; therefore it is impos- sible of enforcement. The foe of prohibition aims to dissatisfy the public with it. There is only one way to combat this implacable foe and that is with the truth. The Eighteen Amendment is a part of the Federal Constitution. It was written into the Constituion 57 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS by the orderly processes of Government, tedious but immutable, and approved by the Legislatures of 45 of the States. It can only be erased by two-thirds of the States reversing the action of the whole. This is clearly impossible when more than one-third — 19 States to be exact — have accepted State-wide prohi- bition by popular vote. The opposition to prohibition is central in the East and North. Defiance to the law is a step toward secession, even as was the hostility of the South half a century ago, to a step of progress which it disap- proved. It is a threat against the Union, which no law-abiding citizen will tolerate, much less nourish. For generations the industrial East has dictated the commercial policies of the nation. It is time now for the citizens of the East to realize that f ey can not dictate the social fortunes of a nation. The con- tention that prohibition is a minority law is false. The record of 19 States, which have accepted prohi- bition by popular vote and 16 others which had State- wide legislative prohibition before national prohibi- tion prove that it is false. The success of prohibition will be promoted In di- rect ratio to the education of the public on t^ e sub- ject. Citizens who know the facts should preach them and uphold the Constitution of the United States. It is an out and out fight for Law Enforcement not prohibition, the sacredness of our Constitution must be defended not on Sundays and Wednesdays but on seven days a week, fifty-two weeks a year. Light Wine and Beer Letting down the bars, or to be more specific, opening the bars to the sale of light wine and beer would be the opening wedge in the nullification of the Prohibitory Law. I know from personal experi- ence the difficulties of suppressing the liquor nuisance under the present conditions, without making the proposition nearly hopeless by permitting the sale of 58 FACTS ON PROHIBITION beer. Every former saloon in the country would open, and could exist on the sale of beer. With these '*hell-holes" running wide open, it would be next to impossible to prevent the surreptitious sale of hard liquors over the bar, or by the walking bar rooms, commonly known as hip bootleggers. Eighty five percent of the liquor sold during the license years was beer. The following extract from a pamphlet published by the Massachusetts Anti-Saloon League clearly de- picts Massachusetts' own experiences in permitting the sale of beer: Entirely aside from the constitutional difficulties and from a consideration of the health and welfare of the people the sale of a so-called light beer should be prohibited. It is universally recognized that it is impossible to enforce prohibition and at the same time permit the continuance of the organized liquor trade. Eva- sions and violations are certain to occur. In other words it is impossible to have a chemist with every keg. In 1869 the Legislature of Massachusetts passed a law (Acts of 1869, Ch. 415) which prohibited the sale of all spirituous liquors, and defined intoxicating liquors as covering spirituous liquors and also beer, ale, porter and wine. The following year the law was amended by striking out the clause which cov- ered ale, beer, porter and wine. (Acts of 1870, Ch. 389) Spirituous liquors were prohibited except for medicinal, mechanical, and i-dustrial purposes, and the sale of beer, porter, ale, and wine was allowed without restriction throughout the entire Common- wealth. In other words the conditions then were as nearly identical with those under a 2f per cent or 4 per cent regime as one might well expect they could be. And yet it is a matter of common knowl- edge that with the resumption of the sale of beer the cost of maintaining corrective institutions almost 59 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS immediately jumped 14 per cent. An exhaustive analysis by the Boston HerrJd shows that arrests for drunkenness increased 72 per cent immediately after 1869 and this increase was identical in point of time with exemption of beer from prohibition. Every day knowledge, the experience of Massa- chusetts, and that of other states caused Congress to reject by overwhelming majorities numerous amend- ments proposing to exempt beer from the prohibition of the Eighteen Amendment to the Constitution. It should, also, be noted that, while six states out of the 48 do not define intoxicating liquors, 18 de- fine as intoxicating any liquor containing any alco- hol, making a total of 35 out of 42 which define in- toxicating liquors, that recognize the validity and necessity of at least a i of 1 per cent standard. Common experience, the deliberations of legisla- tive bodies, and the decisions of the highest judicial tribunals join in compelling the conclusion that to permit the sale of beer "would faciliate subterfuges and frauds and fetter the enforcement of the law;*' that to prohibit the sale of beer "is an essential of either effective enforcement or effective prohibition of intoxicating liquors." «0 PUBLICITY PUBLICITY— IT MADE AND IT UNMADE ME Chapter VI. Publicity, it made me, it kept me on the job several months after I was billed for the discard and at the end to a certain extent was my undoing. If there was any one thing that stood out in my enforcement work that is to be of lasting benefit to the cause of prohibition it is the publicity that was given to my activities. Public attention was focused upon law enforcement from the Top Down rather than from the Bottom Part Way Up in such a way that those who are perniciously scheming to under- mine the constitutional law of the land had better watch their step. The better class of citizens in this country will not tolerate a law administered with differing degrees of elasticity for different classes of people. If there is to be any immunity or humanizing of penalties it ought to be in inverse ratio to the wealth and in- tellectuality of the culprit. The man who has been entrusted with the enforcement of any law or has been elected to some high office and winks at, or openly violates the law he is sworn to uphold, is a greater menace to law and order than the ordinary thief or bootlegger. It is the highbrow constitution dodger who deserves the most drastic treatment. Graft and hypocrisy in high places cannot thrive on publicity. Fresh air and sunlight are the best preventitives for filth and disease. The same is true with corruption. It cannot stand the persistent piti- less publicity that ex-mayor John F. Fitzgerald of Boston has had so much to say about in the past but unfortunately has been unable to put into uni- versal practice. A Federal or State office holder, whether he be elective or appointive, is a public servant. The people pay the bills and have a right to expect ser- vice. The only means at the disposal of the public 61 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS for finding out what is going on behind the scenes in Federal of State offices is pubUcity. When the public awakens to the need of demanding more news, rather than less, regarding its officials, there will be less graft and less hypocrisy. I considered my office as Chief Prohibition En- forcement Officer in Massachusetts a public trust and invited the freest inspection by the public, or- ganization committees, newspaper reporters, or who ever might be in any way interested and if it is ever my fortune to hold another public trust I will again take the people into my confidence. No presidental candidate was ever more persistent- ly in the lime light than I was during my 7i months experience in the Massachusetts prohibition depart- ment. I have been quoted as saying so many things that I never said nor even dreamed of that during the later days of my tenure of the office of Chief Prohibition Enforcement Officer, I had to pinch my- self occasionally to make sure I was the same Harold D. Wilson so freely quoted in the press. Daniel Webster was supposed to have had a won- derful command of the English language. His vocabulary was immense, but he had nothing on me if I actually said all I was reported to have said, in as many different ways, employing such varying phrases and such a multiplicity of words. The principle argument of some people against my enforcement was my alleged volubility. I was condemned for too much publicity, irrespective of whether or not I was actually to blame. I was even told that my so called superior, Potter, should have received the publicity and not Wilson as if I was in a position to dictate to the newspapers what raids they would cover and what names they would use. A man sitting in a swivel chair smoking a T. D. is not news. A man jumping over the top of a bar is quite apt to make news whether he wills it or not. If a dog bites a man it is not news, but if a man PUBLICITY bites a dog it is front page copy. When I raided a poor Italian in the North End there was little news to it, but when I captured the entire police depart- ment of Wrentham drinking in the town fire station it was news of the first order, and it was Wilson news, not Potter news. No amount of humility on my part could have substituted the name of Potter for Wilson. As Prohibition Chief, I had no better friends than the newspaper reporters, who followed me about day after day. Sometimes a paper took a wholesome slam at Wilson but as a rule I was used very fairly. Occasionally a cub or hostile reporter would attribute verbiage to me that I never emitted but such effus- sions are to be expected in publicity. No man can reap the benefits and not get the backfire when he is continually receiving press notices. I am quite willing to bear the condemnation of some conservatives, who would have no publicity except their own variety, firm in the conviction that public attention has been focussed upon the fact that there is a law enforcement department and that un- der my regime an honest wholehearted attempt was made to have it function. The public is so thor- oughly aroused that no let up will be permitted. The following editorial appearing in the North Adams Transcript on January 28, 1922, is very much to the point relative to the valu2 of the publicity re- ceived by the prohibition department during my tenure of office:-^ UP TO POTTER A few days ago, when it was reported that, as a means of terminating the impossible situation growing out of the Wilson-Potter feud, Wilson was to be "let out through the top," we said that while the federal authorities may have hit upon the best solution, they made the wrong choice for a very definite reason. And that reason grows out of the very reason as- signed by Commissioner Haynes for the peremptory dis- missal of Wilson from the prohibition enforcement ser- vice, following his refusal to accept the "promotion" 63 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS that was offered him; namely, his temperament. For it is nothing more nor less than Wilson's tem- perament that has made prohibition enforcement an ex- ceedingly live topic of public interest and discussion throughout Massachusetts today; that has, in fact, very effectively lifted that subject out of the serene depths of complacent tolerance and amused skepticism. It may be, as Mr. Potter charges, that he has done this to get himself talked about. We don't know as to that. What we do know is that he has gotten prohibition enforcement talked about. And he has gotten it talked about by doing the very things that complaceny and skepticism had confidently assumed couldn't or wouldn't be done. The result has been a severe jolt for complacency; a new and questioning note among the skeptical from one end of the state to the other ; an uneasy feeling of won- der as to how far this sort of thing might be carried and where it would strike next in some quarters; a quick- ened interest as to it possibilities in others. And that result was, we maintain, of far greater im- portance under existing circumstances than any so- called "practical" results as recorded in the mere statis- tics of confiscations and convictions growing out of Mr. Wilson's personal activities. It was a result that could be nullified in only one way; namely, by confirmation of the cynical (and none too confident) prediction that Wilson was due for the toboggan. Because the action taken by Commissioners Haynes and Blair in this case rightly or wrongly will be con- strued as nothing more nor less than such a confirma- tion, we regard their decision as a grave mistake. 'Commissioner Haynes says that no question of Wil- son's "honesty, energy or interest" is involved in the situation. Conceding the same to be true of Mr. Potter, it w-- merely a matter of judgment as to which should be retained in the interests of the work to be done in Massachusetts. For the reasons here set forth, and for no other rea- sons, fully recognizing that a choice had to be made, we believe that good judgment dictated a choice contrary to the one that was made. Since the opposite course was taken, the vindication of the commissioners' judgment rests with Mir. Potter as head of the departmnet in this state. He says that the enei^ies of the department will be 64 PUBLICITY devoted to enforcing the law and not to seeking personal publicity. Well and good, so far as "personal" publicity goes. But if he means that henceforth there need be no apprehension in Massachusetts of the kind of unpleas- ant publicity that is inseparable from a vigorous and impartial prosecution of the law, he will not justify the judgment of his superiors in the public estimation. Eliminating all personal considerations, Wilson has set a popular standard that Potter must live up to. And the public is not going to judge the result on the basis of statistics. It is going to judge by the test of who the law hits, who it fails to hit, and why. Publicity is an art. That is, the publicity that gets beneficial results and nothing else. Some peo- ple apparently believe it is a haphazard hit or miss proposition, and, unfortunately, many of our dry or- ganizations and churches conduct their advertising in that manner. Such is not the case, however, with the wet interests. They are not only persistent in their publicity but shrewd and systematic. Some of the most injurious propaganda against prohibition enforcement is disseminated by ardent church mem- bers after the false seed has been slyly sown by the wet propagandist. I know two newspaper reporters who are said to be regularly receiving pay from certain wet politi- cians. This statement is not a mere assertion as I can back it up with concrete proof. One of these men spends most of his time in Washington and the other is a well-known Boston reporter. Both have attacked Wilson at every opportunity, and I have aways considered their abuse as wholly complimen- tary. The wets never waste their ammunition on harmless or passive drys. Big business spends thousands of dollars yearly for advertising experts to protect its public good will, and gubernatorial candidates if wise immediate- ly secure publicity agents to supervise their newspa- per campaign. Without such an agent the average candidate would hang himself in a week. 65 DRY LAWS AND ^TET POLITICIANS I was in the calcium light of continued publicity for several months. The glare was much stronger than turned upon the average candidate for high office, yet, I had to go it single handed except for the advice of friendly reporters. I cannot say too much at this point for these go through lads. Many of them went over the top with me in bar rooms, in kitchen dives, and in elaborate West End distilleries with as much speed and as much enthusiasm as my best agents. They not only covered, but entered in- to the spirit of raids in all kinds of weather and un- der many really trying and dangerous conditions. I could name from six to ten Boston reporters in whom I have the most explicit faith as to their re- portorial judgment and accuracy. Men who have kept my feet on the ground on many occasions when the slightest betrayal of confidence on their part would have been not only extremely embarrassing but very injurious. These news sleuths work with, not against the men they are covering and their friendship is in- valuabe to any man in public life. On the other hand, a strange newspaperman may occasionally wander into the fold and then look out for breakers ahead. He has to be received cordially, for it is foolhardy to try to cover up but no one knows just what to expect. He may be out to get you or he may be simply lacking in newspaper acu- men, but you are out of luck in either event. An unfriendly reporter can do more damage in a three word interview than can be rectified in a week of legitimate publicity. The publicity artist or notoriety seeker, in public life soon loses the confidence of the press and thus defeats his own ends, while the shrinking gumshoe politician who finds the pitiless glare of publilcity a handicap is often played up on the front pages. The man who would cover up cannot, and the man PUBLICITY who would talk for publicity can get no paper to pub- lish his story. No man can get into the newspaper headlines un- less he makes news, and it he does make news he gets in whether he wills it or not. Ponzi, Pelletier and Fatty Arbuckle can hardly be termed voluntary no- toriety seekers, yet column after column has been published about them. I suppose Theodore Roosevelt was the greatest publicity artist the world has ever known. He could make a speech and raise his hand to silence the ap- plause, and actually be leading the cheering. He was pictured as the incarnation of personal conceit by some short sighted politicians who now, that he is dead, proclaim him as the great American. It will be many a long day before his equal is found as a leader in lifting the American public opinion out of the doldrums of petty, personal selfishness. Roosevelt got publicity because he was energtic and belligerant in his actions. His statements were breezy and emphatic. He was always definitely on one side of a question or the other. He was never neutral, therefore he was always news. I have heard the Hon. J. Weston Allen, Attorney General of Massachusetts, called a publicity artist. Why ? Simply because he is continually in the news- paper head lines. Does Mr. Allen seek the newspapers for inter- views or do the reporters trail him? The Attorney General gets publicity because he does things not in the usual conventional, soft-pedal way of bellowing at the little fellows and overlooking the big ones, but in the unusual, unorthodox, un- expected, unheard of (in polite society) manner of a Roosevelt. He is fighting the people's fight and the public knows it. The newspapers are purveyors of public opinion. The editors are in intimate and constant touch with the pulse of the people. They know 67 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS what is wanted in the way of news and as a result, Attorney General Allen keeps on the front page. The peanut headed politicians, and unfortunately we have many of the variety, scream from the roof tops "Allen is a notoriety seeker." He is too volu- ble; he is in constant pursuit of personal aggrandise- ment; he is ambitious for the governorship. If the pea heads had sufficient gray matter to put two and two together, they would realize the Attor- ney General was taking his job seriously, and in so doing was doing the unusual, the extraordinary. As a consequence his every move, his most casual utter- ance, is news. To be sure, Mr. Allen is continually boosting him- self for every time he does anything worth while, he adds just so much to his prestige. Today he is undoubtedly the strongest gubernatorial possibility in the State, not because he has been aiming at that particular position, but because he has been true, aggressive, and unswerving in his public trust. He found a man-sized job and is trying to fill it. The two-cent politi'-ians, as Congressman Under- bill was wont to call his colleagues in the Massachu- setts Legislature prior to his promotion to Washing- ton, are too much concerned with their own petty personal affairs, and too little interested in the safe keeping of the public weal to see anything but the personal aggrandisement of a Roosevelt, or an Allen or any other unafraid, unfettered public official who does things off the ordinary. Jealousy is their first pang, when they see another getting publicity which they crave, themselves, (but lack the moral courage and initiative to obtain), they scream notoriety seeker. It is barely possible that Wilson, the notoriety seeker, as some will have it, was more or less a vic- tim of circumstances. Perhaps his idea of enforcing the prohibitory law from the Top Down rather than from the Bottom Part Way Up was so unusual, so unique, that he automotically became news. Pos- 68 PUBLIQTY sibly the newspaper reporters trailed him not Wilson the reporters. I might deny at length certain statements attri- buted to me, but such a denial would answer no use- ful purpose. The best policy in publicity, unless favored with an advertising expert as an advisor, is one of humility and thankfulness that misstatements are no worse. I have only the kindliest feeling for the press of Massachusetts, and feel that the publicity I received, whatever its effect on Wilson, has been of inesti- miable value to prohibition law enforcement. Wilson *'Statue" Inscription Contest One of the most hopeful signs relative to prohi- bition law enforcement is the universal interest in the subject. It is discussed on the street corner, in the railroad car, and everywhere people congregate. The discussions, to be sure are often grossly exag- gerated upofi one side or the other, but that is of lit- tle consequence in comparison with the importance of keeping the topic alive. If the people continually talk about anything, sooner or later, the truth will come into its own. There is no better illustration of the universal in- terest in law enforce than the "Wilson 'Statue' In- scription Contest" conducted by the Boston Traveler during the latter part of January and the first of February, 1922. It is reported that thousands of inscriptions were received. The four prize winning inscriptions and some twenty others which received honorable mention are published : The Winners First prize, Morris B. Parkinson, 73 Collidge Street, Brookline. "He refused to be clay in the hands of the Totter.' " ' Second prize, Miss Alice M. Wing, 3 Wallingford 69 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS Road, Brighton. 'Tilgrim pause and note this fact , Wilson Mied' for the Volstead Act." Third prize, Stuart Tod, 497 Boylston Street, Brookline. "A man of understanding holdeth his peace." Fourth prize, Edward Reynolds, 152 North Beacon Street, Brighton. "Wilson will be remembered long- er as a beverage than as a reformer." Win Honorable Mention Deposed, like the Kaiser, he reposes *in Dutch' " — By Anna L. Stearns, 55 Magazine Street, Cambridge, suite 1. "Win or lose, he seized the booze, he's gone but not forgotten" — By G. A. Freeman, 471 Maple Street, Manchester, N. H. "The spirit of 1922"— By Edward A. Filene, Bos-: ton, Mass. "Be not too zealous, lest the zeal consume thee" — By H. Kelleher, 7 Bowdoin Street, Medford, Mass. "Destroy the booze or destroy the law" — By W. P. Fitzgerald, 1515 Blue Hill Ave., Mattapan, Mass. "The Carrie Nation of 1922"— By Marguerite Hatch, North Cohsaset, Mass. "Untiring worker, brave and bold, but lacking knowledge, his tongue to hold" — By Mabel Webb Edmands, 78 Forest Street, Wellesley Hills, Mass. "To dangerous a hitter, so they passed him" — By Mrs. Edward J. Spellman, 45 Payson Road, Belmont, Mass. "Removed — for conduct unbecoming an enforce- ment officer" — By Joseph French, Box 161, Chelms- ford, Mass. "Oh, Prohibition, what follies are committed in thy name!"— By Percy N. Lane, 335 Water Street, Quincy, Mass. 'Search,' and the world is with you. 'Find' and you're all alone." — By E. Vernon Peabody, Pleasant Street, Rowley^ Mass. 7© PUBLICITY "Dislodged''— By Gordon C. Douglas, 18 Fuller Street, Brookline, Mass. "The spirits beckoned, he followed blindly" — By Elizabeth M. Bradford, Parker House, Boston, Mass. "There never was a battle but some one was killed"— By Mrs. J. H. Horan, 20 High Street, May- nard, Mass. '^Kicked by a White Horse' ''—By Mrs. Anna M. Lambert, 39 Pine Street, Belmont, Mass. "He Spilled It"— By C. A. Merrill, 40 Meagher Avenue, Milton, Mass. "Sufficient unto the act is the enforcement there- of—By John J. Doyle, 389 Cambridge Street, Alls- ton 34, Mass. "Fired for faithfulness"— By the Rev. A. Z. Con- rad, Park Street Church, Boston, Mass. "Catching bootleggers is all right, but at a politi- cials' party — wow — good-night!" — By Davis Reid, Jordan Avenue Wakefield. "Never still while a still distilled till the distilling still was still.' — By Davis Reid, Jordan Avenue, Wakefield. 71 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS OEER THE TOP— OR THE ZERO HOUR FOR NEAR BEER EMPORIUMS Chapter VII. It is possible to raid near-bear saloons l^ally in but two ways. The more common practice is to obtain a purchase of liquor, go before the United States Commissioner, secure a search warrant for the premises of the near-beer saloon, or "hell- kitchen" or whatever the name of the place making the sale may be, and then search for illegal liquor. If anything is found stronger than i of 1% the proprietor or bartender in charge or both are arrest- ed for appearance before a United States Commis- sioner the next day. The other method, and generally the more excic- ing, is to secure a buy of liquor while another agent is close enough to see the transaction. The minute the buy is consumated, the agent making the pur- chase announces himself as a federal prohibition agent. The other agent jumps the bar and arrests the man making the sale. If this man does not happen to be the proprietor and the proprietor is present, he is also arrested. This little knocking- off stunt generally precipitates a near-riot. Quick and sometimes drastic action is necessary on the part of agents in order to prevent any serious dis- orders. Pistols were never drawn unless absolutely necessary, but many, many times, it was wise to al- low the hangers-on to notice your pistol protruding from your pocket, or in some other equally accessible place. The proprietors or bar-tenders seldom made trouble, although in some instances, some rather strenuous set-to's were staged with these gentlemen. The hangers-on made most of the trouble and there never was any telling what some half-drunk man might do or throw. 72 OVER THE TOP I shall never forget the very first bar room I raided or ''knocked off". I had been on the job about a week and was itching for action. I was passing through Worcester by auto in company with one of my agents and a green chauffeur — green, I mean, in the parlance of liquor raiding. The agent entered a rather notorious near-beer emporium for the purpose of making a "buy". 1 carelessly sauntered into the doorway of a store just across the street where I could see the interior of the saloon. The agent hung around the bar for some ten or fifteen minutes, drinking, much to his disgust, a couple of near-beers, before he was able to win the confidence of the bartender sufficiently to secure a buy of "shine". The minute he had made his purchase and the money had been rung up in the cash register he clamped his hand over the top of his glass of liquor, backed away from the hangers- on in front of the bar and announced himself as a federal prohibition agent. While he was doing this, I rushed from my obser- vation post to his rescue. The chauffeur, who was a game lad, even if green at the game, followed me into the bar room. Several men had jumped upon my agent in an endeavor to make him spill the evi- dence. With the assistance of the chauffeur, the hangers-on were soon convinced, a part of our argu- ment being driven home with our fists, that it was safer to stand back. Arming the chauffeur with a threatening-looking pistol, backing him into a corner, and handing him the evidence he was told to guard it at any cost. The first duty of a prohibition agent is to protect his evidence, regardless of what may happen to him. It is quite easy to understand that a man trying to prevent the spilling of a glass of liquor in his hand is at a decided disadvantage in any rought-and- tumble fight. During my term as Chief Enforce- ment Officer in Massachusetts, some of my agents 73 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS absorbed considerable punishment on numerous occa- sions rather than lose their evidence. The agent with me then jumped the bar. I was new at the game this being my first offense and did not consider such action necessary. I soon learned however, my mistake. As the agent went over the top, the two men behind the bar made a dive to dump the bottle containing liquor. The agent grappled with one man but the other grabbed the bottle and started pouring it down the sink. I then discovered that I was on the wrong side of the bar. The best that I could do under the circumstances was to reach over the t^ p and grab the man spilling the liquor by the nap of the neck and jam his face down into the top of the bar. I used the old football tact- ics of rubbing his nose into the bar. He soon layed off in his endeavor to spill the evidence. In. the meanwhile a hanger-on had seized a couple of bottles and was preparing to beat a tattoo on my head. As luck would have it, my agent had floored his man by this time and rather unceremoniously shoved his pistol into the pit of the stomach of the man who would have brained me. This had a very soothing affect upon the entire fracas. This set-to proved a good lesson for me. I learned that speed and being in the right place at the right time were absolutely imperative to successful raiding. A tremendous crowd had collected outside the bar by the time open hostilities had ceased within and it was only by keeping the doors locked and a pistol plainly visible that no attempt was made to rescue the prisoners. After what seemed an hour to me, which, as a matter of fact, was less than fifteen min- utes, the police responded to our call for help. The prisoners were bundled into the patrol wagon and booked at the police station for appearance before the United States Commissioner the next morning. I have been in other raids on many occasions which 74 OVER THE TOP proved infinitely more exciting than this one, but as I have already stated, this is the one that I remem- ber most vividly. An experience in a New Bedford bar room was quite exciting and more or less amusing. On this occasion I was working with the local police under Chief Dougherty, and, by the way, it is a pleasure to state that I always found the Chief in New Bed- ford very, willing to cooperate in any way. In my estimation, he was one of the best in the state, al- though New Bedford can hardly be called one of the Commonwealth's dryest cities. The chief, like many other similar officials, has been handicapped by poli- tical conditions in the city over which he had no control. These conditions can be rectified anytime the citizens of New Bedford awaken to their re- sponsibility and potential power. I have had no ex- perience with Mayor Remington recently elected, but judging froni my knowledge of his efficiency as a City Clerk I should expect a genuine impartial law enforcement under his administration. It has always been my contention that the police department does not lead in the creation of public opinion but is dependent upon public backing. If the mayor or legislative branch of a city is wet or luke warm in law enforcement the chief is greatly handicapped. Apathy among high officials means general letting down in all law enforcement. On the occasion of the New Bedford raid men- tioned above, two of my agents had been working in New Bedford for some two or three days unknown to the local police, and some thirteen search war- rants had been secured. I gathered togther a force of thirteen agents and started for New Bedford at about three o'clock in the afternoon. When within a half hour's journey from New Bedford I called Chief Dougherty on the phone and told him that I would be in town inside of thirty minutes, and would need some fifteen or twenty live-wire police- 7g DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS men. When my automobile pulled into the police station in New Bedford the Chief with characteris- tic vigor had mustered his men and was ready for instant action. One agent was assigned to each raid with one or more policemen. Watches were com- pared and I issued orders that the thirteen places should be hit at exactly 6.30 P. M. This procedure is always necessary when more than one raid is to be staged, as the telephone bells start jingling throughout a city or town the minute it is known that Prohibition agents are raiding. One of the search warrants was found to be defective in that the address and premises were not properly de- scribed, so I took this bar room myself. The only way in which to make an arrest in this case was to make a purchase and "knock oflE" the place imme- diately afterwards. I sent one of my agents into the bar who had proven a good buyer, that is he had the personality and persistence necessary to convince the proprietor or bar tender that he was a legitimate customer. As this man entered the bar, I watched the interior from a place of vantage outside where I could clearly see what was going on inside but unseen to those in charge within. Two policemen were in my party, but they were left in an automobile some fifty yards from the bar room in order to guard against detection. Some twenty or more hangers- on were congregated inside. My agent succeeded without great difficulty in getting a shot (which is the term generally used in bar rooms) of moonshine. The minute he had made his purchase, I entered and jumped over the top stating that I was a Federal Pro- hibition agent. The proprietor and bar tender were immediately placed under arrest. The hangers-on started a drive for my agent in order to spill the evidence. Covering his glass of whiskey with one hand he drew his revolver with the other and backed into a corner near the lower end of the bar. The gathering around the agent looked so threatening 76 i OVER THE TOP that I left my prisoners and went to his assistance. When the hangers-on had been ejected, some of them with a reasonable use of force, as they were too far gone to navigate very steadily or very rapid- ly, I looked for my prisoners. The proprietor was nowhere to be seen, the bar tender, however, was still standing at his post behind the bar. He appar- ently was somewhat dazed at the rapidity with which things had been happening. As soon as the evidence had been poured into a bottle for safe keeping and placed in my pocket, I sent the agent to locate the police, who were still apparen'^ly slumbering at thevi post entirely unaware of the excitement that had been going on in the bar room. When he notified them that the buy had been made, the place raided, the bums ejected, and the bar tender placed under ar- rest, they were as much surprised as the bar tender had been at the rather unusual proceedings. According to a ruling of some federal courts, no search can be made on a knock-off other than to obtain the retainer from which the drink was poured. I told the bar tender, however, that his place would be ransacked from top to bottom, floors torn up, etc., if he did not locate the proprietor in short order. Without waiting for the call from the bar tender, the proprietor suddenly appeared from his place of concealment in a cache in the wall. Appar- ently he thought it wiser to be arrested than to have his place searched so forcibly. The moonshine that my agent had purchased had been poured from a pint battle, which was about half full. No sign of this bottle could be found on the first preliminary search, but it was finally located in a paper box carelessly thrown into a pile of rubbish under the bar. It is needless to state that the officers used on this particular raid were not listed as New Bedford's finest. Raiding with search warrants is always interesting and sometimes extremely exciting. The usual 77 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIAMS method is to send an agent into the place to be raid- ed, to attempt to make a *'buy". This procedure is necessary because of the close watch for strangers. One stranger is not considered dangerous, but two or more entering the bar at the same time will always result in the dumping of any liquor that may be in the room at the time. The advance agent saunters up to the bar and nonchalently orders a drink. Be- ing a stranger, generally the only drink he can ob- tain is harmless near-beer, of less than -J of one per- cent. While the advance agent is drinking his near- beer, as best he can, another agent enters with a search warrant. Unless the alarm is sounded, the first waits until his pal has located at the other end of the bar, then both go over the top serving the warrant as they go and grabbing anything in sight that looks like liquor. Nine times out of ten the supply is seized on the first rush, if at all, and if it is not obtained at that time, the chance of securing any evidence for a conviction are rather doubtful. In many instances the whiskey is in a container behind the bar in close proximity to the sink. The water is generally left running in the sink in order to be ready for any emergency. All sorts of devices are used for the quick spilling of the evidence. In one case, I found the container with the liquor on a board about four by twelve inches. The board was suspended by a hinge and strings. The strings ex- tended along the bar and into the private office. The slightest jerk on the string from anywhere along the bar or in the private office would spill the liquor. If the man planted in the bar room prior to the service of the search warrant makes a wise guess as to where the liquor is carried, he goes over the top at the proper place for a successful seizure. If he guesses wrong, the chances are no liquor will be found. After the first dive for the liquor, the bar room is generally cleared of all hangers-on. The 7S OVER THE TOP proprietor and bar tender are placed under arrest and a systematic search inaugurated. A typical illustration of the little details that are the determining factor in spelling victory or defeat, is a personal experience in the bar room of a Lowell Hotel. I was working with one agent at the time. I sent this man in to line up in front of the bar for a drink, in front of the source of supply if possible I had the search warrant in my own pocket. Soon after the agent had entered, I came in. The pro- prietor, who happened to be the man behind the bar at that time, turned his eyes almost imperceptibly toward a certain section of the bar. This fleeting glance was enough to tell me that my agent had made a poor guess and that he had lined up at the wrong end of the bar. Consequently I stepped up to the bar be- tween the proprietor and the point he had uncon- sciously given away as the source of supply. As the proprietof walked up in front of me, I reached over the bar, grabbed him by the two wrists, and yanked him into the counter. My agent vaulted over the top and made a dive for the evidence. Just as I had expected it was in the exact spot at which the proprietor had unconsciously cast his eyes on my entering. If I had overlooked this slight warning on his part, and gone to the section of the bar that I would ordinarily have taken, he would have been able to dump the liquor with his knees even if I did grab him by the wrists. As previously stated, after the first rush for evi- dence, every nook and corner is searched. The walls and floors are pounded for loose boards, the cellar is spaded up, piles of lumber or coal or anything else that might be used for covering-up purposes are moved. The liquor is sometimes found in the most extraordinary places imaginable. Secret pockets in the floor and the walls or in the chimneys are com- mon. An agent who has taken no part in the search is sometimes left behind in the bar room after an 79 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS unsuccessful search to congratulate and jolly the proprietor. The proprietor often times feels so good that he starts boasting and discloses his method of concealment. In one case of this kind the proprietor called my men "a bunch of bone-headed, brainless hootch-hounds". My agent applauded his remarks so enthusiastically and pleaded so hard for a genuine drink that a button was pushed and presto, chango! the clock swung out of place and a pocket in the wall was exposed containing two bottles of whiskey. It is needless to state that this bartender had little to say to the judge next morning relative to the lack of ability on the part of my men. Many times the real supply is carried in the cel- lar, which is accessible by means of a scuttle door in the rear of the bar. A bum, generally called a "dog" is stationed in the cellar. When the man up- stairs needs another bottle it is passed up through a hole in the floor by the aforementioned "dog". If a raiding party suddenly descends upon the bar the dog downstairs either runs out the back door with the hootch or smashes the bottles before an agent can seize them. This is a hard game to beat and in some instances makes the search warrant method valueless. The only way to get convictions in some cases is by the "knock-off" method, that is, the securing of a buy in the presence of another agent and the immediate arrest of the man making the sale. "Dogs" or "bums" are also stationed outside the main door to most saloons. These "dogs" are ever on the look-out for prohibition agents, or other per- sons that may make trouble for their master within the bar room. In one well-known bar room in Boston, not many weeks ago, I went over the top and down the stairs into the cellar so quick that "the dog" on guard was still blinking his eyes in surprise with a supply of whiskey squarely ni front of him. When I kicked 80 OVER THE TOP the stool from underneath him and seized the liquor, he was still more surprised. Of course, this un- faithful dog lost his job for fhis failure to be ever watchful. He was discharged forthwith by the proprietor of the near-beer emporium, and judging by the choice and voluminous language used by the proprietor, this dog was sure to lose his card in the watch dog's union. Another case which proved amusing, but might have been disastrous is given as indicative of the many dangers incurred when an agent jumps over the top not knowing what may be on the other side of the bar. In this particular case, the man behind the bar had opened the scuttle door just prior to my entry, and when I jumped over the top, he made a rush for the cellar. I landed squarely on his back as he was half way down the cellar stairs. He thought the end of the world had come, but was much more frightened than hurt. If he had not been in the act of going downstairs when I went over there is no telling what might have happened to me. Nowadays, the average bar room is equipped with a bell system and a private bar in the rear of the main bar room. Nothing but soft drinks are sold at the main bar. When the right "gent" enters the saloon, a man who is well known in the drinkers' fraternity, one bell is rung and he is admitted to the private bar, where he gets his drink and departs at will. When a stranger enters, a man who appears like a gentleman, two bells are soimded and everone sits tight. If a man enters who looks like an agent or a policeman (some policeman are of course ex- cepted) everything is dumped. If two men come along the street who look like gentlemen, the ever watchful dog gives the warning and if the men make a move to enter the bar everything is dumped. As a rule, the ''smash the hootch" signal is not given unless two or more strange men enter at one 81 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS time. One stranger simply means "no more sales for the present". If he persists in remaining, he soon learns from some of the hangers-on that it would be much healthier and safer for him to va- moose. One way to beat the system is to get a man plant- ed in the inner-bar before staging the raid. In one place in Taunton it was necessary to resort to a regular system of fraternal-order knocks, in order to gain admission. I do not mean by this statement to infer that the signals of any particular fraternal order were used, but that the system in vogue was fully as complicated. An illustration of beating the ;system is an experience in Lowell. The saloon had the usual big bar at which nothing but soft drinks were sold. At the end farthest from the main door there was a pri- vate room in which the select followers of Bacchus were wont to gather for their drinks. The door to this room was always locked to the general public. Off of this room was a smaller one known as the "Holy of Holies" in which the supply of whiskey was kept in a suitcase, ready for instant transporta- tion in event of a raid. The cellar stair led out of this room and a "dog" was always present, ready to make a quick exit via the cellar. A bell system was established at the end of tht: bar nearest the door. The door to the private drink- ing room was never opened unless the proper bell signal was given. Next to the main bar room there was a lunch counter, the proprietor was in "cahoots" with the saloon keeper and a side door from the lunch room led into the "Holy of Holies" where the liquor was on tap. Two agents were placed in the rear of the build- ing to nab the "dog" if he tried to run out through the cellar. Two men were planted in the lunchroom with instructions to smash into the inner room the minute they noticed me pass the main entrance to 82 OVER THE TOP the lunchroom. I had two agents with me. One dived over the bar and grabbed the bell man before he had time to give the bell signal. The other agent and I put our shoulders through the two doors sep- arating us from the liquor in about as much time as it takes to relate it. The agents in the lunch room smashed in their door. We all landed in the "Holy of Holies" at about the same time. The "dog'* on guard was so confused at having the doors broken down on all sides of him at the same time that he forget to run or spill the evidence. One whole pint of whiskey was found in the suitcase. It took seven husky agents to capture this pint, yet some people persist in saying that as much liquor is being sold as ever. This in the face of all the pre- cautions taken by those illegally dealing in liquors to guard against raiding parties. Early in January, 1922, on a Saturday night, as- sisted by three agents and several newspapermen, who proved in a number of instances to be just as proficient, ingenious and fearless as my agents, thirty-three Boston bar rooms were raided, one af- ter the other. A pint was the most liquor obtained at any place, and at about half of the bar rooms we did not get a drop. I had no search warrants, and so strategy was resorted to. In some cases an agent was sent in to try and make a buy, while another member of the party was in a position to watch the interior of the bar room. If the **buy''' was secured, the place was "knocked off** immediately, and those conducting the resort placed under arrest. In some cases, when the advance agent was meeting with no success in securing a buy, I rushed the place in company with an agent or a newspaper man, and made an official inspection, announcing who I was. Of course I had no right to make a systematic search, and did not attempt to do so. On six occa- sions the inspections resulted in the bar tender dump- ing whatever liquor he had in his possession. In 88 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS more than half of the raids, however, the man be- hind the bar made no move to spill the evidence which was a pretty good indication that he had noth- ing behind the bar. Unless the evidence was dumped, no attention was paid to the agent who had gone in in advance to make a buy. On several occa- sions he made some remarks to the proprietor rela- tive to the presence of Prohibition agents and re- ceived a good dressing down from either one of my agents or myself. We then apparently passed out of the picture, and the advance agent still stayed with the bar tender to plead for his drink. On three such raids he was successful in making a buy where- upon I returned and again annoimced myself but this time I invited the proprietor or bar tender, or both to be my guests on a little ride down to the police station. There were many amusing features to these raids. I entered one bar room, single hand- ed and found the lone owner of the place standing disconsolately behind the bar without a customer. I sauntered up to the bar without announcing my- self and inquired as to how he foimd business. His tale of woe was quite heartrending. Among other things he called himself a fool to be trying to con- duct an honest business while bar rooms all round him were selling hard liquor. He said, "I am al- ways out of luck. No real trade comes my way." I said, "Cheer up, old man, this is one time when you are in luck. I am Wilson, the Prohibition Chief, and you will be able to spend Sunday with your folks. while some of your brothers down the street are go- ing to spend their Sunday in jail." At another place in Charlestown, where I was working with only one agent, with some twenty-five or thirty hangers-on in the bar, the proprietor got rather obstreperous in his remarks, and seemed about to incite a near riot. He wi ited to know why I was picking on him and leaving others go scot free, I then informed him that I was Wilson and that he knew I was hitting the Si k OVER THE TOP big ones as well as the little ones. He said, "That is right. I guess this is my hard luck night." He signalled for the hangers-on to leave the bar room. This case indicates the wholesome effect the raid on the Quincy House and some other large dealers in liquor had upon the smaller fry. No man likes to be detected in the act of committing a crime, and if he feels that he is the goat while some more power- ful individual is escaping there is much more likeli- hood of trouble than when he realizes that the law is being enforced impartially. The following Saturday night in company with some of the agents, and the usual collection of news- paper men, for it was an impossibility to shake these gentlemen even if I had considered it wise to do so, twenty-two near beer saloons were raided in Boston. The raids of the previous week, however, had had such a wholesome effect that all that was necessary to make a bar room custodian spill his evidence was to drive ijip in front of the bar and rush the place. Such tactics are rather innocent sport and have a very salutary effect on the traffic in liquor. If I had continued in charge of the prohibition enforcement in the state, it was my plan to keep the denizons of the bar rooms constantly guessing by a continuance of such raids at uncertain intervals. If the bar room men ever got to the point where they did not dump their evidence figuring the raids fakes, it would have been possible to switch any time to the search warrant method, and thus capture the goods. To me, raiding bar rooms is much like playing the great national game of baseball. When the opposi- tion expects a hit and run signal cross them with a bunt. When the proprietor thinks you are raiding with a search warrant and keeps his liquor confident that you will not dare come behind the bar, cross him by entering with a search warrant and taking everything in sight including himself down to the police station for safe keeping. 85 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS HOW THE DRY LAWS CAN BE ENFORCED Chapter VIII. The first and most important step in making the dry laws effective is the abolition of the private stock supposedly placed there prior to the passage of the Volstead Act. There is no justice in allow- ing a rich man to drink in his home, or his private club while the poor man is charged with being a criminal for doing the same thing. If anything, the prohibitory law should be enforced more strin- gently from the top than from the bottom. It is the worst kind of hypocrisy for Congressmen to vote for dry laws, and insist upon maintaining private stocks in their own cellars. It is a fair as- section that some of these men ''Talk for public consumption, and drink for private consumption." The first step in a bone-dry United States should be an amendment to the Volstead Act giving the rich man a reasonable time in which to sell his private stock to bona fide permit holders. At the end of this period, any private stock should be con- fiscated. A great deal of the unrest against the Prohibitory Amendment among the poorer class is due to the common belief that every rich man has a choice and unlimited private stock. The number of people having this private stock, in my estima- tion, has been greatly over-estimated, but I do not wonder that the habitual drinker who finds his source of supply shut off or the prices tremendously increased, complains of such rank injustice. The principal value of the Quincy House raid was the effect upon the ordinary citizen. Almost without exception this class was pleased at the raid because it demonstrated that the influential were subject to law enforcement. I have received communications, hand shakes, and words of en- couragement from poor Italians, Polacks, Portu- guese and other nationalities generally considered hostile to prohibition. HOW TO ENFORCE DRY LAWS Many of these people have told me that they are willing to get along without their liquor if the man higher up is subject to the same regulation. The second important step in genuine law en- forcement is adequate jail sentences. It is per- fectly absurd to expect respect for any law unless the violators are actually punished. A bootlegger, in my estimation, is a great deal worse than the ordinary thief. The thief steals your pocketbook, but injures you in no other way. You are quite able to go to work the next day and the day fol- lowing and earn whatever has been lost. The bootlegger takes a man's money in exchange for rotten, poisonous liquor, and in addition impairs the health of the purchaser, by making, him drunk and often disorderly. The bootlegger steals a man's money and by making him sick, deprives him of the chance to recuperate financially by working the following day. The man who has im- bibed moonshine whiskey is a menace to life and property, \vhile the victim of the pickpocket is orderly even if disconsolate. A bootlegger sells to a hundred, while the thief steals from one. His punishment should be commensurate with his crime. After spending part of one day capturing and all of another day convicting a bootlegger he pulled out a roll of bills as big as a man's two fists to pay his paltry fine of $100, and with the utmost brazen- ness turned to me and said, "Wilson, I do not mind this $100 fine, but you have wasted a whole day of my time in court." This bootlegger had the ut- most contempt for a law that would permit him to make several thousand dollars and pay $100 for the privilege. He should have wasted six months' of his time in jail at hard labor and then his con- tempt for the constitutional law of this country would have been considerably less. Quoting from the New York Herald, "Enforce- ment is the poorest where there are no state laws, 87 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS and no co-operation between local and federal au- thorities, conversely, enforcement is best where the local law enables the local police to take a hand. The records indicate the ratio of one case taken to court by the federal authorities to four by the state." This statement is absolutely true in Massachu- setts except that the ratio in favor of local court cases is greater. Without an adequate state law in Massachusetts fully 9 out of every 10 cases handled by my department in the greater Boston district were taken before the state courts. Under the Volstead Act the possession of two ounces of intoxicating liquor is sufficient evidence for a conviction. Under the Massachusetts state law a man may have an unlimited stock, may transport said stock at his will, throughout the state, and may operate a first class distillery to his heart's content without violating the state law. The only way in which he can be apprehended is for keeping and exposing for sale. In spite of this lack of statutory provision it was my experience that more satisfactory results could be obtained before the average local court than before Com- missioner Hayes, because of his open hostility to the Volstead Act and prohibiton agents in gen- eral. An adequate state law is imperative so that the five thousand or more local officers may have the same opportunity to enforce the law as federal of- ficers. As this book goes to press, steps are being taken to pass a bill that will bring the state law into absolute conformity with the Volstead Act. This measure should pass both the House and Sen- ate, and will undoubtedly receive the signature of the Governor. After the Quincy House raid dry speeches and dry votes are in order. Even Charley Innes, the custodian of liquors at governors' ban- quets, will not advise his friend to act to the con- trary. Undoubtedly the wet interests will request 88 HOW TO ENFORCE DRY LAWS a referendum vote so that the measure will come before the electorate for ratification or rejection in the November election. It is inconceivable that the law-abiding citizens of this Commonwealth will keep Massachusetts in the group of states (four in number) which ap- parently would nulHfy the constitutional law of the land, by failure to pass laws to enforce the 18th Amendment to the Constitution. The South tried to nullify the slavery amendment. The Old Bay State will not attempt to nullify the 18th. The enforcement problem could be greatly sim- plified if all near-beer saloons; grocery and fruit stands selling soft drinks were required by law to obtain a license. This license could reserve the right for police inspection of the business premises at any time and require certain definite regulations as to lighting, concealment of illegal traffic, by shutters, curtains, etc. If it was possible to inspect near-beer saloons or any other place ostensibly selling soft drinks at any time when open for busi- ness, it would be much easier to shut off the sale of intoxicating liquors in such places. A severe penalty should be provided for peddling or hipping liquor without a license. The walking bar-room is a decided menace, and drastic steps are necessary to control this nuisance. Taking a nip from the bottle produced from the hip of a dirty bar-room hanger-on is so unsanitary and indecent that only the lowest habitats of the lower world will resort to such practices. A reasonable reward for securing evidence would greatly facilitate the operations of the police and prohibition department. This money would not be a drain upon the public treasury as convictions not only bring in a reasonable amount of money in fines, but revenue from taxes. This money should not be given as a reward, but rather as pay for the inconvenience and time expended in securing evidence. S9 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS Our present system of securing federal search warrants, is absolutely antiquated. It ought to be possible to obtain a warrant at any hour of the day or night. It should be possible to secure such a warrant in Brockton for Brockton violations. Under the present system a Brockton citizen or any other law abiding person within 25 miles of Bos- ton has to come before the United States Commis- sioner in Boston in order to obtain a federal search warrant. An affidavit sworn out before a proper notary by one or more reputable citizens and de- livered to a prohibition agent for presentation to the U. S. Commissioner ought to be sufficient evidence upon which to issue a search warrant. Under pres- ent conditions no search warrant will be issued un- less the interested citizen is willing to come before the United States Commissioner in Boston and per- sonally make an affidavit. Many citizens because of. their business interests cannot come to Boston in the middle of the day, consequently their evidence is useless. Commissioner Hayes would not see the President after hours. It is safe to assert that two-thirds of the worst liquor violations occur in the evening or late at night; yet in Boston, when United States Commis- sioner Hayes is sitting, it is impossible to secure a search warrant after three or four o'clock in the afternoon, and from Saturday noon until Monday noon no warrant can be obtained under any con- ditions. The search warrant for the Quincy House ban- quet never could have been secured if Commis- sioner Hayes had been sitting. Time and time again during my regime as Prohibition Chief I uncovered liquor violations but was unable to secure a warrant because the Commissioner's office had closed. The next day was too late. Some dives at the beaches near Boston ran wide open in the summer of 1921, because no warrant could be obtained to search after dark. 90 HOW TO ENFORCE DRY LAWS Cabarets sell liquor late at night, and at no other time, consequently with a Commissioner refusing to issue night warrants such places are fully pro- tected unless the prohibition department is fortu- nate enough to secure buys in the presence of suffi- cient agents to knock off a place at the time of the purchase. This is a very dangerous proposi- tion, because it is impossible to stage a buy with a reasonable force of agents present. When two agents tackle a road house single handed some one is apt to get hurt. It would be helpful and logical if slops could be considered as evidence. By slops I mean liquor dumped into a pail of water or other receptable before the raiding party can secure it. Slops that actually proofed from five to ten per cent alcohol have been brought into court and thrown out on the ground that the court would not consider swill as evidence. When the proprietor or the bar tender breaks the bottle containing the evidence in the presence of two or more officers who are able to testify in court that by the odor they are posi- tive intoxicating liquor was destroyed in their presence, it ought to be possible to obtain a con- viction. It is farcical to assume that the proprietor or bar tender would rush behind the bar and break a bottle of moxie or some other non-intoxicating liquor. Another handicap of law enforcement which could be largely rectified by a little more devotion to duty on the part of the judges and a little less "kowtowing" to the so-called ethics of the legal profession is the frequent continuing of cases. Fully half the time of prohibition agents is tied up in useless court dilly dallying. Some lawyers seem to collect from clients on the basis of the number of times cases are continued, and it is needless to state that under such circumstances continuances are frequent. DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS This baiting of clients is a disgrace to the pro- fession, but is brazenly practiced by some attorneys who have the most to say about legal ethics. The ends of justice might better be served if some at- torneys would cut out their soft-sob prattle rela- tive to the poverty of their clients. I have taken bootlegger after bootlegger into court who had made thousands of dollars at his nefarious trade only to have some attorney literally weep before the judge, stating that this poor man had eight to ten children and that any fine would be a mis- carriage of justice. If the attorney succeeded in splitting the fine it was so much velvet in his own pocket; the client never benefited. Such lawyers ought to announce that their services were free and then their charity pleas would carry more weight. After a few months in the front line trenches it is easy to believe that Uncle Sam pays one depart- ment for securing evidence for convictions and an- other department for discharging the culprits. One of the worst cases that comes to my mind is that of John Chumura, a Springfield baker, who was brought before United States Commissioner John L. Rice some fourteen months ago for the illegal distribution of liquor. Two Springfield policemen and two agents tes- tified against this man, and it is creditably reported that his own admissions to the United States Com- missioner were sufficient to hold him for the Grand Jury. Fourteen months later the case was thrown out of court by Judge Anderson on the ground, I am told, of a defective search warrant. The search warrant, according to my information, never left the office of the United States Commissioner in Springfield, and none of the four witnesses in the case were ever called before Judge Anderson. More actual co-operation between the evidence securing department, the prosecuting department and the judicial department would greatly facili- 92 HOW TO ENFORCE DRY LAWS tate enforcement of the Volstead Act. The Gov- ernment has never seen fit to appropriate sufficient money for any of these departments, and it has always been my contention that any time that Congress really wanted to make this nation bone dry the Volstead Act could be enforced as well as a majority of our national laws. The cost of prohibiton enforcement is not so heavy as some would have us believe, and as a mat- ter of fact the Government could have appropriated twenty million for the past year instead of seven and one half millions with very little additional ex- pense. According to figures from the New York Herald the appraised value of property seized but not destroyed by the prohibition department during the past year was eleven million dollars. Another two and one half millions, according to the same paper, was the net return from fines. The income from double taxes and additional pen- alties under section 35 of the prohibition act show assessments of fifty-four million dollars. I am sorry to state with the present system of fines only a small percentage of this fifty-four mil- lion has been actually collected. The man with sufficient money to finance the building and opera- tion of a still (and some plants that I have de- stroyed represented an outlay of several thousand dollars) employs some derelict to run the still. When the still and the derelict are captured the financier immediately furnishes bail, pays for a first class attorney and the fines imposed by the court. The derelict has no property, consequently no taxes can be collected. As soon as the courts are ready to impose a jail sentence the man higher up will find it impossible to hire men to go to jail for him. The hired distiller will turn state's evidence, and it will be possible to collect 100 per cent on taxes. Some surprisingly influential men are mixed up in the booze traffic in Boston, and with a stiffening 9t DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS in the court sentences it will be possible to either catch these men or drive them out of the busi- ness. There is a rum clique on State Street, Bos- ton, that is carrying on under present conditions with almost absolute safety. It is this crowd that is making a farce out of many court cases, and is even trying to dictate in the selection of agents. Prohibition officers who could act as secret ser- vice men would be of tremendous advantage to law enforcement. The few agents assigned to any state department are soon listed by the bootleg- gers, so that their value as securers of evidence is greatly impaired. Every scheme was employed during my experience as Prohibition Chief to learn the names and personal appearance of my agents. Bootleggers used to call at the office with phony information for no other reason than to look over the personnel. Many telephone calls were received- relative to illegal traffic at some particular point, when agents were rushed to this place, nothing was found except a number of bootleggers. I was able to keep my men fairly well protected, however, except for court cases. Whenever an agent appeared in court, the bootlegger's attorney took particular care to find out everything possible about the agent, including his home address. This information was passed from city to city. A num- ber of secret service men would have been of in- estimable value. The method of appointing agents in vogue while I was on the job was so cumbersome, and the ap- plications passed through so many hands, that most of my appointees were well known to most of the liquor traffic prior to their appointment. I have felt for some time that a New England Society for the enforcement of prohibition, com- posed of law abiding citizens who actually wanted to see the prohibitory law given a fair trial, would be of tremendous value to the prohibition depart- ments in the various New England States. Such 94 HOW TO ENFORCE DRY LAWS a society could accomplish much because it would be unhampered by Federal red tape, bureaucratic limitations and other Federal restrictions. Much of the rum running is interstate traffic, consequent- ly such a society should embrace all of New Eng- land and eventually the entire U. S. A. New England has always stood as a bulwark for law and order, and the great mass of people who actually believe in genuine impartial law enforce- ment must serve notice on the rum-runner, the bootlegger, the illicit still operator, and the liquor criminals, "Ye shall not pass." I am tremendously optimistic as to the ultimate triumph of prohibition law enforcement. Every month makes enforcement so much easier, for it marks the death of so many more habitual drinkers, and with the saloon gone the liquor trade has no recruiting ground. Eliminate the hypocrisy of the private cellar stock and its attending unrest, impose jail sen- tences instead of picayune fines, adopt a state law in Massachusetts with a kick like the famous "White Horse" whiskey, license the retailers of soft drinks, modernize the securing of search warrants and some of our antiquated custom bound court procedure and establish a reasonable secret ser- vice in connection with the prohibition department and the prohibitory law can be enforced. My answer to the title of this chapter, "How the Dry Laws Can Be Enforced," is by persistent, pitiless, publicity relative to the true situation. If the readers of this book will satisfy themselves as to the truth of my statements regarding prohi- bition law enforcement and then go forth and pro- claim the facts the liquor serpent will take to cover before the first echo from the united voice of the Dry Forces can return. U DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS WET POLITICIANS' WET RECORDS Chapter IX. In analyzing the handicaps to complete and effec- tive prohibition enforcement, we must place politics at the head of the list. Politicians — ^and in Massa- chusetts we have a fine array of those whose politi- cal records reek with the odors of rum and bar-floor sawdust — are the gadflies of the dry idealist. Pro- hibition offices are the honey-syrup that draws them in droves to the feast; they would like to pack the force of dry agents with their friends and constitu- ents. When the Republican party came into power last spring almost every Congressman in Massachu- setts had a flock of friends slated for prohibition jobs whose chief qualification for the position was their proficiency as political door bell ringers. Among the professional politicians prohibition is a plaything. They do not take the problems of en- forcement seriously; they have been niggardly in their appropriations for dry enforcement but are on the job every moment when it comes to picking the choice, meaty scraps out of the pork barrel. They are playing football with a great moral issue and a section of the Constitution of the United States of America. Would the great American public toler- ate for a moment partisan trading and loose parley- ing over the laws relating to theft or burglary? Why, then, will the public permit prohibition to be made the political football, kicked and tossed and fumbled on a surface muddied by the flood from the bootleggers' reservoir? It is time the public served notice on the politicians, by an affirmative position at the voting booth, that they cannot publicly deride and toss into the discard laws adopted under the provisions laid down by the fathers of our country. Fortune, perhaps, decreed that the Republican Party was to be the first to give prohibition a set- back, by opening the ranks of the dry enforcement 96 WET POLITICIANS* WET RECORDS army to the destructive operation of the spoils sys- tem. The Eighteenth Amendment became eflFective on January 16, 1920, while a Democratic Adminis- tration was in power. To that Administration fell the lot of creating the enforcement organization throughout the Nation. This was a task of enormous proportions. It was necessary to build up an organization to meet con- ditions then not wholly clear. The work was highly technical and so involved that it required many weeks experience on the job for an enforcement agent to feel that he was beginning to understt*nd his task. Here in New England, the Government ap- pointed as an enforcement agent, a man with years of experience in investigating liquor affairs for the Revenue Department. This man, and his co-work- ers in the offices of prohibition director for the sev- eral States, remained on the job less than 18 months when they were turned out to make way for new appointees.^ The Republican party was swept into power on the great tidal wave of 1920. The hordes of poli- tical hangers-on looked with covetous eyes oi the hundreds of posts then filled by men who had no claims to favor at the hands of the ruling party. The great prohibition enforcement machine was dis- mantled and overhauled in the G. O. P. machine- shop and came out with a new coat of paint adminis- tered by the hands of Lodge, Winslow, Tinkham, Innes and their confrers. Even this did not satisfy the politicians. Under the enforcement scheme launched by the Democratic Administration there were too few plums on the political tree. New England, for example, had a single chief enforcement agent, with prohibition di- rectors in charge of the permit awards in each State. The entire department was reorganized so that in each State there was both a director and a chief en- forcement agent to be appointed from among the 97 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS ranks of the faithful Republican workers at the polls. In Massachusetts Senator Henry Cabot Lodge was the Czar and dictator. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee did not lose touch with the domestic relations of Massachusetts realizing that he would need the support of the dry enthusiasts of Massachusetts when he should come up for re- election in the Fall of 1922, he amiably patronized the Anti-Saloon League of Massachusetts by inviting them to suggest men for the jobs. The Anti-Saloon League was of course limited in some respects; it must pick men with a Republican label, and it must pick them from such widely separated districts of the State that these political plums along with others to be distributed would be widely scattered through- out the Bay Sate and all local factions satisfied. When the Anti-Saloon League, with the backing of. the church forces, chanced to name as enforcement agent a man who was determined to enforce the law from the top to the bottom — against the politicians as well as against the poor, ignorant foreigner — Mr. Lodge could not stand the pressure — such an amaz- ing lack of discretion was unbearable. He deserted Wilson and tossed the standard of law-enforcement into the gutter. When he foresaw the protest of public opinion from Massachusetts, he attempted to meet it by throwing responsibility back to the Anti- Saloon League and inviting them to name Wilson's successor. This is what the public has to endure from a "statesman" who never gained any happiness in voting for a dry measure except when he could help pass the Volstead Act over the veto of his arch- enemy and political victim, Woodrow Wilson. Let us examine his record on prohibition meas- ures. It is dryer than those of Tinkham, Gallivan and Tague only by the measure of Mr. Lodge's shrewder political sagacity. The Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge voted for the Anti- 98 WET POLITICIANS' WET RECORDS Canteen law which shut off the flow of liquor in army canteens but somewhat later, to be specific, January 9, 1917, he voted against prohibition for the District of Columbia. In other words, the Senator favored arid conditions for soldiers but could not stand for any degree of dryness in Washington which is his domicile a greater part of the time. In July, 1917, he voted for the Prohibition Food Control Bill but not until after it had been badly mutilated by amendments which he favored. He not only voted against the National Prohibition Resolu- tion in 1917 but tried to handicap its effectiveness by favorable votes on amendments designed to make its final adoption less likely. The reservations in the League of Nations Coven- ant which he fought for are no greater than the reservations he tried to put into the dry laws. Sen- ator Lodge has repeatedly opposed prohibition in public speeches. He was also very strenuous in his opposition to the Nineteenth Amendment (Equal Suffrage), which is bound to be an important factor in the popularization of the Eighteenth Amendment. His powerful political influence has been, is, and probably always will be, exerted against prohibition in any form. Although he finally voted for the Volstead Act, it has been said that he did so with the reservation that since President Woodrow Wilson vetoed the Act, Wilson, of course, was wrong, and consequently he could conscientiously vote for the measure. He is also reported to have said when he voted for the Volstead Act, that he had always opposed constitu- tional prohibition and did not believe the amendment should have been put into the Constitution. His attitude relative to voting for the Volstead Act, because Woodrow Wilson vetoed it, is in keep- ing with his numerous about-faces on the League of Nations. Prior to the advent of Wilsonianism, he is recorded as favoring a League of Nations. Presi- de DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS dent Wilson helped frame such a League, and then Senator Lodge vehemently opposed it. President Wilson passed out of the picture through defeat and Senator Lodge turned an about face and was a leader in the disarmament conference, which (has adopted many features of the League of Nations. The following statement from the New York Times is indicative of the opinion some living outside of Massachusetts have of our senior Senator: "By the merest accident of government, Henry Cabot Lodge was enabled to defeat the altruistic dream, the very pinnacle of world idealism, when he killed the League of Nations. It is an unfortunate incident and a serious commentary on government that one man, renowned chiefly for his political astuteness and acumen could undo the great efforts of the finest minds in the universe. The New York Times querously asks if any man since the dawn of history has ever done so much 'harm. We are inclined to concede that not even Nero or any of his followers in disaster and world catastrophes were anything like the peers of the aforesaid Lodge, whose re-election will cast a reflec- tion and a blot on the escutcheon of the Common- wealth of Massachusetts not easily eradicated." Congressman Samuel E. Winslow of the fourth Massachusetts District is reported to be the closest to Senator Lodge of any of the Massachusetts Dele- gation. He dictated the appointment of Mr. Elmer C. Potter, the present state director, and has been the man who has demanded and succeeded in keeping him on the job. Congressman Winslow makes an excellent nmning mate for the Senior Senator as he, too, has been consistently inconsistent. He favored booze for Washington but not for the defenders of our country during the world war. He voted against the Hobson Resoution for National Prohibition ; he failed to vote on the Alaskan Prohibition Bill. He voted "yes" on 100 WET POLITICIANS' WET RECORDS the Jones-Randall anti-advertising and bone dry laws, after the adoption of some amendments. He voted *'no" on the Sheppard-Barkley District of Columbia prohibition bill; "no" on the National Prohibition Resolution; "yes" on the passage of the Enforcement code, known as the Volstead Act, but "no" on passing the measure over the President's Veto. The "drys" in the fourth congressional district can get little nourishment from the above record, especially when the wet affiliations of some of the Congressman's closest political allies in Worcester and Milford are analyzed. It is hardly necessary to present the record of the Hon. George Holden Tinkham, Congressman from the 11th district who is said to openly boast that his record is 100% alcoholic. Apparently the only times that he has failed to vote against Prohibition measures have been during his absence from Washington which is said to be more frequent than congressional duties ordinarily warrant. An analysis of the Prohibition department heads in Washington is not particularly reassuring. Major Roy A. Haynes appears to be 100% for prohibition enforcement and his consistently dry record in Ohio adds weight to his repeated assertions that he is doing his best to enforce the prohibitory laws. He is not the generalissimo in prohibition enforcement, however, as many believe, and labors under many handicaps not the least of which is his immediate superior, David H. Blair, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, who, in turn, kow tows to the Secretary of the Treasury, Andrew Mellon. Secretary Mellon can hardly be listed as bone dry, or even passably dry. His alleged large holdings in Whiskey certifi- cates are not a particularly happy coincidence in view of the fact that he is the titular head of prohibition enforcement in the nation. He has never been in a position to cast a public vote for or against prohi- 101 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS bition, but his private business affairs relative to the liquor traffic are interesting. Mr. Mellon, with the estate of Henry C. Frick, was a joint owner of the Distillery at Broad Ford, Westmoreland County, of A. Overbold & Co., which was founded in 1810 by Frick's grandfather, whose great success was the boyhood incentive of the coke king. In the bonded warehouses of this distillery there were, in February, 1921, 1,500,000 gallons of whiskey, probably valued at $18,000,000 to $20,- 000,000. Mr. Mellon came into a one-third ownership of the Overbold plant years ago through the fact that Mr. Frick, who had married a granddaughter of Abram Overbold and inherited an interest in the distillery, had borrowed some $20,000 from Judge Thomas W. Mellon, father of the Secretary, for his first business venture, suggested to Andrew Mellon, on settlemenc of the estate, that he take over a third interest in the distillery. With the advent of prohibition the company went into liquidation, and what remained was turned over to the Union Trust Company of Pittsburg. Mr. Mellon, it is said, never had a personal part in the distillery affairs and for years aimed to get rid of his stock, claiming there was no profit during the war on account of high costs of grain.* Mr. Mellon, however, is said to have admitted to a Boston Sunday Post reporter, that he had never been in favor of the Constitutional amendment, though heartily in favor of more rigid curtailment or super- vision of the liquor traffic. A constitutional pro- vision, he said, was an extreme step in that it at- tempted to control private and personal conduct of the citizen and must fail on account of its very extremity. With his reputed large holdings in whiskey cer- tificates, and his frank admission that he does not favor the prohibitory amendments how can the pub- 102 WET POLITICIANS' WET RECORDS lie expect firm and aggressive enforcement of the prohibitory laws? Commissioner Blair is pictured by some as a weak sister a mere mouth-piece for the Secretary. A man who does exactly as he is told, no more, no less. When Federal Prohibition Commissioner Haynes tried to hold back the drive of the wets to release large quantities of beer, just prior to the passage of the anti-beer bill in November, 1921, Commission- er Blair, and Secretary Mellon overruled him and opened wide the sluiceways. Thousands of gallons of beer were rushed out of storage during the last stages of the passage of the anti-beer bill when it was known by all that it was only a matter of time when the bill would pass and receive the President's O. K. The beer interests must have had some pow- erful friend in court. As a matter of practice, Blair is the button-pusher in the Mellon Hotel, and Haynes is Blair's bell-boy. Blair is an i^k-spreader who is willing to take the blame off the shoulders of the politicians for the sake of his ten thousand a year or so. In every well-regulated establishment there is a buffer to take up and absorb the shocks from the bumpers. Com- missioner Blair is the buffer of the Revenue Department. When I was removed he issued a statement in which he assumed full responsibility. But in view of the Quincy House Raid, people paid more atten- tion to Lodge's silence than to Blair's forensic on the "Whyness of Nothing.]" In view of the attitude of Secretary Mellon and Commissioner Blair it is not at all strange that when Senator Lodge or some of his emissaries such as Winslow, Tinkham and Innes demanded my dis- charge that they acquiesced with characteristic Washingtonian camouflage. Commissioner Blair the independent, the courageous, the extremely dry federal office holder, manfully took all the blame for 103 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS my dismissal. Such time-worn political bunkum may still be effective in the south, Commissioner Blair's native land, but will hardly do in the cultured and politically wise north east. The fact that the Senior Senator from Massachusetts, Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge, permitted Commissioner Blair to ad- vance such a superficial, ill-conceived and easily re- futed excuse is taken by many shrewd political ob- servers as excellent proof that the Senator is losing his grip on the political situation in Massachusetts. He has long underestimated the intelligence of his constituents in the Old Bay State. The reaction from such a sublime and peaceful, even if precarious, state of mind is apt to be as sudden and as discon- certing as the kick from the famous White Horse whiskey of Quincy House fame. 104 OUTWITTING THE BOOTLEGGER RUM RUNNING, OR THE THRILLS OF OUT- WITTING THE BOOTLEGGER Chapter X. Gunning for the rum-runner is always exciting and can hardly be placed in the same class with tiddley-winks. The rum-runner is a different type from the walking bar-room or the manufacturer and vendor of moonshine. He generally operates in a high-priced car and carries a stock of con- siderable value. Consequently, he will fight harder and use more ingenuity in preventing capture. He sells his stock in most instances to the so-called high-class trade, such as the wealthy man who wishes to replenish his pre- Volstead cellar stock, the steward of the private club, or to the State- Street broker, who acts as middle-man in the dis- tribution. A pet scheme of at least one bootlegging ring is to sell highVgrade stuff in case lots to the stew- ards of some of the exclusive clubs for the top price, and then pay a dollar a bottle for the empties, provided the labels are not damaged. The bottles are then filled with moonshine, sealed with imita- tion stamps, and sold to the man who can only afford to buy a bottle or two at a time as A-one stock. One characteristic of the rum-runner which seems to predominate is his everlasting boasting. To hear one of these individuals talk, anyone would get the impression that he was the bravest, clever- est and noblest of the Jesse James type of bandit. Rum-runners always talk in large figures, and because of their bravado and exaggeration, many people have the impression that the traffic is a great deal larger in volume than the actual facts warrant. I have posed as a bootlegger myself in order to catch a bootlegger. As a rule, I would start the 105 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS conversation by trying to purchase ten barrels or a car-load of whiskey. The bootlegger would counter with the information that he could not bother with such small-town business. If I cared to talk on a worth-while basis, say two or three car-loads, he would be glad to accommodate me. After a reasonable amount of such cheap and harm- less talk, a trade might be consummated for from three to six bottles, possibly a case. It is such talk which leads those who are unacquainted with the facts, or those anxious to distort the truth, to say that more rum is sold under prohibition than in the days of license. A good example of a bootlegger's bluff and blus- ter which led a good churchman to spread propa- ganda against prohibition is the case of a doctor who has been a close friend for some time. He came to me one day and said, "Wilson, I can buy a barrel of whiskey any time from a bootlegger," but unfortunately he refrained from giving the name of said bootlegger. I answered ''Marvelous! Why not buy the barrel"? He answered "I do not drink." Then "Why not buy it to sell," I replied, and he answered quite indignantly, "Why, you know I am not a bootlegger." "Yes," I replied, "and the bootlegger knew that you did not drink or that you would not take the barrel for a gift. I might go to my own church on a Sunday and take orders all day long for barrels of whiskey, safe in the knowledge that no one would ever call my bluff. Doctor, I should advise either trying to buy this barrel or ceasing to be a propagandist in favor of the Svets'." One exciting capture of several bootleggers near the close of my regime as Prohibition Chief is of- ered as a typical example. Arrangements were made by one of my agents with a bootlegger to buy one hundred fifty gallons of moonshine at six dol- lars a gallon. The bootlegger would not talk with my man until he had actually seen the money, so 106 OUTWITTING THE BOOTLEGGER the day prior to the capture nine hundred dollars was deposited in a certain bank and the bootlegger was allowed to see that my man actually had that much money. Arrangements were then made to have the goods delivered at a certain garage in Boston. My agent who was to make the purchase, was to be at the garage at seven in the evening with the nine hundred dollars. Since none of these gen- tlemen trust each other my agent insisted upon the bootlegger bringing in a sample of his goods before handing over the money. At about six in the even- ing, four agents were loaded into a limousine and driven into the garage lying fiat on their backs in the car. At this time, the bootlegger had sentinels watching all avenues of approach to the garage, so that if my agents had come in any other way, the transaction would have fallen through. At the ap- pointed time, the bootlegger put in his appearance at the garage, met my man in a private office, and insisted on seeing the money. Then my man in- sisted on seeing some of the goods. While this was going on, a Dodge truck had been going up and down the street. The bootlegger signalled for the truck, which stopped in front of the garage, and he lifted out a five-gallon can of moonshine and carried it into the office for examination by my agent. The truck immediately started up again but soon turned round and came back toward the garage. As the truck was about to pass, my agent jumped the bootlegger with the five gallons of moonshine. The agents in the car rushed out and held up the truck. The capture happened so rapid- ly that no gun-play was necessary, although the bootlegger in the private office put up quite a strenuous scrap. ^ The men who run whiskey from Canada often- times have some very clever false bottoms or other places of concealment in their cars. One runner, I can remember, instead of having the usual leather cushion in the front and back seats, had inserted 107 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS tanks which would hold in the neighborhood of twenty gallons each, the tank being covered, of course, with leather. Unless a person got into the car and leaned against the tank no suspicion would be aroused that there was anything unusual about the car. Oftentimes the rum-runner carries a lady or two, or even his family to divert suspicion. Sometimes the liquor is concealed in a truck loaded with hay, bricks or anything else for concealment. I picked up a bootlegger near Long Meadow at one time who made the mistake of carrying the same load of furniture each time. A farmer's wife's sus- picion was aroused on seeing the same chair go by the farm on a number of different occasions and consequently tipped off my office. I have found the contraband liquor encased in bales of hay which had been shipped through from Canada, or in carloads of potatoes, turnips, or even Christmas trees. At one time a fairly good busi- ness was carried on by freight cars loaded with po- tatoes at St. Francis or Fort Kent near the Cana- dian line. The whiskey was smuggled across the border in the night and concealed in the potato cars. Each car had its potato bug. The potato bug is the man placed in the car to care for the fire in order to prevent the freezing of the potatoes. En route to Massachusetts, the potato bug breaks the stove occasionally, necessitating a stop in some of the larger cities. Whenever a stop is made, some of the booze is sold. By the time the car reaches its destination, all of the liquor has been sold. Every precaution is taken by the rum-runner to guard against capture. Sometimes they operate in pairs, an empty car running ahead. If no traps are found, the other car with the load passes through with safety. Sometimes when the road is known to be guarded, one bootlegger with an empty car with brilliant lights drives ahead. The man with the load follows in the rear without lights. 108 OUTWITTING THE BOOTLEGGER While the agents are busy stopping the first car, the other man steps on the gas and shoots by before he can be stopped. Desperate tactics are sometimes resorted to, such as driving at tremendous rates of speed without lights, or through congested traffic. The rum-run- ner has no regard for any law, and consequently is a serious menace to the road. In one case in Maine, a bootlegger operating in a Cole Eight, the prohibition agents in a Buick Six, deliberately ran into the prohibition car, badly wrecking both auto- mobiles. His object was to cripple the agents so that some of his pals could run through unmolested. This case had a very peculiar ending. The boot- legger was taken into court and fined a thousand dollars, which he promptly paid. The agents were then served with a trespass writ by the attorney for the bootlegger for occupying more than half the road, and requested to furnish bail in five thousand dollars each.^ As the agents were unable to fur- nish that amount of bail, they were held by the local sheriff until the next day. The district at- torney supplied the bail on the afternoon of the fol- lowing day, and that night the agents picked up another rum-runner, much to the surprise of the latter gentleman, who stated "Where did you fel- lows come from? I understood the sheriff had all the agents locked up." A very amusing case in Boston, one agent entered a house to arrange for a buy, and two other agents were close by in an automobile so as to be ready for any emergency. The agent in the house came out with three Italians, entered a high-powered car, and drove away, followed by the other agents. The car passed through Boston into Somerville, Everett, Revere, Chelsea, back into Revere and stopped at a house. The agent and the Italians went into the house, and in a short time the agents on the outside received a signal to rush the house. They found the other agent 109 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS in the act of paying for fifteen gallon cans of moon- shine. The Italians were immediately arrested and the cans seized. The Italians protested most violently at being arrested, and finally convinced the agents that they had better sample the cans. It was found that all contained water, except two, which had a small pocket underneath the stopper filled with alcohol. The balance was water. As luck would have it, there was sufficient alcohol in the two cans to bring the Italians into court for illegal sale and possession of intoxicating liquor. In view of the small quantity, however, the court let the men oflf very easily. If I had been the pre- siding justice, I should have given a double sen- tence, one for selling liquor, and the other for misrepresenting the goods sold. One very humorous experience shows that the most conscientious prohibition agent may associate with a bootlegger without knowing it. I hired an exceptionally good chauffeur from a certain auto- mobile concern in Boston. With this chauffeur and an agent, I raided a large distillery about twenty miles outside of Boston. I noticed that both the chauffeur and the man running the still acted very peculiarly. After a time, I sent the agent and chauffeur away on an errand and approached the owner of the still and his wife. I said "It was a mean trick for that chauffeur to give you away." "What!" said the man. "Did he tell you that I was running a still?" "How would I know you were," I replied, "unless he did." The man and his wife then grew very talkative and told me the whole story. It seems that the automobile man in Boston was financing this farmer, paying him five dollars a gallon for his moonshine. My chauffeur had been coming to the place twice a week to carry away the product. Some of the hiding-places of the rum-runners are very ingenious. I have found the liquor in false coal bins, in false closets, under the steps 110 OUTWITTING THE BOOTLEGGER of stairways. In one case, I found a barrel which had been buried in the ground and a porch built over it. Needless to say, this latter hiding place was not found without a tip. This particular boot- legger had sold another moonshine and charged the regular price for real whiskey. By way of retalia- tion, my informant told me where the whiskey was concealed. More bona fide tips are received in this way than in any other. One of the most encouraging feaures of prohi- hibition law enforcement is the fact that those en- gaged in the liquor traffic are constantly crooking each other. No business of any consequence can be built on crookedness. Bootleggers do not trust each other, and the consuming public is rapidly awakening to the fact that they cannot trust any- one engaged in this illicit, poison-dispensing traffic. Even a man with the nerve and the equipment to run bona fide whiskey from Canada finds his list of customers seriously limited, because of lack of confidence. The man of limited means who has paid ten to fifteen dollars for a bottle of Old Rye Whiskey and finds that he has purchased moon- shine is apt to be a very wary customer the next time. Especially, if the moonshine is of such a poor grade that it makes him sick. The moonshiner who makes his unpallatable liquor in a cellar, has a printing plant on the first floor, and a bottling plant on the third floor, has seriously cut into the rum-running business. The "shiner" can do a very creditable job on imitation in everything except the contents of the bottle, and that is of no consequence to him as long as he gets his price and his profit. One effective preventative against the road men- ace of the rum-runner would be refusal to issue a driver's permit to any man convicted of this ne- farious traffic. The rum runner with his exaggerated ego, and his crooked methods will soon disappear. Ill DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS THE HYPOCRISY OF WET POLITICIANS DICTATING DRY LAW ENFORCEMENT Chapter XL The absurdity of having wet politicians dictate the personnel and the policy of dry law enforcement is almost too obvious for comment. Nevertheless some observations are necessary as so many near statesmen and professional politicians are so de- cidedly wet in private, and so vociferously dry in public that many, ardently in favor of prohibition but neophytes in the ways of the **pols", are badly fooled. These men speak at a Christian Endeavor Meeting one night and participate (perhaps indulge would be a more descriptive word) in a wet banquet the next evening. They are governed by policy and never by conviction. Such '*pols" vote one way and drink another. What this old world needs today and especially law enforcement is politicians or states- men if possible, who are actuated by personal con- victions rather than the reactions received from their listening posts. Leaders are wanted who will stand up, and beat the tom tom if necessary and thus help mould public opinion. We have had quite enough of the timid reactionary variety who have to be pushed into constructive aggressive action. The public is through with trying to push its elective officials into the performance of their duty. Lead- ership of the type of Theodore Roosevelt will save the day. Roosevelt was not always right but he was always forging fearlessly ahead according to his own con- victions. No man ever beat the tom tom more than Theodore Roosevelt. No man was ever more round- ly abused for being a notoriety seeker and boosting of the big *'I AM" yet he is classed as one of, if not the greatest American. He did more than any other man in the history of our country to awaken the 112 HYPOCRISY OF WET POLITICIANS public conscience and stimulate 100%, virile Americanism. The Republican party today la« ks leadership, es- pecially in Massachusetts. There is no outstanding leader in the Old Bay State and as a consequence the G. O. P. ship is headed for the rocks. It is useless to protest and do nothing. Someone must take the chance of soiling his gar- ments and the serenity of his home life by mixing in the political whirl. If the party is to be purged it must be at the primaries in September. Men who are sincerely dry with the nerve to take the gaff and abuse they are sure to receive must be nominated. It is foolhardy to expect the prohibi- tion enforcement department to get results if a large percentage of the State and City officials are either slackers on their jobs or secretly conniving to bum the bridges behind the men sworn to enforce the law. My discharge as prohibition chief for too im- partially enforcing the law I had taken an oath to enforce may lead other men endeavoring to fill a similar position to believe that discretion is wiser than valor when the law is violated by the big fel- lows. We must see to it that my successor h not intimidated in this way. The fight must be carried to the wet and luke warm politicians so persistently and so effectively that they will either buck up in their enforcement endeavors or find certain defeat staring them in the face. In some instances defeat is the only remedy, while in the case of some officials an aroused public opinion will ^et the desired results. As Chief Enforcement officer I was pestered con- tinually by wet politicians trying to dictate the ap- pointment of dry agents. While these gentlemen could not make me recommend their men they were in a position to retard me in securing appointment of competent trustworthy agents. Such tactics must cease. The man sworn to en- 113 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS force the Prohibitory Law should have every co- operation. He must have clean cut honest fearless 100% prohibitionists for agents. It is just as ridicu- lous to expect a wet politician's wet selection as agent to inforce the law as it is to expect a millinery saleswoman to sell steel products. In other words a business corporation will not employ a salesman who does not know and believe in the particular article he is supposed to sell. The prohibition de- partment should not employ agents who do not be- lieve and actually support the Volstead Act. Agents selected by 100% prohibitionists are not infallible but those selected by anti-prohibitionists are impos- sible. Politics and prohibition enforcement ought to be segregated. Quoting from Dr. Frank King- don's Tremont Temple speech, "If politicians persist in meddling in prohibition enforcement it is the duty of the churches to dabble in politics to the extent that the politicians who would make a farce of the pro- hibitory laws are put out of office." Under the leadership of Senator Lodge and his lieutenants Innes, Bottomly, et al, the G. O. P. was practically wiped off the map in 1912. These same so-called leaders are steering the old party for the same shallow rocky waters, and unless the best citizens of the Old Commonwealth immediately take a hand the Republican Party is due for the toboggan. Even this bugaboo, however, will not deter those standing squarely for law enforcement. Our con- stitutional laws are of vastly more importance than any party. Certain leeches in the body politic that collect both ways regardless of who wins must be eliminated. Men with the courage of their conviction whose ideals are those of the general public rather than -f State Street should be entered in the primary lists against our publicly dry and privately wet politicians. The political aspect of my removal is well illus- trated by the following editorial appearing in the 114 HYPOCRISY OF WET POLITICIANS Boston Telegram, January 21, 1922. While I do not consider myself a martyr or even a near martyr, the folly of allowing a few wet politicians to dictate the destinies of the Republican party is clearly shown in this editorial. It is not a question of whether Wilson was removed or not but whether wet politi- cians can supervise with impunity the exact degree and thoroughness with which the dry laws are to I>t enforced. The Telegram is undoubtedly correct in its statement — traitors of the G. O. P. could not have planned a more effective way in which to in- jure the party. The question that every thoughtful Republican should answer to his own satisfaction, is, "Are certain prominent Republicans who generally collect both ways on all Legislation, more interested in the rum ring than they are in the G. O. P? WILSON'S MARTYRDOM If some traitor within the Republican party had bribed men to wreck the organization, he could not have suggested a better method of bringing ruin than by re- moving Harold D. Wilson federal prohibition enforce- ment officer from his Boston post. Wilson's crime was committed when he took the con- istitution of the United States seriously and accepted it as the law of the land. He believed that the prohibi- tion amendment, being an integral part of the funda- mental law of the land, should be enforced, even when the violators happened to be members of the Republican party gathered at the Quincy House to fete the Govern- or of the Commonwealth. Wilson is being punished by being driven from Mass- achusetts. In the future, men sworn to do their duty as officers of the federal government will realize that they are expected to make mental reservations when taking the oath, and that they are supposed to do their duty only when it will not injure Republican politicians. Today, what do we see? A war veteran who does his duty and attempts to enforce the law is driven from his position because he offended Republican politicians. The petty, narrow-minded, short-sighted Republican politicians who have driven out Wilson, have signed their own death warrants. Their party is doomed. 115 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS When the next election day comes they will find that men and women who believe in the constitution, who up- hold law and order, will repudiate them for what they are — law-breakers and terrorists. What a desperate gang the politicians are. They are the anarchists, truly. They want law only when the other fellow is affected, but they demand for themselves the right to break any law without fear of punishment. If Harold D. Wilson, persecuted by politicians, re- turns to Massachusetts, he will be able to defeat any other Republican who opposes him for the governorship. Is that why the group desiring to murder him politi- cally sees to it that he is offered another iob outside of the state? Do they want to get Wilson away, so far away that the citizens of Massachusetts will forget him and what he has done? I take exception to this editorial in one respect only, that is, the public will forget Wilson, but not law enforcement. Law enforcement is the real issue and not Harold D. Wilson. The Republican party can still prove it stands **four square" for law and order or law enforcement not by the reinstatement of Wilson or his elevation to some other post, but by the absoute repudiation of the group of wet "pols? who stand squarely for rum or ruin. The quicker the Republican party is purged of Charley Innes and his errand boy cohorts the better for the G. O. P. and all citizens who believe in one law which is the same for all men. It is these men who are handicapping the enforce- ment of the Volstead Act, and it is the same crowd who are constantly retarding the passage of any progressive humanitarian legislation. They claim that the prohibitory amendment can not be enforced. That it has been a farce, but they dare not give it a fair chance by a reasonable trial. Like Louis Coolidge, said to be one of the wettest of the wets who attaches his name to anti-prohibi- tionists' literature at every opportunity and is re- ported to be still grumbling about Woman Suffrage, 116 HYPOCRISY OF WET POLITICIANS this group is still living in the past unaware of the fact that the public conscience has been awakened and is demanding real, unmistL^kable results rather than high-sounding verbiage. The main difficulty with prohibition enforcement today, is the obstruc- tionists' methods of certain wet interests and the per- sistent insidious propaganda of the same interests. According to these gentlement the law restricts per- sonal liberty, does not and cannot prohibit; more liquor is sold than ever, there are more drunks. Prohibition agents are lawless and irresponsible in their tactics. Enforcement of the law is terribly expensive. It is the most unpopular act in the his- tory of the ages. It is impossible to enforce, etc., etc. These are arguments of the wet propagandists. Briefly I wish to answer a few of these objections. Personal liberty — Every law that is on our Statute Books restricts personal liberty. A man cannot murder, h^e cannot steal without paying the penalty. The good housewife cannot throw her garbage out the nearest window, although that would be the easiest way. The autoist cannot drive as fast as he wishes, although in many cases his personal liberty and personal convenience are very much incon- venienced by the restraining influence of the auto laws. Does not prohibit — No law absolutely prohibits and some are more freely violated than the Volstead Act, with very many more facilities for enforcement. The laws on stealing, overspeeding and the dodging of taxes do not prohibit and in as much as they do not actually prohibit they should be repealed if the argument of the wet propagandists is carried to its logical conclusion. One of our laws, which is per- sistently violated, is the statute requiring persons carrying a gun to have a permit. Whenever a crook or a bootlegger is arrested, however, he is always fotmd to be toting a gun, and never has a permit. 117 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS Why not repeal this law since it seems to be absolute- ly impossible to enforce it effectively? "More sold*' and "more drunks" will come up for refutation in another chapter. The falsity of the charge relative to the illegal methods of agents and the heavy expense of main- taining the prohibition department will be covered in a later chapter, but both of these are so easily re- futed, that it seems strange that anyone would ad- vance them as an argument. The supposed unpopularity of prohibition law en- forcement is to be established. Some have been very vociferous in their claims along this line and have apparently judged the unpopularity of the law by the volume of their own **mouthings". In the fall the people will have an opportunity to vote for or against genuine law enforcement, as an act to bring the state laws into conformity with the Volstead Act will undoubtedly be up for a referen- dum vote at that time. If this act is defeated this fall I shall be willing to admit that the enforcement of the prohibitory amendment in Massachusetts is unpopular. The wets have claimed from time to time that the yes vote on the ballot opposite the question, "Shall licenses be issued for the sale of certain non intoxi- cating beverages," is an indication of the wet and dry vote. Just how a vote on such an ambiguously worded question can establish anything is a myster}^ to me and to all thinking people. What does the question mean? Does it mean that Moxie and other non-intoxicating beverages are to be licensed? Moxie certainly is non-intoxicating. How many of the electorate know that under the state law intoxi- cating liquors are described as not over 2}%, while under the federal law, anything over J of one percent is classed as intoxicating and that the vote on the above ballot question means an issuing of licenses for the sale of liquors having an alcoholic content 118 HYPOCRISY OF WET POLITICIANS of not more than 2}%. Let us forbear passing- an opinion upon the popu- larity of the Volstead law, until the people have actually had the chance to decide the question. Who says the law cannot be enforced? The men who participated in the Quincy House debauchery; the lawyers who are collecting large fees for tipping the bootleggers on the safe way in which to violate the constitutional law of the land ;the courts who will not try to establish reasonable respect for the law by proper sentences ; or the wet politicians who are moving heaven and earth to put obstacles in the way of law enforcement. It is the very people who are secretly conniving to circumvent the law that protest its impossibility. An ordinary murderer or thief considers our laws farcical until he is brought before the bars of justice, and if he finds the courts too weak kneed to give him a sentence, he will still consider the laws a farce. An outraged public opinion will soon prove wheth- er the prohibitory law can be enforced for the rich as well as the poor. And this same indignant and law loving public will remove the obstacles in the way of enforcement, whether it be the wet politicians, the scheming lawyers, the weak-kneed courts, or the big bankers, who have thousands of dollars tied up in bonded warehouse whiskey certificates. As a rule, it is pretty easy to trace the enthusiasm of any par- ticular individual for the booze traffic to his own extremely wet stomach craving, to his pocketbook, or to the desire to follow the path of least resistance. The first class will soon kill themselves by drinking moonshine. The second class are not so very num- erous and soon will be seeking a more lucrative and safer profession, while the last group is easily sus- pectible to public opinion and will be just as panicky, and weak-kneed before a storm of dry protests as they are now overawed by the bullying and loud- mouthed tactics of a wet minority. 119 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS DRY AGENTS— HOW SELECTED THEIR TEMPTATIONS Chapter XII. It was my belief while Chief Enforcement Officer in Massachusetts that the prohibitory law could not be enforced; By those who did not believe in law enforcement. By those who did not want it enforced. By the actionless appointees of "wet" politicians. By "drys" mentally and physically unfit. By soft-pedal, popularity-seeking "drys." Big business houses do not employ representa- tives to merchandise their product unless the repre- sentatives know and believe in the particular goods to be sold. Prohibition law enforcement should be carried on by men who are possessed with aggressive enthu- siasm, and genuine convictions relative to the cause of prohibition. In addition to conviction and enthusiasm, agents must be able to stand the gaff of public opinion. We have thousands of men who are as brave as lions in physical combat, but downright cowards in the face of public jibes. Physical bravery is a wonderful asset, but it is not to be compared to the mental poise that can carry on when in the right, regardless of the consequences. Prohibition agents need this poise, not because the majority does not approve of their endeavors, but because the wet minority is so much more vociferous. It seems to be a great deal easier to berate a man for his short- comings, than to praise him for his finer qualities. Criticism is more newsy. If I should write a treatise on the virtues of prohibition agents it would re- ceive little if any newspaper notice, but if I should picture my former agents as a lot of parasites living 120 DRY AGENTS on the public, considerable space would be devoted to my harangue. In selecting agents, it is difficult, of course, to determine how much punishment they can absorb in the way of cheap talk from wet propagandists. The safest policy is to take those with backers and intimate friends, likely to approve of and sympa- thize with their activities so that the agents will at least receive encouragfement when at home. A certain amount of temperamentality is neces- sary in an agent. He should not be selected for his pacifist views, or his docility. He should be of the type that gets so enthusiastic over the work in hand that he carries through the job even at the cost of injuring the finer sensibilities of those engaged in the liquor traffic. The "slam-bang," go through man permeating enthusiasm and confidence in his every action is an entirely different individual than the suave bank executive who calmly and quietly directs the affairs of a financial institution. The banker is, to a cer- tain extent, negative. He is constantly checking the impulsive, who would get rich over night. He chills rather than creates enthusiasm. The actions of a prohibition agent are positive. He is in the front line trenches. He does not wait, as the banker, for the other fellow to come to him, he goes out after his man, and if he does not get in his work first the undertaker receives some business with the friends of the agent, rather than of the bootlegger, paying the bills. The coolly calculating banker makes an excellent ambassador to combat European diplomats, largely because he lacks temperament. The ideal agent acts on the spur of the moment. He may plan and scheme for weeks to catch a certain bootlegging ring, but when the time comes to consummate the deal, the plans have to be carried through with pre- cision, speed and confidence. The following editorial appearing in the Spring- 121 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS field Republican Jan. 28, 1922 is very much to the point : BOUNCED "Dry" Wilson is bounced for "incompatibility of tem- perament." That is the long and the short of the reason publicly given in Washington for the removal of the chief state enforcement officer under the prohibitory law. "There never was a question of Mr. Wilson's honesty, energy and interest," Washington admits. And that is some admission. His temperament must have been awful. Abraham Lincoln, when complaints came to him that Gen. Grant at the height of his career of victory was a hard drinker, asked for the brand of whisky he kept so that he might send some to the other generals. Even in such a matter as the enforcement of prohibition, this famous whisky story applies. If the trouble with "Dry" Wilson is his temperament, pray give us more enforce- ment officials with that kind of a temperament. It is temperament that enforces or fails to enforce the law. * * * * This matter of temperament runs deep. Temperament 19 very often the chief difference between success and failure, between victory and defeat. If there was "in- compatibility of temperament" between Wilson and Pot- ter, why should not Potter have been the one to go? Big business fits a man for a particular job. If temperament and initiative are needed such a man is hired. In politics the job is fitted to the near- statesman. A man with ideas and a punch is made supreme High Mogul of the archives division. While the lifeless, helpless, jobless relic of by- gone days is placed in a position requiring execu- tive ability. In other words, a business house has a certain job to do and a man is found with the proper qualifications. In politics, certain individuals have to be cared for and a job is hitched to a man be- cause of his political rather than of his executive merit. Unfortunately the government is not engaged in the undertaking business, consequently it is quite difficult to fit jobs to some political parasites who are dead from their feet up. It would be much cheaper to pension such federal office holders and . stop cheating the undertakers. 122 DRY AGENTS Prohibition enforcement must be taken out of politics, if proper results are to be obtained. It is unfair to those responsible for enforcement, and to those who believe in the prohibitory law, to allow wet politicians to dictate the selection of agents. The farcical antics of some of our Congressmen in trying to make a political football out of law en- forcement is positively scandalous. Some of our high officials will recommend any Tom, Dick or Harry that may apply simply passing the buck to the man responsible for the selection. Congressman Tinkham who boasts of being 100% alcoholic rec- ommended so many men for prohibition positions that I was unable to keep track of the count. Many of these applicants asserted that they had been in- formed, confidentially, that they were the only men recommended by the Congressman. Several Congressmen who are listed as "drys" persisted in recommending political door-bell pull- ers, who if appointed would have been a disgrace to the prohibition department. Some recommenda- tions came through from the Governor of the Com- monwealth, the candidates looking to me more like ward healers than potential agents. The chances are that the Governor never saw the applicants but the principal is the same. Such men should not be recommended unless known. I am pleased to state that some Congressmen such as the Hon. Charles L. Underbill of Somerville, and the Hon. John Jacobs Rogers of Lowell were very careful who they recommended, and as a consequence their can- didates received careful consideration. Recommen- dations from some politicians were not worth the paper on which they were written. The Hon. Charles H. Innes, the G. O. P. Boston whip, called on me but once during my law enforce- ment activities and apparently decided his recom- mendations would receive scant consideration. It was noticeable, however, that he appeared to be more at home in the State Director's office. In fact 123 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS I am reliably informed that he successfully pleaded the cause of a permit holder client the week fol- lowing my discharge. In selecting prohibition agents, I laid down a few rules which I endeavored to follow. With some- thing like six thousand applicants for positions, I was in a position to be quite particular as to the type of men selected. At times the rush for jobs was so intense that I had to stage a raid or two in order to recover my equilibrium. Many of the appli- cants would gladly have worked on a strictly com- mission basis, while others appeared to be the type who could have established an excellent commis- sion business. These men of course were given no consideration. Several hundred of the applicants, however, appeared to be mighty fine men and came with the very best of recommendations. I do not imagine that there was ever a time when more really high class men were in search of employ- ment. It was very difficult to make selections, and some of the pathetic stories of unemployment were extremely hard to resist. I was thoroughly con- vinced, however, that an effective prohibition en- forcement department could not be founded on sym- pathy or compassion and my agents were selected as much as possible on merit. Candidates had to measure up to the following requirements: First, Candidates had to have the physical stamina and intellect to stand the gaff. Second, they had to possess the moral courage and integrity to resist the many temptations sure to confront an agent. Third, they had to be genuine prohibitionists by conviction not through policy. Fourth, married men with families were given the preference as much as possible on the ground that family responsibilities kept a man's feet on the ground. Fifth, service men were given every considera- tion, as their military training, especially in the use 124 DRY AGENTS of fire arms was of value and in my opinion they deserved preference. Little attention was paid to the politicians seek- ing political patronage although the candidate of a Congressman or State Official who seemed to measure up to the above qualifications was selected in preference to the man without political backing. My usual method was to pick a few men who seemed to qualify and then send them out to see if they could pass the third degree of such organiza- tions as the Anti-Saloon League, the American Legion, the Republican State committee or Repub- lican League, and certain well-known citizens not prominently identified in politics in the candidates* own city or town. I take great pride in the class of men selected, and felt that when I left the prohibition department I had a force of nineteen agents that could not be duplicated anywhere in the United States. I wish that I could commend these men individually, for their exceptional loyalty and devotion to the cause of prohibition law enforcement. But in justice to the men and my successor in office it would not be fair to impair their efficiency by publishing their names, consequently I will have to restrict my testimonials to the frank statement that if anything worth while was actually accomplished, during my regime as Prohibition Chief, it was due in large measure to the untiring, unselfish, absolutely fear- less activities of my agents. In spite of the care with which these agents were selected, and the fact that all were thoroughly tested, and not found wanting, I fear that eventu- ally a small percentage will fall by the wayside. The factors undermining the morale of prohibition agents may be grouped under three heads. First, the actual attempt at bribery by those caught trafficing in liquor. Second, the depressing influence of the low class of people apprehended in the liquor business. 125 DRY LAWS AND ,WET POLITICIANS Third, the slurring remarks and persistent propa- ganda relative to the integrity and moral character of agents by those opposed to law enforcement. I suppose the third of these is the most demoraliz- ing. Of course, there is ample opportunity for brib- ery, although the actual number of bribes offered is very limited unless the agent gives some encour- agement to those who would pay for protection. I am proud to say that I was approached on but few occasions and make no boast of unusual virtue in turning down the thousands and thousands of dol- lars in graft money that some seem to believe prohi- bition agents can obtain if they are so inclined. My instructions to agents were to raid any one at any time, and as I did not leave an agent in any city or town for any length of time, there was really no opportunity to guarantee protection as it would be necessary to buy up a new agent every few weeks. I can give a few illustrations, however, of how graft could be taken, and I know was taken by some agents long since siispended from the force. A raid is staged upon a near beer saloon, and the only evidence found is a pint of whiskey. This is ample for the conviction. The conviction may mean a fine of several hundred dollars or a jail sentence. If the agent could be induced to accidently drop the bottle, and break it, or return it to the proprietor, he would save the inconvenience and notoriety of going to court, the fine of several hundred dollars, and the lawyer's fee, also the tax of $500 which is levied by the United States upon any one convicted of selling intoxicating liquors without a license. A few hundred dollars could be passed in such an in- stance with little danger of detection. I discharged an agent for such an offense. Another example, in some court cases an agent might prevent conviction by the slightest uncer- tainty in his testimony. His failure to testify posi- tively would be worth considerable money. If a rum-runner is captured with a valuable 126 DRY AGENTS cargo of whiskey and a high priced car, freedom would be worth anywhere from five hundred to sev- eral thousand dollars to the runner. Another prac- tice which I found had been employed was the fail- ure to account for all of the goods captured, for instance, if $10,000 in liquor is found on a freight car, and only $500 is accounted for in the report of the agent, someone can benefit quite materially with the other $9500. These possibilities are cited simply to prove my contention that it is imperative to hire the very highest type of men for this job. It is per- fectly obvious that the protege of the wet politi- cian, the professional door-bell puller or the poli- tical hanger-on are not qualified. The constant rubbing shoulder to shoulder with the underworld is not particularly agreeable or con- ducive to improved morals. Day after day agents are confronted by this class of people in court. The success of the bootlegger or manufacturer of moon- shine, promjited in many instances by second-class attorneys, in absolutely lying out of any connec- tion with liquor found upon their premises is both disheartening and disgusting, especially when the agent knows he is being double-crossed by the vendor of hootch. It is very discouraging to see such tactics succeed. In some courts the bigger the liar, the smaller the fine. I found after I had been on the job for a few months, that my own vocabu- lary was getting rough, and far from lady-like. When I noticed this unconscious use of the lan- guage of the underworld, it was difficult to lay it aside. The third menace to the morale of a prohibition agent is the constant cheap talk and reputation ruining abuse of the wets. In my estimation this species of abuse is the most dangerous and dis- heartening. I have had people inquire as to how much rum I had in my own cellar, and where I was banking all my graft money. To hear some talk three or four or five months on the job should have 127 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS made me a millionaire. I have seen agents go on the witness stand with sufficient evidence to win a case and through the clever work of a brilliant opposing attorney, get so mixed in their testimony, that the case was lost, and then see the poor fellow come off the stand, crestfallen and disheartened to be con- fronted by the jibing remark, "How much did you make for selling out in that case" ? I have received letter after letter, from good but thoughtless citi- zens, accusing me of protecting some dive in some city that I did not even know existed. When working fifteen to twenty hours a day with a force that was hardly big enough to cover one city, let alone the entire state, I have been freely censored for not be- ing everywhere in the state at the same time. Many times I have sent an agent in to a city, and he has done excellent work cleaning up distilleries, but has had no success getting some of the notorious but cleverly protected bar-rooms. He would be imme- diately charged with hounding the small fry, and collecting from the large dealers. Such constant criticisms and accusations are apt to undermine the morale of the best agent. It is for this reason that I am mentioning these temptations trusting that the better class of citizens will encourage and praise agents who appear to be doing their duty rather than abuse them on hearsay evidence. The least any organization can do, which really wants to better conditions in its own city, is to appoint a committee and actually find out what the prohibition and the police departments are doing in the way of enforcement. I trust that the readers of this book will at least give my successor in office the benefit of the doubt. Investigate and find out before condemning. If the public had been willing to investigate conditions in the Massachusetts department without waiting for me to publicly demand such an investigation my tenure of office might have been prolonged. 128 CARRIE-NATIONING STILLS HUNTING FOR, CAPTURING AND CARRIE- NATIONING STILLS. Chapter XIII. If I was to advise the readers of this book on the best way in which to locate a still, I would say "Look for a piggery, a slaughter-house, an old abandoned farmhouse, or some disreputable tene- ment-house in the slums of any city where the natural odors are so great that the smell of the mash is not discernable." Moonshine is always made surreptiously, and as a consequence, under the most unsanitary con- ditions. Those who make the stuff are generally ignorant foreigners, who are anything but clean in their own persons. The most outrageous con- coctions are used in manufacturing the moonshine and in coloring it to give the appearance of real whiskey or gin. After personally inspecting and destroying a number of hundred stills, none of which could have passed inspection by the most primitive board of health, I have often wondered how any human being could stomach moonshine whiskey and still live. It may be improper to give a receipt for the mak- ing of "shine" in this book, but the process is so simple and the ingredients so distasteful that I will present it for the consideration of my readers, trust- ing that it will tend to deter rather than encour- age drinking. Mash is ordinarily made from sugar, water, yeast and garbage. It is customary to borrow garbage from the neighbors if it is im- possible to obtain enough from the family pail. The more juicy the garbage, the better the mash, and the better the "shine." The garbage, sugar, water and yeast should be placed in an open recep- tacle — an old barrel is generally the more sus- ceptible to bugs and other vermin. This mash or swill — for it is nothing else — should be allowed 129 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS to stand for six to ten days in order to give the yeast sufficient time to work. The mash is then ready for use in the still. If the family can muster ten gallons of swill a week, it is safe to figure on one gallon of moonshine — that is, it takes about ten parts of mash for one part of *'shine." It is no joke when I say that mash is nothing more nor less than swill. I have seen banana peel- ings, orange peelings, and every other conceivable kind of juicy refuse in the barrels of mash. It is a fact that much better moonshine can be made in the summer time than in the winter time, because the barrels of mash, or garbage, are never covered, and the flies and bugs congregate so thickly and are so juicy that they add very materially to the product. I have found stills in every imaginable kind of unsanitary conditions. One very large distillery lo- cated in Norfolk, Massachusetts, was found in an old slaughter-house. An old church deacon lived within two hundred yards of the slaughter house, but never had detected the odor of the mash be- cause he said he never had been able to pass the place without holding on to his nose. Sixty bar- rels of mash were found in this old slaughter-house, without a screen or covering of any kind. The flies were so thick that it was difficult to see the mash. The water for the mash and the still was pumped out of an old spring in a nearby gulley. The heads and hoofs and other refuse of the ani- mals killed in the slaughter-house had been thrown around this spring, polluting the water with the most deadly poisons. Such minor details as these, however, did not bother the moonshiners. They were selling their product, not drinking it. To show the extent to which some habitual drinkers will go in order to get a drink, I found two thirds of a barrel of moonshine whiskey at this place. After dumping the barrels of mash, break- ing up the stills and barrels, and getting pretty 130 CARRIE-NATIONING STILLS much covered with slough from head to foot, my men and I washed up in the moonshine. After our moonshine bath, when my back was turned, an old rummy came along- and stuck his head into the "shine" clear to his ears and started drinking it. To hear his sigh of joy, you would think it was the best whiskey he had ever tasted. Such characters are hopeless. The only thing that can cure them is death, and if they continue to drink, it will only be a short time before the final call is sounded. The family wash boiler is often used for a still one night and for the family wash the next night. The very simplest rules of sanitation are ignored by the distillers. One of the most gruesome fea- tures of the traffic is the personal filth of those operating the stills. Hunting for the moonshiners is always interest- ing. Running a distillery is precarious because of the tell-tale odor of the mash, which is very dis- tinctive. Unusual traffic in the vicinity of certain dilapidated buildings is often the clue that gives away the location of a still. Tips from disgruntled co-partners or from those who have imbibed too freely and have been arrested for disorderly con- duct or have become sick from the poisonous "shine", are other ways of securing information relative to stills. Some of the larger moonshine plants that I have destroyed were found in old abandoned farm houses off the main road, or even in wooded sections far removed from any habita- tions. Stills have to be located near a water supply, and those found in a swamp or woods are generally near a stream of running water. Several have been found by noting the discoloration of the water from the refuse from the mash, and then following the stream until the distillery is located. In quite a number of cases I found stills pro- tected by dogs, not the same human dog men- tioned in the chapter on bar-rooms, but actual, fe- rocious canines. At one place a number of such 131 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS dogs were hitched to slide rings on wires in such a manner that the barn in which the still was lo- cated was completely protected by the dogs. One still located in the vicinity of New Bedford in the woods, was protected by bloodhounds some half mile from the still. Any stranger approaching was bound to attract the attention of these dogs, whose baying would warn the distillers of danger. By the time the raiding party could reach the loca- tion of the still, those in charge had made their get-a-way with the still and "shine." The mash bar- rels might be captured, but the "shiners" always known where to get a new outfit. These "shiners" were finally successfully raided by detouring through the woods and catching the operators from the rear. The men operating stills in the woods seldom remain in any one location for any great length of time but constantly move from place to place to avoid detection. The following is a typical capture of a still: I went to a small town not a great ways from Bos- ton and with the assistance of one of the town selectmen secured a state search warrant. We im- mediately started for the still, because the select- man was under the impression that another mem- ber of the board might tip off the culprits before our arrival. It took less than fifteen minutes to reach the distillery, but in spite of our speed, the tip had been received in advance of our arrival. As we approached the still, on a thickly wooded road, I heard a noise in the woods which I thought at first was an animal running. Then I noticed a man hiding behind some shrubbery. Ordering an agent to follow me I went after the man, after telling the selectman and his constable to seize the still. The agent and I fired over the head of the man who was trying to escape through the woods, and soon rounded up three foreigners. We brought our prisoners back to the distillery and obtained their admission that they had been operating it. Two 132 CARRIE-NATIONING STILLS fifty-gallon stills in complete operation were found and six great vats of mash. I should say that each of these vats held at least four or five hundred gallons of mash. The work of destroying stills is dirty and diffi- cult, but intensely satisfying to a genuine prohi- bitionist. In this particular case, I borrowed a pair of boots, and an ax, and in true Carrie-Nation style knocked everything galley-west. The plant was located in an old, abandoned farm house, absolutely vile from the fumes of the still and mash, and lit- erally filled with flies and other vermin. According to the admissions of those running the still, it had been in operation about a month, during which time no attempt had been made to even sweep the floor. From the looks of the for- eigners operating the plant, bathing and personal cleanliness were lost arts. These men were taken to court and convicted, each man paying a fine of one hundred dollars, and I imagine within a week had resumed operations in some other lo- cality. A jail sentence is the only cure for such law violators. One still that I captured in the woods was pro- tected by a watch tower, which consisted of a high tree with a platform some thirty feet from the ground. From this vantage point the "shiners" could watch the only road approaching the place for a mile or more. This place was captured by leaving our automobile over a mile away and walk- ing through the woods. As a rule moonshiners put up little resistance when captured as they are usually saturated with the fumes from the distil- lery, and in many instances two-thirds drunk. Such men put up a tremendous bluff as to their ferocity, for its effect on citizens living in the vicinity, but are cowards at heart. I remember one place in particular in which I found thirty-two barrels of prune mash. Prunes, yeast and molasses being used in some cases to 133 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS make rum. I was searching for this still in com- pany with one of my agents when we noticed from a slight elevation an old house which had been burned to the ground with a man apparently patrol- ling the premises with a gun over his shoulder. This looked a bit suspicious, so we started on the run for the house ! When we arrived on the scene the man with the gun had disappeared. In the cellar of the old house we located the still and mash. It was one of the most unsanitary places imaginable, but of course was sufficiently clean for the manufacture of moonshine. The man with the gun was as much afraid of federal officers as the near-by citizens were frightened at his gun. In other words, the only reason for this sentinel was to bluff the local people so that no information would be given relative to the still. Raiding in the slums of a city is quite exciting and generally as thrilling as some movie scenarios. Large crowds usually follow such operations. I have very vivid recollections of thirteen raids in East Cambridge, Massachusetts, one evening in a driving snow storm. The police of Cambridge rendering valient assistance. Place after place was rushed, Hquor confiscated, those in charge arrested and bundled into the patrol wagon for a quick trip to the station with whatever contraband liquor seized, while the raiding party kept on for another capture. Barrels of mash, stills, and other para- phernalia were heaved out of second and third story windows with the utmost abandon. For energetic endeavor and willingness to go through, there is not a police department in Massachusetts that can outdo the Cambridge police. Throwing a fifty gallon barrel of mash out of a third or fourth story window is a joy that comes but seldom to the average man. It was my pleasure to throw no less than fifty-five barrels from a third- story window on one occasion and a lesser number on innumerable raids. A fifty gallon barrel of mash 134 CARRIE-NATIONING STILLS makes a tremendous splash when hitting the ground, the contents flying in every direction. No Fourth of July celebration could be more exciting to a man who hates the sight and smell of moon- shine. Every time a barrel is heaved out the win- dow the raider can cry "There goes five gallons more of potential moonshine." Hunting for stills in the middle of the night brings all sorts of unusual experiences. One time at midnight my raiding party got lost in a ceme- tery, and it seemed for a time as if there was no road leading out of this city of tombstones. Many times doors had to be smashed in and par- titions torn down in order to get at the "shiner" before he could destroy the evidence. I shall never forget one experience in Walpole. I had been told that there was a man operating a still in an old farm house who was reputed to be a murderer, and a very dangerous character. The raiding party arrived at his house at eleven o'clock on a pitch dark night, all the doors were locked. I pounded on the side door. A man came to the window directly over my head, and bellowed in a tremendously deep heavy bass voice that he would shoot the whole crowd if we did not vamoose in short order. With a crash a husky agent shoved his shoulder through the door, and we rushed into the domain of the bad man. On the second floor I found a little, old, decrepit, man who could not have harmed a ten-year-old boy. He was the possessor of the terrible voice. The women, especially Polack women, are often harder to handle than the men. The feminine dis- tiller is liable to throw or do anything. They are oftentimes good actors and are not above any strategy. At one place I raided the woman ap- parently became hysterical, carrying on terribly. After searching the house and finding nothing, I noticed that this hysterical woman, although ap- parently in a bad way, never left the front of the 135 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS fire-place. Upon examining the fire-place the "shine" was found concealed behind some loose bricks. The woman immediately recovered from her hys- teria and proved her ability as a purveyor of cuss words. In another case in which four gallons of "shine" in glass jars was found the woman was very friendly and appeared quite reconciled to her fate. Ordering my chauffeur to take two of the jars, and picking up the other two, one in either hand, I started to leave the house. No arrest was made, as I found that her husband owned the place, and so sum- monsed him for appearance in court. As I started to cross the kitchen, like a bolt out of a clear sky, the woman grabbed a large carving knife and made a dive at me. I barely had time to shove one of the jars between the knife and myself, and thus un- doubtedly prevented serious injury. Several elaborate stills have been found in under- ground caves. One of the best outfits was located in Methuen, Mass., near the New Hampshire line. The entrance to the tunnel leading to the distillery was in the cellar of an old house completely camou- flaged with dirt, bricks and burlap. After finding the way into the tunnel, it was found that the subterranian channel was about thirty feet long. At the farther end a good sized room or cellar was found with a large quantity of "shine". This under- ground room was carefully cemented and rein- forced to guard against a possible cave-in. Com- munity stills are frequent. That is a still that is owned by a number of "shiners" and passed around for the use of the various families. Stills were frequently found behind false par- titions ; in one instance the owner of a house had carefully papered the wall to avoid detection. An interesting find was made in a cache in an old garage, the cache having been covered with planks, then bricks, and finally with dirt and rubbish. The clue that led to the capture of this liquor was the 136 CARRIE-NATIONING STILLS smoothness with which the dirt above the cache had been patted down. Another very unusual incident was a Chicopee experience. When my raiding party rushed into the kitchen, the lady in charge ran into the bed- room. I followed her as I suspected by her actions that the evidence was in that room. When I reached the bedroom, the woman was in bed. I knew that she was fully dressed, and not being able to account for her sudden desire to go to bed, pulled her out none too ceremoniously. I found that she had taken the teapot which was filled with liquor with her and was pouring it into the bed in an endeavor to destroy the evidence. On one day, I walked into what looked to be a dark closet but proved to be a blind stairway, when I landed at the bottom, I was thoroughly convinced that it was not a closet. The same day I fell into a blind brook and unwittingly investigated a bee hive. Anything except the expected is liable to happen to a prohibition agent at any time. The life of a federal officer is hazardous and strenuous enough for the most fastidious, and it is for this reason that I urge the readers of this book to give my successor in office and his agents every con- sideration. Their job is not only dangerous, but disagreeable in many respects, and requires a tre- mendous amount of night work if results of any consequence are to be obtained. Back up your law enforcement officials; they are under paid and over worked. 137 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS THE PRETEXT FOR MY REMOVAL Chapter XIV. The actual incident which led to my dismissal and offered the pretext for the charge of indiscretion, insubordination and temperamentality, was the fol- lowing speech, which I made at the Park Street Church on January 9, before the Evangelical Alliance of New England and the Lord's Day League. I am very much gratified with this tremendous re- ception, but do not feel that it is for Wilson but for law enforcement. It merely happens that I am the representative at the present moment of law enforce- ment and I do not want you, and I do not intend my- self, to lose sight of the fact that this demonstration is for the Cause, not for me. I believe thoroughly in the rigid enforcement of the 18th amendment and I also believe in the enforcement of every other amendment and of the constitution itself. The fourth amendment is one of the greatest handicaps to the enforcement of the 18th. Nevertheless I consider the 4th just as im- portant as the 18th and do not propose under any con- ditions to violate it or allow my men to violate it. There are certain conditions in prohibition enforce- ment in Massachusetts that must be rectified immediate- ly if we are to have honest and genuine enforcement of the prohibitory amendment in this State. I am not as much concerned with the obstacles encountered from without the department as I am from those within. I am conscious of the fact that those who would deport me to Siberia where my enforcement activities would not be so irksome to certain wet advocates in this Com- monwealth do not care publicly to request my dismissal, but that secretly they are moving Heaven and earth to bring about my removal. One means they have taken, a mighty effective one, is that of hampering prohibition activities by giving me no facilities with which to prose- cute my work. Since the Quincy House raid my entire department has been removed from the Old South Building and jammed into one room about 15x30, with only one telephone attached to the switchboard of the State Director. Formerly I had four rooms and two independent trunk lines and had great difficulty hand- ling the business of the office. At the present time it is practically impossible to function. Conditions are so serious, gentlemen, that I demand that you do some- 138 PRETEXT FOR MY REMOVAL thing besides applaud my efforts to enforce the pro- hibitory amendment. You should not accept my statements without an investigation. The least that can be done is to appoint a committee to impartially investigate all conditions pertaining to the prohibition department of Massachu- setts and then take definite action. If you find that I am of no value, demand my scalp. If you find that someone else is handicapping the work, demand his dis- charge. This challenge was immediately accepted, and a committee consisting of the Rev. Wm. M. MacNair, chairman of the Massachusetts Federation of Church- es Law Enforcement Committee, the Rev. Frank Kingdon of the Tremont Street Methodist Church, the Rev. David M. Lockrow, of the Tremont Temple Baptist Church, and Dr. A. Z. Conrad of the Park Street Church were appointed. Dr. Conrad was the presiding officer at the Park Street meeting at which I demanded an investigation, and on a vote of those present appointed the above committee and at the request of the committee served ex-officio. The committee investigated, and unhesitatingly confirmed my charges. Before any definite steps could be taken, however, other than the preparation of a preliminary report, I was summonsed to Washington and discharged. The findings of the committee is well depicted in the following extract from a sermon delivered by the Rev. Frank Kingdon on the evening of January 22, to a crowded house at his Tremont Street Church. The plain people of Massachusetts want prohibition enforced. The removal of Mr. Wilson as prohibition en- forcement agent in this state raises the issue as to whether the enforcemnt of prohibition is to meet the will of the people or the will of the politicians. The disagreement between Mr. Wilson and Mr. Potter has been made a pretext for the removal of a fearless official. "Mr. Potter is an estimable Christian gentleman of a somewhat retiring disposition. He is a beautiful Persian cat in an ofiice that demands a buldog. His one qualification for the position of director of prohibition 189 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS is that he is acceptable to the politicians headed by that arch enemy of prohibition, Henry Cabot Lodge. "Commissioner Haynes has bowed to the politicians. He has backed up fair words with foul cowardice. He has removed the only man in this state making any effort to enforce prohibition. Now is the time for the people to speak. We indorse most heartily the work of Harold D. Wilson and we ought to demand his rein- statement. Send your message to Washington in thrae words, 'We want Wilson.' " This committee fought to the last ditch for my retention in the service, and finally when they found that certain politicians had the upper hand, called a law enforcement meeting at Tremont Temple, Mon- day noon, January 30th. Some 2500 ardent prohibi- tionists jammed into the Temple at this time, and made the whole building vibrate with their cheers for law enforcement, I do not wish my readers to misunder- stand the object or temper of this meeting. It was not a Wilson demonstration, but an out and out en- dorsement of genuine impartial law enforcement from the Top Down rather than from the Bottom Part Way Up. The following resolutions were unanimously adopted at the opening of the meeting: *'l. We commend Harold D. Wilson for his fear- less enforcement of prohibition. 2. We commend him for calling public attention to the hampering of conditions under which he was obliged to work, thus making law enforcement a live issue. 3. We call for MORE, and not less, enforcement from the top down rather than from the bottom part way up. 4. We call upon the Legislature now in session to bring the laws of Massachusetts into harmony with the 18th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States." A fifth resolution was passed pledging the whole liearted support of the meeting to my successor in office and I heartily concurred in this resolution. 140 PRETEXT FOR MY REMOVAL The important thing now is law enforcement. It makes no difference whether it is Wilson or someone else who actually does the enforcing, as long as it is done thoroughly and impartially. Those believing in the strict enforcement of the prohibitory amend- ment must forget personalities and fight shoulder to shoulder with those entrusted with the carrying out of the provisions of this law if worth while results are to be obtained. The speech of the presiding officer, Dr. Conrad, was a master piece and for that reason is published in full. ADDRESS AT MASS MEETING TREMONT TEMPLE By Dr. A. Z. Conrad of the Park St. Church, Boston. January 30, 1922. Friends of Prohibition: About a month ago, in a Public Meeting in Park Street Church, of the Lord's Day League and Evange- lical Alliance, a Committee was appointed to ascertain the status of Prohibition Enforcement conditions in Massachusetts. This Committee was appointed with the understanding that they would report to the public. One brief report has been made in print. This assem- bly has been called to receive the report of the Commit- tee and to assist in increasing the public sentiment in this State, which demands an impartial unprejudiced, vigor- ous enforcement of the 18th Amendment in this State. The very first essential at the present time is that Massachusetts shall be brought into alignment with the Constitution of the United State. Any State that de- clines such an alignment is in a condition of incipient rebellion. There is no halting place between loyalty to the Constitution and nullification. There is no such thing as "No Man's Land" in this great fight for righteousness and law. Any party encouraging the violation of the 18th amendment by declining to throw its energies and influences toward State loyaty and enforcement is a menace to the republic and encourag- ing anarchy in every other kind of social, civic and po- litical activity. An aroused and awakened collective conscience in this State, together with an intense con- viction, insists that the present Legislature speedily enact into law, the bill already before it, which will bring Massachusetts out of her anomalous attitude into one of constructive loyalty. 141 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS No one is blind to tlie extreme difBculties attending the enforcement of the Prohibition Law. On the other hand, any man is blind as a bat, who can not see the utter impossibility of any return to the old regime; any reversal of the national decision which adopted the 18th Amendment. Therefore, there is but one thing to do, to insist, and to proceed with determined effort to en- force the law. Not only should every facility be given the Enforce- ment Agent and Director, but he should be backed to the limit by the well-thinking people of this State. We believe in a square deal. The people of Massachusetts regard the men who are entrusted with the enforcement of prohibition, whether in Washington or Massachusetts, as servants of the people. The uncrowned king in America is public sentiment and popular will. We therefore urge the people of Massachusetts to make their righteous demands for aggressive enforcement so apparent that those in posi- tions of power, will not dare to refuse their obedience to the public will. Common justice demands recognition of faithful ser- vice whenever it is given. Our sense of fairness re- quires that we should commend with all heartiness, the earnest and vigorous activity of Harold D. Wilson in the fulfillmen of his duty as enforcement agent in Massachusetts. Mr. Wilson undertook his task with courage, with sincerity and with fidelity. Without im- pugning anybody's motives, there still remains the fact that he was hampered in his activities and was restive under the restraints and limitations which prevented the carrying out of his ideals. He recognized that the task was a difficult one. He knew only too well the characteristics of the enemies of Prohibition, and there- fore demanded effective weapons with which he could put to rout the enemy. He was asked to build a pro- hibition highway straight through the State of Massa- chusetts. When offered a kitchen rolling pin he vigor- ously demanded a steam roller. When starting out in the prosecution of his work, he found one of the imple- ments which was in general use was a feather duster. He demanded instead a big stick, and when he began to wield his big stick, he interfered with the peace and comfort of some heads that came in his way. In looking over his equipment to discover remedies for the grievous wrongs and violations of Prohibition in this State, he found rose water, eau de cologne, Florida water, but he knew with bootleggers in every alley, and bandits at the dividing of every highway in 142 PRETEXT FOR MY REMOVAL Massachusetts what he needed was "Rough on Rats?" These things naturally startled people who were accus- tomed to a quiet, orderly, and in general a gumshoe method of making attacks on the enemy. When the enforcement officer found it impossible to get action removing the limitations which were imposed, he was like an eagle in a canary bird cage, told to sing, look pleasant, and be good. Instead of singing he tore down his cage. When informed that he was the tail and not the head of the prohibition mastiff, he showed his molars and demonstrated that he would not simply idly wag and wait, and that until there was some better reason for his disadvantageous situation given, he would be at least part head in running down law violators. It must be admitted that Mr. Wilson was not always ladylike. He never sent his card in advance of his un- invited visits, but there was no doubt who had been there when he left. He was trying to lift Prohibition out of the "pink tea" class. He took his job seriously. Not one breath of sus- picion has ever been breathed as to his integrity, his virility and his effectiveness in getting results. He threw the energies of a red-blooded, one hundred per cent prohibitionist into his work. He surrounded him- self with men who were avowed prohibitionists and above graft or compromise. The biggest single Prohibition act in this State since the 18th Amendment was passed, was the unceremoni- ous interruption of the Bacchanalian orgy and Belt- shazzar feast at the Quincy House. The greatest com- pliment paid Mr. Wilson during his duties as enforce- ment officer was that he was not invited to that law- defying, Constitution-breaking event. When he ex- ploded that bombshell he had committed the unpardon- able sin. Those responsible for the Quincy House revel were filled with wrath. -So in sacred story, we read, were those who violated the sanctities of the Temple, when One clothed with authority, with a whip of small cords drove them from the sacred precincts. That raid should have been followed by the most un- equivocal condemnation of those who staged the affair, by every temperance organization, and every guest who had been victimized, and once and for all the Rpublican party should have dismissed from its leadership men who deliberately brought discredit upon it. I say this as a life-long Republican. Mr. Wilson has never slumbered on the guard. He has sacrificed himself to the best and greatest of causes, 143 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS the caxuie which is greater than any man or group of men. The successor to Mr. Wilson's office will find no heartier supporters and none more loyal than those who have applauded Mr. Wilson's honest efforts in impartial law enforcement. The Prohibition enemies in this State are counting without their host if they think there will be any break in the solidarity of the law enforcement body in Massachusetts. The Committee that was delegated to inquire into the iProhibition Enforcement situation, neither asked nor received any confidences which might not and would not be given at any time to any citizen or group of citizens in this State who would visit the offices of the men en- trusted with Prohibition Enforcement. Men intent up- on the performance of duty would be glad if a larger public interest were shown in the work they are en- deavoring to accomplish. The 18th Amendment will neither be modified nor eliminated until grass grows roots upward and water runs up hill. It is a fight, a long fight, a hard tight, and a fight to the finish, and we are sure to win, because right is right and God is on His throne. We want action. We want it to be aggressive. We want it to be made impossible for the efforts of En- forcement officers to be nullified by any one whose sympathies are with law breakers. Massachusetts, come into your own! Demand that your escutcheon be unstained! Believers in Prohibition are intent on your honor. Let the voice of righteous- ness be heard throughout the State. Prohibition must and will be effectively enforced when the people make their will the real enforcement power in every city, village and hamlet. A. Z. CONRAD. My reasons for demanding a public investigation are clearly set forth in the following letter of Janu- ary 14, 1922: January 14, 1922. Major Roy A. Haynes, Federal Prohibition Commissioner, Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. Haynes: Your communication of the 12th at hand and contents carefully noted. I am very sorry if I have said or been reported as at^-j 'ig anything; th.t is embarrasing to my Chief. I ap- pi ciate the titi^^endous difficulties under which you 144 PRETEXT FOR MY REMOVAL labor, and am anxious to be a constructive and helpful part of your machine. I have been giving the best that is in me to prohibi- tion enforcement during the past six months, and have been getting absolutely no cooperation from the State Director in Massachusetts. The harder I have worked and the more I have accomplished, the less I have had in the way of cooperation and facilities for the prosecu- tion of my work. I have appealed repeatedly to Washington but each time when a crisis has arisen. Mi*. Potter has emitted a superabundance of high-faluting, meaningless phrase- ology — ^has smiled serenely — has called me Harold — and then has continued to ride me as soon as the danger of an eruption has passed. The removal on the busiest day of the year, Decem- ber 31st, to impossible quarters with practically no telephone service, while IMr. Potter and his help have had the best of facilities, (the State Director's own private office being as large as the room allotted to the entire field force) was the last drop in the bucket. I appealed to you for assistance December 28 and again on January 4, both by letters and by wire. No response was received. My most urgent request was for permission to come to Washington where the diffi- culty could be talked over first hand. With no remedy in sight I had three courses to pursue: 1. I might continue to pose as a Federal Prohibition Officer in Massachusetts with absolutely no facilitites for the prosecution of my work and thus betray those who have repeatedly expressed their confidence in my activities. 2. I could resign and thus quit in the face of op- position. 3. I could fight, demanding a public investigation, trusting that I would not so seriously insult my Wash- ington friends that I would be fired forthwith. I did not go off half cocked in this matter, as I de- liberately weighed the consequences. I knew that many were hoping that I would take the bit in my mouth and fight so strenuously that you and the other public offi- cials in Washington would be insulted by my audacity and thus compelled to take action. I have acquired a reputation for being radical, im- patient, under restraint, etc., etc. Considering the gang that I am fighting and the methods that they have resorted to you will have to admit that I have made very few false moves to date. The best proof of this statement is the fact that I am still out of jail with no 145 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS law suits pending. Two-fisted men are needed, not only to capture the bootleggers but to arouse public senti- ment. I am very sorry if I have acted so drastically that I have embarrassed or insulted you, as I have the ut- most confidence in my Chief in Washington, and you may rest assured that if you will remove some of the obstacles under which I have been fretting the past six months, you will never have any occasion to regret my Massachusetts activities. Very sincerely, HAROLD D. WILSON. True to the prediction in the above letter, the Washington authorities seized upon my challeng-e for an investigation as a pretext for charging me with being indiscreet, insubordinate and temper- mentally unfit. My demand for an investigation was high treasja. Federal business is not public business. What right has a mere voter such as Dr. Conrad to enter a Federal office. He is only a tax payer. Congress pays the bills, with the money of the tax payer, of course, but that does not give Mr. Average Citizen any right to ascertain how his money is being spent. The "pols" saw in my demand for a public inves- tigation an opportunity to charge incompatibility of temperament. They felt that if they could get rid of such a recklessly indiscreet, undisceming prohibi- tionist they could carry on at will. They did not realize, however, that in giving me the grand bounce for being too energetic in the per- formance of my sworn duty they were focusing public opinion upon genuine law enforcement. They succeeded in downing one man, but in so doing awak- ened thousands of law abiding citizens. The wet politicians have not only lost out in their deliberate attempt to prevent honest, genuine, im- partial law enforcment, but they have lost their self- perpetuating right to feed from the public treasury, that is, they have lost the confidence of the electorate and with said confidence, the necessary votes to con- tinue in office. 146 MY ALLEGED INSUBORDINATION INSIDE FACTS ON MY ALLEGED INSUBORDINATION Chapter XV. Among the many charges hurled at me by those disapproving of too much persistency and activity in prohibition law enforcement, and by some others totally ignorant of the true facts, insubordination was possibly the most frequent and the most harmful. I shall show in this chapter that I was not unmindful of the prerogatives of my so-called superiors, and that if I appeared restive and bel- ligerent at times it was because I had found my prohibition enforcement work so seriously handi- capped by picayune departmental inefficiency that it was absolutely necessary to fight, to be a farce in office or to quit in the face of opposition. This chapter deals exclusively with the many many needless internal difficulties I had to combat as Chief Enforcement Officer. Obstacles which I appeared to be gradually over- coming when the Quincy House crash made my dismissal inevitable. June 10, 1921, I was appointed State Director of Prohibition for Massachusetts. This office at that time entailed the issuance of permits for the dis- tribution of liquor to those entitled by law to use same. At the same time Mr. Elmer C. Potter, now State Director, was appointed Supervising Federal Prohibition Agent for New England. These offices were absolutely independent. Early in July the office of Supervising Federal Prohibition Agent was abolished, the State Director being made su- preme in each State. On July 9th, 1921, I received a pre-emptory tele- gram from Commissioner Blair in Washington stat- ing that my services were no longer needed as State Director and ordering me to turn over all govern- ment papers and property to Mr. Elmer C. Potter, 147 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS who was to succeed me as State Director. In other words, Mr. Potter was to be eased into my office with the same ejectment order that kicked me out of office. My theory at that time, and it has not been changed by subsequent events, was that one man was known to be safe, while the other was untried with no particular reputation for docility. I learned at this time from a reliable source and the information was reported to have emanted di- rectly from the office of Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, that Mr. Elmer C. Potter was to be retained in the service at any cost. In other words, the "high-ups" in the counsel of the G. O. P. had decreed that Mr. Potter was perfectly satisfactory to them. A newspaper statement published at this time was quite illuminating, quoting in substance from this article: "Mr. Elmer C. Potter's appointment is eminently satis- factory to both the Wets and the Drys. He is thoroughly trained in the old school of politics, he is not over-aggres- sive, he is sane, he knows the game and above all he is amenable to party discipline. "The article goes on to describe Mr. Harold D. Wilson as an out and out Church man, a Prohibitionist by convic- tion, but untried in the field of politics and probably so unsophisticated that he will fall an easy prey to political chicanery." At about the same time I received my telegram prbitrarily separating me from the Federal pay-roll, I received information through another source that I was to be made head of the Field Forces, with Mr. Potter as my Chief. I immediately rebelled, not only refusing to take the position of head of the Field Forces, but refusing to give up my position as Federal Prohibition Director without a public investigation. In less than three days such a near riot had been created among my church and other dry supporters that I was summonsed to Washing- ton for a conference. At Washington I flatly refused to accept the posi- tion of head of the Field Forces unless given practi- 148 MY ALLEGED INSUBORDINATION cal independence as chief in charge of enforcement in Massachusetts, and the right to initiate the firing and hiring of agents. My contention was that it was unfair to ask me to incur the dangers and hardships of service in the first line trenches unless given absolute charge over my men. These concessions were granted at that time in writing by Major Roy A. Haynes, Federal Prohibition Commissioner and on this basis I came back to the old Bay State pre- pared to enforce the Volstead Act to the best of my ability. There has been so much said pro and con regard- ing the respective duties of Mr. Potter and myself and my alleged failure (termed by my enemies as insubordination) to lay dormant when nearly every city and town in the state was crying for help that I am publishing the section of the agreement signed by Federal Prohibition Commissioner Haynes on July 12, 1921, upon the signing of which I agreed to continue in the service. 4( 3(c 4t :^ 4t « July 12, 1921. We are very anxious that you and Mr. Wilson work harmoniously together, as I know you will, to get the very best possible results in the State of Massachusetts. As Head of the Field Division, Mr. Wilson will have charge of the law enforce- ment work, for which I believe he has special adap- tation. While we would, of course, expect you both to talk over general policies, I believe it necessary that, as Head of the Field Forces, Mr. Wilson be given very large latitude, for it is Mr. Wilson who will be expected to get results in that work. If there are field agents in Massachusetts that he is convinced are not effective and trustv^orthy, we will expect him to report such names to our office with a recommendation that they be dropped from the list and will expect him to recommend for appoint- ment to such positions men in whom he can have 149 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS full confidence and faith. I am quite sure that this will also meet with your approval. 4: :]( # # 4c :«( I found public opinion relative to prohibition en- forcement anything but friendly and the public confidence in the prohibition personnel in the State even less. I soon realized that something must be done to arouse public opinion and to create the necessary confidence in my department, if any sub- stantial progress was to be made in the enforcement of the prohibitory law. Some of the agents in- herited from the old regime had proven anything but constructive and satisfactory in their enforce- ment work. As a natural consequence, many public officials, especially the police in many cities and towns had lost confidence and would not co-operate with the prohibition office. A drastic house-clean- ing seemed imperative. I immedately started dis- charging the old agents in lots of five and six at a time. I wish to add at this point that I did not find all the old agents valueless or untrustworthy and that some of those dismissed from the service were to the best of my knowledge and belief gentlemen in every sense of the word. It was necessary how- ever to let the public know that enforcement work was to be carried on in Massachusetts on a higher plane by a different class of agents. The various newspapers carried considerable space at this time relative to my house-cleaning. This publicity served a three-fold purpose: 1. It focused public attention upon the fact that there was an enforcement department that was at least striving to function. 2. It served notice upon those who had been con- niving with the department that there was to be a different order of affairs. 3. It proved conclusively to those who had lost confidence in the old personnel that in the future prohibition enforcement was to be conducted by 150 MY ALLEGED INSUBORDINATION prohibitionists in the interest of genuine law en- forcement. Obstacle after obstacle was encountered in my house-cleaning endeavors. Some of the men, acting on advice from those higher up or from interests without, questioned my authority to demand their discharge, and in some instances were re-engaged by the State Director. This created a division of authority in the prohibition department which con- tinued to the time of my own dismissal in January. As an example, on one occasion I was notified after recommending two men for immediate ap- pointment that it was not politically expedient to appoint these men. This notice came seventeen days after my recommendation had been forwarded. While I do not believe that political expediency should have had anything to do with the appoint- ment of agents, if politics had to play a part it was certainly as politically inexpedient on the day I recommended these men as it was seventeen days later. Why tie up the Department without agents while ascertaining the political expediency of ap- pointing candidates otherwise eminently satisfac- tory. During the month of November largely because of departmental dilly dallying I was compelled to try to enforce the prohibitory law in Massachusetts with about thirteen agents. My men were scattered so thinly throughout the State that time and time again Wilson's flying squadron consisted of only Wilson and his chauffeur. Reports were constantly brought to my men and to myself that I was to be fired forthwith. On many, many occasions the exact date of my dismissal was designed. My prohibition enforcement activities in Massachusetts during August, September, October and November were handicapped in so many ways and there were so many rumorS as to the dire things due to occur to my agents and myself that it seems like a nightmare when I think of those days. All through these try- 151 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS ing days, the men that I had appointed and the rem- nant of the old agents retained on the force fought almost night and day to obtain such good results in enforcement that no changes could be made. In this respect my two fisted Scotch first Deputy, Mr. Gordon C. MacMaster, rendered particularly ef- fective service. Nothing seemed to daunt him or dampen his ardor. The greater the obstacles, the more numerous the difficulties — the harder and more conscientiously he worked. His example was a constant inspiration to the agents and a great source of comfort to myself. Such men are rare and enforcement in Massachusetts is losing in Mr. MacMaster a rugged, fearless, hard-fighting, four- square man that it will be practically impossible to replace. Inability to collect legitimate expenses was one of the serious handicaps and today I am out of pocket several hundred dollars as a reward for my enforcement activities. Men who were working from fifteen to twenty hours a day some of the time on Sundays as well as week-days, found it impos- sible to collect the money actually expended on expenses. In October matters grew so bad that I had to abso- lutely demand a show-down. I wrote Commissioner Haynes for permission to come to Washington. No response was received to this letter, but after a number of appeals to interest Congressmen and others I was finally invited to Washington. I returned to Massachusetts with the definite un- derstanding that I could immediately finish my house-cleaning without interference from any source. Nine more men were let out at this time. No- vember 10th I recommended for appointment nine men. One of these men was appointed December 2nd, one December 8, one December 9, one De- cember 10, one December 27th and one January 3rd. When I left the service January 27th, three were 152 MY ALLEGED INSUBORDINATION still waiting for their appointment. It took me from August 14 to December 8 to secure the appointment of a man who was out of employment and in dire need of finances. This man had had two years of actual experience as a detective and was the sole support of a wife and three small children. He was held up primarily, because he could not secure the endorsement of his Congressman on the ground that he had not been sufficiently active in the party. In spite of the many difficulties it is interesting to note that practically twice as much work was ac- complished during the month of November with a greatly depleted force as was done in the month of October with practically double the number of agents. At times I appeared to be getting the best of the argument inasmuch as my recommendations for the appointment of agents were gradually get- ting through, although delayed. Then came the Quincy House smash of December 20th. From that time on the handwriting on the wall was plain. I could see it and some of those closest to me knew that it was only a matter of time when I would have to walk the plank. It was impossible, how- ever, to convince the majority of the public of the impending danger. The next step in placing the skids under me was the removal to the Harvey Building, Chauncy St., on the busiest day of the year, December 31st. Just prior to the removal I wrote a four page letter to Washington frankly stating the impossibility of continuing to pose as Prohibition Enforcement Chief in Massachusetts without some facilities for carrying on my work. This letter was forwarded to Commissioner Haynes on the 28th day of December, and followed up by another letter and two telegrams. No re- sponse was received and on January 9th I de- manded a public investigation as described in an- other chapter. 1^8 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS GUNNING FOR THE BIG FELLOWS Chapter XVL The man who goes after the big fellows in prohi- bition law enforcement is said to be lacking in discretion and tremendously temperamental, if not actually fanatical. It is considered good form to raid the ignorant foreigner, but when the stomach indulgence of the rich man and the wet politician is interfered with, someone must suffer and by all the rules of our privileged liquor absorbers the suf- fers should not be the law violators but rather the law enforcers. These more or less philisophical commentaries are based on actual personal experiences, and not on unsubstantiated theories. In the parlance of the raider, I "hit" the Quincy House, and in no uncertain manner, the Quincy House banqueters "hit" me. It now remains to be seen whether they actually knocked me down, or knocked themselves out. My guess, which is the opinion of many genuine law abiding citizens who believe in law enforcement from the Top Down rather than from the Bottom Part Way Up, is that most of the effective hitting is going to be done this fall at the primaries and at the election with the Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge, the Hon. Charles H. Innes, and his close friend and political protege, the Governor, Channing H. Cox, the principle punch absorbers. The Quincy House joy killer, is discussed else- where in this book so this chapter will be confined to some other large raids. It was my pleasure acting with the Boston Po- lice, under the leadership of Captain Reardon, to raid the Hotel Brunswick during November, 192L Ample evidence that the liquor laws had been vio- lated was secured, and some of the patrons of this hostelry were found to have imbibed too freely, 154 GUNNING FOR THE BIG FELLOWS either on the premises or prior to their arriyal, but by one of the strange incongruities of our courts, no liquor violation was found. The fact remains however that one of the big fellows had learned that there was a prohibitory law, and that some of the unsophisticated at least insisted on applyinjf it to the larger hotels. Even when such raids do not result in a conviction they generally have a very salutary effect upon those who have been raided. Charlie Innes was one of the defense counsels. The following is a typical description of the ''hitting" of a "swell" road house. On a Saturday evening, in the early fall of 1921, armed with a search warrant and assisted by eight agents I staged a raid upon the Pine Grove Inn, Marlboro, Mass. Four agents were deployed through the woods and given sufficient time to get within strik- ink distance of the rear of the Inn. With my other four agents, I then drove boldly up to the front door of the road house, and rushed the main and private dining-roonis. As we rushed the front of the house, the agents in the rear took care of the kitchen and cellar. Each man had been given a particular sec- tion to cover. One man, for example, took the cel- lar; another the outside buildings, two, the kitchen and serving room, two, the main dining-room, two the private dining-rooms on the second floor, and I reserved myself as a free lance to search anywhere. The two chauffeurs with our party were ordered to patrol the premises around the road house. Of course, the first act of the proprietor and waiters of a drinking party is to spill the evidence, and naturally unless the proprietor has a large supply, the securing of evidence is absolutely de- pendent upon the speed with which the place is "hit." In this particular instance, we captured ample evidence for a conviction. Another highly successful descent on a j*oad house was made on a well-known Inn in North Taunton, Mass. Forty-two bottles of beautifully 155 DR,Y LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS labeled old rye whiskey were seized in this case. When this whiskey was analyzed in my office, it was found that thirty-eight of the bottles were imi- tation, and four genuine but somewhat diluted rye whiskey. The proprietor, however, was charging a dollar a drink for a small glass of whiskey. If a customer entered who knew liquors, he was sold one drink of real whiskey, and then filled up on imitation; the average patron was fed upon imita- tion from the start. Two hotels in Taunton were raided on one occa- sion, much to the amazement of the owners. These hotels were well equipped with a system of signals which were supposed to be as sure protection as a first class burglar alarm system. In the first place relieved of its liquor supply the proprietor had instituted a buzzer system. If the proper man entered the bar room, he was allowed to pass on up the stairs to the private serving room. If the wrong individual entered, the buzzer was sounded and the source of supply concealed. My agent, who had mastered the details of this system, entered the hotel, and proceeded to the serving sanctum prior to my entry. When I came in, the buzzer was promptly sounded and the man in the serving room said, "Hide the evidence, the federal officers are down stairs." My man replied, "Quite right, and they are also upstairs, you are under arrest." In the other hotel the man who touched the door knob to the private serving room was out of luck, but if he knocked twice, on the door without touch- ing the knob, waited until the man in charge of the bar had adjusted the curtain, and then rapped three times, he was admitted. My agent, the same man, by the way, that mastered the buzzer system in the other hotel, made his entry according to Hoyle and then kindly opened the door for me without requir- ing me to employ the formalities of the knocking system. Both of these proprietors were convicted in 156 GUNNING FOR THE BIG FELLOWS court, and as a consequence had a more wholesome regard for the prohibitory law. One feature of successful raiding is hitting when least expected. In baseball phraseology, "Hitting where they ain't." I visited Greenfield, Mass. in per- son only once, but on this occasion the liquor inter- ests knew we had "hit" the place. The Pullman, the Franklin, and King's Hotel were raided and yielded very handsome returns in the way of liquor. The raiding of these places was very simple as the hotel proprietors appeared to be sublimely confident that no one would interfere with their illegal traffic in "booze." At the completion of these raids, I started for North Adams with my crew, hoping to give that city a taste of the Volstead Act. The dealers in Greenfield, however, took the precaution of calling twenty-two different cities and towns on the tele- phone and notifying the dealers in liquor that I was in their midst. The same disgruntled law violating dispensers of poisonous liquors followed my party as far as Sherburne Falls, where I threw them off the trail by starting for Springfield via Ashfield, and then doubling back on my trail and taking the Mohawk trail for North Adams. In spite of these precautions, however, my raids in North Adams were far from successful. I did secure a number of sugar barrels which were found to contain seven per cent beer instead of sugar, which the dealers were unable to dispose of prior to my arrival so that my trip to North Adams was not entirely in vain. One amusing raid upon some gentlemen holding themselves immune from the law, was staged in the town of Wrentham. I received an authentic tip that the police and firemen were to have a ball in the town hall at which their ladies and friends were to be present, and that different kinds of balls were to be served on the second floor of the fire station. This lay-out differed slightly from the Quincy House in that the second story was in another build- 157 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS ing, and the collection of celebrities was somewhat less notable. When I arrived at about 9 P. M. the festivities were at their height. In company with two agents I entered the second-story barroom, and suggested that possibly it would be better for all concerned if the drinking ceased. My orders were obeyed with alacrity if not with enthusiasm. Some twenty of the select were present. In order to make sure that all interested gentlemen benefited from the effect of the raid, we kept the curtains drawn, and door closed to those within, but allowed the thirsty gen- tlemen from without to enter at their pleasure. After some thirty-five had entered including prac- tically all the police and fire force of Wrentham, with delegations from nearby towns, the names and addresses of those present were secured and the Hquor confiscated. No arrests were made, although the Chief of Police who was also the Chief of the Fire Department was summonsed for appearance in court to answer for the possession of the liquor for his two departments. If I had, wished, however, to make any arrests, it would have been very embar- rassing as there would have been none to actually lock up the men or to stand guard as all seemed to be present, including one of the town selectmen. The Quincy House raid came on December 20th, and had a wholesome effect upon the Xmas and New Year's eve celebrations in Boston. At about this time I changed my tactics relative to hotel raids, because some cases had been lost in court through hotel proprietors disclaiming all knowledge that liquor had been served in their hostelry, asserting that the liquor was brought in by the hotel patrons. I announced that the people found drinking would be the ones arrested, rather than the hotel proprie- tor and that the proprietor would be summonsed to court to testify that the liquor was not sold by the hotel. In this event those drinking were to be charged with illegal transportation and possession. 158 GUNNING FOR THE BIG FELLOWS After giving considerable publicity to this new law enforcement method, I left Boston at about five o^clock in the afternoon of December 31st, in a high-powered car for Western Massachusetts. The revellers in this section little suspected that I was to be with them on the happiest evening of the year. Five hotels were "hit" with comparative ease. The first raid was staged in the Belchertown Inn some twenty miles from Springfield. Sufficient evi- dence was secured at this place to take the joy out of the party. The Nonatuck Hotel in Holyoke, one of the largest and most exclusive hotels in the state was next raided. Couples at two different tables were placed under arrest, and later convicted. The Kimble Hotel, another large and very exclusive hotel was next tackled in Springfield, followed by a successful descent upon the Highland Hotel, Springfield. The New Year's Eve raids culminated with a visit to a Springfield Turkish Bath, not for bathing purposes however, but in search of liquor. The Highland Hotel furnished a number of sur- prises. While I was making my first speech of the year 1922 in a private dining-room to some one hun- dred and fifty revellers, some of my agents were fighting with hotel help and a few bums on the floor below. The circumstances attending this speech were so unusual that I will give it in full. After having searched the greater part of the hotel, I unexpectedly came upon a private dining-room which had been overlooked. As I entered the room, I knew that the tip had preceeded me and that no liquor would be found, so to add to the hilarity of the occasion, I deliberately sampled the punch which proved to be quite harmless. At this point one of the guests recognized me and said, "Ladies and gentlemen, I wish to introduce the famous Mr. Wilson of Quincy House fame." The call was immediately sounded for a speech, and I said, "Ladies and gentlemen I wish you a happy New Year, and an extremely dry one." My speech 159 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS was cut short by notice from one of my men of the rough house going on down stairs. I im- mediately rushed to the scene of action, but found that hostilities had ceased. Three of the combatants were later summonsed to court and convicted of as- sault upon federal officers in the performance of their duties. Raids on such hotels as the Kimbble, Nonatuck, Brunswick and the Quincy House made lots of publicity and undoubtedly have a very wholesome effect upon the society folks, who sometimes prefer stomach indulgence to law observance. Such indi- viduals resent the notoriety of going to court, and as long as raiders are at large who fail to appre- ciate their inalienable right to ignore any law that infringes upon their personal pleasures they are quite apt to be wary as to where and when they drink. There is a lot of satisfaction in raiding such places by agents who appreciate the hypocrisy of permitting the rich to "booze" while charging the poor with criminality for the same offence. The man who believes in enforcing the law from the Top Down rather than from the Bottom Part Way Up of course loses his job but in losing it still re- tains his own self respect and the respect of those who believe in genuine, impartial law enforcement. Incidentally, every time such a man loses his job, the elite drive so many more nails into their own coffin, and I am thoroughly convinced that suffi- cient nails have been driven to warrant announce- ment of the proper burial rites. Abolish the private cellar stock, the carousing in private clubs, and the winking at law violations in the larger, wealthier hotels, and much of the unrest against prohibition law enforcement will be elimi- nated. 160 SNAPPY EDITORIALS SNAPPY EDITORIALS Chapter XVII. Editoriar comment is always an interesting fea- ture of any controversy, consequently a few selec- tions from widely separated centers of population are published. The selections include a Springfield Republican editorial, reprinted in the Boston Herald, and edi- torials from the Boston Traveler, Boston Post, Boston Telegram, Hartford Times, Springfield Union, Providence News, Lowell Sun, Worcester Telegram, Brockton Enterprise, Fall River Globe, Gloucester Times, North Adams Transcript and the following significant sentence from a characteristi- cally vigorous Boston Telegram editorial. "The public is deeply indebted to Wilson for his exhibition of Potter's actual dimensions as an en- forcer of law." Blames Mr. Potter (From the Springfield Republican, Reprinted in the Boston Herald) Elmer C. Potter holds the federal appointment as prohi- bition enforcement director of Massachusetts. On Tues- day, Mr. Potter was a guest at a banquet in honor of Gov. Cox, at the Quincy House, Boston. There is no evidence that liquor was served in the dining room, but in a room upstairs a generous supply was dispensed to all who sought other refreshment than the food and the oratory. This liquor was transported to the hotel for the occasion, and the person who transported it was able to show a permit for its transfer ostensibly to the owner's new "domicile," issued by the office of Prohibition Enforcement Director Potter. To be sure, it is charged that the permit was issued after the transfer had actually taken place. But when Mr. Pot- ter's subordinate, Prohibition Enforcement Agent Harold D. Wilson, invaded the supposedly ironclad security of the occasion, there was at least a permit which could be flashed in his face, and of which he took possession, giving a receipt therefor. It appears that the "domicile" to which the liquor had been transferred from the home of Harold G. Kern in West Roxbury was a small dining room up- stairs. Prohibition Enforcement Director Potter and his office 161 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS staff may have been blandly unsuspicious, when the permit was issued, that liquor was to be transported to a hotel to enhance a banquet attended by prominent citizens and given in honor of the Governor of the state. But, as the prohibition enforcement director was a guest at the ban- quet, he will obviously be expected to show that he was not aware, either before or during the banquet, of the purpose for which permission for the movement of the liquor was sought. If Potter Had Known— (Boston Traveler, Dec. 24, 1921) The prohibition director for New England, Elmer C. Potter, undertakes to put an end to rumors of "bad blood" between himself and prohibition agent Harold Wilson, by declaring that he would have conducted a raid on his own account if he had known that liquor was being improperly dispensed in an upper room of the Quincy House while he was banqueting in the room downstairs. Mr. Potter thus seems to be in much the same position as the newspaper reporter who comes away from the scene of a big news event without bringing the story. When he learns about it at the office, he asserts that he "would have brought the story if he had known there was any to bring." A reporter in those circumstances re- ceives no compliments, though nobody doubts his veracity. We are glad, however, that Mr. Potter assents to the principle that -'the law is no respecter of persons." If the energetic Mr. Wilson discovered an instance of law- breaking that was too close to the eyes of the regional director of prohibition to be noticed, so much the more credit to Mr. Wilson. But, of course, there is a chance that the hearing will disclose an entirely different state of affairs. The public awaits that hearing with a good deal of interest. An Impartial Descent (Boston Post, Dec. 22, 1921) The raid of Prohibition Enforcement Agent Wilson on the dinner of the leading Republican politicians of Massa- chusetts in honor of Governor Cox was certainly an im- partial sort of descent. And it proved two things; first that it is not, as charged by the extreme "drys," the "low, mucker element," alone that lends encouragement to the violation of the Volstead Act, and, second, that here in Massachusetts, at least, the enforcing officer has courage enough to disregard high position, politically or socially, in his determination to make prohibition really prohibit. Whether the "ardent" seized as an outside appurtenance of the banquet was moved to the hotel by valid permit 162 SNAPPY EDITORIALS or not, the Volstead Act was clearly violated by the per- son who appeared to have possession of it, since it could not have been had in his home or supplied to "bona fide guests" to the number of 300, or whatever number partook of the contraband refreshment. The gentlemen who at- tended the dinner knew that the law was violated as actually as if plain Bill Snooks had been caught in Pi Alley furnishing a drink for plain Jim Rooks. Wilson*s Passing (Boston Telegram, Jan. 26, 1922) Harold D. Wilson has been removed from office. Wilson blundered, for he held that all men are the same under the law, and the Republican ring can not forgive that kind of blunder. Perhaps some ancestor of Wilson's offered his life to maintain that principle when Abraham Lincoln set it down as a fundamental creed of the Republican party. Wilson forgets that the Republican ring in Massachu- setts has nothing in common with Lincoln. To the ring all men are equal except Republican office holders. Tkey are royalists, born to rule, and every man and woman and child is serf to be ruled. Wilson has gone, but with him go the petty Republican fakirs who have controlled Massachusetts. They have sealed their own doom. The next election will ^ decide for law and order, and deciding for those principles it will decide against the men and the party of booze. The Aftermath of a Raid f Springfield Union, Dec. 25, 1921) . . . but in spite of these circumstances Agent Wilson had the unerring instinct which told him that the bottles were filled with high grade whisky and cocktails to be found in the room immediately over the banquet hall, and a pro- hibition agent with an unerring instinct like that appears to be of the precise kind needed in the political and social atmosphere of Boston, and, for that matter, of other places where there is less than one half of one per cent, enforcement. Even agents with such rare instinct are not expected to operate successfully in more than one case out of a hundred and his instinct in this case was coupled with that high degree of courage that we have already favorably mentioned and that is generally necessary when prohibition interferes with those of high rather than of low degree. In view of such an exceptional achievement Agent Wil- son should naturally be the hero of the hour and, though he is so regarded by those who cling religiously to the theory that prohibition always prohibits, he nevertheless finds himself walking in a highly volcanic region, meta- 163 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS phorically as spectacular and as uncertain as the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes left by a recent eruption in Alaska. . . . A Boston Booze Raid (Hartford, (Conn.) Times, Dec. 24, 1921) There's a merry hullabaloo in Boston because a federal prohibition agent raided a room in a hotel at which guests attending a banquet given in honor of the governor were supplied with liquid refreshment. The agent found booze, and also found that its owner had a permit to transfer it from his home to his "temporary domicile" in the hotel, this permit being signed by the superior of the raiding agent, who attended the dinner on the floor below. Now there is talk of demanding that this agent be transferred to some place where his activity will be less embarrassing. Quite indignant are some of the Bay State's most brilliant republican political lights. We've about given up trying to dope out the Boston type of voter and politician. Here's Calvin Coolidge talk- ing nearly every day on "law and order" and extolling the idealism of New England. Its bar association moves for the disbarment of some of its prominent lawyers, the at- torney general asks the removal of the Suffolk district attorney, the bank commissioner of the state asks stern- er laws because of Boston trust companies' florid affairs, Ponzi*s 50 per cent, dupes get 10 per cent, of what they put in, as a Christmas gift, and to cap it all, a prohibi- tion enforcement agent raids a party at which the pres- ent governor and other leaders of pure and holy repub- licanism are guests, and which was to be preliminary to starting the governor's boom for renomdnation. The prohibition enforcement agent labored under a most peculiar delusion, of course, when he felt that the prohibi- tion law applied as much to a gathering of state officials and prominent citizens as it does to the denizens of the west end or South Boston, but it's a fact that many other people labor under the same delusion. Foolish In His Duty (Providence, (R. I.) News, Jan. 1, 1922) Nearly six months ago Harold D. Wilson, chief prohi- bition officer for Massachusetts, was put on what are called "the political skids," meaning that certain moralists in the Republican organization wanted to be rid of him because of his desire to earn his salary from the Govern- ment. Mr. Wilson is a fighting sort of person and made such a noise in Washington and in the Bay State that the fakirs in the "dry" movement were forced to let him alone. He was confirmed in power after President Harding was warned by the Women's Christian Temperance Associa- 164 SNAPPY EDITORIALS tion that Mr. Wilson was only an enemy of the bootleggers — even if he occasionally voted a Democratic ticket. Then came the raid by Mr. Wilson on a Boston hotel at a banquet to the Governor of Massachusetts. All the guests were plentifully supplied with champagne, cock- tails, good whisky and light wines. Governor Cox and all the other Republicans there knew the law was being MEW YEAR <3KtETlN&S Monjdu peucrwnoNS-o". Boston Post violated. Federal Director Potter, right on the ground, must have known it, and he is supposed to be the chief angel of prohibition in Massachusetts. Mr. Potter did nothing, but Mr. Wilson immediately acted, seized all the contraband liquor, enforced the law and brought scan- dal on the gentlemen of open morals who were giving the dinner to the Republican Governor. 165 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS The politicians said they would "get" Wilson, and they seem to have put over tibe job. . . . Catching the "Big Fellows" (Lowell Sun, Dec. 25, 1921) Whatever may have been the motive that actuated Pro- hibition Enforcement Agent Harold D. Wilson to make that spectacular raid at the Quincy House in Boston last week, during a dinner complimentary to the governor, the fact remains that there was an apparent violation of the law, and the federal agent was perfectly justified in pur- suing the course that he did. The fact that several of the political bigwigs of the state are embarrassed thereby does not alter the situation in the slightest degree. His duty was just as plain in this instance as it would have been in the case of a still located in a foreign quarter. Conse- quently, it ill behooves any politician, no matter how potential, to seek reprisals against such conscientious and impartial enforcement of the law; and it would be the height of folly for the federal authorities to afford any encouragement to such efforts. The moment that it does, it is destined to forfeit public confidence. No man, no group of men, however exalted their sta- tions, are superior to the law or immune from its opera- tion. The law makes no distinctions and the law-enforcing powers should not. . . . Taking Mr. Wilson's Time (Worcester Telegram, Jan. 10, 1922) Hark to the troubles of a poor enforcement agent, going about the Commonwealth seeking whom he may raid. Mr. Wilson, chief prohibition officer, who brought woe and confusion to the reservoir at the Quincy House and the assembled guests, with whom he entered without either password or wedding garment, says he has many, many enemies. By some metanomy they are against him because of what he does, rather than what he does not do. They compass him about. They are ever alert. They neither slumber nor sleep. Saturday night some heartless wretch in Boston stole hig watch while he was directing some raids. That Anti- Volstead Dinner (Fall River Globe, Dec. 22, 1921) Prohibition Enforcement Officer Wilson was an unwel- come guest at the dinner tendered Gov. Channing Cox of Massachusetts by a number of the leading lights of the G. O. P. in Boston, Tuesday night. Had the staunch "defenders" of all that is right and good and lawful con- sidered that for one moment the press of the entire coun- try would be reciting the story of that anti-Volstead dinner, 166 SNAPPY EDITORIALS other measures might have been taken to see tkat the "meddling" officer was busy elsewhere. There are reasons to believe that the prohibition laws were shattered shamefully on this inglorious occasion and citizens who crave for the arrest and conviction of the ordinary moonshine man, should be interested mightily in Boston Post proceedings that permit a body of gentlemen to drink, to fill 'em up again and again, if necessary, in open violation of the law. The Quincy House Liquor Seizure (Gloucester Times, Dec. 28, 1921) People are not through talking about the seizure of liquor at the Quincy House, while a Republican party din- 167 DRY LAWS AND WET POLITICIANS ner was going on. The newspapers promptly described the incident as the result of personal difficulties between the prohibition officer of New England and the man who has charge of enforcement in Massachusetts. Mr. Potter attended the dinner and issued a permit for the removal of this liquor from the owner's home to a "new domicile." By a destestable hypocrisy that new home was a small dining room in the Quincy House. Some say the permit was not issued till after the liquor was moved. After reflection over this incident for several days, the worst feature seems to be the news that liquor can be served any time at big dinners by legal subterfuges, if the diners have powerful friends. We know of nothing that could give a worse impression than the feeling that highly connected men can have liquor served at any time while the poor cannot. Our clubs and smaller politi- cal societies would not dare to transgress the law by hav- ing liquor served in a side room during a banquet, but the thing is apparently easily arranged if the diners know the right people. The voters of Essex County will have their own idea of this unfair favoritism and will know how to rebuke it. . . . It Can't Be Laughed Off (No. Adams Transcript) Nothing is to be gained by gossiping over what hap- pened at the Quincy House in Boston the other night. The plain fact of the matter is that a dinner was given in honor of the governor of the Commonwealth; that this dinner was attended by high state officials, justices sitting on the superior court bench, and the federal prohibition commissioner for this district; and that m a spacious up- stairs room, reserved in connection with that dinner for the use of guests attending that dinner, were twenty ca* rafes of bronx cocktails, several quarts of whisky, and no less than two hundred whisky glasses. . All of the proprieties, so far as appearances went, were undoubtedly preserved. It is probable that nobody in the company had the bad taste to ask the governor, the pro- hibition director, the state officials or the judges, to have a drink. It can doubtless be duly established that the liquor was privately and legitimately owned, and even that it was legally transported under a duly signed permit from the office of the prohibition director, from the owner's home to his temporary domicile in the hotel. But it would be nothing short of farcical to maintain that this liquor was transported at that particular time to that particular place for any other purpose than to be discreetly dispensed on that particular occasion. 168 A Warning TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE "The Judicial Section of the American Bar Association, venturing to speak for all the Judges, wishes to express this warning to all American people. "Reverence for law and enforcement of law de~ pend mainly upon the ideals and customs of those who occupy the vantage ground of life in business and society. "The people of the United States, by solemn constitutional and statutory enactment, have undertaken to supress the age-long evil of the liquor traffic. "When, for the gratification of their appetites, or the promotion of their interests, laywers,- bankers, great merchants and manufacturers, and social leaders, men and women, disobey and scoff at t his law, or any other law, they are aiding the cause of anarchy and pro- moting, ^^ob violence, robbery and homicide; they'ar^ sowing dragon's teeth, and they need not be surprised when they find that no judi- cial or police authority can save our country or humanity from reaping the harvest.". Unanimously adopted by the Judicial Section [composed only of Judges] of the American Bar Association at the Annual Convention at Cincinnati- August. 31, 1921. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS • 029 827 255 6 ANNOUNCEMENT I am t)lcasGcl to announce that I am to be associate4 witk Henry O. Stat)les and F. A, RicKardson in tkc Clothiers Service Corporation Wholesale Clothiers, 69 Summer Street, Boston, Mass. This Comt)any succeeds the Clothiers Sut)t)ly Comt)any, organized ten years ago by Mr. Stat)les, and has been a suc- cessful and growing concern. jMr. Staf^les has had nearly forty years t)ractical ex- J)ericnce in the clothing business. In addition to the wholesale end of the business, we t)lan to sell our friends at re- tail on co-ot)erative lines. The Clothiers Service Cort)oration is now ot)en for business, ^nd I cordially in- vite my friends to t>ersonally inst)ect our j co-ot)erative t)lan, as w^ell as our ut)-to- ! date merchandise. j HAROLD^D- WILSON LIBRARY OF CONGRESS [ 029 827 255 6 ^