|
corrupt political control with which some of them are shackled. If these fetters
are removed. the overwhelming majority of our officers will lack neither the
ability nor the desire to enforce the law properly in the areas which they serve.
The way to loose the bonds is by citiaen action in the polling places and other
public opinion forums available to every community, not by subordinating the sheriff
or policeman to some higher authority whose decisions are just as likely to be a
reflection of public morals. good or bad. as those of the local officer.
Proposals to centralize lav: enforcement authority can he quite unrealistic:
they tend to assume that either the state or Federal government can and should do
for each community what the people of that city or county will not do for themselves.
This is a somewhat naive View of the problems involved in enforcing the law. a View
based on the fallacious assumption that in "the government" there exists some
magic method by which all good things can be accomplished. regardless of the will
and the responsibility of the people. This is not the case. if the majority of the
communities in a state are unable to enforce a law. either directly as a result of
widespread disobedience or indirectly from public apathy, we have no reason to be-
lieve that some higher authority will be more successful. Federal experience dur-
ing the prohibition cz-a is strong evidence bearing on this point. The basic power
of law enforcement still resides in the citizens of this nation; without their cooper-
ation no agency of government, whether local. state or Federal, can do the Job
well.
It may be argued in defense of these proposals that no such power in the
state or federal government was either assumed or intended--that the authority
proposed is to be used only in a limited and occasional situation where local law
enforcement has broken down. This argument is not reassuring; it is little more
than a promise that the power requested Will not be abused. We had better catch
the malefactors with the statutes now aVailahle to us rather than fasten another
control over every community in order to fashion a new trap for improper law en-
forcement in a few of them.
The most compelling argument against any move toward a centralisation 0!
police power is the danger which it represents to democratic self government. We
should not be misled by urbane representations that the power is lintited and will
be sparingly used. While this may well be the honest intention of those who first
advance the proposal, we have good reason to fear a different result. Experience
teaches that power once granted to a sovereign authority is seldom relinquished.
more often used to the hilt and extended in scope. it may he a tool of great value
when used only for the public good but it can become a vicious weapon in the hands
of one who is corrupt. The judgment of history is on the side of those who take
the skeptical view.
Very truly yours.
. MusW
ohn Edg Hoover
Director
unite?! States Department of Justice
Ethel-n! Stream of investigation
Blushington 25, D. C.
December I, 1952
TO ALL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS:
Every officer and citizen interested in good law enforCement
should be aware that we are occasionally confronted with proposals
painting toward a centralization of police powers in a State or Federal
agency. I firmly believe that such proposals are both unnecessary and
unwise. I have consistently opposed any suggestion for a national po-
lice force, and I intend to similarly oppose any other plan under which
the local peace officer and those whom he serves will be deprived of
their right to fully supervise law enforcement in their own community.
When a proposal of this kind is advanced we ought to immedi-
ately demand that its proponents show proof that our present system
of law enforcement lacks the skill and resources necessary for effec-
tive police work. A due regard for the rights and advantages of demo-
cratic self-government in every community dictates that our present
methods should not be abandoned, either in whole or in part. unless
our peace officers are so ineffective that a surrender of their author~
ity to a higher agency of government has become an absolute necessity.
If this condition cannot be shown to exist, any plan pointing toward the
eventual centralization of police powers in either a State or Federal
agency is no more than a dangerous expedient adopted to serve some
narrow or temporary purpose.
Any proposal for a shift of police powers on the basis that lo-
cal officers lack the ability to enforce the law under todays conditions
is inconsistent with the facts. Law enforcement is already making use
of every system and technique adaptable to its work. Police executives
and administrators generally are providing their departments with both
the training and the equipment necessary to serve the public interest.
Emphasis has also been placed on higher personnel standards and im-
proved methods of criminal investigation.
(Rt-prim (mm the F"! I .m anntremt'nr Hunt-tin. December. 195? nml Innuary, l9
1"
4.
Under the Fugitive Felon Act, described in the October. 1951.
issue of the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. the FBI conducts
investigations to locate and apprehend persons who have fled
the jurisdiction of local officers to avoid prosecution or confine-
ment after conviction for eight major crimes and attempts. as
well as investigations of persons who flee to avoid giving testi-
mony in criminal proceedings involving an offense carrying
penitentiary imprisonment. During the fiscal year 1952, our
investigations led to the apprehension and return oi 501 such
fugitives.
When the FBI has evidence that a crime has been planned or
committed in another jurisdiction, we make the facts in our
possession available to the local officers cha rgeo with respon-
sibility in that case.
The Uniform Crime Reports bulletins. compiled by the FBI from
data supplied by local law enforcement agencies. enable police ex~
ecutives to follow the national crime trend and compare it with
that of their own communities. This information serves a valuable
administrative purpose.
The tools for effective law enforcement lie within the grasp of
every city and county which chooses to use them. if the opposite choice
is made, a shift of responsibility elsewhere for crime in that area is
only a maneuver. not a solution.
Higher personnel standards, modern equipment. cooperation be-
tween police agencies, readily available criminal arrest records, scien-
tific examination of evidence, training in modern investigativc and ad-
ministrative techniques, assistance in the return of fugitives and reports
on crime trends are the basic requirements for good law enforcement.
All of them are within the reach of every community without any departure
from the decentralized, democratic methods of police work now in use.
Very truly yours,
W
lm Edgar
Dirci tor
OOVCI
PAGE 1
corrupt political conrrn1 with dtica sente of rhe:m are r.bacIded. If these fetters are removed, the overwhelminp, rnaiurtty of our efficers wiR laa farther the ability tier the desire to enforce the!aw prayer)y in the areau which they serve, The way to loose the bends it, "try citizi-n action in rbr pollm); places and other pub3tc opinion forums available To every gotrimumty. isut by subordinaling the oberuf or policeman to some hig]:er au!huruy thoro iirculione are just as likely sci be a re.flection of pub]sc. m rara 1 a, jy:Id or load ,4 e t hose cif the loca.1 offit: er Propanale to cemealize law enfarcernent authority can be quitr u.irealtatic; they tend to assurr:e that eithe r the state cir Federai government can and should de for each coramunity what ibe people of that e ity ,>r vuusy will not tio for themselves. Tb~. is a eamewhal naive view af Elte problemel iravolved in enforcing the law, a view based on the faglaciens asiaumptiora that in "the governmerst'' there sexist sotne magic rnethod by which all gnod things can be accomplished, regardless af the wul and the realsonsibyl ity 01~ thz. [,e'aj.lc .t-his 10 nor ihe casc. If the majority of the Commurtifie6 ii'l a Dr.-le -L rrt-.ry.11ate Tri t'ri|ttrUC a atw, eithe r dircetty aCl a result of widespread r-jiachedter x -Crr in
PAGE 2
..tc .... ........ .~stir
PAGE 3
inH ig ain o he oer ate.n .p...d...r.wr~ av fe
|
