arrests for offenses relating to the prohibition laws, the contraband property destroyed, and the disposition of cases are as follows:

Hon. Bibb Graves was inaugurated Governor of Alabama in January, 1927. At that time the number of convicts in State prisons was 2,753. During the past year the number of State convicts increased by 1,100, and in December, 1929, the records of the convict department showed that State convicts totaled 4,389. This does not include county convicts who were taken over when the State abolished the convict lease system. County convicts numbered 609, and that increased the whole number of convicts in State prisons to 4,998, only 2 less than 5,000. The State prison population is now the largest in the history of the State.

Governor Graves does not believe this remarkable growth indicates that crime is on the increase. In commenting on the situation the governor was quoted recently by the press as saying:

I believe the increase is due to the success of the new jury commissions in putting into the jury boxes the names of men who believe in law enforcement. When I became governor I determined to name as jury commissioners only those men who believed in law enforcement and who would see that the names of good citizens in all walks of life were placed in the jury boxes. Only those persons who have excellent records as citizens and who believe in law enforcement have been appointed. In my opinion, the great increase in the number of convicts has been due to this policy.

TRIALS IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS

Compilations from the records of the United States District Courts for the Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Alabama show. that Federal enforcement agencies have not been inactive. Reports for the year which ended last June 30 show that Federal as well as State agents found employment in trying to suppress moonshining and bootlegging activities. Incidentally, six Federal agents were injured in the performance of their duties in Alabama during the

year.

1 Not shown.

During the year mentioned Federal agents in Alabama seized 439 stills or distilleries, 150 gallons of wine, 578 gallons of malt liquor, 7,090 gallons of spirits, and 215,206 gallons of mash. Besides these they seized 90 automobiles, valued at $41,682; 10 boats, valued at $1,135; and destroyed contraband property valued at $48,790.

Of the three Federal courts the northern district disposed of the greatest number of prohibition cases and had the highest percentage of convictions and of jail sentences, the southern district stood second and the middle district last in the number of prohibition cases disposed of and in percentage of convictions and jail sentences. The middle district was considerably behind the northern and southern districts, as shown by the following table:

Considerable attention has been given to a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Alabama in the case of Jim Jinright, whose conviction of violating the prohibition law had been reversed by the court of appeals. In a decision which indicates that the buyer of prohibited liquor is equally guilty with the seller, the supreme court vacated the judgment of the court of appeals and returned the case to the court of appeals, which will be required to affirm the judgment of conviction. The reasoning of the supreme court was substantially as follows:

** * **

"To sell, offer for sale, keep or have in possession, barter, exchange, or give away prohibited liquors, or possess in this State, any of said prohibited liquors or beverages as defined by the existing laws of the State of Alabama, in any quantity whatsoever," is a violation of the prohibition laws. (Code, 4621.) Each of the offenses thus defined is punishable by fine or by fine and imprisonment. (Code, 4622.)

To cover offenses under section 462, the legislature adopted a form of indictment which reads:

A, B did buy, sell, or have in possession illegally, give, barter, exchange, receive, deliver, carry, or ship, prohibited liquors, contrary to law, against, etc.

Code forms are declared by law to be sufficient in all cases to which applicable. Nevertheless, the court of appeals held that the form prescribed and quoted above, when questioned by demurrer, is fatally defective. It held the averment that the accused "Did buy prohibited liquors charges no offense known to the law." On that premise the indictment was held bad, and the case reversed.

The supreme court quoted section 4621 as above set out, and recited that "to buy or purchase imports a sale," and that "delivery is an essential part of the sale of a chattel," and that "to accept delivery of," "to receive into possession," " to have possession of "prohibited liquors is expressly declared an offense. (Code, 4621.) The court

reasoned that while a symbolical or constructive delivery and consequent possession is recognized in the law of sales, such is not the character of delivery and possession meant in the section quoted. It means delivery into actual possession.

"Receiving prohibited liquors into possession, having them in possession, whether by manufacture, gift, or purchase, and whether held for sale or for personal use, is an offense under our law (citing authorities). It follows a man can not buy prohibited liquors in the ordinary sense, acquiring actual possession thereof, without a violation of the prohibition law of Alabama. A charge that the accused did buy prohibited liquors is a charge that he accepted delivery, received the same into his possession. Accordingly, the validity of the indictment was upheld and the judgment of the court of appeals vacated, all the justices concurring.

INTERVIEWS AND OPINIONS

This investigation included interviews with State and Federal judges, prosecuting attorneys, enforcement agents, and other officials, with educators, publicists, business men, and private citizens in various occupations and professions. None thought conditions ideal or beyond improvement, and the too frequent disregard of law was recognized and deplored. With remarkably few exceptions they declared conditions were better than in pre-prohibition days, and no one desired the return of the saloon. The nearly unanimous opinion is that there is less disorder, less drinking and drunkenness in public and in private, and less dissipation among the young than in former days. For the sake of brevity quotations will be limited to statements from two prominent educators, whose observations are extensive and whose illustrations are unique.

Hon. A. F. Harman, State superintendent of education, made an interesting assertion regarding the behavior of audiences he had addressed. When asked if he would consent to put his observation in form for the record he promptly made the following statement:

I wish to call your attention to the fact that the public gatherings which it has been my privilege to attend and in many instances to address from the platform during the past four or five years are highly notable for the good conduct of the people present. In this regard the behavior of audiences and other gatherings of people is in striking contrast with similar groups of people during the days of the open saloon.

My addresses have been confined principally to audiences interested in public education, and after careful observation of the conduct of these groups over a period of several years, and considering the situation from every angle I am quite convinced that it is accounted for only on the basis of improved school facilities and prohibition. Audiences and other public gatherings of people in Alabama in these later years are distinguished for sobriety. Whatever else may be said of the prohibition question, I am sure this is one evidence of a vast improvement in the social order under the prohibition régime.

Dr. George H. Denny is president of the University of Alabama and one of the leading educators of the country. His vigorous administration has been remarkably successful, and the university has made a wonderful growth in facilities, equipment, and enrollment of students. The day this survey began an Alabama newspaper editorially commended an address of Doctor Denny's relating to the work and behavior of modern students. The statements concerning

his address were verified and Doctor Denny added his indorsement of the prohibition laws, giving them no little credit for improved conditions. The editorial is as follows:

DOCTOR DENNY DEFENDS STUDENTS

Dr. George H. Denny, president of the University of Alabama, vigorously came to the defense of modern students in an address before the Birmingham Rotary Club the other day. He contended that students were not only doing better work to-day than in the past, but that their behavior has improved vastly, and he gave much of the credit to athletics, which has taken the place of prankish ideas occupied 18 or 20 years ago. "The 300 University of Alabama students 18 years ago did a lot more aggregate meanness than the 3,000 there now," he declared.

Citing the results of a questionnaire sent by the University of Chicago to the colleges of the Nation, Doctor Denny said that it revealed 80 per cent of college students are doing satisfactory work, 15 per cent are getting along indifferently, and 5 per cent are failing, and then he asked significantly if there is any other line of business, iron or steel or merchandising, which can claim to be 80 per cent efficient.

There is no better proof needed of improved conditions in Alabama than Doctor Denny's assertion that 20 years ago there were 6 accredited high schools in Alabama and to-day there are 400. It is when figures like these are cited that Alabama is able to realize the enormous strides that have been made in education in the last two decades.

CONCLUSIONS

Alabama has been under state-wide prohibition since July 1, 1915, and in session after session the legislature has reiterated its faith in that policy and has strengthened the enforcement laws. The courts and enforcement agencies are making vigorous efforts to enforce the laws. The provisions for State and Federal courts seem sufficient for the State. The enforcement personnel of the Bureau of Prohibition is inadequate for the territory served thereby. Prohibition cases are generally disposed of without unusual or unreasonable delay.

The burden of enforcing prohibition is not left to the Federal Government alone. There were more convictions in the circuit courts of Alabama for violating the prohibition laws than the whole number of prohibition cases disposed of in the Federal courts of the State. Conditions are improving and Alabama is progressing under prohibition.