1938: CRIMEHines Trial |
One of
the most spectacular events of the year in the field of organized crime was the
Hines Trial. James J. (Jimmy)Hines, the defendant, was one of the most powerful
leaders of Tammany Hall. He was accused of "contriving, proposing or drawing
lotteries" and of entering into a conspiracy with "Dutch Schultz" and "Dixie"
Davis, George Weinberg, and other notorious characters, to violate the lottery
laws. According to the prosecution, Hines' part in the conspiracy was to provide
official protection for the "policy racket
" or the
"numbers game," which has
flourished in Harlem and
other sections of New York during the past few years. Hines was charged with
influencing Magistrates Capshaw and Erwin to throw out policy cases in which the
other conspirators had an interest, and to influence former District Attorney
Dodge to "go easy" on policy prosecutions. In return for his efforts, Hines was
alleged to have received a cut in the proceeds of the policy
racket.
The chief significance of the Hines case is that it presented the unusual spectacle of one of the "higherups" in a racket being compelled to stand trial. For years it has been accepted as axiomatic that certain types of organized criminal activity, such as commercialized vice, gambling, illicit liquor traffic, etc., cannot flourish without official protection. Yet one rarely saw corrupt politicians or officials being brought to book for these crimes. Occasionally, it is true, a policeman might be indicted or even convicted for accepting graft from houses of prostitution, gambling houses or speakeasies. But criminal prosecution rarely reached higher than the individual policeman. In the Hines case, however, the prosecution touched what was alleged to be the very source of the official protection, namely, the politician from whom judges, prosecutors and policemen took orders. The trial had a very unsatisfactory outcome. A question by District Attorney Dewey which was put to a witness, tending to implicate Hines in other crimes than the ones with which he was charged, was considered so prejudicial by Justice Pecora, that he granted a mistrial. The case was to be retried early in 1939 (See below).
1939:
CRIME
Some
spectacular successes against criminals were also recorded in 1939. Outstanding
was the surrender to Federal authorities of Louis (Lepke) Buchhalter, who had
been the object of an intensive manhunt and who was described by New York's
District Attorney Dewey as the "worst
industrial racketeer in America" and the
"most dangerous criminal in the United States." With his partner Jacob (Gurrah)
Shapiro, Lepke headed a gang which was estimated to have taken a toll of
$2,000,000 a year for several years from the smuggling of narcotics and from
racketeering
activities in connection with half a dozen major New York
industries. Lepke
was tried in the Federal Court on charges of conspiracy to violate the narcotics
laws, and was found guilty. Lepke is wanted by District Attorney Dewey to answer
charges arising from his racketeering activities.
Spectacular
crimes in 1939 were not confined to professional "gorillas" like Lepke. The
socially, politically and financially great and powerful, the
"lords of
creation," also
contributed some outstanding instances of social demoralization. Chief among
these were Judge Martin T. Manton, who, until his resignation, was the
senior
Federal justice of the Southern District of New York and the tenth ranking
justice of the United States. Judge
Manton was convicted of conspiring
in the sale of justice, of
dispensing favorable judicial decisions in return for substantial cash payments.
He was sentenced to two years'
imprisonment and fined $10,000!!!!!!; and his
conviction and sentence were upheld by a specially convened Appellate Court.
Judge Manton was not the only member of the judiciary who stood before the bar
of justice in 1939. Magistrate Rudich of New York City was dismissed by the
Appellate Division and later disbarred on the basis of charges that he accepted
cash payments in return for approval of fake bail bonds.
Judge
Martin of the Kings County Court was acquitted of charges of having received a
bribe from an abortionist tried by him. The effort to remove him was also
unsuccessful, since the New York Senate, the removal body, voted 28-19 to keep
him in office.
But
judges are not the only ones occasionally faithless to their trust. Even
university presidents are not above making a dishonest dollar. This is
illustrated by the adventures of Joseph M. Smith, former president of Louisiana
State University. In June, Smith resigned his presidency and fled to Canada. He
was returned to Louisiana when investigation revealed that he had indulged in
widespread speculation with university funds and securities. He pleaded guilty
to various Federal and state charges of forgery, using the mails to defraud and
income tax evasion. He received a minimum sentence of 10½ years' imprisonment.
Several political figures were also involved.
One of
the outstanding members of the financial fraternity who came before the criminal
courts in 1939 was Stephen Paine, a member of the well known brokerage firm of
Paine,
Webber & Co. Paine
was found guilty in the Federal Court, along with three codefendants, of
conspiracy and using the mails to defraud three investment trusts of
$1,000,000.
When
judges, university presidents and bankers cannot resist the lure of dishonest
dollars, it is not surprising that public officials and outstanding politicians
also profit from their positions by illegal means. In New York, District
Attorney Dewey brought to a successful conclusion the prosecution of James
"Jimmy" Hines, the powerful Democratic district leader, which had been begun in
1938. On his second trial Hines was convicted of conspiracy and contriving a
lottery. The jury believed the contention of the prosecution that Hines was a
politician who had made crime safe for the racketeers controlling
the policy game in New
York. Originally appeared in
Collier's Year Book
