cused is summoned to police headquarters where he is given the privilege of making a statement, or of calling witnesses in his defense. In these last two respects, therefore, the Austrian system has more of the elements of a judicial determination than the system in vogue in Germany. And yet in Vienna there is some discussion as to the advisability of introducing the Prussian peremptory or "mandat" system with the idea of avoiding the inconvenience of being summoned personally to police headquarters.

As may be imagined from the outline just given, the extensive judicial powers in the hands of the police are easily capable of abuse. Indeed, as Weidlich affirms, the police are in a position to nullify fundamental rights and override the decrees of the courts. That their powers are always used beneficially and liberally, as is claimed by German officials, can scarcely be admitted. For example, under the German law, a man suspected of a crime, cannot be detained for more than twenty-four hours by the police without being produced before a magistrate.1 It is easily possible, however, for the police to imprison a suspect for any period up to fourteen days on the ground that he has violated one or more of their innumerable ordinances. Wherever we get hold of a man whom we suspect of some crime," said one of the assistant police commissioners in Dresden in talking frankly with the writer on this matter, we hunt around to find some ordinance which he has violated. Such a thing is not difficult to discover. Perhaps he has no employment card. Perhaps he has been impertinent to an official. What1 Strafprozessordnung, § 115.

66

66

ever it is, we detain him, and thus have time to work up the case." 1 Such action undoubtedly contributes to the bitter antagonism to the police common among the lower classes of Germany and Austria. Most men would prefer three weeks' imprisonment from a court to three days from the police," was the significant remark of the chief of the detective division of Stuttgart.

Moreover, when we consider the great number of penalties imposed by the police, it becomes increasingly probable that their judicial powers are abused. In Stuttgart, a quiet, peaceful city of 300,000 population, 40,000 police penalties are imposed each year.2 At this rate, under the same system, Manchester (England) should have approximately 93,000 police court cases in a year and Liverpool 98,000. As a matter of fact, however, Manchester had in 1911 but 14,000 such cases, while Liverpool had 32,000; 3 and of these cases one-third were for drunkenness, which, under ordinary circumstances, is not punishable in Germany. In other words, there are.

1 One of the commissioners or division chiefs (Abteilungsvorsteher) in Berlin told me that another way in which the law is evaded by the police, in case no violation of an ordinance can be urged against the prisoner, is to rush him to the court in a carriage, and have him returned immediately to the police prison upon a requisition approved by the prosecuting attorney, without actually producing him before the magistrate. "I have kept men three days in this fashion," he said, "getting my proof together and finishing my case."

2 Personally communicated by officials. The fines resulting from police punishments in this city amounted in 1911 to 83,980 marks. This money is turned into the city treasury. Weidlich thinks that German cities would be very loath to lose this revenue, and that for this reason the system will be hard to break down. (Loc cit., P. 103.)

3 See the annual reports of the chief constables; also Judicial Statistics of England and Wales, 1911, (published by the British Home Office) p. 58. Germany has no such statistics as those maintained by the Home Office.

ten times as many punishments for misdemeanors in German cities as in English cities. This comparison is necessarily rough, but it serves to indicate the excessive use of judicial powers by the German police. "Police judgments are showering over us like hail-stones," says Weidlich, himself a loyal subject of the Empire. "A German citizen who has not had at least one such punishment must be looked for with a lantern!" 1

The combination of legislative and judicial with administrative functions produces an unwieldy and uncontrollable machine. From an English standpoint — indeed, from the standpoint of any democratic government or any liberal political creed - the practice is greatly to be deprecated. Weidlich's word, "monstrous," with which he sums up the entire system, would seem scarcely too strong.2 But it is important to realize that these added legislative and judicial powers in no way affect the function of the police as an organization for the protection of public safety. Strip off these powers, which often incumber and impede the police in carrying out their simpler duties, and the same problems will be found that, in spite of modifying circumstances, confront the English and French cities alike. Although, as we have seen, many factors vary the character of the problem, the task of the Metropolitan Police Force of London is fundamentally the task of the Schutzmannschaft of Berlin, and it is a mistake to assume that, because an official

1 Loc. cit., p. 102.

2 Ibid. Strafgewalt der Polizei gegenüber der Gesamtheit unter dessen Kontrolle sie arbeiten sollte, ist etwas Ungeheuerliches. Kann man sich denn keinen summarischen Prozess ohne Verweigerung der fundamentalsten Rechtsgarantien vorstellen?"

belonging to the latter force has other unrelated functions, his ideas and experience have no applicability in London or elsewhere. The German police organization, in spite of its needless extensions, has many points worthy of careful study by the police forces of other lands.

CHAPTER II

THE PLACE OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE STATE

European police forces usually under state control.- Municipal control for smaller forces only. Unique situation of London police force.- London citizens voiceless in the management of their police.- Features and consequences of this control.- Police forces in provincial cities controlled by Watch Committees.- Supervision by the Home Office.- Results of Watch Committee control.- English county police. State control in Holland and Belgium.- Lack of uniformity in control and organization in Germany.- Municipal control versus state control in Germany.- Uniformity in AustriaHungary.- Movement toward centralization in Hungary.- Centralized supervision in France.- Lack of thoroughgoing municipal autonomy. Peculiar situation of Paris.-The National Constabulary of Italy: the Carabinieri and the City Guards.- Their common functions.

IN discussing the place of the police department in the state and its relations to other organs of government, it must be borne in mind that municipally controlled police forces exist only in the smaller cities of Europe. In all the capitals and large commercial centers, the police are under the direct control of the state rather than the city. Thus, in London, Berlin, Vienna, Rome, Budapest, Madrid and Lisbon, the head commissioners are appointed by the Crown and are responsible to the Ministry. of the Interior or the Home Secretary. In Paris, the head of the police is appointed by the President of the Republic; in Dresden and Munich, by the Kings of Saxony and of Bavaria respectively; in Copenhagen, Stockholm and Christiania, by the Kings of Denmark, Sweden