Confidential File

Cops Troubled With Delusions

A policeman's lot, I've heard it sung, is not a happy one.

And I'm inclined to agree.

He's an underpaid, overinsulted public servant who even has to make good on the bullets he uses protecting the proverbial life and limb.

He's
the guy who finds himself pounding a lonely beat in Staten Island for
giving a friend of a friend of the mayor a bad time about a traffic
ticket.

While the top brass works in air-conditioned offices, he
patrols the streets in 90-deg. weather wearing a heavy wool uniform
shirt. And they tell him he is to conduct himself in "a manner becoming
an officer" even under conditions when human nature makes it just about
impossible.

A policeman, as Ezra Taft Benson might put it, has a tough row to hoe.

And, apparently, it's going to get tougher.

There's
a trend developing among some leaders in law enforcement to consider
themselves and their subordinates as a sort of "elite corps."

It
first became evident with the sudden burst of sensitivity on the higher
levels at the use of the formerly respectable three-letter word "cop."
Even such a calm head as J. Edgar Hoover put himself on record as
considering the term a personal affront to his profession.

Lately, the strange attitude that cops should not be considered mere mortals has become even more evident.

Now a policeman is not supposed to fraternize with civilians on the grounds that the contact will contaminate him.

I refer you to this week end's bizarre headlines out of Las Vegas, where the sheriff of that quaint little village canned one of his deputies for becoming engaged to a chorus girl.

The sheriff, W.E. Leypoldt,
said the showgirl was too wealthy (from some real estate investments
which she made), and explained away his action by stating:

"I don't want any captain of mine coming to work in a Cadillac and living in a $50,000 house.

"It is the policy of the police departments everywhere to terminate officers who marry wealth," he added.

Taking
the sheriff at his word, I still take exception to his logic. There are
enough people around today, telling bachelors whom to marry, without
having it become part of the department's manual.

I could understand a bank president frowning on one of his tellers exchanging vows with a girl who did time for embezzlement.

But I think Sheriff Leypoldt's attitude — whether he's against showgirls or wealthy women — is a little bit wild.

It's a rare occurrence nowadays that a bride comes complete with dowry and a good figure.

It
seems to me that if the sheriff really had a fatherly interest in his
boys on the force, he'd be proud that one of them landed a good catch.

But the feeling I get concerning the affair is that Leypoldt didn't want one of his men to marry beneath his station. This is pure snobbery and a slap in the face to show business.

Not Blue Book Babes, But . . .

It's
true that not many chorus-line cuties are in the social register, but
today's crop, in general, is well protected and well respected. Chorus
girls now are poised, educated, talented entertainers — not Yukon
belles.

If the current protective trend among law enforcement
brass continues to develop, I can foresee a grim day ahead when
deputies will be permitted to fraternize with no one except
departmental personnel.

Policemen would have no choice but to marry policewomen.

And you know what that leads to. Inbreeding!

Confidential File

On the Mentally Sick Who Rule the Well

If someone will kindly run up a flag of truce, I'd like to have a word with Gov. Long.

I
know the old gentleman's respect for the working press isn't too keen
these days, but all I want is a minute of his valuable time.

I want to tell him that I'm on his side.

The boys with the note pads and the pencils have been snapping at his heels long enough. It's time they laid off.

I
think, just as he does, that the reporters and photographers from the
national news services should look elsewhere for copy, and let the
statesman from Louisiana live it up at the races and at bordertown night spots without having to put up with the intruding eye of the press.

If
he wants to insult Mexican officials and bounce four-letter words off
the hard skulls of Texas law officers, that's his affair.

Besides, I'd just as soon not hear any more about his escapades.

Because, from the daily reports I've been reading on Gov. Long's conduct, I've already formed my opinion of the man.

I don't need any more information to convince me that he's mentally ill.

And while, on that score, he has my sympathy, there's another aspect of the situation which, at present, has me more concerned.

And
that is: that here, in the United States, it's possible for a man
ravaged by delusions of persecution to remain — in his own state — a
popular and powerful political figure in spite of evidence that he's
incapable of managing his own personal affairs, much less the affairs
of millions.

In recent world history, we've seen insane men gain fantastic power.

But I can't recollect where it's ever happened in a democracy.

Before Gov. Long went on his rampage, I would have bet anyone that it couldn't happen here.

After
all, the people of the United States are, by world standards, a highly
intelligent, well-informed body. Even in the Deep South, our literacy
rate compares favorably.

To keep madmen from ruling us, our democracy has an intricate system of checks and balances.

But Gov. Long, apparently, has built up a machine more powerful than all of these forces.

The
chief executive of a state is a man entrusted with fantastic
responsibilities. Think, for a minute, what would happen here in
California if an Earl K. Long were sitting in the governor's chair in
Sacramento.

If you've been following the current legislative
session at all, you know the number of vital matters which need the
governor's signature.

I shudder to think about what could happen at a national level.

But much as I'd like to, I can't blame Gov. Long.

I'm convinced that he's not responsible for his own actions.

What Manner of Men?

However,
what I can't figure out is how — against the wishes of his family and
against the advice of some top psychiatrists — he can be turned loose
on the people of the state of Louisiana.

The obvious conclusion is that the people of Louisiana want it that way.

But cynical as I am about public attitudes in the South, I find that very hard to believe.

Maybe that's my trouble. I'm one of those naive individuals who think that humans are the most intelligent of the species.