St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1896-01-15
THE NORTHERN PACIFIC CASE.

THE NORTHERN PACIFlC CASE.
The Glob presents elsewhere this
morning the first clear explanation Of
the proceedings in the Northern Pa
cific case now going forward before
four justices of the supreme court; the
first accurate statement that has been
made Of their nature, validity and eff
feet Not only have our local news
papers fioundered hopelessly in the
mire, at one time saying that the SUI
preme court was hearing the case and
at another that its justices were act
ing without Jurisdiction and that their
conclusions would be without binding
effect, but the same mistakes have
been repeated in the news dispatches
from the East Nobody has seemed to
know how the question got before these
judges, in what capacity they were
sitting, whether they were hearing
arguments about the receivership or
the seat Of primary jurisdiction, or
whether the decision arrived at by them
would be binding in law or only a
mere friendly recommendation. It is
not surprising that this should be the
case; because the relations of the fed
eral courts to one another and their
mode of procedure are thoroughly ia
miliar to no one outside of the legal
profession, and not to all within 1t.
The G 10 b e has therefore asked
gentleman competent to explain these
questions to do so for it's readers; and
his perfectly lucid statement Of the
case, given in our news article, will
correct erroneous impressions current,
and enlighten those who are anxious
to know what prospect there is of
final termination of the difficulties Of
the Northern Pacific by the action Of
the judges now hearing arguments at
Washington.
The United States is divided for judi
cial purposes into as many circuits as
there are judges of the supreme court
Each of these judges, besides being a
member of that great tribunal, is also
circuit judge of the circuit to which he
Is assigned. Within that circuit he can,
either with the other federal judges
or alone, hold court, hear arguments,
make DEGREES and enter orders Sit
ting alone, he constitutes a court, with
all the powers belonging to it. The
prope - Of the Northern Pacific COM
pany lies within four of these circuits;
one including New York, another Wis
in nd 70
and North Dakota, and the fourth
Montana, Idaho and Washington. 1t is
clear, then, that if the same motion
or petition should be heard in each
of these four circuits by the judge of
that circuit. and if all four should
agree in their findings and orders,
there would be established a uniform
rule of action that would put an end
to the judicial controversies which
have marked the litigation thus far.
The four circuit courts cover the whole
territory, and their uniform action
would be equivalent to the decree of
q single court having jurisdiction over
the whole line.
Now, instead Of entering a motion
or making a petition separately in
each of these four courts, thus requir-
Ing the whole question to be gone over
four times and counsel to travel from
one end of the country to the other, the
circuit judges, that is, the four justices
of the supreme court assigned to these
circuits, Brown, Harlan, Brewer and
Field, consented to hear the case to-
gether at Washington. Each is acting
there as a circuit court If they reach
unanimous conclusion, it will apply
and be binding wherever the Northern
. Pacific extends. Thus these judges
not only have jurisdiction, but their
jurisdiction is coextensive with the
Northern Pacific and will apply to it
as whole. The question before this
court or courts, for it is really four
tdrcuit courts sitting as one, is not.
"who shall be receiver of the North
ern Pacific?" but, what court shall
have primary jurisdiction?" Shall it
be the court at Milwaukee, as orig
inally intended; or the court at Seattle.
as the judge there contended; or the
court in Minnesota, or some other?
When they have determined this, then