The times., 1898-02-13


| the Interstate Commission.
4 Perhaps an even greater guaranty or
| fairness and justice in the work of the
English commission arises from the
| fact that ii has no function to perform
| which would be calculated to disquali-
| fy a judge for the most impartial ex-
ercise of his high office. On the other
hand. the Interstate Commerce Com
mission is bureau for gathering rail-
road statistics: il is given supervision
/ of various matters of detail in railway
| management: IL is given inquisitorial
| powers for the purpose of detecting
| violations of the law on the part of
| the railway companies: il may insti-
| tute complaints in its own name, 1t
| may cause prosecutions to be inSti-
| tuted to punish violations of the law.
| BY section Il of the interstate COM
! merCe act. the commission is author
| lied to inquire into the management of
| tie business of carriers, and is required
! To keep itself informed as to the man
/ ner and method in which the same is
| conducted, and is given the right to
| obtain from the carriers full and COM
| plete information necessary to enable
the commission to perform the duties
! and carry out the objects for which it
is created. The commission is author
/ lied and required to execute and en-
/
| is prov.ted that upon the request of
the commission it shall be the duty of
any district attorney OF the United
| States, to whom the commission may
/ apply, TO institute in the proper court
| and prosecute in court, all necessary
proceedings fer the enforcement Of the
| provisions of the act and for the pun
ishment of all violations of it, and for
the purpose of the act the commission
is given power to require by subpoena
the attendance and testimony of wit
neSseSrand the production of all books.
papers. etc, relating to any matter un-
der investigation. In addition to all
this, the Interstate Commerce Commits
sion is given authority to institute any
inquiry on its own motion in the same
manner, and to the same effect as
though complaint had been made.
OF course such duties as these are by
no means conducive to that fairness and
impartiality essential In a judge.
The character of detective which is
imposed upon the Interstate Commerce
Commission and its authority to in
augurate criminal prosecutions, as well
as to prosecute civil complaints on its
own motion, have an especially strong
tendency to deprive the commission OF
a judicial temperament. In saying this
objection is not made TO the existence
of such inquisitor.al powers and pow
ers of regulation as the Interstate
Commerce Commission possesses, but
the point is sought to be made that they
ought not to be exercised by a body
which is called upon to act in a judicial
capacity. In ali these respects the
structures and functions of the Rail-
way and Canal Commission are inf
nitely superior. For the Interstate
Commission with its present varied
fnnafinnG n hG yaFIaIftpd render
judgment against a railroad, would be
almost like allowing man to be con-
Victed of murder by the grand jury
which had indicted him. To give the
commission the power to inaugurate
complaints on its own motion. and then
to hear and finally determine those
complaints, would be allowing party
to be the judge in his own cause. which
is contrary To one of the elementary
principles of law and justice. OF course
such anomalies would not be Temedied
by allowing appeals.
These considerations not only show
the entire unfitness of the interstate
commissionWith its present constitution
and functions for acting as a court, but
they show very ConclusiVely that Con-
gress never intended to give the COM
mission any general independent pow
ers. and. in general, any powers or du-
ties whatever except those of an ad-
ministrative body designed in some re-
spects to assist litigants and the courts
in the enforcement of the interstate
commerce act; this is made perfectly
clear by a study of the debates of Con-
gresS on the subject. During the ten
years of its existence the commission
has got far beyond the idea of Con-
gress, however, and has imagined itself
as possessing the most far-reaching
powers; powers, indeed. which the
courts themselves could not have eXer-
ciSed if the interstate commerce act
had left its enforcement to the courts
alone instead Of adding the commits
sion as a mere adjutant TO the courts.
Now that the courts have very proper
ly refused to sanction the unWarrant-
ed assumptions of the commission, the
commission demands that, while il still
retains the right to act as administra-
tive supervisor of various details of
railway operation, and also the rights
to act as detective. prosecutor. and
complainant. ii be given the powers of
a court. and that its orders be enforc-
ed as the judgments of a court. But
the commission will appeal in vain to
the railway regulation law of England
for any sanction of an arrangement
so utterly repugnant to any sense of
justice.
The Railway and Canal Commission
is empowered to award damages and,
for the enforcement of all its orders,
has all such powers, rights, and priyi-
leges as are vested in a superior court.
Since the way in which the English
commission is constituted and the
functions conferred on it. all give it
the dignity of d court and afford the
most substantial guarantees of judicial
fairness and of just decisions, and since
it is expressly declared to be a court, it
is proper that it be given the authority
of court to carry out its orders, which
are. for these reasons, entitled tn as
much respect as if made by any other
court in the land. Notwithstanding ali
this. an appeal lies from its decisions
on all questions OF law.
The Interstate Commerce Commission
aspires to similar powers, for the en-
forcement of its orders to those enjoyed
by the Railway and Canal Commission.
except that it seems willing to allow
its conclusions on questions of fact To
be reviewed by the courts, but pending
that review or any review of its decis-
ions, il wants its orders to go into effect
and to remain in effect until declared
unlawful by the courts, saving power
in the court to suspend the operation
of the order pending review only when
on the face of the record it plainly ap-
pears that the other is erroneous in
point of law or unjust or unreasonable
on the facts. Since the court could
seldom say that such error or injustice
plainly appears simply on the face of
the record. the practical result would be
that the commissions orders would be
in effect throughout the proceedings
for review
Surely as at present constituted, and
1,;+b its rresent flIpcfiaf,s. 1t would be