Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1905-02-25

ana DolIfyer, has aided In every pos
sible way in this rate bill; and when
it seemed possible to expedite the bill
by dropping his own measure, and
pushing the Esch-T Townsend meas
ure, which achieved substantially the
same result, he at once followed this
course
eve have all been after the same
result; and am very certain We will
in the end achieve it, from the very
fact that we are striving in the spirit
Col. Hepburn has shown In this af-
fair, a spirit which is concerned with
getting the substance and which is
therefore entirely willing to make
concessions on unimportant differ
ences of detail.
Theodore Roosevelt
(Applause.)
In printing the speech that I de-
livered in the house of representatives
upon the occasion Of the passage Of
this bill, it fell to my lot to close the
debate. printed with it, as an ex-
hibit, the Esch-T Townsend bill as it was
called. That was the bill that we
passed. l printed with it the bill /
had introduced, also all the laws Of
every character that are now in force
upon the interstate commerce subject,
and have sent 10000 Of these into
this district. not because of the value
of the speech that made, but because
wanted my constituents to have the
law before them so that they might
see whether there was any little mig
ger in the wood pile, as some gen
tleman suggested, or little jokers up
+I4 ~ - a{>y. r LII
bill as introduced it, there were two
changes In the language as it came
from the attorney generals Office. One
was, the bill originally, as I prepared
it. provided that the rate should go
into effect within thirty days after no.
tice given by the commission. 1
thought that il the time was longer
sixty days-that would expedite the
litigation and that the great mass of
litigation that would grow out Of the
bill would be concluded, at least SO
far as the first court was concerned,
before the lapse of the sixty days. I
believe still that it would be wise. 1
do not think that it makes so much diff
ference whether it is thirty or sixty
days to the great mass of shippers, as
it does that the litigation should be
disposed of. l provided for court
that should be composed of five cir
cult judges taken from the body of
circuit judges on the nomination of
the chief justice Of the United States.
Afterwards that was changed so that
the nomination was made by the Pres
ident, this court to have exclusive jur-
isdiction over all matters growing out
OF the interstate commerce laws, eX-
cept actions for private damages and
crimes. This court was to have four
sessions each year in the city Of Wash
ington. 1t was to be regarded as al
ways open for the transaction of bust
ness. 1t was to have no vacations. It
was to sit in such other places and at
such times as the convenience of liti-
giants and as justice might require. I
believed. and believe now, that under
the provisions of that court. litigation
will speedily be concluded. There will
be litigation. No one can prevent 1t.
Some gentlemen say, why don't
you make this rate go into effect and
keep 1t in effect beyond the reach of
the courts?' You cannot do it. Every
lawyer will tell you that The consti-
tuition provides that all men shall have
the equal protection of the laws; that
property shall not be taken for public
uses without compensation: that all
men shall be secure in their property.
The courts have their powers and
their rights fixed by the constitution,
among them the power to issue an in
junction when any citizen complains
that he is about to suffer an IRENE
diable wrong. No law can take that
power from the courts of the country.
You might as well attempt to take
away the right of the President of the
United States to command the armies
and the navies. The three great
branches of our government are CO.
ordinate, equal in their own spheres.
Neither can interfere with the rights,
perquisites and prerogatives of the
other. Every lawyer knows that.
"This commission is authorized to
determine first whether a rate COM
planned of is unjust and unreasonable.
II they determine that it is unjust. and
unreasonable, then their legislative
power comes to them, and they have
the right and power to fix that rate that
is just and reasonable The question
of whether the first rate was unjust
and unreasonable, or the question
whether the other rate, as fixed by
them, is just and reasonable, is sub
ject to review in the courts. When
any citizen says that it will work an
irremediable injury to him, that 1t
takes his property without due process
of law, and when that showing is made.
the court must issue it's writ of injunc-
ton, and stop the alleged wrong until
investigation is had. No power of
legislation can take that power away
from the courts, and therefore we had
to meet this situation, and to my mind
it appeared the best thing to do to ex-
pedite the litigation that would ensue
if rate fixed was challenged. How
would we do it now? We have 1O6
district judges. Suppose a shipment
is made from Kansas City, through
rate, to the city of New York. 1t passes
through more than twenty districts
each one with judge that has the
jurisdiction and the power to issue an
injunction. do not speak disrespect-
fully of the courts. have the pro-
foundest regard for them; but it may