The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-04-28
spooNER.s REPLY rO BAILEY.
lie Describes the writ or Injunction as fiie
Right Arm OF Jurisprudence.

- FNhiN w fAoBhN nos
WARRINGTON, April Ex-senator Spooner
of Wisconsin resumed his speech on the
rate bill shortly after the Senate met to-day,
attacking the constitutionality Of the
Bailey amendment limiting the power Of
the courts to issue temporary injunctions
suspending orders of the Interstate Com
merce Commission. Throughout his re-
marks to-day the able lawyers on both
sides Of the chamber followed his argu-
ment with profound interest, subject ing
him to but few Interruptions. Mr.. Bailey
volunteered a suggestion once or twice,
which he said was intended to explain his
position more clearly. But there was none
of those spirited colleagues which have
characterized the progress Of the rate bill
debate heretofore.
Mr.. Spooner opened with a tribute to the
writ OF injunction. which he described as
"the right arm Of equity Jurisprudence y
II Congress could cut Of the right arm
1t could also cut Of the left, and II 1t could
cut of the arms 1t could take of the legs,
leaving the equity court as q mere head
less. purposeless judicial trunk, The writ
of injunction was the great preventive
remedy, and equity jurisprudence had been
established to give a preventive remedy
which the law could not AFFORD.
Toward the close Of his speech he replied
to Senator Bailey's charge that he had
misquoted certain decisions OF the Supreme
Court. He had praotised Law for thirty
eight years n had always observed one
OF the first rules he learned as A student,
never to mislead.
Mr.. Bailey interposed the suggestion that
he had never believed the Senator from Wis
consin capable d misleading tho Senate
or any one. He had assumed that the
Senator, for want Of time, had intrusted
the work OF looking up authorities to a
clerk, who had not given it the careful
attention that the Senator himself would
ave done.
Replying to Mr.. Bailey's assertion that
the courts had refused to issue q writ OF
habeas corpus without legislative au-
thority, Mr.. Spooner said the power TO
issue habeas corpus we9 not an inherent
power OF the court. The courts OF the
United States derived nc high prerogative
or kingly writs from the Jurisprudence OF
England. The same was true Of the writ Of
%mandamuE. 1t was not an inherent power.
1t was distinguished from the writ OF in
junction. because the latter was a judicial
power that inferred in an equity court,
Senate Spooner concluded his speech
shortly before 8 o'clock: He said the
ate bill had enough doubtful features In it
already without adding another that might
endanger it's validity
AT the conclusion Of Mr.. Spooner's speech
Senator Clarke of Arkansas addressed the
Senate on rate legislation.
Failing to reach an agreement for closing
general debate. Mr.. Tillman announced
that OF Monday be would put on the
SCREWS" az he expressed it. and keep the
ate bill before the Senate, to the exclusion
OF other business, until 1t was disposed OF;
Mr.. Bailey suggested that there ought
to be an agreement to close general debate
next Saturday, May s, and Mr.. Allison
said he was in hearty accord with thu
suggestion.
Mr.. Tiilman announced that It was his
intention to nave each amendment to the
bill, of which there are more than 100,
taken up in its turn and considered and
voted upon sepa rately. 1t was expected
the consideration of amendments would
take more han a week.
Mr.. Foraker proposed as an amendment
to the bill the statute passed by the Ohio
Legislature providing for a court review
Of orders made by the railroad commission
of that State. The amendment provides
a broad court review and prohibits the
suspension of the orders Of the commission
by temporary injunction without notice
and hearing,