The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1906-06-19
HOW JUDGE PURNELL'S RESTRAINING
SEEKS TO OVERRIDE THE LAW.

4 drift If thought - per
c-lEe that the attempted interference
~ Federal Court Judge Pufn~il "ith
the enforcement ~ suit II 81 order
II the Corporation Commission vas =
clear usarpatioh - a EpNsr which he
Toes not possess and which. III fact.
is expressly denied him b. statute and
bv the decisions u tn Supreme Court
% the United States.
Heretofore In the cases IN which IT,"
Southern Railway has been before
Judge Purnell an applicant for eS-
t~raordinary relief. the judgments
which have issued from his court have
had the SAVIOR if not tn essence II
justice in the argument adducei IN
their uppor They haze strangely
reflected the ability Of the attorneys
Nho are accustomed to argue is
cause. 1t has almost seemed that this
was n happy family in which the
bright youth have combined 10 gI%@ 4
sparkle and q nimbleness Of wit 70
he black-gowned head Of the table
by the very magic Of Virile mental as
ISOLATION. The Fedora Court in Raj
eigh has reveled i'm brilliant Soph-s-
tries and spun distinctions of the tin-
ness of Venetian glass. Even men
q hard headed public, utterly lgnor-
ant Of the law. has succeeded by 4
epecies Of remarkable intuition III
almost always correctly guessing the
outcome of questions hanging on a
hair balance in his court, it has never
theless had along with the realization
Of its surmise a show Of logic against
reason 50 adroit as to be Well-nigll
d~emoraliZing.
In the last instance Judge Pur1eil
has signally failed TO shine. All the
brilliancy which is manifest III the
proceeding for an injunction is contain
ed in the bill, and hen only in the
exposition Of matters which are not
material to the issue and which tan
in Justification of the order itself. was
the Judge as we'll as the southern
Railway IL too much of "A hurry?
strange, if true, for as a rule tne most
involved and brilliant decisions OF inns
particular jurist have been those III
which he acted most precipltately-
However this may be, the melancholy
fact remains that in the latest case the
one question surviving after an exailll-
nation of the law and the facts IS
whether the prostitution Of the court
10 the ends Of the Southern Railway
a wilful or an ignorant act
Usually the attorneys protect Puf-
nell, but the last case was one when
.reanired action both of haste and bold
ness. The r. commentary on
he character Of Purnell as q Judge IS
the fact that attorneys of the ability
of those who drew the bill against the
Corporation Commission should nave
ventured to ask his signature thereto.
If the relation to Purnell be not
indeed more han that which exists
between tutor and child, the betrayal
would still seem cruel. if the apparent
by the terms Of which necessity voids
every material stipulation-eVen to
no law
The law, principles, precedents and
decisions which Purncn has managed
to violate in this one instance. how
are remarkable in their lumber
He seems to have run against pref
ty nearly-everything along his ia
yorite line of injunctions which the
Congress has decreed and the Supreme
Court has decided he cannot do. Such
is the quality of Purneli, however,
that this fact will rank in his vanity
a distinction-which indeed it is.
In the first place Section 100
of the Revised Statutes of the
United States limits the right
of the Federal Courts in the issuance
of injunctions as follows:
"The writ of injunction shall not
be granted by any court of the United
to stay proceedings in any court
Of a State except in cases where such
may be authorized by any
relating to proceedings in bank
ruptcy."
That statute has been repeatedly up
held by decisions of the Supreme Court
and has remained IN the law of the
for years without amendment.
Can there be any question but that
the action of Purnell in attempting to
the corporation commission
from suing in the State courts for the ,
collection of a penalty for the viola
ton of an order the legality Of which
have had to be passed upon by
a judge and jury before they could
obtained judgment was itself a
violation of the law by which
the court attempting to issue such an
injunction is itself controlled?
The Federal Courts are creatures of
the statutes. Every power hat they
possess is specifically granted them by
Congress. The act which Purnell has
attempted is specifically prohibited by
same power which gives him the
TO act at all. And this prohibition
has been many times upheld by the
highest court in the land.
To understand what Purnell has
done and the relation III which he
tandS to the law. it is necessary TO
bear carefully in mind the facts in the
particular case and more necessary
not to be miSled by the adroit reason