The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-08-05

the Corporation Commission and 'shos
cause. IA SfSs II
8 Corporation G Commits sion as q /
Court. \ M ;s$i
The Richmond X ines Dispatch tells tho
sVirginihn-P Plot that n he Corporation Com
;lnissiop8S'reg itself "a a court II
that Is TRUE, ana n LII their re garding
themselves as a. court 4, IS Fy'bac ked 4 UP BY
law and constitutional authority rs they
should, without delay, issue s n rule
against the Hon. Carter Glass, editor Of
the Lynchburg News requiring him to
show cause why he should not be pun-
3ished for contempt OF court;t inasmuch
as The has 4 charged 1.-The court with
#'.ducking, lodging ana sidc-stepplng lin
the matter Of the Churchman railroad
rate bill. II Ill M ii 3} Y. III;
Without presuning, In the5sllghtesttde-
gree, TOT pass upon the question as to
whether or not the commission is tn q
E,'.coutt,"sjw submit that It is against
public policy and public morals to permit
Mr.. Glass soffense to 80 UNPUBLISHED, i
ST Is really true that the commission Is
/ a NJ Court It is scandalous that a high
court Of the State OF Virginia should be
charged with "'ducklng, lodging and
lside-stepping.n"' II the Corporation Com
mission lis going to allow themselves to
be talked about and slandered + in such
d manner without attempting to punish
the guilty person, the people Of Virginia
will readily come to the conclusion that
the commission Is not "a court "a not,
Swlthstanding the fact that the Richmond
Times Dispatch and tho II on Allan Cal per-
ton Brax ton, the father OF the commits
sion, say that 1t Is. If It Is true that tho
commission regards itself as a court
and we have the9word OF the Richmond
Times d dispatch to that effect here they
have a splendid opportunity to demon.
{tlonality of their claim. Let them pro-
coed at once against the Hon Garter
Glass, editor Of the Lynchburg News.
There can be no doubt Of the fact that
MIR. Glass attack upon the commission
$tenAo to lessen the esteem In which the
commission should be heidi and bring II
l3tnto bad repute. Assuredly, the commits
sion should hale Mr., Glass before their
| honorable body. and, unless b. succeed IN
purglng himself OF his very appa rent con-
tempt, punish him by giving him a SEN
J. tcnce to jail for six or twelve month s u
4 course the case would be a pealed to tht
Court Of Appeals, and wrlts OF habeas
3corpus and Squo warranto be almost in
Vulnerable But the game would beswe.l
worth the candle IL il should result In
the Court Of Appeals deciding that the
Corporation Commission Is aa legally and
constltutionally& Titled to regard Itself
as a COURT Culpeper Exponent.
The Constitution and the Code also
regard and recognize the CorDora ton
Commission as n court Of record; and
our sarcastic contemporary may be sur
prlsed to know that the General Assem-
bly, has conferred upon the Corporation
Commission powers and 5urisdlrtlon pos
sesscd and exercised under the law by
courts Of record toApunsh for contempt
| by fine or Imprisonment, or both, any
person who shall conduct himself In IA
before tho commission. or any of them,
celebrating in the discharge Of duty in
! public session. The commission has no
| power to, punish under contempt pros
ceedlngs any editor or other citizen sim
Eply for crIticIzing Its declsions; but for
the matter Of that neither has any court
Loo record That question has been set-
tied both In Virginia and North Carolina
within the past several years, Editor
Glass, OF the Lynchburg News, might
have made tho same criticism OF a de-
clsion OF tho Court of Appeals without
1 involving himself in contempt proceed
ings,A Tho over OF tho Corporation Com
mission to punish by contempt proceed
ings Is not SO broad as tho power Of the
Court Of Appeals and tho Circuit and
Corporation Courts; but the power OK
1 ists.aSQ. r. D. N