The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-03-20
SENATOR BAILEY ON RATE BILL
MAINTAINS THAT CONGRESS has
POWER OVER THE COURTS.
He Defends His Contention That the Con-
Hess Can Prohibit Federal District
and Circuit Courts From Suspending
n Rate Pending Judicial Review.

q Rate Pending Judicial Review.
WAsHNaroN March Ex-senator Bailey
Dem, Tex made an interesting oontri-
button to the railroad rate debate in the
Senate to-day. For an hour he defended
his contention that Congress had the power
10 forbid the courts by law to suspend an
order made by the Interstate Commerce
Commission pending judicial review.
He denied a report in some Of the morning
newspapers that at Senator Newlands's
luncheon yesterday q majority OF the Demo-
cratic Senators present had declared against
mis- views. He asserted that the majority
OF those present agreed with him.
There wasa Misrepresentation even among
some lawyers, he said, concerning the right
Of Congress to limit the jurisdiction of courts
below the United States Supreme Court
the Congressional courts, so-called-based
on the theory that while Congress might
regulate the proceedings at Law it could not
affect the equity proceedings.
The power of Congress to control the
Jurisdiction Of the equity proceedings rs
we'll as the law proceedings in the Federal
courts below the United States Supreme
Court, he maintained, was proved in more
than a dozen decisions.
He read a number of these. which state
explicitly that the Supreme Court OF the
United States was the only Federal court
that derived Its jurisdiotional powers
direct from the Constitution. All other
Federal courts derived their power from
Congress, which created them and which
held the power to regulate their jurisdiction
and the forms Of procedure In such courts.
This, Mr.. Bailey contended, proved abso-
lutely that Congress had control over tho
equity jurisdiction of those courts as we'll
"a the law Jurisdiction.
Mr.. Bailey was questioned by Messrs.
Overman Dem, N. O. and Fulton (Rep.,
Ore.), both OF whom contended that Con-
gress having given the Circuit courts juris-
diction over certain subject matter the
court could 20 further and exercise equity
jurisdiction to protect the property involved,
pending the determination Of the judicial
question raised in the original proceeding.
Mr.. Bailey replied that the Federal courts
could do nothing not authorized explicitly
by Congress.
Mr.. Hepburn (Rep, Idaho sought to In
terrupt, but Mr.. Bailey declined to permit
him to interject certain casee In his speech.
Mr.. Hepburn resented Mr.. Bailey's denial
and the Texas senator remarked that even
the Senator from Idaho would change his
own mind on the subject
Mr.. Hepburn resented tho remark. The
Senator from Idaho ought to be given credit
for as much knowledge on this subject
as his juniors at the bar" said he.
age does not necessarily denote wis
dom, 'retorted Mr.. Bailey.
NJ Dl-- lz.-I -lNh a lkaor@ @AEa0nH
that the Federal circuit and district courts
be prevented by act Of Congress from un-
doing the work Of the Interstate Commerce
Commission. He had great confidence
In the United States Supreme Court; he didn't
believe there was a member Of that tribunal
who would knowingly be swerved from his
official duty, by. personal considerations,
the Federal judges in the lower courts:
Mr.. Bailey read a letter, the name Of the
author Of which he declined to disclose,
attacking United States Judge Pardee
for interfering by judicial. process to pre-
vent a State Ha d from re- ssds an Ii, 1y ,aM paS es sSe
disposition OF some Circuit Judges to put
aside the will Of Legislatures and become
a law unto themselves.
Does the Senator favor an ultimate re-
view by the oourts?' inquired Senator Al
drich.
Il do replied Mr.. Bailey. Il shall never
he swaysd BY popular olanorfrom accord
ing to every citizen his right TO a day In
court
Mr.. Hepburn (Rep, Idahol replied to Mr.;
B, Bailey Exit 0=o tSs dn14Esd sSat II Of oP 9ss Fed dfl9d
courts the United States Supreme Court
would declare The act unconstitutional
because there we're certain Inherent powers
10 a court which Congress could not take
away.
McCreary Dem, Ky).. Mr.. McCreary said
that the evolution Of railroads in the United
States was divided into four ages: Con-
struction, competition, combination and
regulation.
He defended the right of a commission to
make rates and reoounted the number OF
States that had created commissions with
rate-making powers. The United States
Supreme Court had upheld the rightof such
State commissions to make rates, holding
as it did in the case Of Reagan vs. Farmers
Loan and Trust Company, in which the
power of the Texas commission to make
rates was involved, and the Court held that
the commission exercised administrative
functions only that had been properly dele
gated by the State Legislature.
we face three proportions In this oun-
try at this time said Mr.. MoCreary; first,
Government regulation; second, Govern
ment ownership; third, acceptance and in
dorsement Of present railroad law as sufh-
Client. We must choose between these
three. am in favor OF the first
Mr.. MoCreary said he considered the bill
constitutional. "If it is not constitutional.
we should know IL as soon as possible said
he, 4for il it is not It will be necessary to
amend the Federal Constitution to give the
people relief
Mr.. McCreary said he did not object to a
judicial review provided IL did not hamper
the work Of Congress- or the Interstate Com
merce Commission.
He said that the right Of judicial review
already existed and 1t was unnecessary to
declare it In the bill.
sESAToR M PROPOSES AN AMEND
MENT.
Senator Simmons Dem, n. CO. has pre-
pared and will propose an amendment
TO the Hepburn Rate bill. which a number
Of Senators approve, as a possible solution
Of the differences on the rate question.
Mr.. Simmons proposes to amend first by
extendi ing the time when the rate fixed
by the 1nte rstats Commerce Commission