The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-08-28
Letters to The Editor
Is the Creature Greater Than The
 CreatOrs

Is the Creature Greater Than The
 Creators
 Troy. Ala, Aug, 2e. 1907. Editor Advertiser:
 You will pardon my temerity in making this request for enough space in your valuable columns to express some views heretofore overlooked Tn the multitudinous discussion of the rail- road cases through the press by Hon. Thomas G. Jones and others.
 am not an anarchist, socialist. nor Republican. therefore love my State. honor the constitution, and revere the courts of the land, State and national Therefore what say in this too brief letter to express we'll my views. is submitted with the most gro found love for my State, honor fSr the constitution and reverence for the courts. together with other like delegates fresh from the people. the creators of all constitutions and laws in a republic created a compact of union and gave it certain powers and limitations, 1t was not their intention that the creature should ever become greater than the creator. Again when the eleventh amendment to tt.e constitution was ratified the intent was more forctbly shown that the powers granted the central government should not encroach upon the right of the creators of that government. |,
 The two greatest principles involved in the constitution of our government. are the liberties of person. and the rights of property. On these two questions eminent lawyers and learned 1urists have expressed more dtversi- fled opinions than all other questions attempted to be settled by the courts. The lines are so finely drawn between State and national Jurisdiction. be- tween personal and property rights between quasi public and individual rights. interstate and local right, that 1t is hardly possible to prevent a clash of those interests But one thing IS obviously and manifestly clear to the calm thought of every thinking man that whenever a powerful interest. or corporation becomes dissatisfied with ,an act of the Legislature of State instad of pursuing the course of in- and giving the law the benefit of the doubt until the proper authority passes upon the validity of the act. they treat tho act as prima facia void and under take to throw the burden of proving its constitutionality upon the State. The first thing they do Is to rush into a Federal court with theoretical and speculative arguments, alleging en- croachments upon property rights, and then begins the clash of opinions above referred to. In the present case of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad In Judge Jones' Court, the error of such a course is more pointed than any yet on record Becoming tired of this procedure which in effect repealed all legislative acts distasteful to the rails roads the Legislature of Alabama pro- vided in the law a criminal penalty. The State cannot under the provisions of the constitution be sued. There is no federal authority for interference with a State in executing its criminal laws. And here Is where the railroads made their mistake. and Judge Jones has taken their view of the case. They know and he knows that an. in- junction cannot lie in this case against the execution of a criminal statute. but and mark the point well. for herei~ lies the error under the equity claim of property rights they sought to have an injunction issue against its enforcement and thus make 1t impos- sible for the law to ever have a real test. Now what have we in this ease An injunction cannot issue in this case against criminal procedure by the State unless the luity of property rights Is involved. The question of property rights is solely and absolutely one of fact Where is any fact presented in this case? It is all theory and specuIa- ton. There is no equity In specula- tion. therefore the restraining orders of Judge Jones are as void as he under takes to make the act of the Legisla- ture. As Judge Jones well stated to the committee of trainmen last Satur- day: "This Is a land of laws and courts" but the powers of a court should be carefully exercised.
 K. B. Price