The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-08-19

handed down by Judge Thomas G. Jones on Saturday:
 Louisville and Nashville Railroad com
 fany, ct al, vs. railroad commission ct
 al. In circuit court of the United States
 for the middle district of Alabama, in
 equity Jones, district judge.
 When the restraining orders and pre- hminary injunctions discussed in railroad companies vs. railroad commission ct al. in Mss. were made, the court necessarily passed upon the power of a court of equity 10 enjoin criminal prosecutions when required 10 protect a property right against impairment or destruction by state officers or private individuals, un- der color of enforcing unconstitutional statutes, or statutes which on inquiry might be found to be unconstitutional and whose force had been suspended in the very mode provided by the laws of the state, as well as by the authority of the well settled equity powers of the court.
 What the answers will show as to the new matters brought forward by the amendment, the court, of course, can- not now know, and neither has, nor ex- presses any opinion now as to what or ders it should make when the answers to the amendment come in. The courts action In including other parties in the restraining orders is based solely upon the
 
 and In legal effect only made solicitors and sherfffs parties by name instead of including them under the designation of "other persons against whom the court may enforce its process, though not made parties by name, under section 725 of the revised statutes. This was deemed d far wiser course, in view of the allegations made in the amended bills, than to leave them or any one else in doubt as to the scope of the iniunctions and restraining orders heretofore issued in these cases
 AS to the power of the court of equity to make these orders, and the propriety of making them, under the circumstances the court does not doubt Even casual consideration of the facts of the cases before the court will convince the refie, t. ing layman as well as members of tho profession, that these orders In no legal or moral sense infringe upon the right of the state to administer It's own crim- fnal justice or interfere in any way with the discharge of any duty which a so- licitor or sheriff owes to his oath and the law of the land.
 Under our system of government the execution of any law affecting the life, liberty or property of a citizen, is al ways subject to the supervision of courts of justice, whenever the citizen questions It's validity or construction in the courts In any case affecting him in his personal or property rights. As long as consttu- tions like ours endure, which are or dained that the great general and es- sential principles of liberty and free gov ernment may be recognized and estab- lished," this must be so. The executive department and the legislature as well is bound by the judgments of the court As to the validity of statutes and the con struction which the courts put upon legis. 1ation and must execute such laws. or re- a they are construed by the courts
 If the courts hold that statute vo- 1ates the constitution, it Is the duty of all the other departments of government to respect It's decisions, and to go no fur ther. and so In all other steps fin the enforcement of a statute every depart ment Is bound to conform to the construc- ton the court puts upon the statutes and to enforce them only in the mode and cases where the courts declare 1t to be lawful. The judgment of the court so long as 1t is unreversed is the law of the land and must be respected. Such has always been the spirit of our institutions and the custom of all the departments Of government, both state and federal If this rule be not observed. our system of "a government of laws and not of mem would perish from the earth.
 If Is also the assertion of a mere truism known to all intelligent men. that a court having jurisdiction both of the subject matter and of the person, has the right and duty "to decide every question ars- ing in the case to the exclusion of every other court, until It's duty Is fully per- formed, and the jurisdiction exhausted, and that this rule applies alike both in civil and criminal cases" Taylor vs Taintor, 1s Wallace, 366. Ex parte Crouch, 112 IT. B.. ITS. Freeman vs. Howe "A How ard. 450.
 It is also the statement of another truism. always allowed by the su- preme court of the United States and of every state in the Union, that when the Jurisdiction of a court has attac ed although It's proceedings in the sub sequent exercise of It's Jurisdiction may abound in error, its judgment and or ders are binding upon all other courts and all departments of the government as well as private citizens, until set aside or annualled on appeal or writ of error or other revisory authority and in the mode provided by the laws of the power that creates the court. The remedy, if the court errs, is 'by appeal not by resistance" by other depart ments or other courts, or by lawless act of private individuals. No one denies, or can deny with any basis of truth, that the cases before the court presented not only "a case in equity" arising under the constitution and laws. but also controversies between citizens of different states, of which this court had undoubted Jurisdiction. Even the subtlest casualist who might be tempt - ed to deny it. must admit that this question of Jurisdiction is put beyond the pale of controversy by an unbroke line of decisions of the supreme court Of the United States. to whose decls- ions all courts and officers In this land must bow, and which 1t has been our faith in all the past. should have the support of all patriotic citizens. Keeping these truisms and plain prin- ciples in mind, let us inquire what Is the nature of the cases before the court, what the clements of the right contested. and what has heretofore been decided in them, and thus analysing the matter, test the propriety of the orders now asked.
 The complainants, among others, filed their bills on the equity side of the court, against the railroad commission and the attorney general. to test the validity of the statutes regulating pas- senger fares and freight rates, and to entoin the enforcement of the statute which expelled foreign corporations from doing domestic business here, for filing it's bin in this court, as 1t had right to do under the constitution of the United States and of the state as well, to test the reasonableness of the rate. This court, as 1t was specially auth orized to do by the state statute as well as required by well settled prin- ciples of equity, suspended the opera tion of the rate statute, upon exacting