The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-09-03
The Railroads ys. the State.

II. E. G., in PrattYiile Progress.
 All the railroads save. we believe.
 Alabama. the Atlantic Coast Line and
 the Louisville and Nashville, have ac- >eepted the rate of 1-2 cents per mile
 for passenger and the freight rate for
 llO commodities as passed by the Leg tslature at the late session of that
 body The three mentioned first above
 have not signified what they will do
 act, but the Louisville and Nashville , has secured from the Federal Court of
 the Middle District of Alabama an in- of Alabama. enjoinlng them from en- forcing any of the laws passed by the late session of the Legislature. that are gre being tested by 9 suit tiled in the ., The latest order of the Federal Court through Judge Thomas G. Jones was directed to the sheriffs and solicitors where the Louisville and Nashville is likely to violate or infringe any of the laws in issue. There has been some with regard to the Federal Court as- suming Jurisdiction. but there is really no question of State rights It Is simply, question of jurisdiction of risdiction has the right of way as we should say, to exhaust its jurisdiction before any other court should inter fere.
 The railroad companies being citi- zens of another State opened the Fed eral Courts with It's. Jurisdiction to then F5G and they ehoss the Federa court litigate the question of the reason ableness vel non of the rate laws. and after the Jurisdiction once attaches the court exhausts before dismfssing the subject matter.
 There has-been some talk by solici- tors and sheriffs enJoined leading one t5,,sg to conclude that they did not feel feel court. Much of this talk might cre- ate trouble for q few men. No one, in- dividual or official, has a. right to vio- might be that the state wins all it's suits with the railroads, we may say, 1t might be so clear that any one could win the railroads case, but If the, court is authorized by law to make the or der, then 1t Is the duty to obey such order Gntil t IS nnliified no by Pr95per get this is government of laws and not of men. If the sheriffs and solici- tors do not like to be controlled by the injunction under which they, are com pelled ~fo act they are parties to the bill seeking the injunction, and the ear of the court is open to them as to the duty to go into the court and have the order set aside. For an executive of- fcer of the State to ignore lawful or ders of the Federal court Is little bet
 It is an error to think the 1urisdic- ton of the State and Federal courts conflict in these matters. Both courts were equally open to the litigants, and they, or each of them, might go into either of the courts. When turisdfc- tion has been assumed by either of the courts, it is the duty of that court to exhaust the jurisdiction before turn ing 1t over to another court And 1t might be well to remember that these matters are not new. they are old as the principles of the common law. It Is the rule of practice after considering the matters for many years by the best legal minds of ages. If the people are to continue in well-being. from democratic government standpoint, 1t is highly necessary for all to fall in fine when the court decides a ques- ton. This should be done at least fill the case can be carried to higher court and reverse the judgment of such court.