Barbour County index., 1908-04-29
FROM THE
COMMONER
THE SPHERE OF THE STATE.
MR.. BRYATJ'S PAPER


The recent decision of the supreme
court, sustaining the federal judges in
North Carolina and Minnesota, focuses
public attention upon a subject, con
sideration of which can not be much
longer delayed: Shall the lower fed
eral courts have jurisdiction to sus-
pend the laws of the various states be
fore the state courts have had an OPP
portunity to pass upon those laws?
The newspapers which. take their in
spiraron from the large corporations
are Congratulating the country that
property is made more secure by the
decision, and that vested interests are
rescued from peril. How long will
these papers be able to deceive the
public and to mislead their readers?
Property is in no danger and vested
interests arc not imperiled. The laws
of the states can be depended upon TO
protect property rights and vested
interests. The question is simply a
question OF dealing with corporations.
Shall the. corporations be regarded as
superior TO the natural man? That is
the only question involved. If a natur-
nj man locates in a state and engages
in business he must rely upon the
state courts for his protection. The
state protects him in his life, in his
liberty and in his property and he re-
sorts TO the courts of the state when
he seeks TO enforce a right Under
the present laws and decisions it is
different with the corporation. 4 rail
road corporation can be organized in
the state OF New Jersey and proceed to
engage in business in any of the 46
states of the uniCn; it gets from the
state q license to build a railroad; it
uses the power of eminent domain
and condemns land; the state laws
protect its property and the lives of
its employees. but when a citizen sues
the railroad for more than $4,000, or
the state attempts to regulate the rail
road, the railroad cOntemptuously
turns its back upon the state and the
o. courts of the state and drags it's ad-
versary into the United States court.
Why should a state be so impotent
when it deals with a corporation
If the state passes a rate law the
railroad at once enjoins the enforce
ment of the law on the ground that it
is unconstitutional. While the courts
are deciding this question the state
stands helpless. The law has not been
declared unconstitutional by any
court. and yet, the state is not per
mittn1 Of l,c
or years of litigation the Cnited States
court decides that the law is not un-
constitutional then during all the in
tervening tinTe the state has been pre-
vented from enforcing n constitutional
law. Why not give to the state courts
rather than to the railroads the benefit
Of the presumption? Why clothe a
corporation with privileges so much
superior to those of the natural man
The Democrats of congress are right
in urging the passage of q law with
drawing from the circuit and district
courts Of the United States power to
suspend state laws. Let every cCrpo
ration doing business in the state sub
NIT its controversies to the courts OF
the state. and thus put itself upon the
same footing with domestic CORPORA
tions and with individual residents. II
the state courts deny the corporation
justice, the corporation still has its
appeal from the highest state court tC
the United States supreme court. Is
not this protection enough?
The big corporations and their de
Tenders. conscious of the weakness ot
their cause. constantly confuse the
issue. The question is, not whether
property shall be protected. for the
state has as much interest as the ma
ton in the protection of property,
the question is. shall the corporation
be brought down to the level Of the
God-made man, or shall it be made al
object OF worship? The Democrats are
right in insisting that the state shal
not be deprived of its power to pro
tect its citizens. and that federal RENE
dies shall be added to state remedies
not substituted for them. There is NJ
disposition anywhere TO deny 10 tn,
federal government it's constitutions
authority, but the Jurisdiction of tn,
district and circuit courts of tn,
United States is regulated by con
gress and congress ought to Withdraw
the jurisdiction which the lower fed
eral courts are now using to tn,
prejudice of the states and citizens O
The states.