The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1909-10-07
Conner DECLARES JUDGE
JONES OBSCURED COURTS



statements against the railroad COM
mission made rates in Iowa. stating
that the only way that fair trial
could be given was by actual test OF
the rates. Judge Newman Of Georgia
refused to enjoin the passenger rate
OF Georgia which was less than that
now In operation In Alabama, stating
that on the ex parte statement OF the
railroads II would not be fair 20 grant
the injunction, before an actual trial
of the rates. Those rates are In Ell
feet today. and the railroads In Iowa
and Georgia show no disposition 10
question them, although at the triai
the railroads alleged and conoiusiveiy
proved by their ex parte afffdayits
that the rates were confiscatory. The
United States Supreme Court in three
distinct cases refused to sustain In.
functions granted by the lower federal
courts of New York. Tennessee ana
louisiana, on the ex parte statements
of the corporations. The supreme
Court stated that II was best to give
the rates a trial unless manifest IN
justice ana confiscation was shown OF
being inaugurated. The Appellate
Court at New Orleans made the same
decision in the Alabama rate cases.
"In all my experience do not
know OF an instance where Judge
had a better opportunity than Judge
Jones had to rise above his environ
ments and say to his former employ
ers. the railroads, that lower rates
than these had not proven confiscat-
Org after years Of trial in other states
Of like tonnage and conditions as that
Of Alabama: that Alabama has
greater tonnage than Georgia had
thirty years ago. twenty years ago.
ten years ago, five years ago. great
er tonnage than Georgia has now
where lower rates did not prove con-
fiscatory thirty years ago. and that
there Is no reason why an injunction
should be granted on the ex parte
statements of the railroads. II he
could not think that way. he could
have advised the roads to have COM
menced proceedings In the State
courts, from whence they could take
appeals to the Supreme Court OF the
United States. II they should deem
such course necessary.
Other Rates Fixed.
"All these things were familiar TO
Judge Jones. The rates In those
Sttaes will stay indefinitely as there
Is no fight against them. Notwith-
standing the courts above named con-
sidered as too indefinite the ex parte
statements of the railroads In their
contention of confiscation and dis
elimination and decided that an ac-
tual trial would form the only proper
guide for the court, Judge Jones ig-
nored this phase of the matter ana.
as every aspect OF the case shows, was
predetermined to issue inJunctions
against any law the State might make
In restraining the railroads In their
charges 1t looked fearful TO the
State, however pleasant II might have
looked to him, when In great mead
lines the press would state that Judge
Jones had knocked out another Ala
bama statute. do not think the
trainers of the Federal Constitution
intended these things to be. To the
request of a majority of the rail-
roads, after they had made settle
ment with the State. to be allowed to
withdraw their suits, Judge Jones re-
piled In an angry. hectoring lecture,
auarrellinE with them for settling
with the state.
AT the extra session of the Legis-
lature when the laws regarding rail-
roads were being enacted. II was
widely reported and generally beiiey-
ed that Judge Jones had assured the
railroads that he would enjoin all the
laws. He not only issued injunctions
against the railroad commission,
against courts. solicitors, attorneys
ana citizens, but he also published
threatening edicts of imprisonments.
fines, etc. This was the most unusu-
al proceeding ever instituted In any
State. 1t. was. new to Alabama ana
caused unrest and humiliation
throughout the State. II naturally
created any amount OF talk pro and
con- / believe that several solicitors
and judges gave out statements that
he had exceeded his authority and that
the injunctions were invalid. I have
no doubt there was a good deal of