The Washington herald., 1909-04-14
a Notable Opinion Respecting Iniunctions

A Notable Opinion Respecting InjunctiOns.
An interesting sequel to the remarkable
railroad war Of nearly two years ago in
Alabama. wherein the contending forces
on one side were Gov. Conner and the
legislature. and on the other judge
Thomas G. Jones. OF the Federal court,
and the Louisville and Nashville and
other railroad companies. has been writ
ten in a recent opinion OF the United
States Court OF Appeals for the Fifth ju-
dicial circuit. In 1907, the Alabama leg
islature undertook the reduction Of rail-
way passenger fares 10 ~ cents q mile
and the establishment of lower freight
rates. besides providing an elaborate sys-
TEN Of enforcement, with heavy penalties.
the whole warranted injunction-proof by
provisions designed 10 place the mechan-
ism Of enforcement outside the jurisdic-
ton Of the Federal courts.
Judge Jones. a man Of strong viii and
positive views, when applied to by the
railroads. counsel for which set I'D the
usual pleas of cOnfisCation and destruc-
ton Of property rights, enjoined the new
statutory rates in sweeping decrees
which affected in their terms every. State
official charged with the execution Of
law. For a time it looked as If there
would be open conflict between the Fed
eral court and the State officials Of Ala
bama, but, after war Of words. the mat
ters in controversy were left to the ar
bitrament Of the courts
Now comes the Court Of Appeals to
wipe out every one of the injunctions is
sued by Judge Jones in pursuance Of
what ne believed to be his sworn duty.
and in accordance with his conception OF
the law then existing. Since 1907. how
ever. much water has flowed under the
judicial bridge, and ex parte injunctions
against the regulation and fixing OF pub
lie service rates have become less fire.
quent and less approved or in our higher
courts The opinion OF the Court Of Ap-
peals under consideration shows strongly
the influence Of two recent decisions OF
the United States Supreme Court. both
strongly upholding the right Of public
regulation Of public monopolies and dep
recating the interference Of the Federal
courts with such regulation on ex parte
claims Of confscation. We refer to the
opinion Of Justice Peckham. in the New
York Gas Company case. and 10 that
OF Justice Moody in the Knoxville Water
Company case. Following the precedent
and the reasoning Of these two decisions.
the Court Of Appeals dissolved the in
functions against the Alabama railway
rates on the broad ground that no real
case OF cOnfscation had been made out,
that no satisfactory evidence had been
presented TO the court that the lower
rates would have affected the property
rights Of the complainants, and that the
new rates were not on their face so un-
reasonable as TO warrant their Injunction
without a trial The evidence before the
court consisted merely Of afidavits Civ
ing opinions as to the effect Of rates which
had not had a days trial There had
been no practical test Of their influence
over income, which might concelyably
have been favorable. An element of un-
certainty existed that could only be over
come by actual test Of the new rates.
The practice Of requiring such a test be-
fore granting an injunction was com
mended. Speaking generally Of the atti-
tude OF the courts toward legislative
changes In railway rates. the opinion
says:
such statutes not apparently extreme or unjust
should rot in Our opinion. be suspended at all on
tx parte opinion aidavits. The courts cannot. as
rule yield their night Of Judgment TO the opinions
Of interested experts who are not even subjected 20
cross-exaIninaton- II they did So IN railroad law.
the regulation Of rates would become obsolete. and
in criminal law murder would cease 10 be a pun
ishabs crime"
The opinion. as a whole. is a complete
vindication OF the right Of the State Of
Alabama TO regulate railroad rates. and
TO have its regulative legislation given a
fair trial. free from the Intervention of
the Federal courts, unless, or until. a con-
elusive case is made out OF eonfscation.
as appears 70 have been done in Missouri
after a years trial Of the 2-cent rate law.
What a notable change has come about
in judicial feeling respecting the ex parte
injunction for the protection Of corporate
rights viii be seen on a reading of Judge
Jones sturdy and uncompromIsing opin-
ions upholding the writ Of injunction as
a legitimate refuge of troubled railroads
from presumptlvely unjust State regula-
ton. While the Federal Jurisdiction is in
nowise curtailed by the Court Of Appeals.
and is. in fact, upheld in as strong terms
as those used by Judge Jones. the point
is settled that the injunction Of State reg
ulation OF monopoly is too important
judicial function to be exercised upon the
representations Of interested parties. II
must rest upon a solid ground Of fact.
not upon speculative calculations as 10
what may be the financial consequences
OF legislative act.
A Virginia gentleman writes 70 the
Baltimore Sun that b is a .sRr,-an Dc