The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1910-12-06
Relief Of Supreme Court From
Unnecessary Appeals.

No man ought 70 have, as q matter
OF right, a review Of his case by the
Supreme Court. He should be satisfied
by one hearing before a court Of first in
stance and one review by a court OF ap-
peals- The proper and chief usefulness
Of the Supreme Court, and especially Of
the Supreme Court Of the United States.
is, in the cases which come before Il, 50
20 eSpound the law, and especially the
fundamental IaW-Lhe Constitutions 10
furnish pEeCedents Tor the Inferior
courts IN future litigation and for the
executive Officers IN the construction OF
statutes and The performance Of their
legal duties therefore, any provisions
for review Of cases by the Supreme
Court that cast upon that Court the duty
OF passing on questions Of evidence and
the construction Of particular forms Of
instruments Ike ip1iCtmPnLS, or wills,
or contracts, decisions nOt7of general ap-
DIicdtion or importance, merely clos and
burden the Court and render more diff
cult It's higher function. which makes It
50 important q part Of the framework
81 our Government The Supreme Court
IS now carrying an unnecessary burden
Of appeals - this kind, and 1 earnestly
urge that II be removed
The statutes respecting the review BY
the Supreme Court Of the United States
Of decisions Of the Court OF Appeals OF
the District Of Columbia ought TO be
20 amended as to place that court in
the same position with respect TO the re-
view Of its decisions as that OF the
various United States Circuit Courts OF
Appeals The act Of March 2. 1901, aU-
IhOriZlnE appeals by the Government
from certain judgments In criminal cases
where the defendant has not been put
IN jeopardy, within the meaning OF The
constitution should be amended 50 that
sgJch appeals should be taken 10 the Cir
cult Court Of Appeals instead OF the
Supreme Court IN all cases except those
q
tuition OF the COnsU1UuOnaiitv OF q stat
Uter with the same power IN the Su-
pre-ue Court 20 review on CsTIiOTa1 as
Is now exercised by that court over
determinations Of the several Circuit
Courts OF Appeals
Appeals in copyright cases should
reach final judgment IN the court Of
appeals instead Of the Supreme Court
as now The decision OF the court Of
appeals should be made final, also in
all cases wherein jurisdiction rests on
both diverse citizenship and the exist
euCe OF q Federal question. and not as
now be Renewable in the Supreme Court
when the case involves more than S1.0o1.
Appeals from The United States
Court IN Porto Rico should also
run to the Circuit Courts Of Ap-
peals Of the third circuit instead Of to
The Supreme Court. These suggested
changes would, ! am advised, relieve the
Supreme Court Of the consideration Of
about eighty cases annually and would
be IL harmony with the theory OF re-
view which Led TO the establishment Of
the Circuit Courts of Appeals and which
I have stated above
The American Bar Association has
had before it the question OF reducing
the burden Of litigation involved IN re-
versals on review and new trials or re
hearings and In frivolous appeals IN
habeaS corpus and criminal cases
Their recommendation have been en-
bodied in bills now pending in Con
Eress- Tb~ Recommendations are not
radical, but they viii accomplish much
II adopted into law. and I earnestly
recommend the passage Of the bills en-
bOdyinE them