Ottumwa tri-weekly courier., 1910-01-08
Inter- State Commerce

-Iyear l90S attention is called TO the
fact that between July J., 1908, and
the close of that year sixteen suits had
been begun to set aside orders Of the
commission (besides one commenced
before that date) and that few orders
of much consequence had been permit
ted to go without protest.; that the
questions presented by the various
suits were fundamental, as the consti-
tutionality of the act itself was in is
sue, and the right of congress to del
egate to any tribunal authority to es-
tablish an Interstate rate was denied ;
but that perhaps the most serious prac-
tical question raised concerned the .ex-
tent of the right of the courts to re-
view the orders of the commission;
and it was pointed out that if the con-
tention of the carriers in this latter re-
spect alone were sustained, but little
progress had been made in the Hep
burn act toward the effective reaula-
tion of interstate transportation
charges. In twelve of the cases refer
red to, 1t was stated, preliminary in
functions were prayed for, being
granted in six and refused in six.
Railroads Now Have Advantage.
"1t has from the first been well ,un-
derstood," says the commission that
the success of the present'act as reg
ulating measure depended largely upon
the facility with which temporary in
functions could be obtained. If rail-
road company, by mere allegation In
Its bill of complaint, supported by ex
parte afffdavits, can overturn the re-
suit of days of patient investigation,
no very satisfactory result can be ex-
pected. The railroad loses nothing by
these proceedings, since if they fail
1t can only be required to establish
the rate and to pay to shippers the
difference between the higher rate col
lected and the rate which is finally
Aeld to be reasonable. In point of fact,
it usually profits, because it can sell
dom be required to return more than
fraction of the excess charges col
Iected."
In it's report for the year 1909 the
commission shows that oe the seven
teen cases referred to in its 1908 re-
port, only one had been decided in
the supreme court of the United
States although five other cases had
been argued and submitted to that
tribunal in October, 1909.
Uniformity and .Promptness Needed.
OF course, every carrier affected by
an order Of the commission has a con-
stitutional right to appeal to federal
court to protect it from the enforce
ment Of an order which it may show
to be prima facie confiscatory or un-
justly discriminatory in its effect; and
as this application may be made to a
court in any district of the United
States, not only does delay result in
the enforcement of the order, but great
uncertainty is caused by contrarietv
of decision The questions presented
by these applications are too often
technical in their character and re-
uuire knowledge of the business and
the mastery of great volume of con-
flicting evidence which is tedious to
examine and troublesome to compre-
hend. 1t would not be proper to at
tempt to deprive any corporation of
the right to the review b va court of
any order or decree which if undisturb-
ed would rob 1t of a reasonable return
upon its investment or would subject
it to burdens which would unjustly
discriminate against it and in favor OF
other carriers similarly situated.
What is, however, of supreme i'm
portance, is that the decision of such
questions shall be as speedy as the
nature of the circumstances will adj
NIT, and that uniformity of decision
be secured so as to bring about an
effective, systematic, and scientific en-
forcement of the commerce law, rather
than conflicting decisions and uncer-
tainty of final result.
Court Of Five Members Favored.
For this purpose | recommend the
establishment of a court of the United
States composed of five judges desig-
mated for such purpose from among
the circuit judges of the United States
to be known as the United States
Court of Commerce. which court shall
be clothed with exclusive original jur-
isdiction over the following classes of
cases:
ID All cases for the enforcement
otherwise than by adjudication and
collection Of forfeiture or penalty, or
by infiiction of criminal punishment,
of an order of the interstate commerce
commission other than for the pay
ment Of money.
(2) All cases brought to enioin, set
aside, annul or suspend any order or
requirement of the interstate COM
merce commission.
(3) All such cases as under Sec
tion of the act of Feb. 10, 1908.
known as the "Elkins Act, are author
lied, to be maintained in a circuit
court of the United States.
(4) All such mandamus proceed
ings as are under the provisions Of
Section 20 or Section % of the inter-
state commerce law are, authorized
to be maintained in circuit court of
the United States.
Reasons precisely analogous to those
which induced the congress to create
the court of customs appeals by the
provisions in the tariff act of Aug. s.,
1909, may be urged in support of the
creation of the commerce court
Courts Duties and Powers.
In order to provide sufficient num-
ber of judges to enable this court to
be constituted. il will be necessary to
authorize the appointment of five addi-
tional circuit judges, who, for the pur-
pose of appointment, might be dis
tributed to those circuits where there
is at the present time the largest vol.
I,ne of business slch as the second