The Evening statesman. [volume] (Walla Walla, Wash.) 1903-1910, 1910-03-16

thought that executive propriety did
not permit it. for when he was dealing
with the same subject in his message
at the beginning of the first session
Of the 59th congress in 1905 he said:
1t is not my province to indicate the
exact terms of the law which should
be enacted, but / call the attention
of congress to certain existing cond1-
lions with which it is desirable to
DEAL
Il would not, however. be inclined
to attach much Importance to the prac-
tice which now seems to be very gen.
eral were IL not that it's course, in
the very nature of things, must be dis
astrous. Although a senator may be
in full sympathy with the broad pur-
poses which the executive proposes to
accomplish, the moment he asserts his
independent view of the best way to
accomplish the purpose, he finds him
self in direct conflict with the president
and he must choose between losing
the presidential favor and doing a
| thing in a way his conscience tells
him it ought not to be done.
II do not fear that in slight IN
stance or during one administration
the independent will of the members of
| congress can overcome; but If upon
subjects like the one before US, the
practice of having a bill prepared in
the executive offices and presented to
congress for passage, acco mpanied
with an applied message that punish
ment follows disobedience is continued
from year to year, in the end congress
VIII become mere form in organized
society
Records a Protest.
with the utmost respect for the
exalted office of president of the Uni
ed States and for him who occupies II
at the present time / record my protest
here and now against a practice which
I believe to be of dangers and disas-
ters"
Declaring to be extraordinary, the
circumstances connected with the ORR
gin of the bill, the Iowa senator de-
tailed the meeting last August of At
torney General Wickersham in New
York with others who, he said, had un-
dertaken to put into shape for enact
nent, the various recommendations of
the president on railroad legislation.
The report as made to the chief exc
cutive was supposedly confidential, he
said, but as a matter of fact, long be-
fore it reached the president it had
fallen into the hands of the railroad
men.
Discussing the progress Of the bill
after 1t reached the president Mr. Cum
Minis declared that it had been vastly
changed. Indeed, he declared, but for
the birthmark of the commerce court
no one would recognize the measure
born in the dog days up there in
New York"
These changes he attributed to the
influence of the railroad men that had
been brought to bear upon the pres
ident and attorney general before JAN
uary IL, when the bill was presented
to the chairman Of the committee on
interstate commerce. He asserted from
the time the measure had been turned
in to the president until 1t had left
him. nearly every railroad president
in the country had visited Washington
and had been heard by the president
and attorney general, many of them
twice Substantially every change had
been made to suit the railroads.
Makes No Objection.
He did not object to the granting
of the hearings on legislation he said.
His objection was to the course of the
executive officials in taking in hand
the entire direction of legislation. If
the attorney general and the president
were to prepare bills it was "eminently
fair that they should hear those inter-
ested.''
But while the railroad men had pre-
sented their views to the president
and his attorney general only one Of
them had been heard by the senate
committee.
| Because of the method of proceeding,
the senate, he urged, necessarily was
| ignorant Of the arguments used to
bring about the changes. No doubt
there was good reason for the changes
but be that as it might, the introduce
ton of a system (which would lead
those desiring to influence legislation
to appeal to the White House rather
than to congress-" he considered per-
nicious.
| Mr. Cummins inveighed against the
proposed court of commerce as unnec-
cessary and expensive He asserted
that not to exceed seven or eight cases
| a year would come before the court
and the expense would not be short of
| 100000 per annum. He also argued
that any court created for the trial of
railroad cases alone would be unw:se
because Of influences surrounding the
selection OF members of the court and
because of 1.-The tremendous power of
the railroads."
Might Have More Jurisdiction.
| Mr. Cummins also pointed out the
possibility of an enlargement of the
| jurisdiction Of the proposed court over
that now exercised by the United
States courts. He thought the juris-
diction should be made as specific as
possible
| More serious and disastrous than any
! of these objections, he said, was the
blow to shippers In taking the inter-
state commerce commission out of the
defense of the cases, making the Uni
ted States the defendant and placing
4