The Elbert County tribune., 1910-01-13
Makes Recommendations as to Com
merce Law and the Trusts
WOULD CONSTITUTE A SPECIAL COURT
Judges to Have Power Act Certain Specified Case.
Wisdom of Federal Incorporation of Indus
trial Companies Suggested--Scope
of Present LawToo Wide

is
President Tafts message to conpress on
the subject of needed legislation re-
garulng the interstate commerce law and
the control of the trusts:
10 the Senate and House of Represent
atiVes; l withheld from my annual mes
sage discussion of needed Legislation
under the authority which congress has
TO regulate commerce between the states
end'with foreign countries, and said that
4 would bring this subject-matter to your
attention later in the session. According
ly. L beg to submit to you certain recor1
mehoations as to the amendments to the
interstate commerce law and certain con-
slderauons arising out OF the operations
oI the antitrust law suggesting the wis
dom of federal incorporation of indus-
trial companies.
Interstate Commerce Law.
In the annual report of the interstate
commerce commission for the year 1905
attention is called to the fact that be-
tween July /, 1905, and the close of that
year l6 suits had been begun to set aside
oruets OF the commission (besides one
commenced before that date) and that
Kew orders of much consequence had
peen permitted to go without protest:
that the questions presented by these va
flous suits were fundamental as the con-
sututionality of the act itself was in is
sue, and the right of congress to dele
gaze 10 any tribunal authority to estab-
hsh an interstate rate was denied. hut
that perhaps the most serious practical
question raised concerned the extent of
the right of the courts to review the or
oers OF the commission; and 1t was point
ed out that IL the contention of the car
rfers in this latter respect alone were .us-
tained. but little progress had been
made in the Hepburn act toward the ef-
fective regulation of Interstate transpor-
tauon charges. In u of the cases re-
lerreo TO. II was stated. preliminary in
functions were prayed for being granted
In six and refused in six
II has from the first been well under
STOOD, says the commission that the
success OF the present act a regulat-
ing measure depended largely upon the
facility with which temporary iniunc-
tions could be obtained. II a railroad
company, by mere allegation in its bill
OF complaint, supported by exparte affi-
davits, can overturn the result of days
OF patient investigation, no very satisfac-
tory result can be expected The railroad
loses nothing by these proceedings since
II they fail. 1t can only be required to
establish the rate and to pay to shippers
the difference between the higher rate
collected and the rate which is finally
held to be reasonable. In point of fact
1t usually profits. because 1t can seldom
De required to return more than a frac-
ton of the excess charges collected"
In It's report for the year 1909 the COM
mission shows that of the II cases re-
ferred to in Its 1908 report 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.
OF course, every carrier affected by an
order of the commission has a constitu-
donai right to appeal to a federal court
to protect 1t from the enforcement of an
order which it may show to be prima-
facie confscatory or unjustly discrimina-
tory in its effect: and as this appilcaffon
he ma n a In
the United States. not only does DELAY
result in the enforcement of the order
but great uncertainty is caused by con-
trariety of decision.
The questions presented by these an
plications are too often technical in
their character and require a knowledge
of the business and the mastery of a
great volume of conflicting evidence
which is tedious to examine and trou-
blesoms to comprehend. 1t would not be
proper to attempt to deprive any cor
poration of the right to the review bv
a court of any order decree which
II undisturbed. would rob It of a reason
able return upon its investment or would
subject 1t to burdens which would un-
Justly discriminate against 1t and in ia
vor of other carriers similarly situated
What is, however. of supreme impor-
tance is that the decision of such ques-
tions shall be as speedy as the nature of
the circumstances will admit, and thar
n
as to bring about an effective, system
attic and scientific enforcement of the
commerce law. rather than conflicting de-
cisions and uncertainty of final result
Recommends "court Of Commerce"
For this purpose 1 recommend the
establishment of court of the United
States composed of ive Judges desig-
mated for such purpose from among the
circuit judges of the United States. to
he known as the United States court
of commerce" which court shall be
clothed with exclusive original turisdic-
tion over the following classes of cases:
ID All cases for the enforcement. 9TH
ervise than by adjudication and collec-
tion. of a forfeiture or penalty, or by in
diction of criminal punishment. of any
order of the interstate commerce COM
mission other than for the payment Of
money.
aside annul or suspend any order or
requirement of the interstate commerce
commission.
(s) All such cases as under section
of the act of February ls. 1903 known
as the "Elkins act" are authorized TO
be maintained in a circuit court OF the
United States.
az All such mandamus proceedings
hs under the provisions of section % or
section % of the interstate commerce
circuit court OF the United states
Reasons precisely analogous TO those
whtch induced the congress to create the
court Of customs appeals by the provi-
sions in the tariff act of August ;, 1909.
may be urged in support OF the creation
of the commerce court
In order to provide sumclen. NUN
her of Judges to enable this court 10 Dc
constituted IT will be necessary 10 au-
tborIze the appointment of fiye add
aonal circuit judges. who. for the pur-
,oses OF appointment, might be distrip-
1ted to those circuits where mere az
me present time the largest volume OF
anv,,,ess such as the second. third, fourth,
seventh and eighth circuits the act
,no,,jd empower the chief justice at any