Rock Island Argus., 1910-12-06

by the supreme court of the United
States of decisions of the court of
appeals of the District of Columbia
ought to be so amended as to place
that court in the same position with
respect to the review of It's decisions
as that of the various United States
circuit courts of appeals. The act or
March 2, 1907. authorizing appeals by
the government from certain judg-
ments in criminal cases where the de-
fendant has not been put in jeopardy.
within the meaning of the constitution,
should be amended so that such ap-
peals should be taken to the circuit
courts of appeals instead of to the su-
preme court in all cases except those
involving the construction of the con-
stitution or the consdtutionality of
statute, with the same power in the su-
preme court to review on certiorari
as is now exercised by that court over
determinations of tie several circuit
courts of appeals Appeals from the
United States court in Porto Rico
should also run to The circuit courts OF
appeals 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 in har-
mony with the theory of review 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
reversals on review and new trials or
reheariugs and in frivolous appeals in
habeaS corpus and criminal cases.
Their recommendations have been EN-
bodied in bills now pending in con-
gress. The recommendations are not
radical. but they Will accomplish much
If adopted into law. and | earnestly
recommend the passage of the bills
embodying them.
Injunction Bill.
| wish TO renew my urgent recon-
mendation made in my last annual
message in favo- of the passage of
law which shall regulate the issuing of
iujunctions in equity without notice in
accordance with the best practice now
in vogue in the courts of the United
States.
I regard this of especial importance.
first. because it has been promised.
and. second. because it will deprive
those who now complain of certain al
legged abuses in the improper issuing of
injunctions without notice of any real
ground for further amendment and
will take away all semhlance OF sup
port for the extremely radical leGiSla-
ton they propose. which will be most
perniCious if adopted. will sap the
foundations of judicial power ard le-
galize that cruel social instrument. the
secondary boycott.
Judicial Salaries.
I further recommend to congress the
passage of the bill now pending for
the increase in the salaries of the fed
eraI judges. by which the chief justice
of the supreme court shall receive S1I,-
SEQ and the associate justices $1,000.
the circuit judges constituting the cir
cult court of appeals shall receive S10,-
600 and the district judges $4,000.
These judges exercise a wide jurisciic-
ton. ard their duties require of them
profound hnOWleuGe Oh the law.
great ability in the dispatch OF bust
ness and care and delicacy in the eX-
ercise of their Jurisdiction SO as to
avoid conflict whenever possible be
tween the federal and the state courts.
The positions they occupy ought to
be filed by men who have shown the
greatest ability in their professional
work at the bar. and it iS the poorest
economy possible for the government
to pay salaries so low for judicial serv-
ice as not to be able TO command the
best talent of the LEGAL profession in
every part of the country.
The cost of living is such. especially
in the large cities. that even the sal
aries fixed in the proposed bill will
enable the incumbents to accumulate
little if anything to support their fam
lilies after their death. Nothing is so
important TO the preservation of our
country and its beloved institutions as
the maintenance of the independence
of the judiciary, and next to the life
tenure an adequate salary is the most
material contribution to the mainte-
nance of independence on the part of