Albuquerque morning journal., 1910-12-07

members of the public and are saw
ing them hundreds OF millions of dol
lars The violations Of the antitrust
law present perhaps the most import
ant litigation BEFORE the department
and the number of cases filed shows
Irhe activity of the government in en-
forcing that statute.
National Incorporation.
In a special message last year
brought to the attention of congress
| the propriety and wisdom of enact
| ing general law providing Tor the
| incorporation of Industrial and other
companies engaged in interstate COM
| merce, and | renew my recommends
| tion in that behalf.
Claims.
| l invite the attention Of congress 70
1 the great number of claims which, at
| the instance of congress, have been
considered by the court of claims an y
| decided to be valid claims again
government. The delay that u,t rs
| in the paymcnt of the money due un-
der the claims injnres the reputation
| of the government as an honest debtor.
and | earnestly recommend that those
claims which come to congress with
the judgement and approval OF the
court of claims should be promptly
paid.
judicial PROCEDURE
one great crying need in the unitcd
States is cheapening the cost Of litiga-
ton by simplifying judicial procedure
tpednng final judgement Un-
der present conditions the poor man Is
at a woeful disadvantage in legal
contest with a corporation or rlch op-
ponent The necessity for the reform
exists both in United States courts ana
in all state courts, In order TO brlng
. - 4eatI
the general government by its example
to furnish a model to all states A
legislative commission appointed py
ioint resolution of congress to revise
the procedure in the United States
courts has as yet made no report
Under the law the supreme court OF
the United States has the power ana
is given the duty to frame the equity
rules of procedure which are to OBJ
tain in the federal courts of first in
stance In view of the heavy burden
of pressing litigation which that court
| has to carry, with one or two OF ITS
members incapacitated through i'll
health. ii has not been able to take up
problems of improving the equity pro-
cedure, which has practically remained
the same since the organization of the
court in 1883 1t is reasonable to ex-
(pect that with all the vacancies upon
the court filled it will take up the
question Of cheapenng and simplifying
the procedure in equity in the courts
of the United States. The equity bust
ness is much more important in the
federal courts, and ! may add much
| more expensive. | am strongly con-
vinced that the best method of i'm
! proving judicial procedure at law is to
empower the supreme court to do II
, through the medium of the rules of
| he court, as in equity This is the
way in which 1t has been done i'm
England and thoroughly done. The
simplicity and expedition of procedure
I in the English courts today make a
| model for the reform of other systems.
Several of the Lord chan
eellors of England and of the chief
Justices have left their lasting impress
iupon the history of their country by
heir constructive ability in proposing
and securing the passage of remedial
legislation effecting law reforms.
can not conceive any higher duty that
the supreme court could perform than
in leading the way to simplificatton
of procedure in the United States
| courts.
, | Relief of supreme Court From tn-
necessary Appeals.
No man ought to have, as a matter
I of right a review of his case by tht
supreme court. He should be salts
fled by one hearing before court oi
first instance and one review by cour
. | of appeals. The proper and chief use,
| fulness of the supreme court. anc
| especially of the supreme court of tho
| United States, is, in the cases which
come before it, so to expound the law
. | md especially the fundamental law
| the constituton--as to furnish prece'
| tents for the inferior courts in future
3 litigation and for the executive Officers
! in the construction of statutes and th'
performance of their legal duties
Therefore, any provisions for review
of cases by the supreme court tha'
asst upon that court the duty of pas
| ing on questions of evidence and the
5 construction of particular forms of in
| struments, like indictments, or Wits
& | or contracts, decisions not of genera
| application or importance, merely CLOG
and burden the court and render more
| difficult it's higher function, which
makes il so important a part of the
| framework of our government The
( supreme court is now carrying an un-
necessary burden of appeals of this
! kind, and / earnestly urge that ii be
rem owed.
The statutes respecting the review
4 by the supreme court of the United
4 States of decisions of the court of APP
! peals Of the District of Columbia ought
! lin the same position with respect to the
review of its decisions as that of the
q various United States circuit courts of
! appeals. The act of March 3 1907,
authorizing appeals by the government
from certain judgements in criminal
+ cases where the defendant has not
been put in jeopardy, within the mean
ing of the constitution. should be
amended so that such appeals should
be taken to the circuit courts of ap-
peals instead of to the supreme court
in all cases except those involving the
construction of the constitution or the
constitutionality of a statute, with the
same power in the supreme court to
review on certiorari as is now exer-
cised by that court over determina-
tions of the several circuit courts or
appeals. Appeals in copyright cases
should reach final Judgment in the
courts of appeals instead of the su-
preme court as now. The decision OF
the courts Of appeals should be made
7 final also in all cases, wherein 1uris-
diction rests on both diverse citizen
} ship ana the existence of a federal
question, and not as now be review
able in the supreme court when the
case involved more than one thousand
dollars, Appeals from the United
States court in Porto Rico should also
run to the circuit courts of appeals OF
third circuit fnefana Of ~ the Sill