The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-12-06

number of cases flied shows the activ. ity of the government in enforcing that statute.
 National Incorporation.
 In special message last year l brought to the attention of congress the prOpriety and wisdom of enactine general jaw. providing for the in. corporation of industrial and other companies engaged in interstate com. merce, and I renew my recommends tiOn in that behalf
 Claims.
 I invite the attention of congress to the great number of claims which, sa the instance of congress, have been considered by the court of claims and decided to be valid claims against the government. The delay that occurs in the payment of the money due under the claims injures the reputation of the government as an honest debtor. and earnestly recommend that thoso claims which come to congress with the Judgment and approval of the court of claims should be promptly paid.
 Judicial Procedure.
 One great crying need in the United States is cheapening the cost of liti- gation by simplifying judicial pro- cedure and expediting final judgment. Under present conditions the poor man is at woeful disadvantage in a legal contest with corporation or 8 rich opponent. The necessity for the reform exists both in United States courts and in all state courts. In order to bring it about, however, it naturally falls to The general government by its exam pie to furnish a model to all states, A legislative commission appointed by joint 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 and is given the duty to frame the equity rules of procedure which are to obtain in the federal courts of first instancs. In view of the heavy burden of press. ing litigation which that court has had to carry, with one or two of its mem bers incapacitated through III health, 1t has not been able to take up prob. lems of improving the equity proce- dure, which has practically remained the same since the organization of tho court in 17S9. It Is reasonable to CT. pect that with all the vacancies upon the court filled it will take up tho question of cheapening and simplify. ing the procedure in equity in tho courts of the United States. The equi. ty business Is much the Ipore impor. tant in the federal courts apd, I may add, much more expensive.
 I am strongly convinced that the best method of improving judicial pro- cedure at law is to empower the su- preme court to do 1t through the mo. dium of the rules of the court. as fn equity. This is the way in which it has been done in England, and thor oughly done. The simplicity and ex- petition of procedure in the English courts today make model for the re- form of other systems.
 Several of the lord chanceilors of England and of the chief justices have left their lasting impress upon the his tory of their country by their construc- tive ability in proposing and securing the passage of remedial legislation eff fecting law reforms. I cannot con- ceive any higher duty that the su- preme court could perform than in leading the way to simpliflcation of procedure in the United States courts. ~
 Unnecessary Appeals.
 No man ought to have as . matter of right review of his case by the supreme court. He should be satisfied by one hearing before court of first instance and one review by a court of appeals. The proper and chief useful ness of the supreme court, and espe- cially of the supreme court of the United States, is in the cases which come before 1t so to expound the law, and especially the fundamental law-the constitution-as to furnish precedents for the inferior courts in future utiga- ton and for the executive officers in the construction of statutes and the performance of their legal duties.
 Therefore any provisions for review of cases by the supreme court that cast upon that court the duty of pass ing on questions of evidence and the construction of particular forms of in- vtruments, like indictments or wills or contracts, decisions not of general application or importance. merely clog and burden the court and render moro difficult its higher Junction. which makes it so important part of the framework of our government. The supreme court is now carrying an un- necessary burden of appeals of this kind. and I earnestly urge that 1t bo removed.
 The statutes respecting the review 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 tue review of it's decisions as that of the various United States circuit courts of appeals. The act of March 2, 1907, authorizing appeals by the government from certain judS. ments in criminal cases where the de> fendant has not been put in jeopardy. within the meaning of the constitution. ~A