Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-02-13
TERMED A CALAMITY
Lawyers Discuss Denial of Ap-
peaIs From District.
NOT LIKE STATE COURTS
People Have No Voice in Selection of
Their Judges.
BETTER WAY POINTED OUT
Lawyer Declares Situation Could
Have Been Met by Making
$4,000 Minimum Amount.
NOT LIKE STATE COURTS
BETTER WAY POINTED OUT

Marked activity in legal circles is be-
ing shown since The Star yesterday cali
ed attention to the amendment to the
judiciary BILL turtailing the right Of ap-
peal to the Supreme Court Of the United
States.
To some of the leaders Of the bar the
passage of the substitute offered by Sen
ator Sutherland Of Utah to section 237
OF the bill came as distinct surprise,
especially when it was Learned that it's
radical effect seemed to make no impress
sion upon the Senate
1T has been well known for a long
time, said prominent attorney to-
day, that the Supreme Court has been
burdened with appeals from the Dis
trict court. and II was only just and
proper that the right of appeal should
nave been curtailed to some extent
But the action of the Senate in prac
tically wiping it out. except as to con-
stitutional questions, is astounding.
All that was necessary was to raise
the amount of the value Of the prop
erty in question in cases appealed from
$4,000 to $4,000. This would have ac
complished all that the Supreme Court
desired and all that was necessary
simple one. and there would have been
little If any objection to 1t.
No Vote in Lawmaking.
1.-THE laws and the courts of the Dis
trict Of Columbia he continued, ARE
not to be compared with the laws and
the courts of the states Here Con-
gresS. under its constitutional aulnoi l.. 4,
makes all our laws. Here the Presi-
dent, by and with the advice and con-
sent of the Senate, selects all our
In N states
a voice in making their laws, and they
select their own justices, especially
those whom they elevate to their courts
of appeals. 1t is not SO here. These
taking away from our citizens the right
Of appeal to the Supreme Court.
I'm the beginning we had the right OF
appeal to the supreme Court of the
United States In cases where the vaIue
of the p. operty affected amounted to but
800. Later it was raised to $1,000, then
to $500, and at last to 5000. Now
comes the Senate and wipes 1t out alto
gether, except In perhaps one case IN
a thousand. 1t is wrong. 1t is unjust
1t is really what one of my brethren OF
the bar has correctly declared calamity
to the people OF the District of Columbia.
Other members of the bar toway de-
clared the Senate amendment fll-advised
and unjust. One OF them injected per
haps q new feature to the case by de-
claring, with some emphasis. that ~ per
cent of the cases appealed to the Supreme
Court of.the United States had been over
ruled in that court since the creation OF
the District Court of Appeals.
Common Law Prevails.
Some mentioned the fact that the old
common law of England existed In the
District to a larger and more effective ex-
tent than anywhere else in this country,
and explained that lawyers Of other juris-
dictions, as q rule, were not as well posted
in the details affecting the District as the
local lawyers. 1t Is therefore necessary,
they claim that the court of last resort
in very important cases should be able to
consider them free from statutory bias
and prediction.
Neither Alexander H. Bell, president Of
the local Bar Association. nor Nathaniel
Wilson, chairman of the committee Of
the association supposed to look after
the Districts interest in the judiciary
ball. could be seen for a statement con-
corning the Senates action. Mr.. Bell
was said to be at the Capitol in con-
nection with the matter. Mr.. Wilson sent
word that he was very busy upon the
subject and had no public statement to
make.
A. 4. Birney, formerly United States
attorney. characterized the Senate amend
ment as a calamity, as did William F.
Mattingly. r. Ross Perry and other
leaders of the local bar.
The general sentiment seems to be that
the Senate amendment did not receive
the careful consideration to which the
immense interests affected by 1t entitled 1t.