Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1911-11-16
ALDRICH ON STATES RIGHTS
Nebraska Governor Addresses Trans
Mississippi Congress.
WOULD LIMIT MINOR COURTS
Executive SuRRcsts that Appeal TO
Federal Courts ON Traffic Mat
ters lie Made from state
supreme Court.

KANSAS CITY. Mo-, Nov 15-Today
was Governors day" at the Transmiss-
ssippi commercial congress, three state
eXecutyes-Harmon OF Ohio, Aldrlch OF
Nebraska and stubbs OF Hansas-address-
ing the delegates. In addition, United
States Senator Robert l.. owen OF Okla
homa delivered an eloquent plea for tho
conservation of the nations health and
the establishment of a government health
bureau.
Governor Aldrich OF Nebraska, in his
address concerning, the right of the
states TO control intrastate traffic rates,
laid down some fundamental propositions
upon which TO base his arguments. lie
showed the facts and figures that In
the case Of the fixing and establishing
OF passenger and freight and express
rates in his ow1 state that the railroads
ana common carriers were on moro
prosperous business basis today than
ever before, that they had declared larger
dividends than at any prior time and
that the relations between the public
and the common carriers were friendly
and confidential and that II this stua-
ton was changed and the old bitterness
should be renewed the minor federal
NNhl ~ NAliu hlt NulAllluhllg lhAtlltl
with state laws, alone would be respon-
slble. lie charged an unwarranted as
sumption Of authority on the part OF
minor federal courts in multiplying state
government and as a remedy TO thes'
abuses suggested the following:
WOuId Limit Minor Federal Courts
Let congress pass a law limiting the
jurisdiction OF these minor federal courts;
take away from them the authority 20
enjoin state officers from the enforce
ment of state statutes. This would give
each state supreme court original Juris-
diotion In applications to enjoIn the en-
forcement of a state law; let the APP
peal 20 directly from the state supreme
court TO the United States supreme court
In this way, the well known abuse of
ex-parte hearing for the purpose OF
multiplying state laws on the part OF this
minor federal judiciary would be done
away with.
Cong ess, by statute, created these
courts, gave them the Jurisdiction which
they now enjoy. and congress has the
right OF course TO limit this jurisdic.
tion.
fhe supreme court OF the United
States is largely an appellate court, hav-
ing original Jurisdiction only In cases
affecting ambassadors or other public
ministers or conBuls and those in which
the state shall be a party In all other
matters the United states supreme court
has appellate Jurisdiction with the eX-
ception and under such regulation as con
gress shall make
Government ny Injunction.
bau lFroa baI n
the question Of restraining state officers
from enforcing state laws, that the state
officers were not a part of the state to
avoid the proposition that a state cannot
be sued and have allowed state officers,
as individuals, to be enioined. Then, II
this remedy which / suggest should be
carried out, government by injunction int
sofsr as the enjOining OF state officers In
tho enforcement OF state statute is con
cerned would be done away with.
The greatest abuse In government by
injunction generally Is TO be found in the
willingness OF these minor federal courts
to enjoin state officers in the enforcement
Of q state statute when It has TO do with
the regulation OF a public service corpora
ton. For a great many years last past
these courts have so effectually interfered
with the right Of the state In regulating
rates for transportation OF persons and
property that the state traffic in this re-
gard has been placed wholly at the mercy
OF the common carriers and they have en-
| joyed practically no regulation what
ever"
Sanborn Decision AnHiyNed.
! Then the governor took up the famous
| Sanborn decision in the recent Minnesota
rate case and analysed the opinion care
fully and minutely following the same
| line OF argument that he did at the gov
ernors' conference, and concluded as fol-
/ lows:
/ And in concluding my remarks on this
Sanborn decision, I say, first, that It Is
unjust and uHsound.
SECOND, that It has failed to look into
Continued on Page Two)