Little Falls herald. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1889-1950, 1912-06-14
WRITES olIsJuDnEa

part OF the time of these judges.
A. Z, Sanborn, Federal judge at NJ ad-
ison, Wisconsin, was for years the lob
byist of the publ -service corporations
Of Wisconsin. When he was appointed
to the Federal bench, his son succeeded
to his place. = 49,.
Henry F. sanborn, son of Judge
Walter, r.. Sanborn Of st. Paul, who
wrote the opinion in the recent Min
nesota rate. case; which aroused the
temper Of the governors assembled at
Lakewood, New, Jersey, last summer,
is traffic: inspector for the Great
Northern Railway company, one Of the
bene6ciaries Of Judge Sanborn's de
cision. The son was appointed last year.
Another son Of Judge Walter: II.
Sanborn, Bruce Sanborn, was taken in
to partnership in the law firm Of Dur
ment & Moore Of st. Paul, Immediately
after Judge .sanborn had appointed a
member Of that firm to, q lucrative
position in connection with the receiv.;
ership Of the Chicago & Great Western
Railway. .:
If any lawyer is curious to know how
far and how foolishly q judge will go
to serve railway, let him read III
Federal Reporter, page 463. If he is
also curious to read a singing rebuke
to lower court by Chief Justice Of
the: United States, let him read 1876
United States Reports, page l. This is
the story of those decisions: -.
A Southern Pacific brakeman. named
johnson: was ordered to uncouple the
engine from his freight train and
couple it to dining car standing on
side track at Promontory, Utah, for
the purpose Of turning the dining car
around, in readiness to be picked up by
the next west bound. passenger train
an hour or so before. An act of con-
gress provided that all interstate COM
MERGE cars should be equipped with
couplers coupling automatically. The
engine of the freight train was equip
ped with a different coupler from that
Of the dining car, and the two would
not work automatically. johnson was
compelled to couple them with a pin,
jured.
Judge Walter H. Sanborn Of St.
Paul held that the dining car was not
engaged in interstate: traffic, because
it was on the side track waiting for
engine was not car, and that it made
no difference, so long as the cars were
equipped with couplers, whether they
were couplers that would couple or not.
In overruling him, the Supreme court
Of the United States paid its respects
to Judge Sanborn in scathing
opinion, saying, in part, that his con-
illusions were ARRIVED at by an. in
admissible narrowness Of construc-
tion.'
The Abuse Of Injunction
The Minnesota legislature recently
passed law fixing maximum freight
and passenger rates within that state.
Judge Lochren Of the Federal court Of
Minnesota, at the suit Of certain bond
holders Of the railways residing in New
York, enjoined the state from enforce
ing this law, and fined the attorney
general Of Minnesota for ignoring the
injunction. The eleventh amendment to
the constitution Of the United States
prohibits the prosecution Of any suit
against state by citizens of another
state, and the Supreme court of the
United States had heretofore held
that suit against state official as
such was a suit against the state. In
this case they held that the attorney.
general Of Minnesota could be enjoin-
ed.
While the Minnesota legislature was
in session, the representatives Of James
j. Hill, among whom was his own son,
announced that if the legislature would
accede to their terms, they would not
seek evasion Of the law. The legislature
acceded to their terms and increased
the rates as contemplated to be fixed
in the law. After the legislature adj
journed, James j. Hill repudiated the
agreement Of his agents. A master was
appointed by Judge w. H. Sanborn to
take testimony on the question Of wheth-
er the rates were condscatory. More than
one Minnesota lawyer said to me that
he would as lief submit his case to Hill
himself as to this master, who had
formerly been known as a Hill Judge.
The whole proceeding was one Of the
most amazing in the amazing history
Of Federal courts.
While it was pending, James J. Hill
promises his officers in securing the
appointment Of Judge Sanborn, WHO
wrote the opinion in the case, to the
Supreme bench Of the United States.
Judge Sanborn, basing his judgment on
the doctored evidence before the mas
ter, decided that the rates were con-
fiscatory and made the injunction
against the state Of Minnesota per-
manent. He did this under color Of the
fourteenth amendment to the con.
stitution, which may be said to have
freed the negro and, by judicial con-
struction, to have enslaved the white
people Of this country. The case is now
before the United States Supreme
court.
Without exaggeration this may be
said to be one Of the most important
questions that has ever come before
that court-perhaps the most import
ant. So important was it that the con-
gress Of governors at Lakewood last
year appointed committee of three of
their number to represent the states A
decision in favor of the railways will
mean that the sovereign states of the
Union are merely tenants upon Federal
reservation. to be dispossessed of their