Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-08-15

or. in other words. was confiscatory. juris-
dction belonged to the circuit courts OF
the United States to enjoin the orders OF
the commission until their validity could
be established. 1t had been the purpose
of many to give to the interstate COM
merce commission complete regulatory
control over the railroads of the country
in the matter of rates, and in other lea
lures of their management, without allow
ing courts to interfere.
Question of Validity.
But it was clearly developed that any
law was unconstitutional by which it was
attempted to deprive the railroad COM
panes of the right to go in court to test
the validity of order confiscatOry
or violative of the statutory authority of
the commission. and that if no provision
at all were made for such judicial re-
view then the courts would possess it
without special authority. So such juris-
dictiOn in circuit courts OF the United
States was recognized In the act. The
system involved hearings in circuit courts
of eighty-fOur different districts in which
the cause of action might arise. The liti-
CATION begun at Washington and carried
through the interstate commerce COM
mission might then be transferred to
some distant district.
"'The district judge, the circuit
judge. or the circuit court of appeals.
took up the case presenting a subject mat
ter often entirely new and found it diff
cult promptly to dispose of it in the null
titude of other duties. This system i'm
posed a delay in the necessary judicial
consideration Of interstate commerce
orders before they became effective. that
sometimes postponed their going into
force for several years.
I'm the interest, therefore. Of the dis
patch OF business. in the interest of the
public, and especially in the interest Of
the shippers who We're seeking to prevent
injustice by the railroads. it was thought
wise to create a court of five circuit
judges whose first duty should be to sit
EN- banc as Court of Commerce into
which all complaints might be brought
for prompt hearing and disposition.
Litigation Is fastened.
The statistical record of the last two
years shows that the average time in
which this ordinary litigation, following
the interstate commerce commissions or
ders before the order of the commission
shall become effective, has been reduced
from more than two years to about six
months. The litigation has not occupied
all the time of the Commerce Court, and
under special provisions of the act the
Chief Justice of the United States has
assigned the circuit judges to judicial
labors in the federal courts all over the
country, greatly to the advantage Of litl-
giants and to the dispatch of business in
those courts
1T should be said that under the provi-
sions of the section abOlishing the Com
merce Court in this bill jurisdiction to
consider the validity of the orders Of the
interstate commerce commission is given
to a court of three judges in each of
the nine circuits. one of the judges to be
a circuit Judge or a supreme justice. This
requirement good in many ways. only
makes the DELAYS of such country side
jurisdiction more certain. and is in no
way comparable in the matter of dispatch
OF business to the Commerce Court sys-
tenn.
1T appears from the decisions of the
Supreme Court of the United States that
the Commerce Court in several cases has
amplifed its jurisdiction beyond that
which proper construction of the stat
ute justifies. 1t also appears that in a
number of cases the decisions We're
against the shippers and for the railroads
when the Supreme Court decided t.. 1T
On the other hand. it appears that in
number of other cases the decisions of
the Commerce Court were in favor of the
shippers and in favor of giving relief to
the shippers against the railroad compa-
MES. but that the Supreme Court has
since denied the existence Of such judis-
diction under the statute
Limits Established.
"A series Of decisions of the Supreme
Court has satisfactorily established the
limits of the jurisdiction of the new
court. and there is no reason to believe
that these limits thus established will in
future be exceeded. There Is every rea-
son to believe that the dispatch of bust
continue, and now the. question is. why
should the court be abolished? Because