The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-06-21
COMMERCE COURT JUDGES.

When the question OF aboishipg the
Commerce Court was before the Senate,
MI Sutherland of this State insisted
that it was unconstitutional to abolish
that court because of the constitutional
provision that Judges ''shall hold their
office during good behavior - The point
vas such very thin one that the Sen
ate paid no attention TO it whatever,
and Justly so, because that constitu
tions provision is inapplicable to the
case.
The constitution establishes only the
but il authorizes Congress to provide
for such inferior courts as 1T may see
fit from time to time. These courts
established bv Congress are subject TO
the Will of Congress, since what one ses.
sion or one Congress may do with re-
spect to establishing a court, another
Congress can undo; ii can change,
amend, or abolish. This is a plain prin-
ciple Of parliamentary practice and pro-
cedure. No Congress can bind sue.
ceeding Congress by undertaking TO
establish under that constitutional
clause useless courts or to provide for a
greater number of Judges than are
needed, 1t is a plain matter of routine,
acknowledged everywhere, that what
one Congress can do another Congress
power. To say that because of the con
stitutional provision that Judges shall
hold their office during good behavior,
therefore court or system Of courts
established by one Congress must neces-
sarlly be continued by succeeding Con
crosses. is to violate all rules Of legis-
lation and practical government To
contend for this is TO assert that Con-
cress. merely in order 10 keep Judges
in office. must continue court which it
holds to be useless and perhaps even oh
structive and Objectionable, Congress
unquestionablv has the power to abol-
ish any court that 1t esta blishes, and the
tenure Of office Of Judges Of such court
no longer applies.
But aside from this plain proposition
of practical government operation, the
abolition of the Commerce Court does
not necessarily interfere with the Of
flee and salary Of the Judges of that
conrt: for that court was made up by
the assignment to it Of Judges from
among the circuit or district Judges of
the United States, TO serve on that de-
tail for period of five wears. This de-
tail having been vacated by the aboli-
tiou of the court. these Judges remain
simply circuit or district judges of the
United States, and subject to assign
ment to duty as such There is no more
reason for raising the constitutional
question in this case than there would
be for raising it in the case Of the Fed
eral District Judge of Utah, for in.
stance, If he were called to preside over
q district OF circuit court in St Louis, |
ST. Paul, Indianapolis, or San Fran
cisco At the expiration of his assigned
service in those places, he would re-
turn to his position as Federal District |
IS so plain a case that it is astonishing
that any one should raise a constitu.
tional question in the premises. There
will be ample employment on the cir
.uit OF district bench for those Judges,
constantly. There is always need of
lelp in one district or circuit court or
another, and the employment Of these
Judges in their appropriate capacity can
DC regular and constant.
No other Senator ventured 10 support
he opinion of Senator Sutherland in
his matter. The case is so absolutely
lear against his frivolous point that it
S astonishing that even he should have
attempted to raise such witless issue.