New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-09-24
WILSON FOR RETENTION
Of COMMERCE COURT
McReynoIds Presents Views OF
President 10 Senate
Committee.
OPPOSES DROPPING JUDGES
Legislation to This Effect Is
Unconstitutional, the Ad-
ministration Be-
lieves.

Washington, Sept. 23-The President
and the Attorney General are both op-
posed to any legislation abolishing the
United States Commerce Court which
would remove the judges from office, and
this opposition will be carried TO the
United States Supreme Court II neces-
sary.
While the administration takes the view
of ex-Presidept Taft. that the Commerce
Court should be made an almost lndls-
pensable tribunal by the enlargement or
its powers and jurisdiction. President
Wilson and Attorney General McReynolds
are more concerned with the plan 70
Iegislate the judges, appointed for life or
during good behavior out of office. Their
view is that such legislation is clearly
unconstitutional and should not be en-
acted.
Mr.. McReynolds appeared before the
Senate Appropriations Committee to-day
and stated his objections, which are
known to be those of the President. In
most emphatic manner. He declared that
Congress is threatening to establish
dangerous precedent, although he did not
discuss the constitutional questions he
/ believes to be involved. The gravamen Of
his plea to the committee was that the
| courts powers should be widened 10
I cover any possible defects. rather than
! that the tribunal should be abolished.
( The first consideration. Mr.. McReynolds
/ said. should be the wisdom Of abollshins
! the court without a thorough tnvestiga-
: ton. He maintained that such defects as
now are claimed 10 exist in the procedure
and mowers OF the court can be easily
remedied. In any event, he asserted, pro-
vision should be made for maintaining the
status Of the judges constituting the
court.
1t is expected that President Wilson
will confer with a number OF Senators on
the subject. as Il is recognized that the
Attorney General acted practically as
spokesman for the Chief Executive, al
though he has well defined views OF his
own. Just how far President Wilson VIII
be willing to go TO prevent the abolition
81 the Commerce Court is still conjectural,
as thus far he has tacitly permitted the
House TO pass the bill. which is now be-
fore the Senate, and has made no pubic
announcement of his position. That ne
entertains the same general idea TOWARD
the subject, however. Is not beyond con-
lecture
These are the views OF eX-President
Taft. as set forth In his message vetoinS
the former bill. On this score President
Taft said;
IT have read the arguments upon which
this proposed legislation Is urged and /
cannot find in them a single reason why
the court should be abolished. except that
those who propose 10 abolish IT object TO
/. certain OF it's decisions. Some Of those
m decisions have been sustained and others
III have been disapproved or modified by the
Supreme Court. am utterly opposed 70
the abolition Of a court because its deci-
s,ons may not always meet the approval
of majority of the Legislature. II is
introducing a recall of the judiciary
which, in its way. is quite as Objectionable
as the ordinary popular method proposed
Next TO impartial and just judgment.
the great desideratum in judicial reforms
! to-day is the promotion of the dispatch
of business and the prompt decision OF
cases. The establishment Of the Com
nerce Court has brought this about in a
substantial way by reducing the average
delay from two years TO six months. and
doubt not that as time goes on and the
procedure becomes better understood this
! period Of six months will be further re
duced II is greatly in the interest of the
SINNERS. and therefore of the public,
that this means OF reducing the time OF
effective remedial litigation against rail
roads should be preserved"