The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1914-04-05
BY
JUDGE
L. J.
REEVES

state. The federal courts may, and
| do. in many instances, deviate from
| the substantive law of the state where
sitting. The federal Jurisdiction has
| been so exercised as to hamper the ex-
/ ercise Of constitutional authority in
| the state. In fact, by judicial con-
! struction the states are gradually be-
| ing reduced to the exercise of a mere
police power. On account OF this the
| federal judiciary has frequently been
denounced by men of high standing,
and in the last ten or twelve years
many efforts have been made to i'm
peach federal judges.
Yet, notwithstanding all this, we sell
dom hear a word from a United
states senator or congressman, in
| whom the absolute control Is lodged,
| in reference to the matter. Congress
could limit the jurisdiction OF the fed
eral judges; it could repeal the statute
authorizing a transfer of these causes.
From the formation of this govern
ment down to the civil war. as now
remember it, the United States SUI
preme court declared but three or four
acts unconstitutional, but during the
reconstruction period, and from that
time on it has not hestated to de-
clare acts of the state legislatures as
well as acts of congress, unconsti-
tutional by a divided court with five
in favor of unconStitutionality and
four against such a holding; and this
trine that if there is any reasonable
doubt, an act should be held to be
constitutional.
The many refinements by the United
States supreme court in its efforts to
distinguish and reconcile it's own de-
cisions On the different phases of al
legged interest commerce and it's
subsequent admissions that its former
decisions cannot be reconciled, is
enough TO make one dizzy. NeVerthe-
I1r,-
the time of the Louisiana lottery cases
down to now, the interstate commerce
clause of the constitution has been
rapidly extended so that the states
are being narrowed to the exercise of
q mere police power.
Interstate Commerce.
. Recently it has been held by inferior
federal judges that one injured upon
a railroad bridge which is a fixture
within the stare, can maintain an ac-
ton under the National Employers Lii
ability Act, thereby necessarily holding
that this bridge comes under Interstate
Commerce Law. II this be true, then
county bridge forming part of a
highway leading into another state
over which commodities regularly pass
between the states, and the men en-
ployed on farms gathering any COM
modify to be transported to another
state, as we'll as the wagons, teams
and implements used in and about
the work, come under the Interstate
commerce law. Mills and factories and
all persons engaged in the production
or removal OF any article for trans
shipment to another state are engaged
in interstate commerce. If these
brides, mills. factories, and men come
under the interstate commerce law,
where is the authority of the state to
deal with them, to pass any act looking
to the maintenance Of the bridges, the
liability Of the employers to the en-
ploye, the hours constituting a days
labor, or the liability of railroad COM
pany for injuries inflicted by it? These
are questions which the United States
supreme court SO far as l know, has
not so far fully determined against the
state, but apparently because it has
not yet been called upon to do So
The attitude of candidates for con-
gress and the United States senate
toward these questions is now of the
utmost Importance and will become
more so to our children. Ask your
candidates for congress and the United
States senate where they stand on
these questions.