Perth Amboy evening news., 1922-08-31
TALKS
ON UTILITY BILL
Issues Statement Following
Letter From Bacharach on
Bill Now in Congress

METUCHEN. Aug. 31.-Judg'
George s. Silzer. in a statement IS
sued today, quotes from a letter n
has just received from Congressman
Bacharach, in which the latter ad
mits his bill cannot pass at this ses'
sion, but says that when congress
reconvenes he will use every paria'
mentary lea of having the bill re
ported to the House." The judge:
statement follows:
In response to the request o:
group of newspaper men made a
Sea Girt last week, l am making
this further statement regarding my
bill, and the Baracharach bill.
THE Bacharach bill was intro.
duced in congress, Jan. 81, 1921 dno
now, Sept. /, v months later, II
is still in committee. The sub-com-
mittee is against it, and the main
committee is against 1t. and 1t Is MOI
to be reported, in spite of all OF Mr.
Bacharach's efforts to get 1t moving
mfr. Bacharach writes me that IL
Is his intention. just as soon as con-
gress reconvenes for the regular ses-
sion lin December) to use every par
liamentary means of having the bill
reported to the House.
THE casual reader can see what
chance there is for the bill. Every
effort should he made to secure its
passage at once. but evidently Mr..
Bacharach finds himself against a
stcne wall, unable to make progress.
1.-TWO objections have been made
to the bill: (a) that it is %unconsti-
t~utional, and (b) that it is not ex-
pedient to pass such a bill.
Passing the question Of constitu-
tionality, let us look at the question
Of expediency. The Bacharach bill
provides, that where there is an ap-
peal from the Utility Board to a
State Court. jurisdiction shall not lie
in the inferior United States courts
TO interfere. 1t is admitted that, even
if this bill be passed. there would,
after the state courts finished, still
be an appeal TO the U. s. Supreme
Court.
The present law has been in ex-
istence 1875 years. 1t is evident that
congress will not now, at this late.
day, put upon the U. s. Supreme
courts, for it would be physically i'm
work. 1t is also apparent that the
congress will not leave its citizens
without a L. S. court to protect
them against confiscation of their
property and to insure them the full
protection of their constitutional
rights.
THE U. s. Courts have absolutely
no right or power 10 interfere with
N rights to regulate our W al
fairs and to fix our own rates. as
long as there is no allegation that
there is confiscation of property and
a consequent deprivation of some
ones constitutional tights.
This being so. We can understand
why the committee will. not report
the Racharach bill. Shall we sit Sy.
then, and get no relief for the peo-
PIE?
Let me call attention to what my
bill would accomplish. IN the first
place, there can be no claim made
that it is not constitutional. nor that
it is inexpedient. Next, 1t would
eliminate the abuses due to the in
functions issued by the United
States Circuit courts.
"In the pending case. the Pu!Tt
Service Company illed a bill in the
United States Circuit court On Au-
gust 8. 1921, and an injunction was
issued October IT, 1921. On October
20. 1921. the case was referred to
Special Master Haight. lie has been
taking testimony, which was closed
a week or SO ago. lie must now
digest this and report.
1--WE should get the report when
the snow is flying, and then it goes
to the court, which must go through
the same process and then give de-
cision. Perhaps when another winter
arrives we may have a decision.
More than a year has already
passed with no result. except the ex-
pense and nuisance of rebate tickets
and consequent loss to the trolley
riders.
"If my bill had been a law, as
soon as the trolley company applied
to the United States court for an in
junction on affdavits, the states at.
torney could have offered in evi.
dence at once the entire testimony
taken before the Utility Board, and
the entire case would have been be-
fore the court and a decision could
have been given Immediately.
This would have avoided the de
lay of q ear or two, the reference
to a master; the cost of lawyers an(
witnesses and of testimony; the ex'
pense to trolley-riders, and the NUS
ance Of rebate tickets. In short, j
would bring immediate results, ant
eliminate the necessity for the
much-hated injunction.
"If then, Mr.. Bacharach finds tina
get real benefit from passing mine?'