WW,
am jjtv
Y-
r'fc ,
f w" uSi. i
";7
"1
Commoner.
w'4
3MBBR 14, 190f
ft.
HE FEDERAL COURT
DODGING THE ISSUE
IN NEBRASKA
fwy
X'iJ
jtjj
vf
nresentatlve Finis J. Garrett, of Tennessee,
need in the bouse at last session of congress
lis (H. R. 15720 and H. R. 15721 respective-
o object of which is to abrogate the juris-
n of the federal courts over state corpora-
where the sole ground of such jurisdiction is
diversity of citizenship of the parties to the
ation. Mr. Garrett's idea is that there are two
linct lines of legislation which will bring the
uit desired one being by amendment to exist-
stamtes, and me other being a direct ana
4ginal legislative declaration of the jurisdictional
tus or state corporations and both ideas are
bodied in the two bills.
In a speech made March 14, 1906, he discussed
no proposed legislation somewhat elaborately en
tering into the history of the legislative enact
ments along this line and also the history of tho
judicial, decision. The constitution provides that
the "judicial power of the United States shall ex-
ftend to all cases between citizens' of
amerent scares, rne juuiciary act or .uey .carry
ing the various constitutional provisions into effect
provided that the circuit courts should have orlg-
ll mal jurisdiction concurrent with the Courts of
,Cof a civil nature) where the amount of dispute
exceeded $500, "when the suit is between a. cit
izen of the 4tate where the suit is brought and a
citizen of another' state." "Under this provision it'
,was held by the supreme court of the United
States Until 1844 that a corporation was not a citi
zen of the state where its original charter was
obtained in the jurisdictional sense so as to en
title it tb remove a cause from a state court to a
federal court on. the grounds of diversity of citi
zenship. In 1844, however, in the case of Railroad
Company vs. Letson this holding of the supreme
court was reversed and since that time a corpora
tion chartered by the laws of a state has been
held to be a citizen of that state and when suit Js
brought against it in the courts of another state it
can remove the cause to the federal court on the
ground that it is a non-resident of the state where
sued. Under the act of 1887-, however, it is now
rjequired that the amount In dispute must exceed
$2,000,. It is the ipurpose of the legislation pro
posed by Mr, Garrett tP provide that: a corporation,
shall, for jurisdictional purposes, be deemed a citi
zen of any state wherein it has an office or an
agent or carries on any part of its corporate bufai
ness, without reference to the state of its incorpor-j
ation.
In his speech in advocacy of the measure Mr.
Garrett insisted that the present condition is re-i
sponsible for the so-called "tramp corporations"
that obtain charters from a state with no inten
tion of doing business there but for the sole pur
pose of escaping the jurisdiction of the courts in
the states where they do intend to do business
He also pointed out that it is an encouragement to
corporations to obtain charters in some state
where it Is not Intended to carry on the corporate
business; that it gives foreign corporations doing
business in a state an advantage oyer domestic
institutions and is confusing to the citizen in that
different tribunals are had for determining rights
existing or arising under precisely the same state
of facts, the tribunal being dependent upon the
question whether the corporation is domestic or
foreign.
No attack is made by Mr. Garrett on the federal
judiciary but evidently he does not think-the fact
that under the law federal judges hold their posi
tions for life renders them any more honest or
conscientious or able than are the state judges
who at regular intervals return "to the people for
a new lease of power." He says: "For every
case where harm has come (by reason of the state
judiciary being elective and holding ior short
periods) I believe I could point to an equally large
number where harm has come because of the life
tenure of federal judges. But comparisons of
wrong doing are needless. The necessity for the -legislation
rests upon plain business principles
convenience to the citizen, fairness to all corpora
tions, protection from the reckless granting of
charters, economy to the individual and to the
government." ,
Mr. Garrett deals with both the constitutional
and practical phases of the question, quoting de
cisions bearing upon the constitutional right of
congress to declare the jurisdictional 3tatus of
corporations and fix the limitations of the exten
sion of judicial power.
To the objection that corporations might suffer
cm account of local prejudice he answers that, in
the first place, his bill does not prevent the
removal, of causes where it can be alleged that
local prejudice will affect the rights, and secondly;
that the state courts would certainly give, justice
In his speech before the Jefferson Club on the
evening of Sept. 4, Mr. Bryan referred to tho caso
of Mr. Roger Sullivan, democratic national com
mitteeman from Illilnois. His speech on tho sub
jects appears on another page of this issue. Mr.
Sullivan has replied In a statement quite charac
teristic of tho man and hiB methods, but ho will
not bo permitted to lower this discussion1 to the
level of a personal controversy. The public is
not interested in Mr. Sullivan's views of Mr. Bryan
any more than it would be Interested in Mr. Bry
an's views concerning Mr. Sullivan wore Mr.
Bryan to deal with Mr. Sullivan's personality. Mr.
Sullivan is the democratic national committeeman
from Illinois, holding his office by virtue of unfair
methods. This matter was presented to the St.
Louis convention, and the 'evidence would have
convinced the convention had not the delegates
feared the effect of an adverse decision upon the
presidential candidate whom they were pledged
to support. If Mr. Sullivan disputes tho assertion1
that a considerable majority of the delegates to
the Springfield 'convention were opposed to lilm,
he can fight the question out with tho Majority
League of Illinois, which will doubtless accommo
date' him.
As Mr. Bryan has not asked for a nomination
and has not announced that he will be a candidate,
he will not submit the question whethor he should
be a candidate to Mr. Sullivan or to any body of
persons' iesB numerous than the members of the
democratic party of the United States. Neither
can the question as to whether Mr. Sullivan should
be. re-elected to tho national "committee be sub
mitted to the members of a convention already
adjourned. Such a decision would have no binding
force. The question must be submitted to' tho
democrats, of Illinois when they moot to select
delegates to the next national convention, and Mr.
Sullivan will not be permitted to dodge the issue
that is raided against him. He is officially con
nected wjth a favor-seeking, franchise-holding cor
poration, and the question is whether the demo
cratic organizatipn should be paralyzed by the In
fluence of men wbos private interests .make it
impqssible for them to be guardians of the public.
In speaking of the Sullivan case at Chicago, Mr.
Bryan said: "I hold that no man who Is officially
connected with a corporation that is seeking privi
leges ought to act as .a member of a political or
ganization, because he cannot represent his cor
poration and the people at the same time. He
cahnob serve the public while he is seeking to pro
mote the financial interests of the corporation with
which he is, connected."
This is the Issue. Before the trust question be
came the dominant one, it was not so important
what a man's cqrporate connections were, but
when this question is the supreme question of the
hour, the party organization must be above sus
picion, and the democrats of Illinois and all other
states are invited to inspect the connections of
those who aspire to the position of party man
agers. The people cannot be fooled, and the party
that attempts to fool them is sure to learn of its
mistake when the votes are counted.
The Commoner will urge the democratic party
to put itself in a position where it can fight boldly
and persistently for the regulation of such corpor
ations as are not monopolistic and for the preven
tion of any private monopoly whatever. To this
end, the organization must be composed of men
who are free to act for the public and not tied by
personal interests to corporations which are seek
ing favor at the public's expense.
to a foreign corporation the same as to a domestic
one. Neither court nor jury ever think whether
a corporation is foreign or domestic. The passage
of this legislation, Mr. Garrett Insists, would be a
restoration to the states of governmental powers
that ought never to have been taken from them,,
and in this connection the proposition Is insisted
upon that in such a government as ours "every
function of government which can bo exercised
by state authority as well as it can by federal
authority should be left to the state and the
federal arm be extended only where the state
arm cannot reach,"
. Hippie's directors had not - met for three
years, but they held a hurried meeting the .other
day when it was nor use.
The shades of Messrs. Artemus .Ward and
Josh Billings will how line up on' the White House
grounds for their vindication, . , . .
As soon as I roturn from a threo weoks' trip
through the south I shall cntor tho cam
paign in Nebraska and soveral other states from
which invitations have been received. I fool deep
ly interested in tho result In this state. Tho re
publicans have nominated an oxcollont man for
governor. Mr. Sheldon was a captain in my regi
ment, and I learned to admiro him during our
association in Florida and Georgia. If it were
puroly a personal matter I might rojoico in his
olection, but our candidate, Mr. Shallonborgor, l
his equal in character and ability and has had
nf?M xTl)0rLe,nc,? In vxxWc affa,r- In addition
to this, Mr. Shallenbergcr Is running on a botter
platform and would, if elected, bo more free to
carry out needed reforms. I have known Mr.
Shallonbergor for many years, have confidence in
his intogrity and am proud of tho record which
ho made in congress. He was one of tho best
congressmen this state evor sent to Washington
and ho will, I believe, make one of tho best gov
ernors this state has had. He is not only In favor
of tho rigid enforcement of railroad regulation
and tho two cent passenger fare, but ho advocated
tho government ownership of railroads boforo I
did.
The election In Nebraska Is not only Impor
tant because of its bearing upon state matters, but
it Is also important because of its influence upon
the next national campaign. Tho voto this year
will be taken as an indication of the trend of
public sentiment. Wo are entering upon a great
fight for the extermination of the trusts and for
the protection of the public from exploitation at
the hands of tho railroads. The republican party
has shown Its inability to deal effectively with
theso and kindred subjects. Wherever the presi
dent has attempted to do anything ho has been
compelled to follow tho democratic rather than
the republican platform and the republicans in
tho house and senate have not supported him.
Tho republican senate emasculated his rate bill,
and a republican congress opposed his moat In
spection bill.
The best way to stand by the president Is to,
elect democrats to congress and tho senate, fori
the democrats have stood by him botter than the
republicans upon the most important questions.
Even the president, while prosecuting" some
x trusts, has not aimed a blow at tho principle of
private monopoly and so far ho has not dared to"
oppose the protected Industries even when they
are selling abroad cheaper than they sell at home.
A democratic victory in Nebraska would show
the republican leaders that something must be
done; a republican victory would simply reassure
them and delay remedial legislation. Our demo
cratic candidates for congress stand much nearer
the people than the republican candidates and
their olection would have a wholesome influence
at this time. Mr. Green, tho candidate for lieu
tenant governor, and nearly all the other candi
dates on the fusion state ticket, are old time per
sonal and political friends and I shall be glad to
give them any assistance I can upon my return.
Hon. W. H. Thompson, our candidate for the
United States senate, is admirably qualified for
the position to which he aspires, and he has earned
the honor by faithful service during nearly two
decades. Wo need him in the United States sen
ate at this time to secure the election of United
States senators by tho peoplea reform which
nine-tenths of the people, republicans as well as
democrats, favor, but which a republican senate
delays. I am glad that tho democrats and popu
lists are working together and our ticket ought
to have the earnest support of all the members
of these parties and a. large republican voto
besides. W. J. BRYAN.
DON'T WORRY
The New York Tribune commenting upon the
Roosevelt-Carnegie spelling reform order says:
"Should the next occupant of the White House
reverse his predecessor's action and restore, so far
as his jurisdiction extended, the familiar and gen
erally accredited forms of English words, there
would then be in existence a set of executive doc
uments preserving to future use a variety of
orthographical eccentricities which had been offi
cially current during tnly a brief period of time."
The Tribune need not worry. It is more than
probable that Mr. Roosevelt will conclude that it;
may be just as well, after all, to adhere to the
old rules so far as dpcuments coming under public
inspection are concerned,
i
i
fi
i
