« PreviousContinue »
And, as recently as April 11, 1938, in his message to Congress relating to relief for railroads, the President said:
From the point of view of business efficiency, such as a private corporation would seek, it would seem to be the part of common sense to place all executive functions relating to all transportation in one Federal department-such as the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Interior, or some other old or new department. At the same time all quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative matters relating to all transportation could properly be placed under an independent commission-a reorganized Interstate Commerce Commission.
The present bill does not adhere to the recommendations of the President in either one of these respects.
Commissioner Eastman, of the Interstate Commerce Commission, during the hearings on H. R. 7273, speaking of his experience as Coordinator of Railroads, testified:
I also reached the conclusion that the transportation problem is, after all, a single problem and not a series of problems, because all of these forms of transportation are interrelated in at least two different ways: They are either interrelated by competition or they are interrelated by the opportunities for cooperation and coordination between them or by both. Therefore, it seems highly desirable to concentrate regulation in a single body instead of spreading it over a number of separate bodies. That is necessary not only in the interest of proper coordination between these various forms of transportation but to insure fair and impartial treatment of them all by a body, which has not greater or different responsibility with respect to any one of them than to any of the others.
All students of the transportation question agree with the position taken by the President and Commissioner Eastman on the desirability of unified control of the transportation systems of the country.
As stated by Prof. Emery R. Johnson, of the Wharton School of Finance and Commerce of the University of Pennsylvania, in a new work on Government Regulation of Transportation:
The task to be performed by the Government is the regulation of transportation as a whole and in the general public interest. This involves the regulation of all the agencies of transportation by applying to each of them like principles of regulation for the accomplishment of a common purpose—that of enabling each agency to function advantageously and appropriately as a part of a national transportration system.
We recognize the need of additional legislation for the regulation of agencies engaged in transportation in air commerce. We favor the passage of the bill on the calendar reported unanimously by the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce giving the Interstate Commerce Commission additional authority for that purpose. We are opposed to the pending bill for the reasons above stated.
CARL E. MAPES.
ADDITIONAL UNITED STATES JUDGES
May 2, 1938.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of
the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. SUMNERS of Texas, from the Committee on the Judiciary,
submitted the following
[To accompany S. 3691]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 3691) to provide for the appointment of additional judges for certain United States district courts, circuit courts of appeals, and certain courts of the United States for the District of Columbia, after consideration, report the same with an amendment with the recommendation that as so amended the bill do pass.
The committee amendment consists of striking out all after the enacting clause of the Senate bill, and inserting the provisions of the bill H. Ř. 10014 as reported to the House by the Judiciary Committee, with an amendment.
The committee amendment is as follows: Strike out all after the enacting cause of the Senate bill, S. 3691, and insert in lieu thereof the following: That the President is authorized to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, four additional circuit judges, one for each of the following judicial circuits: Second, fifth, sixth, and seventh.
Sec. 2. The President is authorized to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, one additional associate justice of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
SEC. 3. Section 2 of the Act entitled "An Act authorizing the appointment of an additional circuit judge for the third circuit”, approved June 24, 1936 (49 Stat. 1903) is hereby repealed.
Sec. 4. The President is authorized to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, fifteen additional district judges, as follows:
(a) One district judge for each of the following districts: Western district of Louisiana, southern district of Texas, eastern district of Michigan, western district of Washington, southern district of California, northern district of Ilinois, northern district of Ohio, northern district of Georgia, district of Massachusetts, district of New Jersey, western district of Virginia;
(b) One district judge for the northern district of California, whose official residence shall be Sacramento;
(c) One district judge for the southern district of New York: Provided, That the first vacancy occurring in the office of district judge for the southern district of New York shall not be filled;
(d) One district judge for each of the following combinations of districts: Eastern and western districts of Arkansas, eastern and middle districts of Tennessee: Provided, That no successor shall be appointed to the judge for the eastern and middle districts of Tennessee.
Sec. 5. The President is authorized to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, three additional associate justices of the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia.
SEC. 6. (a) That any vacancy which may occur at any time in the office of United States district judge for the district of Montana, created by the Act of September 14, 1922 (42 Stat. 837), is hereby authorized to be filled.
(b) That section 2 of the Act entitled “An Act authorizing the appointment of an additional district judge for the eastern district of Pennsylvania”, approved June 16, 1936 (49 Stat. 1523), be, and it is hereby, repealed.
It is unnecessary here to dwell on the denial of justice resulting when calendars of courts are congested and judges overworked. Meritorious claims are compromised on harsh terms when litigants of ordinary circumstances are confronted with interminable delays before a trial can be had and an appeal heard. A speedy trial is a constitutional right of one accused of crime.
Judges should be attentive to their duties, but it is not good economy for the Government to ask judges to risk the impairment of their health from too much work. Moreover, a weary judge cannot give the character of consideration to cases before him which it is the right of those concerned to have from him. In short, it is essential to the efficiency and good repute of the courts that they be adequately manned.
With the shifting of population in this country, the increasing complexity of life and the expansion of Federal jurisdiction, both civil and criminal, inevitably increases in the personnel of the judiciary must be made from time to time.
Your committee has given careful study to the volume and status of the business of the courts of the United States. It has had the benefit of investigations made by individual members of the committee in their respective circuits. It has had before it the recommendations of the Judicial Conference, composed of the Chief Justice and senior circuit judges of each circuit, whose duty it is under the statute establishing the conference (U. S. C., title 28, sec. 218) to make recoinmendations with respect to the business of the courts. The committee has also had the benefit of the recommendations of the Attorney General, the Honorable Homer Cummings, and wishes to acknowledge the unfailing courtesy and helpfulness of the Attorney General and his staff, especially Hon. Joseph B. Keenan, the Assistant to the Attorney General, and Mr. Alexander Holtzoff, special assistant to the Attorney General, in quickly responding to every request of the committee for data and statistics relative to judicial business. Data furnished by
the Department of Justice are incorporated in this report by circuits and districts for the information of the House.
As the result of its studies, the committee recommends the creation of 24 additional judgeships, which are embodied in the reported bill, and which are as follows:
JUDGES PROVIDED IN REPORTED BILL
One circuit judge for the second circuit.
One associate justice of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
One circuit judge for the third circuit.
One district judge for the northern district of California, whose official residence shall be Sacramento.
One district judge for the southern district of New York, provided that the first vacancy occurring in the office of district judge for the southern district of New York shall not be filled.
One district judge for the eastern and western districts of Arkansas.
One district judge for the eastern and middle districts of Tennessee, provided that no successor shall be appointed to the judgeship for the eastern and middle districts of Tennessee.
Three associate justices of the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia.
The committee also recommends that restrictions be removed prohibiting the appointment of successors to one district judge now sitting in the district of Montana, and one district judge now sitting in the eastern district of Pennsylvania,
Of the above list, the following are recommended both by the Judicial Conference and the Attorney General:
BOTH BY JUDICIAL
One circuit judge for the second circuit.