in a labor dispute, it is asserted, are about to burn a freight train of their employer. This would be a damage difficult if not impossible to repair. The owner may go to the Federal court and secure an "injunction," that is, an order to the men to stay away from the train. Violating this order by approaching the train would constitute "contempt of court," for which the men could be promptly arrested and sentenced to jail by the same judge who gave the order. This illustrates a common equity case. Equity is a branch of unwritten law, as is the common law. It is designed to work justice where written law and the common law would fail. In the case above given for illustration, it is obvious that the judge lays down the rule (in a sense therefore is a lawmaker), judges as to its infraction, and pronounces sentence. We sometimes hear complaints concerning "government by injunction." But since prevention is better then cure both in medicine and in law, this power of granting injunctions and other orders will probably not be taken away from the courts. Court Officers.-The President appoints for each District Court a District Attorney and a Marshal. The District Attorney is charged with the duty of bringing suits against the violators of Federal law in his district. The Marshal, like a sheriff, is the executive officer in his district. His duty is to execute the orders of the court. United States Commissioners, appointed in each district by the Circuit Court correspond somewhat to the justices of the peace in the State judicial system. They hear complaints, examine witnesses, prepare matters for the sessions of the court, and in various ways assist both District and Circuit Courts. Workings of the Courts.-There are four grades of law in the United States, and they are, in the order of their importance: (1) Federal Constitution; (2) Federal laws and treaties; (3) State constitutions; (4) State laws. In case of conflict, the lower must give way to the higher. Thus the judges in a Federal court may overrule a State law, a provision in a State constitution, or a Federal law, if it conflicts with the Federal Constitution. The Federal Constitution is the "supreme law," to be changed only by the people by the process of amendment provided therein. Do the Federal judges therefore control the State legislatures and Congress? The real work of the court on constitutional questions, is to pass judgment not on the wisdom of the law, or the benefits or evils of the law, but on the sole question of the constitutionality of the law. When the first law of Congress was declared unconstitutional (Marbury vs. Madison, 1803) by the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Marshall laid down this sound principle: "So if a law be in opposition to the Constitution; if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the court must determine which of these conflicting rules govern the case." The Constitution must of course prevail. The court is thus seen to be merely one more of those "checks and balances" provided so liberally in our system of government. The court cannot "control" the legislature, but merely checks the legislature when it attempts to overstep its true constitutional limits. The courts try only concrete cases. The Supreme Court refused to furnish President Washington opinions on a set of abstract questions which he presented to the court. An actual case must be brought before it. The Supreme Court listens to the arguments in a case, reads the printed briefs filed by the attorneys, and then discusses the matter. One member writes an opinion on the case, and brings it in for further discussion. If the other members concur, it is printed and stands as the opinion of the court. If the members differ among themselves, any one or more may sign an opinion of their own; but the opinion of the majority is the opinion of the court. Thus many important opinions are given by a "divided court"; some by a unanimous court. The famous Northern Securities case decision came from the court divided five against four. The written opinions of the Federal courts are all bound in substantial volumes and preserved in law libraries in every section of the country, where they are consulted and followed by the lawyers and judges. Precedent is religiously followed. The Supreme Court has great stability, yet it sometimes reverses itself. This court changes, but changes slowly. QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT 1. Name five Federal courts. 2. How did the Federal courts rank at first among the three branches of our government? Why? 3. State briefly the action taken by Pennsylvania and Virginia in 1809-1810. 4. What is the present position of our Federal courts? 5. What are the salaries of the different Federal judges? Term of office? Method of appointment? 6. How may judges be removed? How many have been thus removed? 7. State the jurisdiction of the Federal courts. 8. What kind of cases come before the Supreme Court? The Circuit Courts of Appeals? The Circuit Courts? trict Courts? The Dis 9. What kinds of cases may be appealed from State to Federal courts? 10. May a person sue a State? Why? 11. Define Equity, and illustrate its meaning. 12. Name three court officers. Give duties of each. Method of appointment. 13. How many grades of law in the United States? Which is "supreme"? Who can change the "supreme " law, and how? 14. Are our judges above the law? Do we have judge-made law? 15. Describe the workings of the courts. QUESTIONS SUGGESTED BY THE TEXT 1. Debate, Has the Fourteenth Amendment (sec. I) been justified? 2. Debate, Government "by injunction" is contrary to public policy. 3. Should five Supreme Court judges have the power of overruling a law passed by the 400 members of Congress and signed by the President? 4. Have we too many "checks and balances" in our government? 5. Name the present members of the Supreme Court. Name the District Judge for North Dakota. In which judicial circuit is North Dakota, and who are its Circuit Judges? (See "Congressional Directory.") 6. Give a sketch of the life of John Marshall. 7. Secure a copy of a brief and examine it carefully. (See any lawyer or judge.) REFERENCES Bryce, "American Commonwealth," Vol. I, Chs. 22-24. Woodburn, "American Republic," Ch. 6. Hart, "Actual Government," Ch. 17. Willoughby, "Supreme Court." Carson, "Supreme Court." Harrison, "This Country of Ours,” pp. 300–330. CHAPTER XII PUBLIC FINANCE, MONEY, AND BANKING "(1) The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state. 66 “(2) The tax which each individual is bound to pay ought to be certain, and not arbitrary. The time of payment, the manner of payment, the quantity to be paid ought all to be clear and plain to the contributor and to every other person. "(3) Every tax ought to be so contrived as both to take out and to keep out of the pockets of the people as little as possible over and above what it brings into the public treasury of the state." ADAM SMITH, "Wealth of Nations,” Bk. V, Ch. 2, Part II. Public Finance.-Public finance deals with the revenues, expenses, and debts of a government. The main difference between public finance and private finance is this: the private individual must adjust his expenditures to his income, whereas the state makes its income big enough to fit its expenditures. A surplus at the end of the year is a good thing for the individual. It is a bad thing for the state, for it means that too much money has been taken from the pockets of the people. It also is, as our bitter experience proves, a fruitful source of wasteful and corrupt expenditures. A budget is an estimate of the state's expenses and revenue for the next "fiscal" year. The fiscal year means a year of the treasury administration, and is commonly counted from July 1 to June 30. The budget is prepared |