OCR Text |
Show -81+- Nhat may be done to remedy, or forestall such impending divergences. So far as the coiamercial codes are concerned* no objection appears to the. states* agreeing with the consent of Congress, to yield to the federal^ courcs, or to a tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction, the adjudica- tion upon appeals of all controversies involving the construction of these acts. ^Such a compact would imperil no substantial rights. Merchants, Bankersj warehousemen and common carriers vant and need real uniformity* not a uniform point of departure. The mischief is not limited to particular parties or controversies in litigation. For every adjudicated case, there are many disputes, and for every transaction risked under a doubtful'juris- prudence, a multitude are thwarted, The battle won for uniform legislation is not the war, and the victory nay prove unfruitful unless followed by a successful campaign- for uniform interpretation. Within the limits as to subject-matter, and vdth the consent of Con- gress 0 all the resources for consummating international negotiations and for erecting international tribunals are open to the states. They will not lack for precedents- The self-governing colonies of Great Britain* which now enjoy greater independence than the states of the Union, esteem it an advantage that the Law Lords may determine the construction of laws which require that finality, The republics of Central America have created a tri- bunal common to them all, and they have vested it with an international jurisdiction. The Hague Tribunal, suggested directly by the .American move- ment toward uniformity, rests its jurisdiction entirely upon compacts among sovereignties. The intimacy, the national identity, and the interwoven interests of the United. States would seem to recommend strongly* in some cases a submission to federal jurisdiction, and in others to a proper in- terstate tribunal,, permanent or occasional, of controversies involving rights, and interests that transcend state lines., yet escape federal juris- diction* A second occasion for concert among the states arises upon transac- tions, also chiefly commercial* about which Congress may legislate in regulating interstate commerce, and performing other national functions. But congressional legislation to have, its perfect work must be supplemented by cooperative state legislation. The Ohio statute prescribing the field^ of the commissioners on uniform state laws, mentions the regulation^of pri- vate corporations, unfair competition, pure food, insolvency and uniform hours of labor. The national safety applicance act, the employers liabil- ity act, and the interstate commerce act may be cited in furthering illus- tration.. All should have their complementary laws regulating commerce with- in the several states. And not only so, but such complementary laws should be as ixearly uniform as consistent with domestic policy. The regulation^ of interstate commerce was a chief internal reason for the present Constitu- tion. But harmonious regulation within, as well as between, the states is equally desirable. In. this same connection is suggested the well-known casus omissus of the Constitution, whereby, although the federal government is held res- ponsible by foreign, powers for the protection of aliens in the United States, yet the sovereign states, upon whom devolve the duties of furnishing that protection, are not answerable in such case to any power. This condition |