New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-03-20
Courts Opinion UNFOLDING
Adamson Eighth Hour Law
cr of Congress Deal with Hours of Work and Wages
Of Railroad Employees Engaged in Interstate Com
merce Principal Question. Says Court

excludes the other. Both pro-
visions are equally mandatory.
However. there is this very broad diff
ference between the two powers ex-
erted. The first. the eight-hour stand
ard, is permanently fixed. The see
ond. the fixing of the wage standard
resulting from the prohibition against
paying lower wages, is expressly lin
tied TO the time specified in Section .
(of the law. II is therefore not per
manent, but temporary. leaving the
employers and employees free as TO the
subject OF wages 10 govern their rela-
tons by their own agreements after
the specified time.
EightHour Standard Not Disputabe
Concretey stated. therefore. the
question is this: Did Congress have
power under the circumstances.
TO provide permanent clght-hour
standard and to create by legislative
action standard of wages 70 be opera
tive upon the employers and employees
for such reasonable time as it deemed
necessary 70 afford an opportunity for
the meeting Of the minds of employers
and employees on the subject Of wages
Coming to the general considerations
we put the question as to the
eight-hour standard entirely out OF
view on the ground that the author
ity to permanently establish it is so
clearly sustained as to render the sub
ject not disputable.
What was the extent OF the power
therefore of Congress TO regulate, con
sidering the scope of regulation which
the government had the right to exert
with reference to interstate commerce
carriers when it came TO exercise its
legislative authority to regulate com
merce, is the matter TO be decided.
That the business of common carriers
by rail is in a sense a public business
is settled by so many de
eisions, state and Federal. and is il
lustrated by such continuous exer-
ton OF state and Federal legislative
power as 10 leave no room for ques-
ton on the subject.
If the situation which We have de-
sCribed and with which the act of Con-
gress dealt be taken into view. il
would seem inevitably to result that
the power to regulate necessarily OBJ
tanned and was subject to be applied to
the extent necessary to provide a rem
ecy for the situation. &c..
Public and Private Rights
This must be, unless it can be said
that the right TO so regulate as TO save
and protect the public interest did not
apply to a case where the destruction
of the public right was imminent as
the result of a dispute between the
PARTIES and their consequent failure TO
establish by private agreement the
standard of wages which was essential:
in other words. that the existence of
the public right and the public power
to preserve il was wholly under the
control of the private right to establish
a standard by agreement
Nor is it an answer to this view TO
suggest that the situation was one OF
emergency and that emergency cannot
be made the source OF power. The
proposition begs the question, since. al
though an emergency may not call into
life a power which has never lived,
nevertheless emergency may afford a
reason for the eXertion of living
power already enjoyed. II acts which
If done would interrupt, if not destroy,
interstate commerce may be by an
ticipation legislatively prevented. by
the same token the power to regulate
may be exercised 20 guard against the
cessation of interstate commerce
threatened by a failure of employers
and employees to agree as 10 the stand
ard of wages, such standard being an
essential prerequisite TO the unlnter-
Iupted flow Of interstate commerce.
Here the chief Justice recounted
OF length the previously ocknoWt-
edged powers OF Congress to regu-
late commerce.
Right to End Dispute
In the presence Of this vast body OF
Acknowledged powers. there would
seem to be no ground for disputing the
mower which was exercised in the act
which is before US so as to prescribe
bv law for the absence of standard
Of wages caused by the failure to OK
ercise the private right to me
end that no individual dispute or dlt-
ference might bring ruin TO the yast
interests concerned. W nat
would be the value Of the right
to a reasonable rate If all move,
ment in interstate commerce could
be stopped as a result OF mere as
pute between the parties. or their faii-
ure TO exert a primary private rignI
concerning a matter of interstate corr
Again. what purpose would be sub
served by all the regulations cstaV
lished TO secure the enjoyment Dy tnc
nublic Of an efficient and reasonaOie
service if there was no power III gov
eminent TO prevent all service Iroi'I
being destroyed? Further yet wha'
benefits would flow TO society oy recoE-
MIXING the right, because OF ihe pun
- i,9toros, 70 regulate the relation Ct
emnIover and employe to and oil inc
cnnnIoyes among themselves. and TO
Give 10 the latter peculiar and specla'
rights safeguarding their persons pro,
tecting them in case OF accident ahC
e,;ving efficient remedies for that puI-
nose. if there was no power TO remeu1
q situation created by dispute D..
tu,een employers and employees as 70
Ito NJ wages. which. if not remedleu'
,,'nuld leave the public helpless t.e
hole noople ruined. and all the homes
~ tho land submitted TO danger o.
Tho most serious character ,,..
And. finally. to what dcrision would u
rot reduce the proposition that gov
arnoent had power to enforce the outy
~ oneration, if that power did not
cv,ond TO doing that which was essen
,iai 10 prevcnt operation from belhg
co,,nIetelv stopped, by filling the m
terregnum created by an absence OIL
conventional standard OF wages pecd uSe
80 disnutc on that subject between
,bo employers and employees By a legis-
Live Standard binding on employers
nnd emnloyes for such time as might
30 deemed by the Legislature reason
obtv ADEQUATE to enable normal condi-
co.. 10 come about As the result OF
s ,yr, as 70 wages between the
parties.
Ac, Within Legislative Power