Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-05-14
COMMERCE PROVISION
IN CONSTITUTION SUBJECT
TO MANY INTERPRETATIONS

( Washington. May 13.-The ole
axiom that Commerce IS the Life
Blood of a Nation" could be amended
to read and of it's courts" ac-
cording to attorneys of many years
Supreme Court.
! Inquiry of number of experts on
constitutional law as u the section
which has been productive CT most
| litigation, brought the unanimous re-
! sponsc:. Section s, Paragraph 81
I This section, one of the shortest in
the immortal document, declares that
Congress shall have the power to
regulate Commerce with foreign ma
! lions and between the several states"
From that brief clause, however
has arisen all the rate cases. those in
Volving public utilities, the Interstate
Commerce Commission, child labor
Federal Employers Liability Act, the
lottery laws, the White Slave Act and.
more recently, the numerous prohibit
ton statutes preceding the amend
ment itself.
Chief Justice Marshall assorted in a
=
be interpreted to mean intercourse
and, lawyers say his wide interpreta-
ton was the progenitor of the whole
family of legal battles turning upon
the commerce section.
washington showed his foresight
edness Immediately after the Revolu-
tlonary War" said one constitutional
law expert recently, land placed his
finger On the most glazing weakness of
the Articles of Confederation. when
ne called the Annapolis Convention
to discuss commerce between Mary
land, Virginia and Delaware" This
convention, forerunner of that held
In Philadelphia shortly afterward
agreed that no restriction of any sort
should be placed on the commerce of
the three states.
Realizing that the agreement was
worthless unless supported by the
adjoining states, Washington and his
conferees determined. it is said, to
make the question of commerce a fea-
ture of the Philadelphia meeting.
1t is the contention of some authori-
ties that the section written into the
Constitution was the outcome of a
dellberate effort to take away all
regulatory powers over commerce
from the states. Others maintain
that the school of thought headed be
Hamilton and Marshall was decisive
~ beaten in this endeavor as in sew
eral others fostered to establish a
strong central government and that
congressional regulation of commerce
was intended to cover only the move
ments of goods over the state lines
without hindrances of tolls and tariffs.
he that as it may. under recent de-
clsions of the Supreme Court. com
merce' has been Interpreted to cover
NoT only the movement of goods, but
ol men and women-as in the White
slave Act. In the Peterson Case. the
court held that a man handling bolts
intended for use in a bridge over
which Washington-New York trains
passed must be considered to be EN-
saged In interstate commerce"
within the last few weeks. NO less
than a dozen cases involving in some
way the Commerce section, have been
80 INC '7upltiHe court. The
wisconsin and New York Rates Cases
VIII determine whether the Inter.
state Commerce Commission has the
right to fix purely intra-state rail-
road rates. A case from Texas
VIII decide whether the Commits
sion can authorize the abandon
ment of railroads lines. Other
suits turn upon obscure points in
the Federal Employers Liability Act
Jordan Hiuh Honor Parts