The Bismarck tribune., 1922-05-15
SUPREME COURT
DECIDES CHILD
LABOR LAWFUL
Holds Child Labor Law Invalid
In Appeal From North
Carolina Court
STATE RIGHTS INVOLVED

Washington, May 15.-The supreme
court held the child labor law uncon-
stitutional and not valid This deci-
sion came in the case of the govern
ment versus the Drezell Furniture
company of South Carolina.
What was generally regarded as
one of the most vitality important
questions to reach the Supreme Court
in recent years, involving the extent
to which the courts will interpret the
motives" of Congress in determin-
ing the constitutionality Of its exer~
else of the right to impose excise tax
es, was presented in the child labor
cases.
Three Cases Up
These cases, three in number, came
from North Carolina, where the Unit
ed States District Courts held that
the excise tax levied by Congress up
on mines and fla Iytries emp i'''i g
child labor was an unconstitutional
cncroachment upon the prerogativeS
of the states in the exercise OF their
police powers. The same issue was
presented to the court inc the Future
Trading Act case, brought by men,
bers of the Chicago Board of Trade.
Solicitor general in presenting the
views! of the government contcnded the
people, and NOT the courts, should in
quire into the object Of Congress in
levying taxes which may have the
effect of extending Federal control in
to the field of regulatory government
al activity formerly exclusively occu-
pied by the state. Unless the Supreme
Court adopted that doctrine, and as
one of the three coordinate branches
of the government, refused to investi"
gate the motives" of Congress in en-
acting excise tax legislation, the. ma
tion, he insisted would be confronted
with "a serious dilemma" i'2'
Contention of Opponents
The court should hold that such a
tax imposed by Congress cannot be
nullified by attributing to Congress
an ulterior motive, the solicitor gen.
eral insisted, declaring that otherwise
IAN intolerable burden may be put
upon the court" and require it in the
future to determine the purpose which
Congress may have had in the enact
ment of any tax law which may be
challenged. The solicitor general
frankly stated that shonld tie co"~t
refuse to question the motives"
1of Congress then it would be
possible for "the mowers Of the Fed
eral government to be utilized TO Sc
cure objectiyes which are beyond the
scope Of Federal power"
Opponents of the child labor law
contended that the court should take
judicial notice OF what was character
lied as the constant encroachment of
Congress upon the strictly local at
fairs of the states, and consider the
motive behind each Federal law, re-
gardless sof whether it imposed an ex-
else tax, They pointed out that when
the Supreme Court holds unconstitu-
tional the former child labor act, in
which the penalty was the exclusion
of child labor products from Interstate
commerce. Congress promptly re-en~
acted it in the form Of the present law
by merely substituting an excise tax
as the penalty. 1t was insisted that
the court never intended that such
regulatory measures, encr0aching up.
on the police powers Of tho states.
could be made legally effective by
merely a change in the form Of PEN
atty imposed. - j..