Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1922-05-16
LAW COMPLETELY
WIPES OUT RIGHT
OF STATE CONTROL
Taft Rules Congress AS
sumed Power Not Grant
ed by Constitution.
WOULD CAUSE BREACH
OF ARK OF COVENANT
To Declare Act Valid Would
NuIlify Tenth Amend
TAFT RENDERS COURT OPINION
DccIsi"n VIII Mean Closing m Chill
drrns Hurcnu in Washing
WOULD CAUSE BREACH
OF ARK OF COVENANT
,rT RENDERS COURT OPINION
decision VIII Mean Closing "f Chill
drrn'. liurcnu in Washing
ton.
lKv .Associa,eh Prcssl

- associated fr'ss
WASIINGTOS. May iI-Th. child
labor l"r was declared uncon.,itu-
tional ,odav BY the Supreme Court
The law. enacted in lai9. was in
tended 10 regulate tho ON pioymco,
OF children I'm any mill, cannery
workshop. factory ar manufacturing
establishment. under tho age ot li or
.'n any mine or quarry under Is years
bv Imposing an excise tax OF 10 per
cent on the annual profits OF those
employing such labor It was at
tackled on tho ground that IT at
tempted :" regulate an exclusively
state function. In violation Of the
Federal Constitution and tn. tenth
amendment. and ~as defended as a
mere excise tax levied by Congress
under its broad power OF taxation
conferred by the Federal Constitu-
,ion.
The Law was attacked In IN. Su-
prcmc Court by three cases from
North Carolina, appealed by the gov
ornmcn' Two of these the Atherton
A'ils ANA that ny John i George
aud others. were dismissed on tech
nlcalt;i"s. but the case brought by
'hc Dr"Xcl Furniture Company was
fund ia proper FORM. and 1t was in
that tho law was declared invalid
Opinion by Taft.
The opinion vas delivered by Chief
Justice Taft, with no dissent an
nounccd
Docs This law impose a tax with
al H.
regulation which a tax must insvi-
tahly involve" the Chief Justice
asked. "or does it regulate by the
us" OF The so-called tax as penalty
II tax is granted as an excise? If
IL were an excise on a commodity Of
other things of value, we might not
b" permitted under previous de-
cisions OF this court to infer solelv
\ from IT'S heavy burden shat the act
intends prohibition instead Of
tax. But this act is more
After analyzing the PRINCIPAL foa.
rrcs Of the law and its operation
lac Chief Justice said. in the lirh,
of thes" features OF the act. a cour,
must be blind not t" see that the 40.
called tax is imposed To s,on tho
"mpl"ymcnt "f children within the
Sasc limits prescribed"
Its prohibitory and regulatory ef.
act and purpose arc palpable." he
iddcd Nh others can see ana in.
ierstand this. How can We properly
smut our minds TO it,"
Declaring u the duty Of the court
70 decline to recognize or enforce
avs of Congress dealing with sub
rcts not intrusted to Congress. but
e EFT by tho supreme law uf The land
the control Of the States. the chief
= Justice said tho cour; must perform
nat duty. even though II REQUIRE
~ 10 refuse 10 give effect to leg,sla-
ION designed to promote the high
st good"
Feature Insidious
Il me good sought In unconstitu-
ional legislation" he added "js an
nsidious feature because il leads cit :
zens and legislators of good purnosc
promote it without thought OF tho
erionS breach il will make in Inc
Tx or our covenant or the harm
winch Will come from breaking down
ecoSn'zcd standards. In the main.
chance of local self government on
nc one hand. and the national pow-
on the other, our country ha. bccr
'o'e 10 endure and prosper for near
century and q half"
out of proper respect to CO.
rdinate branch Of the government
ne supreme Court has gone far 10
nstain taxing acts as such" Cb,o,
istice Tart continued. adding this
ao Deen done even though there Ia :
cen ground for suspecting from tba
eight Of the tax, IL was intended
destroy its subject"
But in the act before us" he said
ne presumption OF validity cannot
revail. because the proof of tho
'ntrary Is found on tho very face
Its provisions. Grant the validity
this law. and all that Congress-
~ ould need to do. in seeking to take
Yer to Its control any one OF the
H1feat number OF subjects of, public
CONTINUED on Pare 3. Col. 81