The producers news. [volume] (Plentywood, Mont.) 1918-1937, 1923-06-29
TAFT'S DECISION And
The KANSAS COURT
BY MILDRED MORRIS
Federated Press Staff Correspondent


WASHINGTON. - Chief Justice
Taft wrote the decision which is hailed
as sounding the death l1nell of the
Kansas Industrial court.
The Kansas court practically en-
tered the moribund state when its
chief nurse, former Gov. Allen, went
out of Office, and aside from the ex-
pectation that it vii hasten the end,
the decision offers nothing for labor
to shout over.
It's outstanding feature is its decLar-
alton that what industries are clothed
with public interest" and what are
not, is a thing to be determined not
by the peoples duly elected repre-
sentatives but by the federal courts.
and the final determination rests with
the supreme court Of the United
States. In Unmistakable tones, the
decision proclaims the supreme court
to be supreme over state legislatures
and congress.
Furthermore, the decision reaffirms
/ the vicious doctrine laid down by the
court in the Coronado case: that labor
unions, like trusts, may be restrained
IN their activities and prevented by
judicial power from striking.
! Here is one paragraph of the deci-
sion:
"The regulation Of rates to avoid
monopoly is one thing. A business
may be of such character that only
the first is permissible, while another
may involve such a possible danger
/ of monopoly on the one hand and such
disaster from the stoppage of labor
on the other that both come within the
public concern and power of regula-
ton" 2l}$
Taken together with other parts of
/ the decision, this makes clear that
compulsory labor may be enforced
whenever the courts decree that "stop-
! page of work" is a matter Of public
concern.
The decision is typically Taft, COW
i ering wide territory and leaving the
courts real meaning on many points
open to many interpretations.
It's language is such that the court
will be able to pass on each subse-
tquent case that comes before it touch
ing on the questions involved in the
decision, without being hampered by
precedent.
One paragraph reads:
ct has never been supposed since
the adoption of the constitution that
the business of the butcher, the baker
the wodchopper, the mining operator
or the miner was clothed with such
public interest that the price of his
product or his wages could be fixed by
state regulation"
Most newspapers have interpreted
this to mean that the coal operators
and the miners specifically are de-
| clared beyond the powers of the Kan
sas court or similar institution II
may not be out Of place to mention il
this connection that the supreme court
IN Alex HOWat's case gave no indica-
ton that it takes that view with re-
spect to the miners. The paragraph
just quoted and taken in connection
with other parts of the decision is
said to show that the court has little
sympathy with compulsory arbitra-
| ton and disapproves of extending both
state and government regulation OF
business. Considered as a whole and
carefully studied, the decision leaves
the impression that the court would
not object to interference by the Kan
sas court in the business of small fry
like the butcher and the baker or its
exercise of arbitrary power over even
labor's wages if there were not danger
OF setting precedent undesirable
from the standpoint of big business.
In the case which led to the decision
the plaintiff was the Wolff Packing
Company of Kansas City, Kan, en-
ploying 300 men. It is interesting to
note that in this instance the employer
objected to a ruling of the Kansas