Evening star., 1923-04-14
Minimum Wage Act Hit
Lawyer Upholding Supreme
Court. Sees Probable Evil
i'm Law.

| To the Editor of The Star:
The usual hue and cry over deci-
sion of the Supreme Court declaring
an act of Congress invalid for viola
tion of the Constitution has already
arisen over the decision on the act
providing a minimum wage for wom-
en- in the District of Columbia Again
! the ancient hydra of amending the
Constitution TO prevent decisions by a
5-to-4 ruling or decision lifts its
head. Senator Borah and Mr.. Com
pers already have raised that ques-
tion and declare it to be a one-ma-
jority decision-a 5-to-4 decision
Why, indeed. by the Borah and Com
pers rule it is a 6-to-3 decision-two-
thirds majority. What more is want
ed than that?
The decision was made by a court
OF eight justices. Justice Brandeis
did not sit in the case at all. Messrs
Borah and GomperS take the nom
participating Justice and add him to
the three of the minority and make
1t 5-to-4 decision. They can show
no rightful monopoly on the rule thev
employ, and | have as much author
lty to add the participating JUS
tice to the majority and make it a
6-to-3 decision as they have to add
him TO the minority and make it
5-to-4 decision.
Then some hyperboIical diatribes
are indulged in on a one jority"
decision.
There is no statutory law command
ing respect to the dignity of the Su-
preme Court. and there ought to be
none. But there Is n law of public
opinion. and, j might add, there ought
to be one of self-reSpect, that does
command 1t from every good citizen.
L have cursorily examined the opin-
ion of Justice Sutherland-and of
Ch1ef Justice Taft and Justice Holmes
filed in the Supreme Court library
and my recollection is that Justice
Sutherland-nor either of the others
does not use the phrase Selling la
bor," except where he is quoting from
a former decision of the court. Yet
much Indignation" is expressed in
the public criticisms over the courts
reducing human labor to selling
commodity.
BY the consensus of all the jus
t1ces. asserting and dissenting they
are, to employ the phrase of Justice
Holmes. ''pricking" a way along the
line of principle laid down in
former decisions, involving construc-
tion of the same clause or phrase of
the Constitution. In each decision
or case they are compelled to apply
the rule of Interpretation to state
of facts with phase differentiated
from any former one. On the question
of constitutional validity five justices
travel to one conclusion and three to
the opposite. all relying on the same
former decisions on kindred ques-
tions.
Aside from the question of consti-
tutionality, the majority of opinion
Is the only public utterance, so far.
in favor of that vast millions OF
women, both white and colored. and
especially the latter. who are. by the
circumstances of life's denouements
coupled with natures limitations, in
capable of earning "$16 per week"
If such law were held constitutional
and all the states should enact such a
statute-and Congress, too, for the
District of Columbia--what would
become of the independence of those
of women. Under such laws
they must needs organize some means
of a livelihood for themselves. indi-
They can't get jobs as en-
ployes, no matter how much they
might desire them, at less than the
statutory minimum wage. They
would have to organize individual
wash -tubberies: for they have not
the combined mental equipment and
physical powers and capacity to or
ganize pretentious industries. That