The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1925-05-04
U. s. SUPREME
COURT RULES
AGAINST LAW
Second Statute of Similar
Nature to BE Invalidated
BY High Tribunal
RESTRAINT ON TRADE
Decision Not Expected To
Cause Any Marketing
Change in State
(By The Associated Press)


Washington, May 4.-The North
Dakota grain grading act was de-
clared invalid and unconstitutional
today by the Supreme Court.
1t was the second North Dakota
statute Of similar nature to be in
validated by the highest court. After
an act passed in 1919 had been held
to be in conflict with federal law,
the voters of the state in 1922 adopt
ed the present statute, which the
state contended was free from the
Objectionable features Of its prede-
cessor.
The Farmers Grain Company Of
Embden led the attack on the 1922
law as a restraint upon Interstate
Commerce.
Justice Vandeventer in delivering
the decision today said the right to
buy grain in interstate commerce
was not state given right but is
common right such that no state
could fetter with conditions or con-
troll. For that reason the decision
of the lower court invalidating the
act was affirmed.
Justice Brandeis dissented but did
not prevent formal dissenting
opinion.
The North Dakota act CLEARLY
falls" the majority opinion de-
clared, within, the supreme courts
often maintained rule that "a state
statute, which by it's necessary oper-
alton directly interferes with or bur-
dens such commerce is prohibited
regulation and invalid regardless of
the purpose with which it was en-
acted"
by the act" the court held, "the
state attempts. to exercise a large
measure of control over all wheat
buying within her limits. About 30
per cent Of the buying is in inter
state. commerce. Obviously, there
fore, the control of this buying is of
concern to the people of other states
as we'll as those. of North Dakota.
"Only by disregarding the nature
of this business and neglecting i'm
portant features of the act can it be
said to affect interstate commerce
only incidentally and remotely. That
it is designed to reach and cover
buying for interstate shipment is not
only plain but conceded"
After reciting various provisions
of the state act, Justice Vanderven-
ter declared that in the courts opin-
ion they clearly comprise IAN at
tempt to prescribe rules under
which an important part of such
| commerce shall be conducted"
"This," he added, mo state can do
consistently with the constitution.
"The defendants make the conten-
tion that we should assume the ex-
istence of evils justifying the people
Of the state in adopting the act. The
| answer is that there can be no justi-
fication for the exercise Of q power
| that is not possessed. If the evils
! suggested are real, the power of cor
rection lies with Congress where the
constitution intends it shall be exer-
cised with impartial regard for the
interests of the people of all the
| states that are affected"
The United States supreme courts
decision declaring the North Dakota
grain grading act unconstitu-
tional marks another step in long
contest in the state to set up rules
for purchase Of grain.
| The original law on this was pass
ed by the 1919 legislature, setting
up an elaborate set Of machinery
regulating purchase Of grain. DR..
E. F. Ladd was named chief grain
inspector following the bills pass
age and headquarters were estab-
lished at the state agricultural col
lege here with an elaborate set of
rules governing grading, docking and
storing Of grain purchased in the
state. The rules compelled the ele-
vators either to return the dockage
in grain or pay the farmer certain
amount per bushel for it.
A number of grain dealers in the
state led by the Farmers Grain Com
pany Of Embden attacked the act.
According to North Dakota grain
men the principal reason they op-
posed the statute was that practical
~ all the grain bought in North
Dakota was sold in other states. Thus
they said, the grain is sold unde,
federal grading requirements while
it is purchased by grades set up by
the state.
It was not thought by agricultu.a .,
authorities here today that the action
of the federal high bench wouls
cause any great changes in the mar
keting Of grain in this state or ma
terial immediate fluctuations in tn.
prices Of grain.
! After long court battle the su
preme court held this act unconsti
tutional because It conf1icted will
the federal grain grading act reRu
lating interstate commerce.
| Following this new Grain grad.
ing law was initiated at the electies
Of November. 1922. and carried. 4
hot political fight centered akorn1