The times-news. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1927-current, 1933-12-13
PlBLICPOLICY
CHANGE Seen
BY U. S. COURT
Conservative Pronounce
ment by Tribunal Paves
Way for Rulings
By c. c. NICOLET
United Press Staff Correspondents

WASHINGTON. Dec. -. up.
eFbe public policy o: one genera
ton NAV not. under changed CON
ditions. become me puoic poicE
Of another.
That sentence appeared yeSter-
day IN a United States supreme
court opinion written oy one OF
the conservative Justices ana CON
Cured in o. al bat three mem
bers Of the court.
II came II a case which nad no
connection With the recovery pro-
gram or with any facet OF me
Experiments Of the Roosevelt ad-
ministration. But a. time when
me attitude o. ne supreme court
is perhaps more Importan; tnan
ever before in the nations MS
tory, and when every straw 20
indicate that attitude Is beng
watched with equal intensity
bv proponents and opponents OF
The administration experiments
the sentence assumes Importance.
Coming from Justice Brande.s,
CardozO. Stone or Roberts, the
words would have less slgni!-
canoe. But the opinion was VIII
ten by Justice Sutherland; Inc
only Justices who dIssenred from
the decision were McReyro!ds
and Butler of the extreme con-
seryative wing Of the court.
Cardozoa agreed on the decision
but differed on some aspects OF
the opinion
the conservative side when the
court divides.
whether the daring expert
nents of the Roosevelt admins
tration are held constitutional! or
unconstitutional in the test cases
which must go before the su-
ureme court sooner or later VII!
depend. il IS recognized, upon .
philosophy rather than upon cola
facts of law and precedent. There
are no preeedentS for many OF
these departures from past Gus
tom. -,
The question 20 De decided vii!
be basically whether the constItu-
ton is TO be interpreted rigldly |
in accord With tradition, or |
elast;cally in accord with the
view frequently expressed by At
tornev General Cummings, Cen |
eral Hugh Johnson and other ad-
ministration leaders. This is the |
view that the constitution was
made for the people. not the peo-
ple for the constitution; that u Is +.
plastic: that changing conditions
REQUIRE changing viewpoint TO-
ward law and private rights. IL
ia the view taken so often by
Former Justice Holmes and by
Justices Brandels and Cardozo.
Frequently Justice Stone has
joined in decisions based on tins
philosophy; less often Justice
Roberts and Chief Justice Hughes
have Joined in such decisions.
Since decisions involving the !
liberal philosophy Of law often
have been decided in recent |
years by five to four decisions
On che conservative side, a lib
eral trend by one of the con-
sesvative justices might well be
enough TO uphold the recovery !
program.
To attempt to forecast how
any supreme court justice would |
stand upon a specific question |
would be obviously absurd and |
impertinent. There may be phases
Of the recovery legislation which |
the conservative justices will up
hold and the liberal justices will
oppose. But decisions on in
dividual emergency laws will be
unimportant. The essential ques-
ton is whether the recovery pro-
gram as a whole is held consti-
tutional. And this depends upon
whether the majority of the court
chooses TO judge it wholly on the
basis Of tradition, or whether the
majority feels that ''the public
policy of one generation may
not, under changed conditions,
become the public policy of an
other"
The case in which Sutherland
made that statement yesterday
involved a prohibition agent ac-
cused of aiding bootleggers. He
was convicted in a court which
refused to allow his wife TO
testify for him. Under common
law, which is TO say traditional
L.. ,,.;Fo ..ayy not taStify for