Evening star., 1933-09-08
COURT ISEXPEcTED
TOAPPR0VE n. R. A,
Legal Experts Believe Su'
preme Tribunal Will Keep
; Emergency in View.
8y the Associated Press.

BY the Associateq Press
When, If ever, the Roosevelt recovery
program Is taken to the Supreme Court
of the United States to test its con-
stitutionality, legal experts here believe
that body will endeavor to suit its de-
cision to the emergency situation the
laws in that program were designed
to meet.
While, in the nature Of things. the
course Of the Supreme Court Is un-
predictable, these experts expect the
justices in ,disposing Of the constitu-
tional questions that may arise from
the legislation to display a desire to
carry out the purpose Of Congress and
the President, with the public welfare
closely in mind
Precedents, which In the past have
had heavy weight upon decisions while
they were in the white hot, formative
stages, may sound again ON the judicial
anvil, however.
So far as the national industrial re-
covery act IS concerned, there Is unani-
nifty Of opinion that there will be no
occasion to pass on any phase Of the
voluntary codes.
Under the constitutional amendment
which guards against the taking Of pri-
vate property without compensation, all
contracts affected by Federal laws are
Interpreted.
Licensing May Bring Test.
The opinion is uniform that rights
under this amendment may be waived
by mutual agreement between the
parties to a lawful contract, such as
the presidential agreement.
The real test might arise. however,
should the President endeavor to COM
pei recalcitrant industries to take out
licenses before engaging in Interstate
commerce. Legal experts believe any
attempt to enforce the licensing pro-
vision might be made the vehicle for
a test The law provides q fine or
imprisonment. or both, for operation
without a license.
The case Of Henry Ford has raised
the question whether should he violate
the automobile code, the President
would resort to the licensing provisions
If the President should leave the mat
ter to public sentiment, however, this
would relieve the court of passing On
the constitutionality Of the law.
A challenge Of the licensing pro-
visions would confront the court with
Its decision Of March 81, 1892, in which
1t held invalid an Oklahoma statute
requiring those engaged in the ice busi-
ness in that State to obtain q license
In that case Justice Brandeis deliv-
cred a dissenting opinion substantially
forecasting conditions the recovery act
Is aimed to remedy.
States Without Authority.
Justice Sutherland, writing the ma
9ority opinion, declared that under the
fourteenth amendment, which regu-
lates the power Of States as the nth
does Federal power, ''it Is beyond the
- 81 xy.A -
protecting the public, arbitrarily to in
terfere with private business or pro-
bibit lawful occupation or impose un-
reasonable or unnecessary restrictions
upon them"
The court declared In that opinion
that "the business Of the grocer, the
dairyman, the butcher, the baker, the
shoemaker or the tailor" was essentially
private, adding that it had definitely
said that the production or sale. Of
food or clothing cannot be subjected to
. public use"
A recent case from Minnesota brought
the decision there could be no inter-
ference with the liberty Of contract
In fixing prices and wages.
Other decisions have painted an
easily distingldshable line Of 'psecedent. |
Some notable ones:' as's+4He ~
The court declared Unconstitutional
the Lever act fixing prices during q |
state Of war.
d. C. Case Is Cited.
In q minimum wage case from the
District Of Columbia it held: 1.-THE
authority to fix hours Of labor cannot |
be exercised except in respect Of those |
occupations where work Of long con-
tinued duration Is detrimental to |
1nn =, Y, y hfc = IL A-s
OF minimum wages for women was an !
unconstitutional interference with the |
liberty of contract. -.
A New York test brought the de-
cision that the fixing Of hours Of work |
for men in bakeries was an illegal |,
exercise Of police power.
A Texas case, however, approved |
collective bargaining and determined |
that employees Of q railroad were en- |
titled to present their grievances |
through representatives Of their own |
choosing, and prohibited the railroad |
from forcing them to act through an
employees organization it had set up. |
In the Appalachian coal case, con-
sidered under antitrust laws, the /
court last March, with only one dissent,
recognized that an emergency existed |
in bituminous coal fields in Virginia |
and neighboring States and permitted |
the owners Of the mines to organize |
Q selling company, in the hope Of re-
viying industry and relieving unem-
ployment.
Another recent opinion set aside an ,
order Of the Interstate Commerce
Commission reducing grain rates on
finding that economic conditions had |
changed materially after the order was
issued. thus recognizing the effect of
changed economic conditions in sham
ing legislative and administrative