Evening star., 1934-02-22
n. r. A. Plea for State Aid
Linked With Legal History

these codes the force of State law,
which would have covered the sub
ject adequately, but he asked OF the
Legislature to set up State N. R. A
system for Minnesota, copying the
national organization, with himself in
the same relative position as Presi-
dent Roosevelt. There would have
been State codes. State administra-
tive set-up, and so on. In addition,
the State system would have included
agriculture. The plan seemed over
ambitious. Moreover, the confusion
and havoc if each State were to have
a set of codes of its own are OBJ
vious. So the Legislature declined to
grant the power and Minnesota con-
sequently cannot cooperate for at
least another year"
Suggesting that it is difficult for
the States to establish uniformity OF
laws on any subject" the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram argues that ''it begins
to be apparent that any sort Of con-
troll Of industry must be put into force
and effect by a central agency" That
paper continues: THE States re-
fused cooperation so far back IN
their histories that the Interstate
Commerce Commission was created as
early as 1887. The original act OF
Congress was amended a half-dozen
times within the following dozen
years-each amendment being tight
ening of the interstate portion OF the
law and a removal Of State authority.
The law and the amendments were
self-preservative activities on the part
of industry, which had-even in that
remote age-outgrown local trade re-
lations. The opposite idea to State
control of its industrial units Is re-
flected in the single instance Of rail-
roads being forbidden by the Inter-
state Commerce Commission from
constructing a line wholly within a
given State without consent Of the
national group-and the regulation
has been upheld until 1t has ceased
to be controversy"
"The rights of the individual States
have been cherished during our his
tory" suggests the Sioux Falls Daily
Argus-Leader, with comment on the
obstacles that appear in its own
State. The Argus-Leader says Of
these difficulties: South Dakota has
specific antitrust laws and an anti
trust provision in the Constitution.
Both the laws and the Constitution
directly prohibit any price-fixing VEN
ture. The words are clear and un-
mistakable. They can't be mfsin-
terpreted. And these regulations did
not come into being by accident.
They resulted from a long and dif-
f1cult battle on the part of the people.
The legislation was several years in
the making and imposed In due
course in the proper manner. Per-
haps the people of South Dakota have
changed their views on the antitrust
topic. But the laws remain on the
books and the Constitution has not
been changed. II We have laws or
constitutional provisions that are out
of harmony with the current views
of the citizens they should be changed,
not ignored. But, it seems. not even
a mild effort toward a change mas
been made. A special session OF the
South Dakota Legislature has been
held since the N. r. A. and N. I. r. A.
were placed in operation. Our OIL
flcialS, however, did not suggest 10
that assemblage that the laws be
changed or that steps be taken to
amend the Constitution"
On the general subject OF codes,
plea for natural recuperative powers
Of business" is made by the Columbus
Evening Dispatch, with emphasis on
the fact that there has been "a nat
ural world increase in business" while
the Baltimore Sun argues: 1T Is
worth noting that not single i'm
portant business house or corporation
engaged in interstate business has
been punished for violation OF the
law. And, of course, it would be diff
ficult to reach larger violators through
boycotts. In his appeal to the sew
eral States, Gen. johnson suggests
that If the States will cooperate
small 'chiselers' will be easier to get
at. But the statement implies plainly
enough that the N. r. A. lacks au-
thority to coordinate all American
business enterprises"