Evening star., 1934-04-25
RIGHT OF PETITION
NOW UNDER FIRE
Business Group Denounced
by House Committee Head
for propaganda"
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

the right of a citizen to exercise his
constitutional rights, and thus far
freedom of speech and freedom of the
press have been declared by the new
dealers to be immune from their web
of economic reform, but the latest
drive is directed against an entirely
different constitutional privilege-the
right of petition.
Within the last week members OF
business organizations, believing that
they had the right to petition Con-
gress, have sent petitions to commit
tees asking for the revision of pending
legislation and for changes in pro-
posed bills.
One of the groups-a committee
of business men organized at the re-
quest of the N. r. A.-saw fit to ex-
press its view to the House Of Repre-
sentatives through the proper COM
mittee.
This step now has been denounced
by the chairman of the committee as
unwarranted propaganda and an I'M
proper approach to the legislative
branch of the Government. The par
ticular point involved is that the
Durable Goods Committee, in present.
ing its case, happened to propose the
same objections to the pending stocE
exchange bill that various members OF
the New York Stock Exchange did
The argument made against the Dur
able Goods Committee Is that. While
they claimed to represent business
men. their views conceded with those
of the stock exchange opponents oil
the bill.
Drive Against Bill.
The President himself has said thai
a concerted drive. very powerful ir
it's organization, was trying to defeat
the stock exchange bill. There is ne
secret about il. The people in the
brokerage business think the legisla-
ton pending will force the honest
and the dishonest to close up shop
and that, just as was the case with
the securities act, 1t is as II the ad-
miniStration, in order to stop train
wrecks, were to suspend all railroad
travel.
Does a business man or group o1
business men who think they are 60
ing to be deprived of their means OF
livelihood have the right to petition
Congress to redress their grievances?
The Constitution says they have. Can
a congressional committee refuse
hearing to such citizens? They may
compel the protesting groups to flle
their grievances in writing, but this
has not heretofore been regarded as
reprehensible conduct.
The new dealers insist that they DC
not intend to abrogate or suspend
constitutional guarantees, but often
they give the impression that Who
ever attempts to exercise those prlVl-
leges must do so in conformity with
the new deals conception Of what is
right and proper.
1t is often asserted by members oi
Congress, and quite recently it was
revealed at the White House that
any concerted attack on a govern
mental policy is considered to be
somehow, a corrupt or sinister step
As a matter of fact the average citl-
zen who does not wish passage OF
law which injuries him from an eco
nomic standpoint wants some organ
ization of which he is member to
express his view for him and usually
he is quite willing to sign an identical
message because it represents his
viewpoint better than one he could
draft himself.
Question Of Sincerity.
But, when a number OF individuals
send the same letter or telegram.
members of Congress and the White
House denounce it as propaganda.
The only real question at issue is
whether the signerS sent the messages
or whether they authorized the send
ing of the communications. If it Is
argued that individuals should not
unite with other individuals in
petitioning Congress, then the right
of collective bargaining. which is so
freely granted to workers nowadays,
apparently is not going to be granted
to business men who wish to negotiate
with Congress in groups on economic
matters affecting the life or death Of
their businesses.
For the right of petition by groups
is not essentially different from the
right of collective bargaining, or the
right of labor organizations to petition
Congress through spokeSmen of their
own choosing. For many years, the
constitutional right of petition has
been scarcely observed, but the de-
nunciation Of groups for seeking to
exercise this right of petition is one
Of the things that may lead to a
movement to suppress the right of
petition altogether. Some of the new
dealers, of course, would like to have
the privilege of legislating behind
closed doors and without the inter-
ested parties or affected groups being
permitted either to express themselves
or to persuade their fellow citizens
to protest. The right of petition was
the safeguard put into the Constitution
to prevent autocracy and legislative
abuses.