Evening star., 1935-01-20
BY OWEN L. SCOTT.

twice weekly In the White House
cabinet room heads of the Nations
Government ponder problems of ma
tional policy. Day in and day out
President Roosevelt from the White
House answers these problems with
decisions. many Of them breath-taking.
Up in the Capitol the Senate and the
House Of Representatives grind away
putting those decisions to work as law.
But suddenly the Nation awakes to
learn that all the pondering, all the
deciding, all the legislating come to
naught unless at least five out of nine
men, meeting in basement room of
the Capitol on Saturday afternoons,
decide that those actions fit into the
framework of a set of fundamental
principles first applied in 1889.
The result today is a threatened
severe test Of the republican form Of
United States. That form calls for a
system of checks and balances. The
Legislature enacts laws; the President
executes them through governmental
departments: the Supreme Court re-
views those laws to see that they At
into the pattern Of principles that is
the Federal Constitution.
+ \ u
The Supreme Court has Just made
clear to the country that the original
plan Of checks and balances is not to
be altered with its consent. That
much was demonstrated in the word
ing Of its decision against the Gov
ernment on the matter of production
control in oil. President Roosevelt
quickly gave assurance that court de-
cisions will be adhered to and that the
New Deal will be re-dealt if necessary
to conform to the courts require
ments.
Thus the Nation gets a new insight
into the functioning of its Govern
ment. The Attorney General has
argued In the oil case that the things
Congress and President Roosevelt
sought to do were for the good of the
country. The court, with eight out Of
nine justices concurring, replied:
The point is not one Of motives
but Of constitutional authority, for
which the best Of motives is not a
substitute"
Now that same test is being applied
by the court to the vitality important
question of whether Congress and the
President can abrogate a contract Of
the Government, or of its citizens,
to pay debts in gold. So important
may be the repercussions II the court
should decide against the Govern
ment on this question, that Senator
Elmer Thomas of Oklahoma Is sug-
gesting that the decision, in that
case, be ignored.
Immediately this suggestion raises
the question: What actual power does
the Supreme Court possess to force
the Federal Government to comply
with its findings?
The answer is: No very real power
without the cooperation of the Exec
utive. The court has no police force
or army. Prestige and tradition are
its direct weapons. But, at the same
time, the President has sworn to up
hold the Constitution of the United
States. The court determines the
meaning of that Constitution. Indi-
rectly, the President may be obligated
to bow to the court. This leads to
the conclusion that no President
would hout the Supreme Court unless
ready for revolution. Refusal to ac-
cept its decisions could mean the end
Of the present form Of our Govern
ment.
Another suggestion has been made
In New Deal quarters. It Is that the
court might be packed" in order to
obtain q desired decision. Could
something Of that kind be done? It
might be done If Congress wished.
But, again, such action would be
flying in the face of precedent and
defying the tenets of the American
Government as they have come to be
accepted.
Congress has the power to alter the
size of the court, but it does not
possess the power to influence the
justices once they are appointed.
Historians of the court point out that
men named to the bench frequently
made decisions directly contrary to
the wishes of the President who ap-
pointed them.
On that point, Charles Evans
Hughes, now Chief Justice Of the
Supreme Court, said a few years ago:
"If conscientious, able. and inde-
pendent men are put on the bench,
you cannot predict their course as
| Judges by reference either to partisan
J motives o.. to personal OF party loyal