Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1935-02-28
ThePolitical Mill
By C.. Could Lincoln.

New Dealers turned their eyes to-
ward the Supreme Court today. That
court might reverse, If it sees At. the
decisions of Judge John P. Nields in
the Federal Court at Wilmington and
Judge Charles I Dawson In the Fed
eral Court in Louisville, both Of which
struck body blows yesterday at the
N. r. A. The Government Is pre-
pairing to carry these cases and ad-
verse opinions Of the lower courts to
the highest tribunal in the land.
Should the Supreme Court uphold the
lower courts, one Of the major parts
Of the New Deal will come tumbling
down like a house Of cards in a gale
Of wind.
4 r X II
The decision Of Judge Nields holds
section IA Of the national industrial
recovery act, the section which sets
up the right Of collective bargaining
by employees, to be unconstitutional
when 1t Is applied to relations between
a local employer and his employees.
The Constitution gives Congress au-
thority to control interstate and for
eign commerce. The Congress has no
| constitutional authority to pass laws
dealing with intrastate business and
commerce. 1t seems clear that If
the opinion Of Judge Nields is sus-
tanned, the great mass Of employers
and employees in the United States will
be affected. Judge Nields went fur
ther in his opinion and declared that
the facts in the Weirton Steel Co. case
did not sustain the contention Of the
Government that the employees were
Disseminated against and prevented
from collective bargaining, because
they had Joined what is called the
company union instead of the Anal
gamated Association of Iron, Steel
and Tin Workers, an American Fed
Grafton Of Labor union.
~ ~
The soft coal code, set I'D under
the N. r. A., was held unconstitu-
tional by Judge Dawson on the same
ground, l. e., the coal-mining industry
40 GAL 4AAOCA dIlO
not subject to control by the Federal
Congress and its laws. Here are two
great industries affected, steel. and
coal, by these decisions. Sooner or
later the Supreme Court, which al
ready has cases before it involving
the constitutionality of the N. r. A.,
will hand down its decisions. The
recovery act expires June Is next,
unless it is further extended by Con-
gress. The President has already
recommended the extension of the
law for another two years. Congress
sional committees are at work or soon
will be ct work on this legislation.
Two Senate committees at least are
planning investigations of the opera
ton OF the N. r. A. Prospects of
speedy legislation on the N. r. A. are
nil. Perhaps the Supreme Court will
have had an opportunity to pass on
these vital constitutional questions in
volved in the operation of the N R. A.
before the House and Senate under
take to legislate further on this sub
ject. 1t would seem the sensible
thing to get this matter of legality
and constitutionality settled before
the passage Of a new law.
Food. Secretary Wallace of the De-
partment Of Agriculture says, is going
up. In fact, the people will pay II
per cent more for their foodstuffs in
the first quarter of 1885 than they did
in the last quarter of 1884. This is
matter that any housewife could
give plenty of testimony about, al
though she might not be able to say
Just what the percentage Of the in
crease in prices has been. The Sec
rotary Of Agriculture takes pride in
the increased cost of foodstuffs. It
seems perfectly clear that if the farm
ers OF the country are to make profits,
the prices Of food had to 60 up. And
certainly the farmers are entitled to
profits on their investments and their
labor. The higher cost of living, as
reflected in foodstuff prices, will
cause a lot Of grumbling, however,
among consumers. The offset, of
course, should be increased purchasing
power by the consumers, due to in
SACooCo CAliPfOyIACAG dIlQ 11iCIc
wages. Otherwise, the farmers will
not be able to sell their products in
as great quantities. 1t looks as though
the administration might well hesitate
to take any step that would beat down
wages undersany conditions and GER
tainly under the conditions that pre-
vail today.
r. n - u
This brings to mind the fight now
in progress in the Senate over the
administrations plan to pay
security wage" averaging $50 a
month to 100000 workers now I'M
employed. The opponents of this
security wage are insisting that the
prevailing wage" paid in industry
for similar work be the compensation
Of workers on relief projects. They
are not insisting that the monthly
compensation of the relief workers
shall be more than $50, but they do
insist that the hourly wage shall be
paid according to the scales in private
employment. They point out that
the number of hours of work may
be curtailed for each worker, so that
his compensation shall be no more
than $50. To do otherwise would be
to jeopardize the whole wage scale of
American labor, for If the Govern
ment hires an army of workers at a
low wage, the tendency will be to
bring wages down in private employ
ment.
There has been talk of a compro-
mise on this matter of wages for
workers on relief projects. It is diff
cult to see just how it can be COM
promised. so far as the principle in
volved is concerned. The language
Of the McCarran prevailing wage
amendment might be changed or
amended, it is true. But so far as
the payment Of the prevailing wage
scale is concerned, there seems to be
no way to compromise. However,
there could be written into the amend
ment a provision that compensation
may be limited to $50 to each worker,
and the hours of work per week cur
tailed accordingly.
The curtailment, through the A. A.