Evening star., 1935-04-09
General disappointment Over
Withdrawal of n. r. A. Appeal

General disappointment is reflected
in newspaper comment on the with
drawal by the Department of Justice
of its case against the Belcher Lumber
Co. for violation of labor wage and
hours requirements of the N. R. A.
code. 1t had been expected that an
appeal from the decision against the
Government by Federal District Judge
Grubb at Birmingham, Ala, would
bring before the Supreme Court vital
questions as to the constitutionality
Of N. r. A.
The Kalamazoo (Mich) Gazette de-
scribes the case as "a broad, thorough
and four-square test of the N. r. A. on
constitutional grounds" That paper
feels that the high court would have
cleared up many of the most widely
disputed legal issues arising from the
New Deals recovery legislation" The
Portsmouth (Ohio) Times says many
viewed it as the Governments best
chance to win a court test on the
principle of the New Deal"
"An adverse judgment" in the opin-
ion of the Boston Transcript. lis not
necessarily fatal. In fact, it is ex-
tremely unlikely that the court will
find that all features of the recovery
act are unconstitutional. Its decisions
are generally discriminating, and If
1t followed its usual practice in this
instance, itSs conclusions would have
the very useful effect of providing a
sound basis for the pending N. r. A.
legislation. Congress as well as the
people at large are entitled to know
where they stand"
I'm place of the lumber dispute"
explains the Chicago Journal of Com
merce, comes a new one. the Ames
case, which aims to prove the recovery
act unconstitutional on much the same
grounds" The Journal of Commerce
adds: THE w. Ames Co. of New Jersey
is a manufacturer of steel which has
either refused to wear or has been
refused the use of the N. r. A. Blue
Eagle. Its trouble started when the
Government barred it from bidding on
Federal contracts because it did not
have the famous badge. This COM
pany argues that its products are in
trastate in character, hence not
amensble to regulation by the Fed
eral Government Especially 1t claims
that the Federal Government. as
result of this discrimination, has no
right to dictate employer-employe re-
latlonships-both sections Ia and the
wages-and-hours phase, attacked IN
the Belcher case. The new case can
not come I'D much earlier than next
Fall"
MANY business men," according to
the Macon (Ga.) Telegraph, think
that if the Government quits its code
regulations savage price cutting will
result and cruelty to labor will be
worse than In bygone days" The Wor-
cester (Mass.) Evening Gazette feels
that "a court decision would settle, |
once for all, the Governments claim
to authority for the regulation OF
industry" while the Marshalltown |
1owa) Times Republican contends
that nothing would do more to allay
and renew confidence
than fair and complete test Of
the act"
Congress" says the Columbus
(Ohio) Citizen, must now reconcile
itself to the necessity Of proceeding |
on N. r. A. legislation without any |
word of guidance from the high court.
which must eventually pass on the
avs that emerge. The same thing
applies to labor disputes legislation,
Tor In the Houde test case the Coy. |