Evening star., 1935-06-02
No Analogy.

As reported by the Associated Press
the President referred to the war
days Of 1917 and 1918. Much of the
legislation enacted in that emergency
exceeded the Constitution more than
any enacted in 1888. he said, but that
emergency legislation was never
brought before the court
But the great difference, of course,
between the war legislation and the
so-called emergency legislation OF the
depression period is that the one
drew its authority direct from the
Constitution that other proceeded to
declare an emergency and, on that
basis, to assume powers which we're
never assumed before.
As expressed in an article on
Emergency Laws" by Robert A.
Maurer, professor of law at George
town University Law School, appear
ing in the Georgetown Law Journal
for May:
It is to be remembered during the
war; that there was no need to invoke
any emergency" powers. Every oo-
iective that bore any appropriate re-
lationship TO the war-and all OBJ
jectives we're centered there-Was
fully within the powers delegated TO
the Congress expressly by the Con-
stitution, and the exigencies OF war
necessitated extensive authority W the
Commander in Chief, the President.
And. as Prof. Maurer suggests:
Within recent years strong move
nnent has been on foot to translate
these war needs into peace-time needs.
The tendency has been to concen-
trate objectives in executive action
with the legislative power relegated to
the background. a mere authorizing
agency. The conditions OF economic
depression and distress account prln-
cipally for this result.
Every one is, of course, familiar
with this tendency and the ease and
readiness with which the declaration
of an emergency has been seized
as the source of powers which previous
interpretations of constitutional limi-
tations upon Congress and the Execu-
tive never granted. AS for the extent
to which this theory Of emergency
laws may be carried, one has only to
view the prospect under N. r. A..
had it's principles been sanctioned by
the Supreme Court, with the Federal
Government given authority to con-
troll every form of business in the
land.
One of the best comments on
emergency powers as opposed to con-
stitutional guarantees is contained in
a decision by the Virginia Supreme
Court of Appeals last year in refer
ence to State control of milk prices:
It would be dangerous to hold that
constitutional guarantees were effec-
tive only in fair weather. when there
Is no reason to invoke them. They
should stand four square to all the
winds that blow. 1t is for that pur-
pose that they were written. They
serve to curb the heated impulses
of the people and to give time in
which to form sober judgment. II
they fail in this they are not worth
the ink that prints them. When
proven to be oppressive they may be
changed by orderly constitutional
processes provided Emergencies or
fancied emergencies constantly arrive
and for the time absorb our attention
and We are prone to view them with
alarm" Within the lives of living
men has been witnessed the period
of reconstruction, the panic of 1873,
and others scarcely less distressing.
= =" Problems that today seem por-
tentious are by the next generation
as forgotten as Pharaoh's famine. 8 l"
An emergency calling for legislative
relief is present pressing necessity;
indefinitely prolonged, it drifts into a
normal condition.
Some of that cool philosophy is
not out of place today.