Evening star., 1935-07-17
Shadows of Coming Events.

While more than SiXScore cases IN
volving the validity of the A. A. A. are
now pending in the courts, the case
brought by former Senator William M.
Butler. one of the receivers of the Hoosac
Mills Corporation, was one of the earliest
attempts to overthrow the processing
tax and and all its works. The Gov
ernment counted on it-involving, as 1t
did, most of the important features OF
the agricultural adjustment expert
ment-for the test of constitutionality
before the United States Supreme Court.
And the fact that the Government was
upheld in the district court gave added
incentive to the Department OF justice
to expedite the appeal toward a final
decision.
But the lower courts decision was
made prior to the Schechter decision
ending the N. r. A. And this latter de-
cision plainly forecast the fate OF
AA. A. That forecast has now received
added force by reason of the decision
Yesterday. While the Government in
tends to press for final answer next
Fall. the Government attorneys must
suffer an overpowering sense OF tutllty'
For the decision yesterday in the Fed
eral Circuit Court of Appeals at Boston,
while covering three main points, strikes
at the very heart of the processing tax
crop control principle-leaving very little
to build on.
Such legal objections as the delega-
ton of power to the executive oranch
of the Government might be overcome
by proper amendment of the A. A. A.
statute. The A. A. A. amendments now
pproaching a vote in the Senate have
been defended by their proponents
partly on that ground; that they seek
a more explicit and legislatively defined
delegation of power.
But the doom of A. A. A. seems logic
ally to have been sealed by the appellate
courts emphasis on inherent limitations
of the extension of Federal power in
new fields, the court basing much OF its
opinion on the findings in the Schechter
case:
THE power of Congress to regulate
interstate commerce does not authorize
it to do so by taking products, either
of agriculture or industry, before they
enter interstate commerce, or otherwise
to control their production merely be-
cause their production may indirectly
affect interstate commerce. 1t is
clear, we think, that under the recent
decision of the Supreme Court that
Congress at the outset has attempted
to invade a field over which it has no
control, since its obvious purpose, viz,
to control or regulate the production OF
agricultural products in the several
States by the methods adopted in this
act, is beyond the power of Con-
gress. The issue is not, as the
Government contends, whether Congress
can appropriate funds raised for any
purpose deemed by Congress in further
ance of the general welfare but whether
Congress has any power to control or
regulate matters left to the States and
lay a special tax for that purpose"
If it is now the purpose of the Presi-
dent to make an issue of constitutional
amendment for the purpose OF accom-
plishing what otherwise is impossible
under the Constitution, the opinion yes
terday constitutes further step in clari-
fication OF that issue. AS David Law
renee suggests elsewhere in today'S Star,
the A. A. A. decision covers ground
which should end all doubt as to the
validity of the Guffey coal bill, which
the President wants enacted. 1t may
even place further doubt on the corsti-
tutionality of fundamental principles OF
the pending social security legislation.
The fact that this second major test
of New Dealism has been brought by
william Butler, former Republican ma
tional chairman, is not without some
political significance and political in
terest.