Evening star., 1935-05-06
Beyond Powers of Congress,
Justice Roberts Asserts,
in UNFOLDING D. C. Bench
on Protest by Carriers.
COMMERCE CONTROL
HELD NOT LAWS AIM
Hughes Writes Dissenting 0pin-
ion, Joined by Brandeis, Stone
and Cardozo-Hint Is Seen to
Tribunals Judgment on N. z.
A. and Code Rule of Industry.
By the Associated Press.

By the Associated Press.
In another of its famous 5-to-4
decisions, the Supreme Court today
declared unconstitutional the railway
retirement law affecting more than q
million employees.
"The act was beyond the powers Of
Congress" said Justice Roberts, who
delivered the high courts opinion.
He aSsailed sections of the law pen
sioning employees. who have voluntar-
lily left the carriers service; those who
have been discharged for dishonesty
and for gross negligence and those
who have been automatically retired.
Hughes Writes Dissent.
Chief Justice Hughes, who delivered
the opinion upholding the Government
in the famous gold-clause cases, was
in the minority this time. He wrote
the dissenting opinion and was Joined
by justices Brandeis, Stone and Car
dozo.
Aligned with Justice Roberts were
Justices Van Devanter, McReynolds,
Sutherland and Butler.
Justice Roberts words that the act
was invalid as violative of due pro-
cess" of law and was mot In purpose
or in effect a regulation of commerce"
was Immediately interpreted by some
observers as laying down principles
which may affect materially the
courts Judgment of N. r. A. and its
code rule of industry.
President Roosevelt In signing the
railway law last Spring, had com.
Act Is Arbitrary.
Justice Roberts said the act would
benefit $4,000 persons who had re-
tired within one year before its en-
actment.
"This is in the last degree arbi-
trary," he said.
Ruling that invalid sections Of the
law made the entire act unconStitu-
tional. Justice Roberts said those who
were scheduled to retire when the act
was to become effective would have re-
ceived a pension although they never
had contributed. He added the cost
the first year would be $e.o0o,000.
4Aldb - 4AOt q RC1A414oolbAC odbyCNS
of legislation" he said, explaining 1t
set up new contract obligations"
Some railroads, he said, would have
had to pay money for the employees
Of other carriers.
This pooling provision of the act
is unreasonable and arbitrary" Rob-
erts held.
Hughes Dissent Vigorous.
In a vigorous dissenting opinion
Chief Justice Hughes said the majority
decision was departure from sound
principles and places an unwarranted
limitation upon the commerce clause
of the Constitution"
He said the conclusion that Con-
gresS could not enact pension legiSla-
ton is "of such serious and far-reach-
ing importance as to overshadow all
other provisions of the act"
THE power committed to Congress
to govern interstate commerce does
not require that its Government should
be wise, much less that it should be
perfect" the Chief Justice held.
THE power implies a broad discre-
ton and thus permits a wide range
even of mistakes. Expert discussion
of pension plans reveals different
views of the manner in which they
should be set up and a close study
of advisable method Is in progress.
1T is not our province to enter
that field, and I am not persuaded
that Congress in entering it for the
purpose of regulating interstate car
riers, had transcended the limits Of
the authority which the Constitution
confers."
The majority had ruled that "the
primary purpose Of the legislation Is
social security" and held that the
"contentment Of mind" for the EN-
ployes, which was intended was not q
permissible subject of regulation as
affecting interstate Commerce.
The District of Columbia SupremV
Court, to which carriers took theif
objections to the law, also had held
the act invalid.
Justice Roberts declared principal
Continued on Page 2. Column 81