Evening star., 1935-05-02
n. R. A. DECISION
HELD SIGNIFICANT
Senate Committees Action
Indicates Awakening to
es Reaction OF Voters.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

NJ partv. as a sensible solution OF a
dilemma that might have precipitated
the most controversial oebate of the
whole session.
But the significance of the 16-to-3
vote of the Finance Committee far
transcen6s the merits of N. r. A.
President Roosevelt wanted an en-
larged N. r. A. with drastic powers
over industry Congress didn't agree.
This. Of course. is the prerogatlve
of the legislative body, but anything
which Congress does to indicate to
the people that it is still legislative
organization and not rubber stamp
is bound to attract attention and
occasion some surprise.
The reasons for the action of the
Senate Finance Committee are not
difficult to discover.
First of all, the people back home
have found the codes unavoidable in
the main. The confusion resulting
from enforcement and non-enforce-
ment has provided such a reaction
that members of Congress up for re-
election next year have become wary.
Many of them consider that Mr..
Roosevelts popularity might pull him
through. but. il opponents In each
State and district heap upon the in
eumbent members all the blame for
the N. r. A.. there may be many new
faces in the next Congress.
Court Decision Due.
The second reason. and 1t Is really
as important to the Roosevelt admin
istrations reform obJectives as it is
to the opponents Of N. r. A.. is the
proba bility that the Supreme Court
Of the United States will hand down
a decision within the next month on
certain fes lures Of the N. r. A. which
will define the limits of Federal
action.
This very week the Schechter case
is being argued in the Supreme Court
1t is the first important test OF the
constitutionality of the national in
dustrial recovery act. and a. opinion
Is expected to be rendered before the
court adjourns for the Summer In
June
Donald Richberg. counsel for the
N. r. A.. has prepared the principal
argument in behalf of N. r. A., and
he admits that there are not many
precedents to support his position. but
he believes. nevertheless, that new
set of circumstances has arisen which
1ustiies action by the Federal Gov
ernment in a national emergency.
The Constitution says that Congress
shall have the right to regulate COM
merce among the States. 1t says
nothing about Federal authority with
In State lines. and. in fact. it has
always been understood throughout
American history that the power to
right of the several States.
Emergency Privilege Cited.
The New Deal theory is that COM
merce within State might possibly
affect" commerce between the States,
and that. If this is the case, the Fed
eral Government can. especially in
an emergency, take cognizance of such
q situation. as was dore in the N. r.
A.. and put businesses of all sorts
under a code.
While there are no court decisions
on this particular point it would be
q mistake to dismiss as wholly un-
reasonable the contention which Mr..
Richberg and his colleagues are max
ing. Thus. for instance. II human
labor became the instrument through
W-k IA inh nd -
petition were carried on so that per-
sons were being paid hardly SUBJ
sistence wage. would the establish
ment of minimum wage by Congress
tend to remove this particular burden
from interstate commerce? Is a gen.
eral condition of economic depression.
brought about through action, per-
haps not concertedly, but simulta-
neously in different parts of the eoun-
try by major industries. an action
which tends to affect" interstate COM
merce?
The Supreme Court has not hesi-
tated to look at an incident of busi-
ness carried on within q State as per-
haps having some bearing on inter-
state commerce. But in every such
case the episode has been directly re-
lated either to proved conspiracy
to obstruct interstate commerce or to
some instrument of interstate COM
merce. like a railroad
The Department Of Justice Is rely
Ing on those cases. nevertheless. to
bring out the point that an action
within a State could somehow affect
Q step In commerce outside a State.
viii be Weighed on Merits.
The Supreme Court undoubtedly
will treat every future case on its
merits; that Is. it will examine the
facts to determine whether the par
ticular action complained of does ac-
tually affect interstate commerce
The Circuit Court of Appeals in New
York. in its opinion. couldn't see how
the persons employed by the Schech-
ter company in handling poultry were
themselves a part of interstate COM
merce and how their hours of labor or
working conditions could be super
vised by a code proclaimed by the
Federal authority
There have been cases In which
cattle shipped to stockyards in Chi
cago have been held to be articles of
interstate commerce. but that was be-
cause the cattle merely paused in
Chicago en- route to some other des-
tination. and hence the Federal
authority was really exercised to reg
ulate their operations in transit.
The Department of Justice Is rely
ing to some extent on the stock yards
cases, but there were no labor prob
lens involved there. The truth Is
there are no cases on all fours with the
Echechter case
So whatever the Supreme Court de-
cides on the labor questions will have
q profound influence on future legis-
laticn. Indeed. the Wagner labor dis
putes bill may be held over till next
session because of the desire of Con-
gress to learn the outcome OF the
case II the Supreme Court
should hold that poultry handling Is
an intrastate business and is not
subject to the Federal authority. 1t
will mean that section IA on collec-
tive bargaining is also not applica Bile
to production or maintenance opera
tions conducted wholly inside State.
and that Federal regulation of en-
-