Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1935-05-27
Delegation of Authority to
President Is Held
Invalid.
Continued From First Page.)

the legislative branch of the Govern
ment?
Could Congress, in exercising its
right to regulate interstate commerce.
compel business firms in activities
affecting" such commerce to adhere
to Federal regulations through the
codes?
Infringement on Rights.
Were prosecutions for code VIOLA
lions an infringement upon conStltu-
tionally guaranteed rights OF indl-
viduals under the fifth amendment Tor
due process of law?
The sections of the N. r. A. in
volved gave the President the right
to approve codes of fair competition
upon the application of representative
trade or industrial associations.
Any violation of such code was
declared by the act to be a miSde-
meanor if it occurred in a transac-
ton in or affecting interstate or
foreign commerce. The penalty was
$500 fine.
The poultry corporation which did
not accept the code which the PreSi-
dent approved for New Yorks live
poultry industry was convicted on ID
counts charging violations of code
provisions, and one charging con-
spiracy to violate the recovery act.
Fined i'm New York.
In the New York District Federal
Court the company and its proprie-
tors were fined for the code violations
and Martin. Alex and Aaron Schech-
ter were given brief prison sentences
on the conspiracy count
They appealed, and the Second
Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the
conviction on II counts. including the
conspiracy charge. These counts in
volved violations of trade practices,
such as the sale of unfit poultry,
refusal to submit reports to the code
authority and permitting customers
to select poultry they purchased in
stead of taking the run of the COOP"
The appellate court reversed the
conviction, however, on two counts in
volving violations of wage and hour
provisions of the code. holding that
Congress could not regulate such ques-
tionS in interstate business.
Both the Government and the
Schechters we're dissatisfied with the
Circuit Court ruling and carried it to
the Supreme Court, the Government
contending that the wage and hour
ruling should be overthrow and the
Schechters contesting the decision on
the other II counts.
Argument Advanced.
On their joint request, the high tri-
bunal advanced the case for argu-
ment so that it could be decided dur
ing this term. The Government previ-
ously had withdrawn another N. R. A.
case involving the lumber code.
Frederick H. Wood and Joseph
Heller, attorneys for the SchechterS
contended before the court that the
code-making authority given the Pres
ident was unconstitutional because
Congress had failed to define or limit
his powers. They argued that the
codes had the affect of laws, and that
under the Constitution. law-making
was reserved to Congress.
They also commended that the
Schechter business was solely intra-
state in character, and while subject
to regulation by New York State,
could not be required to submit to
Federal regulation. Congress, they
held. was limited by the Constitution
to its enumerated powers. The right
to regulate interstate commerce, the
lawyers insisted, die not extend to
the right to nationalize all industry
on a theory that a local business