Evening star., 1936-03-30
TEST Of VALIDITY
Of UTILITY ACT IS
REFUSED BY COURT
Supreme Tribunal Declines
to Hear Case Involving
ConStitutionaIity.
UPHOLDS RESTRICTIONS
UPON SUGAR INSTITUTE
Bench Also Adjourns Without
Giving Decisions in Guffey Coal
and Securities Acts.

The Supreme Court today affirmed
in substance a New York decision i'm
posing As restrictions on the Sugar
Institute, Inc, trade organization of
leading American sugar refiners, and
refused to hear a suit involving the
constitutionality of the public utility
holding company act of 1885.
The court also adjourned withoue
announcing decisions in cases involv-
ing validity of the Guffey coal act
and the securities act of 1893. Deci-
sions in these cases, however. were
| not expected today since the court
has had them under advisement less
than three weeks.
In another decision, involving an
attempt by the State of Washington
to tax the gross receipts of a radio
station. the court for the first time
ruled that radio broadcasting is in
terstate commerce and comes within
the protection and control of the COM
merce clause Of the Constitution.
Circuit Court Upheld.
In refusing the request to review
the holding company case. the court
in effect affirmed the ruling of the
Circuit Court of Appeals. The Dis
trict court held the act was uncon-
stitutional and void in its entirety.
The Court of Appeals. however. modi-
fled this decree by directing that the
declaration that the act is unconsti-
tutional in its entirety should be
omitted.
The suit was brought by Burco, Inc.
doing business in Baltimore. The Dis
trict Courts decision that the corpo-
ration was not subject to the pro-
visions of the holding company act
because its business was intrastate in
character still stands.
In delivering the opinion in the
Sugar Institute case, Chief Justice
Hughes pointed out that suit originally
was brought to dissolve the institute
for alleged violations Of the Sherman
antitrust act. The decree Of the
lower court, however, did not order
dissolution of the institute, but granted
an injunction to prevent the per-
formance of As specified acts.
New York Decree Affirmed.
After reviewing conditions in the
sugar industry before and after for
nation of the institute, Chief Justice
Hughes announced the decree Of the
New York court, with certain modif-
cations. was affirmed.
The principal modification related
to a requirement in the decree can
cerning the dissemination of data by
the institute: "To require, under the
penalties of discbedience of the in
junction, the dissemination of every
thing that the institute may learn
might we'll prejudice. rather than
serve the interests of fair competition
and obstruct the useful and entirely
lawful activities of the refners," the
Chief Justice declared
The court then ordered the decree
amended to conform to this restriction
by the deletion of the words "or any
other statistical information of a SIM
liar character" from a section Of the
decree directing the dissemination by
the institute of certain trade infor-
nation.
Test Of Validity.
The decision had been eagerly
awaited by some trade associations as
a guide to the extent they could go
toward self-regulation. They had
wondered about their status since the
courts invalidation of the N. r. A.
Formed in 1928 by Is cane sugar
refining companies, the institute was
described by its hackers as intended
to eliminate secret determinations"
and other ABUSES" of the industry.
Sued for Dissolution.
In 1881 the Government sued for
its dissolution, contending the men,
bers produced from 10 to 80 per cent
United States and competition was
curtailed.
Appealing to the Supreme Court
from the ruling Of Judge Julian ".
Mack of New York, the sugar re-
finers said "the case involves the
most elaborate legal test of the activ-
tiles of trade association ever under.
taken by the Government"
Because of the collapse of the Fed
eral Governments attempt at trade
regulation under the N. r. A." they
added, commerce and industry are
looking to this court for guidance in
determining what they may do to