Evening star., 1936-01-07
Minority Opinion
Holds Tax Levy
Right Beyond Doubt
TINE text of the dissenting opinion
on the A. A. A. case. read by
Justice Stone and concurred
Il in nv Justices Rrandeis and

TINE text of the dissenting opinion
on the A. A. A. case. read by
Justice Stone and concurred
u in by Justices Brandeis and
Cardozo. follows:
I think the judgment should be re-
versed.
The present stress of widely held
and strongly expressed differences Of
opinion of the wisdom of the agri-
cultural adjustment act makes 1t i'm.
portant. in the interest of clear think
ing and sound result. to emphasize
at the outset certain propositions
which should have controlling influence
in determining the validity of the
act. They are:
l. The power of courts to declare
a statute unconstitutional is subject
to two guiding principles of decision
which ought never to be absent from
judicial consciousness. One is that
courts are concerned only with the
power to enact statutes. not with
their wisdom. The other is that
while unconstitutional exercise Of
power by the Executive and legisla-
tive branches of the Government is
subject to judicial restraint, the only
check upon our own exercise of power
is our own sense Of Self-restraint.
For the removal of unwise laws from
the statute books appeal lies not TO
the courts but to the ballot and to
the processes of democratic Gov.
ernment.
2. The constitutional power Of Con-
gress to levy an excise tax upon the
processing of agricultural products Is
not questioned. The present levy Is
held invalid. not for any want Of
power in Congress to lay such tax
to defray public expenditures, includ-
ing those for the general welfare, but
because the use to which its proceeds
are put is disapproved.
Need to Assist Agriculture Is Cited.
8. AS the present depressed state Of
agriculture is Nationwide in its ex-
tent and effects, there Is no basis for
saying that the expenditure of public
money in aid of farmers is not within
the specifically granted power Of Con-
gress to levy taxes to provide for the
general welfare" The opinion
of the court does not declare other
wise.
4. No question Of a variable tax
fixed from time to time by fat Of
the Secretary of Agriculture, or Of un-
authorized delegation Of legislative
power, is now presented. The sched-
ule of rates imposed by the Secretary
in accordance with the original COM
mand of Congress has since been spe-
officially adopted and confirmed by
act of Congress, which has declared
that 1t shall be the lawful tax. Act OF
August "a, 1885, Stat. That Is
the tax which the Government now
seeks to collect. Any defects there
may have been in the manner of lay
ing the tax by the Secretary have now
been removed by the exercise of the
power Of Congress to pass a curative
statute validating an intended, though
defective tax. United States VS..
Heintzen g. Co., 206 U. S. $40; Gra-
ham & Foster VS.. Goodcell, 282 U. S.
400; C. F. Milliken VS.. United States,
283 U. s. is. The agricultural ad-
justment act as thus amended de-
clares that none of its provisions shall
fail because others are pronounced
invalid.
Upholds Use
OF Processing Taxes.
1t is with these preliminary and
hardly controverted matters In mind
(see DECISION, Page 70.