Evening star., 1936-08-08

Continued From First Page)
policies and practices of the present
national administration either chal-
lenge or infringe these political
rights of the citizen has no justiflca-
ton.
The wide delegation of power to
the President. beginning in March,
1888, is most frequently pointed to as
an invasion of these constitutional
guarantees and as the substitution of
some kind of dictatorship for political
democracy. This is a distorted view.
Neither Congress nor the Presi-
dent considered this delegation of
power as the end or as a limitation
of our normal political processes. At
no time did any one suggest that Con-
gress had lost its power to withdraw
these extraordinary powers.
mo one believed in November,
1884, that the congressional election
was a sham battle in the sense that
the Congress then being elected
could actually have no power to con-
troll national policies. No one asserts
that the campaign Of 1886 is futile
because the people have been stripped
OF any part of their political power"
The true character" of the New
Deal, the report said, and the trend
Of its policies "is just as uncertain
today as it was two years ago."
Laws specifically proposed as emer-
gency measures with limited life" it
added, have been declared by i'm
portant members of the administra-
tion to be the beginning of perma-
nent changes in national policy. There
has been q continuing conflict be-
tween such officials as to whether a
new social and economic order is in
the making or the old institutions are
neing perfected so that they may be
preserved"
The committee attached "the great
est practical importance" to what it
said was the refusal of the Supreme
Court ito accept a new theory of the
extent OF Federal legislative power
under the interstate commerce clause
OF the Constitution At the same
time, the committee said that the
court had shown that it would not be
destroyed by thwarting congressional
action.
To persons "misled by criticism of
the divided opinions of the court
the committee said
They do not realize that if We
ADOPTED some policy OF requiring
more than majority of the court to
invalidate a statute, we would only
be substituting policy under which
minority of the justices could set
aside a constitutional provision. The
Constitution would no longer be the
supreme law of the land"
After praising the court for apply
ing the Constitution to legislation, the
committee majority said:
"One who would preserve our con-
stltutional system must deplore the
action of President Roosevelt in rec
ommendlng that members of Congress
set aside any doubts they might have
about the validity of proposed legisla-
ton. If in this way an increasing
burden is cast upon the court, our
traditional policy is bound to COL
lapse"
The committee said expansion of
Federal control and restriction of
State authority has been under way
for many years.
But the increased tempo of the
movement now exhibited" the COM
mittee said. gives renewed emphasis
to the need, If our constitutional sys-
TEN is to be preserved, of a more
eager regard for that system by Con-
gress itself" -
The majority report was signed by
John D. Clark, Cheyenne, Wyo.; Fred
H. Davis. Tallahassee, Fla; George
L. Buist, Charleston, S. c., and Taft.
The minority report said any fur
ther study by the committee would
serve no useful purpose" in throwing
light on constitutional questions and
recommended that the committee be
discharged
Minority members said the major
ity- report docs not deal with the
problem but concerns itself with a
short-range attack on surface trivial
tiles"
The minority members were Ken
meth Wynne, New Haven, Conn;
James G. McGowen of Mississippi
and Fred L. Williams of Missouri.