Evening star., 1936-05-19
Cuffey

Continued From First Page)
leaves the price provisions open for
consideration in the future"
Members of the National Coal Com
mission and Senator Guffey, Democrat,
of Pennsylvania, author of the act,
were silent. Henry P. Warrum. coun-
sci for the United Mine Workers, said
the union probably would support re-
enactment of the acts price, fixing
provisions.
Five of the Supreme Court justices
joined in holding the labor provisions
of the act void and in finding that the
price fixing provisions were insepa-
rable from the rest, and, therefore,
equally bad.
The broadness of the majority
opinion with regard to labor provi-
sions Immediately stirred speculation
as to the probable fate of the Wagner
labor disputes act.
At one point in its opinion the
majority said:
THE power conferred upon the
majority, is in effect, the power to
regulate the affairs of an unwilling
minority. This is legislative delega-
tion in its most obnoxious form ."
Under the Wagner labor disputes act
the National Labor Relations Board is
empowered to hold elections to deter
mine which union or group shall
represent the majority of workers in
collective bargaining. The minority is
bound by the vote.
At another point in the Guffey de-
cision the majority said that the
evils which come from the struggle
between employers and employees over
the matter of wages. working condi-
tions, the right of collective bargain
ing, etc, and the resultant strikes.
curtailment and irregularity Of pro-
duction and effect on prices" were
"all local evils over which the Federal
Government has no legislative con-
troll"
Green VERY Disappointed"
After a preliminary study of the
decision. Chairman J. Warren Mad
den of the National Labor Relations
Board said:
1T is clear that the decision does
not affect the application of the ma
tional labor relations (Wagner) act
as to certain types of industry. The
extent to which the decision does
apply to that act involves issues too
for early determination.
President William Green of the
American Federation of Labor, after
calling the decision very disappolnt-
ing" told reporters he still believed
the Wagner labor disputes act would
be found constitutional.
Chief Justice Hughes, in separate
opinion. agreed that the labor pro-
visions were invalid. but added he did
not believe this requires us to con-
demn the act in its entirety"
Submits Minority Opinion.
Justices Cardozo, Brandeis and
Stone, the liberal members of the
bench, submitted a minority opinion
that the price-fixing provi-
sions we're valid and separable from
the labor provisions. They held the
suits to be premature so far as a test
Of the labor provisions was concerned.
In delivering the majority opinion,
Justice Sutherland, with the concur
renee of Justices Roberts, Butler, Van
Devanter and McReynolds, held the
labor provisions of the law were an
of State powers and legis-
lative delegation Gin its most obnox-
ious form"
Declaring the labor provisions void
and inseparable from the rest of the
act, he said the price-fixing section
must fall with them, although the
opinion expressly refrained from pass
ing on their constitutionality.
He added however, that neither
this disposition of the matter nor
anything we have said is to be taken
Is indicating that the court is Of the
opinion that these provisions, If sep
arately enacted, could be sustained"
The majority of the court said much
stress was laid upon "the evils" in
working conditions and their effect
Upon interstate commerce.
But" it said, "the conclusive an
Swer is that the evils are all local
evils over which the Federal Govern
nent has no legislative control. The
relation Of employer and employe is
d local relation. At common law it is
one Of the domestic relations. The
wages are paid for the doing of local
work. Working conditions are OBJ
7iously local conditions
Even harder, the majority struck |
1t provisions for fixing of wages and |
1ours by majority of operators and |
miners.
"The power conferred upon the ma
ority is. In effect" it said, "the power |
% regulate the affairs Of an unwilling |
This Is legislative delega-
ion in its most obnoxious form. for
t is not even delegation to an ofiicial
n an official body, presumptively dis
but to private persons
whose interests may be and often are
adverse to the interests Of others In
he same business"
The court held that such power
vas IAN intolerable and unconstitu-
ional interference with personal