The Waterbury Democrat., 1936-01-10
BY RODNEY BUTCHER Democrat Washington
 CnrreSnOndent.

OOEICoRUHUCHbs
 WTASHINGTON, Jan. 10-Weeks w before the U. s. Supreme Court came crashing down on AAA, the small circle of secretaries and ex-secretaries to justices-a group far closer to the court than any other and practically the only pipe line through which it's secrets con- ccivably might leak-was whisper ing with conviction that Chief Jus tiCe Charles Evans Hughes was se- xicusly worried about the courts prestige and future power.
 Hughes, the story vent was afraid of the effect of further BltO-l decisions in vitally impOr- tant cases and was willing to do almost anything in his power to avert them.
 He felt that it might be difficult tO preserve any belief in the courts 1nfaiiibility if its critics were able to point out that the judgment of one man was determining the eco- homie and political future of the nation; that plausibility would be lent to charges of one-rnan judicial dictatorship; and that aid and com fort would be given to would-be curbers Of the court.
 
 Point to Vermont Case
 rONSEQUENTLY, the boys were A whispering, when Hughes found himself about to be on the short end of a 5-to-4 decision he would be willing to move over to the majority, realizing that he couldn't change the result by dis senting, but that in concurring he Ynigbt do much to preserve the court and its power.
 When the Vermont income tax case came up for ruling-an as- tcnishing curb on state legislative pOwer--the word quickly went around that such reasoning had led Hughes to desert the Liberal lainority"-of which he. along with Brandeis, Stone, and Cardozo, had been considered a member since Roberts delivered the slashing ma jority opinion against the railroad pensions act-and thus effect G. to.S decision.
 And of course now the story fin the same quarters Is that the 6-to-3 decision against the gov ernment on AAA probably would have stood 5 to { if Hugh hadn't fsIt 1t would be ruinous to the Ceurt and therefore sought to sGye the courts face.
 But the secret of just how Hughes felt about AAA will re- pose in his own bosom and the s'inside dope" passed along here with Is presented only as subject for interesting speculation.
 Hughes Book Quoted TT is considered significant by 1 some lawyers that Hughes did not read the majority opinion in this case, which many consider the most important supreme court rul- ina since the Civil War. Previous ly he had read the opinicas in all important New Deal cases.
 If his heart had been in the AAA opinion as much as in pres ervatiOn of the courts position, it is argued, he would have insisted on expounding the majority view instead of leaving 1t to Roberts.
 Tn the past Hughes has written that the court had inflicted at least three grievous wounds upon itself, including the Dred Scott decision.
 And in his book, "The Supreme Court of the United States"-writ- ten between his terms on the bench ---he also said:
 "There are some who think 1t desirable that dissents should not be disclosed. as they detract from the force of the judgment. Un- doubtedly they do. When unanimity can be obtained without sacrifice of conviction, it strongly comments the decision to public confidence. " UphOlds Dissent Custom
 HUGHES went on, however, tc Al uphold the custom of public dissent and to say that such right preserved the individuality of jus tices and that "a dissent in q court of last resort is an appeal to the intelligence of future day observing that many dis