The Washington times., 1936-04-07

n GUIDE 10r the COnQucL Oh SOV"
eminent commissions and bu'
reauss with q sharp warning
against invading the rights Of the
individual, was laid down by the
Supreme Court today in its de-
cision on the 1888 securities law.
While postponing decision on
the power Of Congress to regulate
the sale Of securities, the courts
ruling was even more important IN
It's structures upon arbitrary &C
ton by Federal bureaus.
The truth in Securities Act,"
enacted by Congress to force
sellers Of securities to tell the
truth about them, was believed by
court observers to be unimpaired
as . result Of the 6-to-3 decision.
individual Liberty Upheld
The courts ruling was confined
to one issue-the right Of j. Ed
ward Jones, a New York oil Sc
curities dealer, to withdraw q reg
istration statement after 1t had
been filed, and the right Of the
SEC to compel him to testify at q
hearing despite the withdrawal.
In the majority decision, Justice
Sutherland likened the procedure
before the commission to that OF
q court. He said, in effect, that
Government bureaus must heed
the constitutional guarantees
against invasion Of the liberties
Of the individual.
The dissenting opinion Of JUS
tees Cardozo, Brandeis and Stone
denied that the action Of the SEC
invaded the individuals rights.
Arbitrary Power Hit
Speaking through Justice
Sutherland, the court declared:
arbitrary power and the rule
Of the Constitution cannot both
exist. They are antsgOnistic
and incompatible forces, and one
or the other must Of necessity
perish whenever they are
brought into conflict"
In some quarters it is believed
the ruling may have a direct bear
ing on the wholesale seizure OF
private kilograms by the Black
lobby committee Of the Senate.
william Randolph Hearst has an
injunction suit pending In the
District of Columbia Supreme
Court to halt this practice. The
case viii be heard tomorrow.
Majority Opinion
The Court, in the majority opin-
ion, written by Justice Sutherland,
said:
''Tho action Of the Commits
sion finds no support In right
principle or In law. It is wholly
unreasonable and arbitrary. 1t
violates the cardinal precept
upon which the constitutional
safeguards Of personal liberty
ultimately rest-that this shall
be 0 government Of Iaws-be-
cause to the precise extent that
the mere will Of an official or
m official body is permitted to
takeothe place Of allowable off
ciaI discretion or to supplant the
standing law 40 o rule Of human
conduct, the Government ceases
to be one Of laws and becomes
an autOcracy.
against the threat Of such :
contingency the courts have al
ways been vigilant, and II they
are to perform their COnstitu-
tiOMal duties i'm the future, must
never cease to be vigilant, to de-
teCt and turn aside the danger
ut its beginning"
Warning Is Quoted
Justice Sutherland at this point
quoted from former Justice Brad
ley:
cit may be that it IN the OBJ
nOxiOus thing i'm its miIdest and
least repulsive form: but ilIe-
Ultimate and unconstitutional
practices get their first footing
I'm that way, namely by silent
approaches and slight devia-
tiOns from legal modes Of prO.
Cedure.
ct IL the duty Of courts TO
be watchful for the COnstitu.
tiOnal rights Of the citizen, and
against amy stealthy encrOach-
memtG thereon"