Evening star., 1937-01-24
Bogy Man of Legislators
of

ulated in the Guffey case related to
production, not commerce, and In the
N. I. r. A. Congress dealt with some
subjects which were not commerce
and attempted to cover all commerce
as well, whether interstate or not.
In the opinion Of most lawyers the
three pending industrial cases present
q much cleaner issue on the CONF
merce clause question and offer the
court an opportunity to define with
considerable precision the length to
which Congress can 60 in regulatory
legislation affecting the Nations major
industries.
Although the Associated Press con-
tends its activities do not come within
the commerce clause, the lower courts
held otherwise, and the major issue
in that dispute probably will concern
the guarantees Of freedom Of press
and freedom of contract in the first
and fifth amendments to the Con-
stitution. The Government says the
act makes no attempt to interfere
with the freedom Of the press, but
merely assures press association en-
ployes the right to organize for coll
lective bargaining.
Reinstatement Ordered.
The bus case presents no substan-
tial issue relating to interstate COM
merce. Oficials Of the company dis
charged 81 men, all members Of a
union, on the ground of ineficiency.
The board found the men were dis
charged because they had joined the
union and ordered their reinstate-
ment. with back pay. This action
was upheld by the court. The COM
pany claims the order violates the
due process clause of the fifth amend
ment in that it deprives them of the
freedom Of contract, property right.
Apparently the Government intends
to make its main fight in the three
industrial cases, since a favorable
ruling on these would extend the scope
Of the Wagner act to the great major
ity Of working people in this country
In asking the Supreme Court to re-
view the three cases, counsel for the
Government said:
THE national labor relations aci
is the elimination of a long series OF
attempts by the Federal Government
to deal with the national problem
presented by labor disputes which
obstruct and burden the free flow oi
interstate and foreign commerce
Numerous and extensive studies oi
the causes Of disputes. and Of effectiv,
ways Of preventing their occurrence
have been made by both congressional
and presidential committees sinct
1882. On many occasions Federal in.
tervention in particular disputes ha.
been found necessary to protect in.
terstate and foreign commerce from
serious harm, existing or threatened
The present act, an outgrowth Of thil
experience, attempts to 60 beyont
ad hoe interference and, in brief. I
apply to other enterprises in inter
state commerce the principles sue
cessfully applied to railroads by the
railway labor act of 1925.
1.-THE court below has held tina
the application of this act to respond
ent is beyond the power Of Congress
under the commerce clause Of tn
Constitution. Whether the power o
the Federal Government is thus limit
ed Is q question of vital interest to tn
| ~ ~ fhA NottNn
Authority Seen Adequate.
"Congress is fully empowered tc
protect interstate commerce from bur.
den and injury, however local may
be the effective causes. More spe.
cifically, it has adequate authority
as invoked in this act. to maintain the
orderly conduct Of interstate COM
merce by providing for the peaceful
settlement of disputes which recur-
rently burden 1t or threaten to do so
In many operations besides railroad
TRANSFORMATION labor disputes can, anc
Congress has correctly found in the
recitals Of the act that they do, i'm
mediately burden and obstruct COM
merce. The reasonable fear by Con-
eress Of the likelihood Of the recur-
renee of such burdens or ohstructions
serves the purpose of specific intent
to interrupt or burden interstate COM
merce In the particular case.
"The N. r. A. and Guffey act de-
cisions are not to the contrary. In
those cases the court held unconstitu-
tional the regulation Of wages and
hours in activities occurring after the
movement of interstate commerce has
ceased or before it has begun, but
made 1t clear that where the activity
occurs, as In the present case. in the
midst of q well-defned flow Of COM
merce, it is subject to regulation.
Moreover, the N. r. A. and Gufiey
cases deal with an entirely different
type Of regulation. They concern
labor provisions which sought undel
the commerce clause to regulate hours
and wages of production employees st
as to stabilize production costs ant
thus to stabilize interstate commerce
in poultry and coal. The present ac'
does not regulate hours or wages. Il
is directed solely to the protection o.
interstate commerce itself from the
actual interruption, burden and OBJ
struction caused by employer-em'
ploye strife, such as strikes and boy
colts. While. as means to such pro-
lection, the present order restrains
the conduct Of q corporation engaged
extensively in interstate commerct
toward its production employees. among
others, this does not make the order
. regulation Of production activities
rather than o regulation of commerce
The relation to production, II 1t may
be said to exist at all, Is incidental ant
the regulation is permissible because
necessary to prevent employer EN-
ploye conflict under such factual cir.
cumstances and Of such . nature u
would Immediately, directly and sub.
stantially burden or obstruct the ac-
tual physical movement Of. and con-
tinuous trading in, commodities In
interstate commerce.
| UJJIa the TartAr ease (Csuffev act)