Evening star., 1937-12-03
EDGERTON ARRIVES
FOR SENATE QUIZ
May Be Called Before Sub
committee Tomorrow to
Give Judiciary Views.

Prof Henry w. Edgerton of New
York, whose writings on judicial re-
view of congressional acts have
caused his nomination to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Dis
trict OF Columbia. to be questioned by
some Senators, arrived here today and
may testify before Senate subcom-
mittee tomorrow.
The Cornell University professor
was invited to come before the Judi
ciary Subcommittee handling his ap-
pointment by its chairman, Senator
Burke, Democrat, of Nebraska. Sena-
tor Burke was the first to suggest that
the views OF the nominee on the uues-
ton of how far courts should go in
reviewing acts of Congress should be
inquired into before Prof. Edgerton
is confirmed.
The NebraSkan indicated he would
fix the hearing for tomorrow morning
II it is convenient to the other mem
bers, Senators Borah of Idaho and
Van Nuys, Democrat, of Indiana.
Several days ago Senator Burke said
ne thought the subcommittee should
question the nominee on the points of
view ne expressed in an article on
The Incidence of Judicial Control
Over Congress-"
Files Report on Groner.
Meanwhile. Senator King, Demo-
crat. OF Utah, filed in the Senate late
yesterday the favorable report of the
judiciary Committee on the nomina-
ton OF Associate Justice D. Lawrence
Groner for promotion to be chief
justice of the same court. Prof. Edper-
/ ton has been nominated to take Justice
Groner's place as an associate Justice.
Published first in the Cornell Law
School Quarterly of last April, the
Edgerton article later was used by
supporters of the Presidents Supreme
Court reorganization plan in Senate
hearings on that controversial issue.
The article was one Of seven briefs
included in the court bill hearing by
proponents. Echoes of last sessions
court fight may resound in the Sem
ate when the Edgerton appointment
reaches the floor for discussion.
Comment of Burke.
Senator Burke said yesterday that
when he read Prof. Edgerton's article
1t left him with the impression that.
while it did not directly challenge the
power of the Supreme Court to in
validate acts of Congress, it indi-
| Gated disapproval of the principle.
Senator Burke has not announced a
definite decision to oppose confirma-
ton but indicated his course of ac-
ton would depend on whether the
doubt left in his mind by the article
Is cleared up by the testimony of the
nominee when the subcommittee
| meets.
In one place the professor wrote:
1T may be necessary to national
survival that some national tribunal
have authority to decide that acts of
State Legislatures are inconsistent with
the Federal Constitution. Judicial
supremacy over national legislation
rests on no such necessity. Whether
to preserve. restrict or abolish the
power Of courts to hold acts of Con-
gress void is a pure question CT poll
icy, the answer to which should de-
pend on the character of the results
which the present system has pro-
duced and is, therefore, likely to pro-
duce"
At another place he wrote.
When a legal scholar says, I am
for continuance of the Supreme
Courts power Of review, I think that
it has proved its worth. I think
that over the long haul the court has
done a superb job, wonder what
cases seem to him so valuable as to
outweigh the Dred Scott case, which
helped to entrencf1 slavery; the civil
rights and related cases, which pro-
tected the oppression of Negroes; the
employers liability and workmens
compensation cases, which denied re-
lief to injured workmen; the child
labor and minimum wage cases, which
protected the hiring Of women and
children at starvation wages; the in
come tax cases, which prevented the
shifting of tax burdens from the poor
| to the rich, and the many minor in
stances in which the courts review has
done harm to common men,"
The Circuit Court of Appeals for the
District Of Columbia is often rated as
second only to the Supreme Court in