Evening star., 1937-05-25

| concurred in the majority opinion In
all points but one.
He disagreed only upon the method
OF administering the law, with the
States depositing their unemployment
insurance rebates in the Federal Treas
ury. This provision. he said, invades
the rights Of the States. Associate
Justice Butler. in a third dissenting
opinion, announced his agreement
with both McReynolds and Sutherland
Age Benefits Taken Up.
With unemployment insurance
safely on the constitutional side of the
fence, Justice Cardozo then took up
the old-age benefits.
This phase Of the act was attacked
by George P. Davis, stockholder in the
Edison Electric Illuminating Co. Of
Boston. Davis suit for an injunction
to restrain the corporation from paying
the tax was dismissed by the Boston
district court on the ground it was
not proper action. but the First
Circuit Court of Appeals took a diff
ferent view and declared the entire act
| unconstitutional.
Cardozo's opinion disclosed that he
and Justices Brandeis, Stone and
Roberts felt the suit should be dis
missed on the ground a suit for in
junction was not the proper remedy.
The majority of the Supreme Court
decided. however, that because Of
extraordinary features" in the case it
was proper to determine whether the
benefits and taxes are valid or in
valid"
Proceeding to his consideration Of
the case on its merits, Justice Cardozo,
speaking for the majority, said
Congress may spend money in aid
OF the general welfare. There have
been great statesmen In our history
who have stood for other views. We
will not resurrect the contest. 1t Is
now settled by decision.
Line Must Be Drawn.
The conception of the spending
power advocated by Hamilton and
strongly reinforced by Story has pre-
vailed over that of Madison, which
has not been lacking in adherents.
Yet difdculties are left when the power
Is conceded. The line must still be
drawn between one welfare and an
other, between particular and general
Where this shall be placed cannot be
known through formula in advance
OF the event. There is a middle
ground or certainly penumbra in
which discretion Is at large. The
discretion, however, is not confided
to the courts. The discretion belongs
to Congress, unless the choice is
clearly wrong, display of arbitrary
power, not an exercise Of judgment.
This Is now familiar law
Nor is the concept of the general
welfare static Needs that were mar
row or parochial a century ago may
be interviewer in our day with the
Well-being Of the Nation What is
critical or urgent changes with the
times"
Court Liberality Seen.
Followers of the controversy over
the Presidents court bill seized eagerly
go eAAAo AADSA al InAA6OdSC, 1lOW Lllc law
OF the land, as clear proof that the
Presidents plea for infusion Of new
blood" into the judiciary to obtain
more enlightened' Interpretation
OF the Constitution, now has no foun-
dation in fact.
continuing, Justice Cardoza said:
Inc purge OF Nationwide calamity
That began In 1929 has taught us
many lessons. Not the least is the
solidarity Of interests that may once
nave seemed to be divided. Spread
ing from State to State, unemploy-
ment Is an Ill, not particular, but
general, which may be checked, if
congress 50 determines, by the re-
sources Of the Nation. If this can
nave been doubtful until now, our
ruling today Gin the unemplovment