Evening star., 1937-04-12

cases as "terse. we'll considered and
sound" the minority expressed the
view that the Supreme Court de
parts from well-established principles"
followed in the Schechter and the
Carter Coal Co cases
The three respondents" the minor
ity said in reference to the present
cases, happen TO be manufacturing
concernS-one large, two relatively
small. The act is not applied to each
upon grounds common to all
obviously what is determined as to
these concerns may gravely affect a
multitude of employers who engage in
great variety of private enterprBes-
merchantile, manufacturing, publish
ing, stock raising, mining, etc 1t puts
into the hands of a board power of
control over purely local industry be-
yond anything heretofore deemed per-
missabie
During the argument of the case,
counsel for the Government had asked
. the court to hold that labor disputes,
even though their effect on commerce
be indirect, resulted in such substan-
tlal obstruction to the free flow nj
commerce that they should properly
be within the power of Congress.
Counsel for the steel corporation, how
ever, had expressed confidence the
| court would follow its former rule
| that the effect must be direct before
/ coming within the scope of congress
sional power.
Effect of Labor Disputes.
Alter asserting the right of en-
| ployeS TO bargain collectively with
| their employer, the court then LAID
| down the rule that the determining
| principle in deciding the validity Of
the act in this case must be the nature
of the effect of labor disputes on inter
state commerce, not the character Of
work in which a particular employe
may be engaged.
Although activities may be intra-
state in character when separately
! considered" the Chief Justice SAID
If they have such a close and sub
stantial relation TO interstate COM
merce that their control is essential or
appropriate to protect that commerce
from burdens and Instructions, Con-
greSs cannot be denied the power
TO exercise that control"
The opinion then proceeded to hold
| that discrimination against workers
because Of their union affiliations and
/ the refusal of employers TO bar
gain collectively with representatives
chosen by the employees tended TO re-
suit IN strikes having a substantial
effect on the free flow of interstate
commerce
OF the five cases involving the WaE-
ner act. three manufacturing cases
concerned a question of fundamental
importance to the New Deal and the
Nation-namely whether the Fed
eral control Of interstate commerce
can be extended to intrastate mai
ters indirectly affecting the flow of
commerce between the States
Constitutional Provision.
The Constitution provides merclv
that Congress shall have power 10
regulate commerce among the States.
The Supreme Court has interpreted
this 10 mean that congressional con-
troll extends only 10 matters having
a direct effect on this commerce.
Arguing that the tremendous in
duStrial development in the country
must now be taken into consideration
in interpreting the commerce clause.
attorneys for the Government argued
during the hearing of the Wagner
cases that Congress should be given
control Of any industrial activity
which affects commerce indirectly, il
that effect Is substantial one
Under previous definitions announced
by the high court, big steel plant j.
an intrastate business. But even if this
be true, the Government lawyers
argued, strike shutting down the
plant must necessarily have far
reaching effects on interstate corr
merce. They pointed out that most
Of the big industries operate their
| own transportation systems and also
/ employ the regular channels OF inter-
state commerce in hauling vast guam
/ titles Of raw materials to their plant
| from all parts of the country, and
repeat this process in shipping their
finished products to buyers in vir-
tually all the States.
In such situation, they contended,
the courts should not apply hair
/ splitting definitions in upholding
/ conception of commerce that was
/ evolved during the horse and buggy
era.
Argument on Strikes
| The position taken by ATTORNEYS for
! the companie was that a strike Is
the direct result of labor trouble,
! and that the effect on commerce is,
therefore, secondary or indirect. This
has been the attitude adopted by the
| court in the past
These suits have been treated SIS
test cases. the court having rejected
/ several subsequent petitions TO review
similar employer-employee contro-
versies
Law in Effect in 1895.
The challenged law went on the
statute books July S, 1885. after a
slow trip through Congress in which
its constitutionaity frequently was
/ challenged. 1t guaranteed workmen
the right TO select representatives for
collective bargaining with their en-
ployers on wages. hours of labor and
| working conditions.
The National Labor Relations Board
was created to administer the Law.
President Roosevelt, in signing the
bill, said the measure Should serve
as an important step toward the
achievement of just and peaceful Ia
Dor relations in industry" William
Green, president of the American
Federation of Labor, said the law was
"labors magma charta."
In August, 1888, the President an
pointed three-man board TO admin
lister the act. 1t was made up of ].
warren Madden of Pittsburgh. a COL
lege law professor; Edwin S. Smith OF
| Rngfnn fnrr,1ar }ot III