Evening star., 1937-03-30
Controversy May Prompt New
Minimum Wage Law for d. c.
Authorities Disagree as to Whether Su'
pren,e Court Reversal Puts Into
OperatiOn Act VOided in 1923.

have no case on which to claim fnan-
cial reimbursement.
In expressing his view last night
that no new legislation will be needed,
because the old law was never re-
pealed, Seal stated
MY recommendation will be for the
Commissioners to go right ahead and
appoint a new board The old law is
still on the statute books and today's
decision makes it alright"
Different Opinions Widespread.
Other lawyers, however, expressed
conflicting opinions on the question of
whether operation Of the old law can
be resumed without congressional ac-
ton. On the floor Of the Senate
members differed openly.
The Senate was in the midst Of de-
bate over the Supreme Court a few
hours after it rendered its far-reaching
decision and members were quick to
turn the discussion to the District
situation.
While Senator Black, Democrat, Of
Alabama, had the floor some one asked
about the District law and the Ala
baman replied, there is some doubt
as to that, for the reason that num-
ber OF years ago the court held un-
constitutional the minimum wage law
for the District and since that time
1t has been illegal to enforce it. To-
day, in an entirely different case,
arising from a different jurisdiction,
the court held that it was wrong In
the other case. Query: What is the
law in the District of Columbia? Do
we have minimum wage law in the
District or do we not? Will we have
to re-enact another law?"
Senator Minton, Democrat, Of In
diana, chimed in with, "Oh, yes, we
have a minimum wage law in the
District Of Columbia, because the Su-
preme Court time and again has said
that it does not veto and strike down
an act of Congress; that as between
the rights Of the parties involved in
rather than the act Of Congress. So
the law lives"
Yes" Black countered, but the
court has already spoken, and when
the court speaks that is final on case.
1t has already said, like the oracle at
Delphi, that that law in this District is
unconstitutional; and I insist that we
will probably have to re-enact that
law"
"Oh, no." said Minton.
Discussing the subject later off the
floor, Chairman King of the District
Committee said it has been his view
that the Districts original law was
too uncertain in its definition of
standards on which to base the mini
mum wage rates.
The act of 1918 was sponsored in
the House by former Representative
Edward Keating of Colorado. 1t was
steered through the Senate by the late
Senator Park Trammell of Florida.
The law applied to women l8 or over
and to minors, both boys and girls.
The term occupation" applied to a
business, industry, trade or branch
thereof, except domestic service.
The board was given full powers to
| conduct Investigations to ascertain the
wages paid women and minors in the
various industries; to examine books
and pay rolls, and to require state
ments from employers as to wages
paid those affected by the law.
The board was empowered to ascer-
tain and declare, "(a) Standards of
minimum wages for women in any
occupation within the District of Co.
lumbia, and what wages are made
quate to supply the necessary cost Of
living to any such woman workers to
maintain them in good health and to
protect their morals; and (b), stand
ards of minimum wages for minors in
any occupation within the District Of
Columbia, and what wages are un-
reasonably low for any such minor
workers"