The Waterbury Democrat., 1937-04-13

6ut the oeciSlona unqueSylOnaDly established the governments right to invoke the interstate commerce clause to impose regulation on any industry whose stoppage by strike would tend to interrupt trade be- tween the states. It is believed, therefore. that tho government can impose other types of regulation within the same limits of industry provided the measures taken are equally designed to prevent stop page of trade across state lines.
 There is an MIRA substitute drafted by administration lawyers with the aid of Donald P. Rich berg, former counsel and later chief of NRA.
 Area Not Yet Known
 Precisely the area in which the court has voted the federal gover,,- ment a right of way Is not yet known and may not be determined until new legislation has been en- acted and tested in later suits. But that the new area is considerable is generally conceded. One of MT. RoosevelHs foremost perplexities now is how to c::tend the guarantees of the Wagner act and, more particularly. the forth- coming provisions of legislation to limit hours and provide minimum wages, to the service and retail trades.
 The Wagner act cases did not ad- vance federal authority in those fields. But they did place the pro- lection of federal power over organ ization of labor in. roughly, any plant or industry which obtains sub- stantial raw materials and disposes Of substantial quantities of its man. ufactured product beyond the bor- dcrs of it's home state.
 The court decided that manufac- turing issue in three cases. In two others it held that the press asso- ciation and a bus company were engaged in interstate commerce.
 Rights of Wagner Act One or more employees of the As- Sociated Press, the Washington Vir- ginia and Maryland Coach Co.,, the Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp, the Fruehauf-Trailer (Automobiles) Co.,, and the Friedman-H Harry Marks Clothing Manufacturers) Co.,, ap- pealed to the national labor rela- tions board against encroachments upon the rights guaranteed them by the Wagner labor relations act. The act was signed by MT. Roosevelt July 5, 1885. It created the board and forbade employers to:
 ]. Interfere or coerce employees In collective bargaining.
 2. Dominate labor organization or contribute to its financial SUD- port, thereby eliminating company unions.
 3. Discriminate in employment with a view to encouraging or dis couraging membership in any labor organization.
 4. Discharge an ernploye for fil- ing charges with the board.
 5. Refuse to bargain collectively with representatives of their em- ployes.
 Found for Employees
 The court held 5-to-4 that the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution warranted congress in imposing these prohibitions and found for the employees in each in- stance. Where discharged they must be reinstated with back pay, less any other earnings since they were fired.
 Chief Justice Hughes, 75 years old on April II, read the three 5-to-4 opinions on manufacturing, speak ing in each instance also for Asso- ciate Justices Louis D. Brandeis, Harlan F. Stone, Owen J. Roberts and Benjamin N. Cardozo.
 The Associated Press opinion was with an identical vote. The bus case was unanimous. Both opin- ions were read by Roberts.
 Clustering Dissent
 Associate Justice James Clark McReynolds, i,l behalf of Associate Justices Pierce Butler, George Suth- erland and Willis Van Devanter read blistering general dissent on manufacturing, contending that the court was reversing its earlier New Deal decisions which held the NRA's blue eagle and the Guffey coal con- trol act to be unconstitutional.
 Any effect on interstate com merce by the discharge of employees shown here would be indirect and remote in the highest degree" said McReynolds. "A more remote and indirect interference with interstate commerce or a more definite inva- sion of the powers reserved to the states is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine.
 Whatever effect any cause of dis content may ultimately have upon commerce is far too indirect to justify congressional regulation. AL most anything-marriage, birth, death-may in some fashion affect commerce.
 Tt seems clear to us that con- gress has transcended the powers granted"
 Four Justices Opinion
 The four justices who held that the steel, auto-trailer and clothing manufacturing companies were not engaged in interstate commerce freely conceded that the press asso- ciation was so engaged. I But they argued that the press association was protected against federal imposition of labor prohibi- tions by the constitutional guaran- tee of freedom of the press. They insisted that a press association must have sole right to deal with its editorial employees to protect the editorial product from the possible bias of an employe committed to an idea such as union organiza ton, pointing out that labor problems bulk now larger than usual in the news.
 Freedom of Press
 The five headed by Chief Justice Hughes contended freedom of the l A..G.-