Evening star., 1937-01-24
BY JOHN H. CLINE
THE powers Of Congress under
Il the commerce clause Of the
Constitution, bogy man Of leg.

the commerce clause Of the
Constitution. bogy man of leg
= islators since American indus
try became Of age, will be debated
before the Supreme Court once again
next month, when the justices will
hear arguments in five cases arising
under the Wagner labor relations act.
In effect, the court will have to de-
eide whether the activities Of worker
in the big industries such as steel, au-
tomoblle and garment manufacturing
are an essential part Of interstate COM
merce.
The courts decision, in addition to
the far-reaching effect it will have on
the lives Of millions Of Americans.
will be awaited with added interest IN
view of President Roosevelts recent
demand that the judicial branch of
the Government do its part in max
ing democracy successful"
The President undoubtedly had the
Wagner cases in mind when. in ad-
dressing the opening session OF Con-
gress. he said:
During the last year there has
been q growing belief that there Is
little fault to be found with the Con-
stitution of the United States as 1t
stands today. The vital need Is not
an alteration of our fundamental law.
but an exceedingly enlightened view
with reference to it.
I'VE do not ask the courts to call
non-existent powers into being, but
we have a right to expect that con-
ceded powers or those legitimately
implied shall be made effective inStru-
ments for the common good. The proc
ess of our democracy must not be i'm
periled by the denial Of essential pow
ers of free government"
Issue Squarely Presented.
Whatever one may think Of the
Presidents position, 1t must be con-
ceded that he has presented the issue
squarely. The question is essentially
one Of Interpretation; Of deciding what
the founding fathers meant when they
specified in the Constitution that Con-
gress shall have power to regulate
commerce with foreign nations. among
the several States and with the Indian
tribes.
Obviously the controversy turns on
the Interpretation to be placed on the
meaning of the word commerce, and
the Supreme Court has consistently
refrained from laying down any hard
and fast definition of the term. In
stead, the justices have dealt with
each case as 1t arises, being guided
by the particular facts as they have
seen them in each instance.
OF the five cases set for argument
during the week of February 8, that
involving the Jones & Laughlin Steel
Corp. Is the most important.
In attempting to regulate the en-
ployer-employe relations of this cor
poration, the National Labor Relations
Board has proceeded without equivo-
cation on the assumption that the
concern Is engaged in interstate COM
merce. Should the Supreme Court
accept this view, 1t would mean that
virtually all big business" as that
term is understood today, is subject
to Federal regulation in its relations
with labor. If the court on the other
hand should hold that the company,
so far as its production workers are
concerned, Is not engaged in inter-
state commerce the effect of the Wag-
ner act would be virtually nullifed.
1t is possible that the Supreme
Court may decide the case on other
grounds, but most observers believe
the justices will base their decision on
the fundamental commerce clause
issue, as did the Fifth Circuit Court
of Appeals In holding the act uncon-
stitutional.
Similar Questions Involved
Two other cases, those involving
the Fruehauf Trailer Co. Of Detroit,
Mich, and the Friedman Harry Marks
Clothing Co., Inc, of Richmond. Va,
tions. In both Of these cases the lower
courts ruled against the Government,
holding Congress had exceeded its
powers in seeking to regulate the labor
relations Of the concerns. The other
cases involved the Associated Press
and the Washington. Virginia g.
Maryland Coach Co. The Government
won both Of these in the Circuit
Courts.
The Jones & Laughlin Corp. is the
fourth largest steel company in the
country. In 1885 it discharged 10 en-
ployes, all members and active leaders
Of the Amalgamated Association Of
TrA~ -
America. The company said the men
were dismissed for inenhciency and vio-
lations of rules, while the employees
asserted they were discharged for
union activity.
A hearing was held by the Regional
Labor Board, which received testi-
mony bearing on the companys claim
ton to hear the case. When motion
to dismiss the complaint on the basis
Of this evidence was denied, counsel
for the company Withdrew. The board
went ahead with the hearing. ordered
the reinstatement Of the workers and
issueds cease and desist" orders
against the company.
AltAiOuSh t4AC UOoLos . uACi woo
overruled by the courts, its finding Of
facts as to the company's activities
will serve as . guide for the Supreme
Court in determining whether 1t is en-
gagged In interstate commerce. Briefly,
the facts as found by the board are:
Jones & Laughlin Is q Pennsylvania
corporation with 10 subsidiaries. It
y,,,rnhssoe vnop,,fs ef,,ree fransnorts
and sells steel, pig iron and sundry
ores; employs some $4,000 workers in
plants at Pittsburgh and Aliquippa,
Pa. The corporation owns and oper-
ates ore and coal properties and trans
ports these materials In interstate
commerce to Its plants by its own lake
steamships and barges, manned by its
own employees. In addition, 1t owns
and operates by its own employees two