The Washington times., 1938-04-19
BY CHICK KENNY

On Thursday, April %, the
Supreme Court of the United
States will render an important
constitutional decision relative to
whether or not the United States
Government can be enjoined from
collecting admission tax on tickets
purchased by the general public
for college football games.
Behind the decision is the de-
batable question of college foot
ball as big business versus educa-
tional promotion.
Is it a billion-dollar business to
satisfy alumni, or is it an institu-
ton designed to build character?
BUSINESS OR CULTURE?
IS it a business designed to carry
the name of an institution over
the radio on New Year Day as its
sons" play in post-season cham
pionship game, or it is an instru-
ment to build the mental culture
of the masses to higher plane?
The famous Carnegie Founda-
ton Report, Number %, the blud-
geon which was used in the late
twenties to startle nation gone
touchdown mad, and to tone down
the existing athletic educational
policies of colleges, has not been
used in any way. AS far as that
famous protocol is concerned, it
can be laid at rest with the stony
scraps of Neanderthal man and
the dodo bird or the remains of st.
Swithln. 1t will not be dragged
out to aid the Supreme Court
gentry in their final decision.
Briefly the case, now up for
final decision, passed from the
district court at Atlanta, Ga, to
the circuit court of appeals.
COLLEGES FIGHT
The regents of the University
of Georgia and Georgia Tech
pointed out that the Federal Gov
eminent through the Bureau of
Internal Revenue, could not COL
lect admission tax on football
game tickets. On January 6, 1887,
the district court rendered the de-
cision in favor of the Government.
On December Is, 1887, the circuit
court of appeals affirmed the lower
court decision, two to one.
The case was based on sums Of
money in tax admissions amount
ing to $895.37, as collected by the
University of Georgia for games
in September and October; and
$3,914.63 collected by Georgia
Tech athletic department during |
the same span of games.
The regents maintained that
the moneys, accrued from football
receipts, was governmental instru-
ment for educational purposes,
and the promotion of physical
training, including athletic con-
tests, for which admission fees
we're charged. was an integral
part of educational activities.
ONE DISSENTER
The dissenting vote, that of |
Judge Hutchinson, in favor of the
college officials, was opinionized |
by the fact that back in the early |
days of athletic competition when
the Greeks and Romans staged
their mighty displays of proves,
such affairs were considered a de- |
velopment of mans moral and |
mental culture. Therefore, foot
ball games as played in colleges
today are governmental func-
tions," and are moulds for a
playerS's physical welfare.
However, as noted above, the
opinion of Judge Hutchinson, was
overruled by those of his two col
leagues of the bench.
1t was held by the higher court,
therefore, that athletic games by
State Universities are not "gov-
ernmental functions" and that a
football game as played by a col
lege is no different than a pro
fessional contest. Therefore, it was
decreed that college football is
strictly commercialized business,
and is subject to amusement tax.
With the decision of the Dis.
trict Court of Appeals defeating
the plea of Georgia and Georgia
Tech by two to one vote, will
the Supreme Court rule likewise
on the decision?