The Waterbury Democrat., 1938-10-03

the court crier, T. Perry Lippitt
solennnly intones "Oyezl Oyer" at
noon. The ninth seat will remain
vacant until President Roosevelt
names d successor TO Associate
Justice Benjamin N. Cardozo, who
died last summer after a prolonged
illness.
Tpday,s session constitutes q for
NAL prelude to an arduous nine
months term during which the tri-
bufaai win face important questions
relative to National Labor Relations
Boerd powers, principles Of taxation
and constitutional civil rights.
The opening OF the new term Is
IN sharp contract to the start OF the
lD37.3e term. When the court con-
vened q year ago, bitter feelings
aroused by the presidents plan 70
enlarge the court had been famed
anew by the revelations Of the one
time membership In the Ku Klux
Khan. Of Associate Justice Hugo l..
Black, the courts new appointee.
New Attitude Reflected
These issues have receded with
the intervening year, marked by
the courts apparent change 70 APP
proval, IN general, Of major New
Deal legislation. Not once since the
court bill fight has the tribunal
ruled against the administration IN
O major case. !.
The IVA Is the only top-rarik
administration program whose va
lldity Is involved In o case already
before the tribunal. But 1t was
thought likely that the tribunal will
be called upon to rule, later In the
term, on constitutionality Of the
new wage-hour act.
That act, embodying wage-hour
regulatory authority and q ban on
use Of child labor In production OF
goods In interstate commerce. be-
comes effective this month. Under
last years statute providing for
direct appeals from district courts
TO the Supreme Court In cases In
volving constitutionality Of federal
statutes, It was believed that the
first test Of the wage. hotir program,
II brought promptly. will reach the
Supreme Court early IN 1899 and
be acted on by the high tribunal
before conclusion Of the term.
Judge Allen Challenged
the iva case concerns the ap-
peal OF 10 private power companies
operating IN the iva area from the
decision Of q special three judge
federal district court In Tennessee
upholding validity Of the program,
in Q decision by Circuit Judge Flor
ence Allen.
Mooney, whose case now Is before
the high court for the third time,
seeks writ Of habeas corpus re-
leasing him from q life iInprison-
ment sentence imposed as q result
Of conviction OH charges brought
IN connection with San Franciscos
fatal 1915 Preparedness Day" par
ade bombing.
Now lodged in San quentin peni-
tcntiary, Mooney contends that his
original trial was conducted In IL
legal manner and that his convic-
ton was based on perjured testi-
mony and erroneous evidence. Tech
nicaiiy, he seeks 10 have the high
court review q California Supreme
Court decision rejecting his plea for
release on habeas corpus.
Four NLRB Cases
The National Labor Relations
Boards powers are challenged IN
four cases now pending before the
high tribunal! More challenges are
expected during the year. In one,
the Consolidated Edison Company
Of New York seeks TO be freed from
NLRH Jurisdiction on the grounds
Il Is purely IN interstate commerce,
In its business Of producing and
distributing electricity within New
York City.
On another case, the Ford Motor
Company contends the board does
not have authority TO seek TO revise
or modify its orders after a circuit
court has gained jurisdiction OF the
case by filing Of q review petition
by the company and Of a transcript
OF the record of the case by the
board. Although the case involves
only Q very technical point, 1t Is OF
general interest because 1t Is the
first Of the clashes between the
board and Ford to reach the high
court. f
In cases involving the Column
bian Enaaneling and Stamping Com
pany Of Terre Haute, Ind. and the
Sands Manufacturing Company OF
Cleveland, the board seeks reviews
Of circuit court decisions setting
aside the board orders ON grounds
that strikes violated contracts be-
tween employers and employees and
that the employees therefore were
not entitled to relief from the board
The broad previously had found
that IN both cases the strikes were
called as result of employer vio-
lations OF the contracts, but the
circuit. court set aside these find-
angs.
Time Issue In Dispute
An important question is raised
In two cases, namely, whether the
lapse Of time since the proposed
child labor amendment was placed
before the state by Congress In
1924 has made the proposal q dead
issue.
In enc case brought by a group
OF Kansas state legislators, the
Kansas Supreme Court held the
proposed amendment Is still open to
ratification. and the fact that a
state has once rejected the amend
ment does not bar it from later
ratifying 1t. The Kansas legislature