Evening star., 1939-04-25

JHugment OF American Liberty
League la,Dyers that it ,Das plain
ly unconstitutional resulted in
widespread lack of compliance
until statute 1Dds upheld by ST.
prene Court in April, 1887. Since
then, agitation has been con-
ststent for revision, with Congress
no1D considering numerous
amending proposals.
BY JOHN C. HENRY.
Expressing himself as amazed
at the distortions" by those criticiz-
Ing the National Labor Relations
Act and at the blindness of many
Of the assaults upon its admins
tration," Charles Fahy, general
counsel of the Labor Relations
Board, today asked the Senate Labor
Committee to reject the numerous
pending procedural amendments.
mot only is the present pro-
cedure fair. full and sound" he de-
clared, but it is so temperate
that were It to be changed at all
IN material respects, means for
strengthening it should be sought.
Most of the amendments, however,
are weakening and debilitating, de-
structive of time-honored and es-
tablished processes, and permeated
with possibilities of delay and frus-
tration."
Reviewing the boards record be-
fore the courts. Mr.. Fahy pointed
out that the Supreme, Circuit and
District Courts had rendered 211
final decisions under the Labor Act
since the fall of 1885.
Act Precedent Making.
Nothing comparable to this has
ever occurred in the history of any
agency of Government. No other
legislation which has been the sub.
ject of such mass assault through
the courts, or has been obliged to
carry forward such an offensive
through the courts. has ever before
survived. But this law has survived
and with vitality"
At one point during questioning
VI 4AA. ally, OCildtOl ool nc, DCulO-
crat. of Nebraska declared the
boards record before the courts
"has been remarkable, I will admit"
In summation of his views Of
validity of the boards procedure,
Mr.. Fahy remarked:
The courts have thoroughly
analyzed, studied and judged this
procedure. 1t was threshed out
before them by the bar of the
country in 100 cases in a contin-
uous debate of 18 months. That
debate is entirely concluded in the
courts. 1t has been decided 100
times that these methods are sound;
that they fit into our legal system
without the slightest infringement
Of constitutional rights of any per-
son: and that they conform to
established American standards"
Chief Justice Quoted.
The Chief Justice of the United
States said in the Jones & Laughlin
case:
1--WE construe the procedural pro-
visions as affording adequate oppor-
tunity to secure judicial protection
against arbitrary action in accord
ance with the well-settled rules
applicable to administrative agen-
cies set up by Congress to aid in
the enforcement of valid legisla-
ton"
AS a comparison, Mr. Fahy told
the committee the Circuit Courts
of Appeals have been affirmed by
the Supreme Court in only IS per
cent of their decisions relating to
the Labor Board. while the board
itself has been upheld by the Su-
preme Court in 76 per cent. not in
cluding the Fainblatt case Of last
Monday.
TOO often to specify" he told the
committee, "the cry of arbitrariness,
unreasonablness. infringement OF
constitutional rights, lack of fair
hearings. ad inf1nitum, has been
silenced by the courts as unfounded
when the courts have reviewed the
actual records of cases before them,
and have calmly considered and
judged what has been done.
Critics Often Praise Act.
"Time after time, parties to ac-
tual cases, previously led by mis-
information and vicious propagan-
da to believe they could not obtain
a fair hearing, that the cards were
stacked against them, have frankly
expressed on the record and in
correspondence their reinsurance as
to the manner Of the conduct of
the work of the board.
Senator Burke (seeking numer-
Gus procedural changes) does not
mention these innumerable cases in
which the claims of unfairness and
error are merely the outcries Of
lawyers in their diligent and often
unseemly efforts to save their clients
from the consequences OF illegal
conduct. or to discredit the board,
efforts turned back by the courts.
Persons may inveigh against the
board on the basis of decisions in
which the courts have disagreed
with the board. They seem obliv-
ious of all else, and would approve
of the board, presumably, only if,
unlike any court or agency ever
known to men. it had not only
achieved perfection but even had
escaped differences of opinion
about disputed matters 1t has de-
cided.
They ignore the hundreds, in
deed the thousands, of cases in
which the rights guaranteed by the
act have been preserved, lawless-
ness ended, decency brought into
lives and labor relations, cases
amicably adjusted, elections held,
and peace secured consistently with
the policies of the statute