Evening star., 1939-04-19

III JlOuuClS 3##$$$#
that may enter
"the stream of DAVID Lawrence.
commerce
Until now, the Supreme Court has
declined to permit any regulation of
the amnint of farm production. but
now. using the device OF market
ing the same result can be at
tanned. Most people will fail to
see the distinction between the
courts refusal to allow the Secretary
of Agriculture to fix the quotas that
may be produced-as in the famous
A. A. A. caSe-and in permitting him
now to fix the quotas that may be
sold. The fact that a farmer still
has the power to raise. and not sell.
Is supposed to be the difference. but
in actuality it is not of any practical
Importance.
Broadens Path to Power.
The Supreme Court gradually has
been approving the attempt of Con-
gress to enlarge its own powers and
to assume rights which hitherto have
been reserved either to the States or
to the people. The definition of in
terstate commerce has long been in
dispute insofar as the power of
Congress to prohibit the movement
of goods is concerned. But uni
formly the Supreme Court has held
for the last so years or more that
the power to regulate commerce is
not the power to prohibit it alto
4
goods themselves or the transactions
. may have an adulteration or taint
of fraud or injury. as, for instance,
in the movement OF lottery tickets
across State lines or of foods or
drugs deleterious to health.
Now, however, all qualification app
pears to have been swept aside and
the Supreme Court says Congress
may prevent the flow of commerce
from working harm to the people of
the Nation
In other words, Congress, when
ever it feels that any sort of COM
merce may work harm" and this
is broad phrase-such particular
kind of business can be regulated as
to marketing. And it goes without
saying that if you can't sell your
products across State lines, there
isn't much use. in many instances, of
trying to manufacture them.
Permits Complete Control.
Complete control of the American
economic system can thus be as
sumed at any time by Congress, and
there will be no objection from the
judicial branch of the Government.
Do the American people want to sur
render complete power over produc-
ton to the Federal Government?
Maybe they do, but the customary
way for this to be achieved is for
the Federal Constitution to be
amended in the regular manner,
specifically delegating that function
to Congress. The original Constitu-
tion-and the interpretation which
has been followed for more than 100
years-provided that unless the peo-
pie delegated specifically to the Fed
eral Government anv authority to
control their lives and business, this
authority was considered to belong
to the people in what are known as
the reserved powers"
Under the latest Interpretation.
the American constitutional system
undergoes a very fundamental
change. because disregard of the
right of the people to pass on a grant
OF power and assumption by Con-
gress of rights not belonging to the
Federal establishment marks a de-
parture from custom and precedent.
And so long as the Supreme Court
offers no dissent, Congress will con-
tinue to exercise more and more
power over the Nation, while States
rights will gradually become less i'm
portant.
Different System Abroad.
There are many who believe in
strong centralized Government and
that Congress should necessarily
control production and marketing or
goods and even fix prices as we'll as
= wage rates. The experience of Eng
land and France is often pointed to
as justification for controls insti-
tuted within democracies. but what
is often overlooked is that in the
European democracies. the people
can at any time recall their legisla-
tive body, whereas in the United
States an undesirable law may be
passed and there is really no way
to apply a check upon Congress ex-
cept once in two years. Nor can an
election take place on particular
Issue separated from all other oues-
tions that usually arise when, as in
America, presidential and congress
sional election is held on the same
day.
1t Is important, therefore, to re-
cord that the Supreme Court has
come to the conclusion that Congress
can exercise supreme power over
marketing and even if it means
regulation of production, the court
says, "the motive of Congress in
exerting the power is irrelevant"