Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1943-03-18

e'htuN bie executive OTueF WfnCn
ordered, among other things, pre-
war salary contracts broken. The
President said:
The legality of the executive or
der was attested by the Attorney
General. prior to its issuance. No
executive order is issued without
such approval"
Disney Requests Copy.
IT seemed odd that the President
did not transmit to Congress a copy
OF the legal opinion, so Representa-
tive Disney. Democrat, OF Oklahoma
wrote a letter to Attorney General
Biddle asking for copy Here is
Mr.. Biddle's reply, dated March TO-
My dear Mr. Disney:
II have your letter OF March S re-
ouesting a copy of my opinion on
executive order No. $3.50 entitled
Providing for the Stabilizing OF the
National Economy
II am inclosing copy Of a letter
10 the President dated October 3,
1a42, In which I approved the le-
gality OF the proposed order, which
was subsequently issued by the
President as executive order $3.50
The language of the letter is that
commonly employed in connection
with the approval by me of proposed
executive orders"
The Enclosure reads as follows
October 3, 1912.
THE President,
'The White House,
my dear Mr.. President:
IT have examined the proposed
executive order Providing for the
6tabilizing of the National Economy
submitted to me today
ut has my approval as to form
and legality.
Sincerely yours,
'"tSigned) FRANCIS BIDDLE.
Attorney General"
On all of which, Representative
Disney made the following comment:
This document should take its
place among the truly great legal
opinions OF all times!'
Order Not Justified In Law.
Thus, with a mere dictum of the
Attorney General, and without any
analysis Of the statute itself or justi-
fication for freezing salaries TO an
arbitrary level, the entire executive
management class in America was
deprived of the right to have its in
come fixed by law and limit was
placed not by Congress, but. by the
Executive on the opportunity Of in
dividuals to earn salaries hitherto
deemed commensurate with their
abilities and talents.
There was nothing in the antrim
hation law which justified such an
arbitrary restriction. In fact, Con-
gress had been assured by spokes-
men for the administration that II
the bill which subsequently was
passed on October 3 did become law.
the powers therein would not be used
to effectuate proposals that had been
specifically rejected by Congress.
House Action no Surprise.
In some administration quarters
the argument has been advanced
since October that the anti-infia-
~{a M Il pre 81
broad authority. Certainly the pub
lie discussion OF this point was so
widespread that it was believed The
President must have had a legal
opinion of some kind in writing be-
fore be took action on such an i'm
portaht matter as salaries But 1t
appears that he merely took the
assurance of the Attorney General
and didn't call for an opinion In
writing Likewise, the Attorney Gen.
sral regarded the breaking down of
the salary contracts between execu-
tives and their employers, even ex~
tending into prewar DAYS. of such
routine character that he didn't
think the subject of the broken con-
tracts merited written analysis de-
Tending the step taken
The habit of arbitrariness in per-
sonal government and government
by directive seems to have become
deep~rooted. Small wonder the
House by a more than two-third
vote, adopted the Disney amendment
repudiatlng the Executive action
and that the Senate Finance Com
rlttee Is working on an amendment
with a similar objective.
Reproduction Rights Reserved