Detroit evening times. (Detroit, Mich) 1921-1958, 1944-06-21
Freedom Of Speech
New Deal Style
By Benjamin DoCasseres

DILL VI
TT IS an astonishing fact that 153 years after the
adoption by the states of that vital amendment
to our Constitution occasion should arise
wherein that very keystone of our liberties
freedom of speech-should need to be decided by
a court of law.
1t is all the more startling in view of thesfact
that we are fighting war to conquer those
totalitaran powers that have denied the right of
free speech.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Phil
adelpha has just rejected by unanimous vote
petition of the New Deal National Labor Relations
Board to have the Budd Manufacturing Co.
and its president, Edward G. Budd adjudged in
contempt of court because Mr.. Budd has written a
letter to the $4,000 employees Of the company argu
ing for what he sincerely believed to be "the
advantages of union of their own"
In this petition the NLRB placed itself
ABOVE THE CONSTITUTION.
1t demonstrated again the dangerous usurpa-
tons of bureaucratic rule in free democracy.
THIS board, spoiled child of the Wagner Labor
l. Relations Act, says, in effect in all It's tota-
tartan arrogance
1.-THE Constitution? AM THE CONSTITU.
TIONw
The soundy American judges who constitute
the Third Circuit Court of Appeals show in their
decision every evidence of profound surprise that
at this day and date in American history they
should be called upon to pass the question to
whether the president of manufacturing COM
pany has right to express openly his opinion on
labor organizations.
In the United States that is like a challenge Of
the right to breathe.
Judge Charles Alvin Jones, who wrote the
decision against the NLRB and who is, by the
way Democrat and an appontee of President
Roosevelt, says:
ut can hardly be questioned that the consttu-
tional guarantee (of free speech) protects the
employer and employe alike"
But it has been questioned by the administra-
tons National Labor Relations Board!
Is it not incredible that the simple basis of our
liberties needs to be restated in the year 1944-of
all years!
CPEAKING of the Wagner Act Judge Jones
~ says
"The Wagner Act does not purport to author.
ze restraint upon freedom of speech in any cir.
circumstances 4. . had there been such provision
in the statute it would have been invalid as in
traventiOn of the first amendment. Accordingly,
Congress to forbid an employer from expressing
opinions as to labor unions to anything else so
long as his expressions do not constitute, or con-
tribute to acts or threats of discrimination, coer
cion intimidation in denial of his employees free
and untrammeled exercise of their rights as guar.
anteed by the Wagner Act"
1t does not take much imagination to believe
that the above words of Judge Jones were aimed
directly at the whole labor policy" of this admin
istration.
That policy" has been continuously and
demagogicaly in favor of the laboring man and
just as continuously and demagogicaly against
the employers of labor, the most striking instance
of the latter being the Montgomery Ward seizure
which will not down.
THERE is now in this country one law for the
worker and another for the employer
That is not constitutional Americansm
The Constitution, if it is not saved by such
fearless Americansm as the judges of the Third
District Court of Appeals displayed, may become a