Evening star., 1952-03-04
Gambling Tax Survives
First Test in Ruling
By Supreme Court


way open today for future con-
stitutional tests of such diverse
matters as daily reading of the
Bible in public schools and the new
Federal tax on gambling.
But for this year at least, the
tribunal, in rulings yesterday on
District and New Jersey cases. re-
fused to set aside the tax policy
and the school practice. 1t would
not pass on questions Of constitu-
tionality in either instance. but it,
indicated it may do so if stronger
suits come up next term.
Those were major actions in an
avalanche of opinions and orders
as the justices returned to the
bench for the first time since Feb
ruary 4. Another decision upheld
validity of New York States Fem
berg law. banning employment Of
subyersives in the public school
system.
The court also found that the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement
Act does not empower the Secre-
tary of Agriculture to order pay
mentS to co-operatives for dispos-
ing of milk. In a Missouri case.
it sustained requirement that
employers pay employees who take
time off to vote in political elec-
tions. In a Georgia case it dis
missed an appeal attacking that
States county unit election system.
First Gambling Tax Case.
The gambling tax case, while
not clear-cut test, was the first
of its kind to reach the Supreme
Court. The law requires gamblers
to pay an occupantional fee and
a 10 per cent tax on their gross
receipts. A special three Judge
court here last November threw
out suit brought in behalf of
Hayes L. Combs, colored, of 1443
T street NV.
That panel based the dismissal
mainly on the ground that it was
being asked to issue an injunction
to protect criminal enterprise.
While it did not rule on the con-
stitutionality of the tax, the three
Judge court commented that it |
thought the tax conformed to the
Constitution.
The Supreme Court announced
merely affirmed the lower court |
decision. Justices Black, Jackson
and Burton said they believed the
appeal should have been argued.
Court officials remarked that a |
sharper case. possibly involving
some admitted gambler legally
claiming direct damage, conceiv-
ably might be accepted for review.
The challenge to the New Jersey
law requiring the reading Of at
least five verses from the Old
Testament each school day was
turned down, principally because
the court felt the persons who
brought the suit had not suffered
injury to their rights.
Three Dissent.
Justices Douglas Reed and Bur-
ton dissented from the majority
opinion, written by Justice jack
son. They said the New Jersey
case should have been considered
on it's merits. Justice Douglas
wrote that where the clash Of
interests is as real and strong asl
it is here, it is odd indeed to hold
there is no case or controversy
within the meaning of the Con-
stitution's provisions relating to
the courts jurisdiction.
Justice Jackson's opinion did
not close the door to future test
case.
"It is apparent, he stated. that
the grievance which it is sought
to itigate here is not direct dol
lars-and-cents injury but is a
religious difference"
In other actions the Supreme
Court:
l. Refused to review a District
Court judgment that Columbia
Auto Loan, Inc, violated the Dis
trict Small Loans Act by making
loans in excess of per cent in
terest. District officials charged
that premiums collected by the
company for insurance policies
for securing loans were in fact
interest.
2. Denied a review of a District
Court refusal to grant a new trial
to Margaret L. Somerville in a
damage suit against the Capital
Transit Co. She was injured in
q collision between a taxicab and
streetcar in 1947 and got $500
verdict only against the cab
driver, Howard Day. There was
a new trial and Mr.. Day won.
Miss Somerville protested that as
a passenger in the cab she was
denied an opportunity to sue
Mr.. Day and the transit company
-R NAR -