Evening star., 1953-05-02
Supreme Court
To Decide Fate
Of Lost Laws
Justices Interested
In Districts Old
Discrimination Ban
By Robert K. Welsh

likely OOOdy W 1A11U "AIIAAA q
what happened to the
"lost laws" aimed at
restaurants to serve
Negroes in the District.
Attorneys doubted. however.
that a decision before adjourn
ment in early June would reach
the constitutional issue OF con-
power to give the Dis
trict q broad measure Of legis-
lative self-government.
The wind-up Of two days Of
oral argument yesterday was
peppered with references to Dis
trict home rule, daylight saving
time, fossil" laws, q Feather
duster legislature" and what Dis
trict law officials were supposed
to have said or done in the past.
Justices showed especially close
interest in arguments that anti
discrimination enactments by the
Districts old Legislative AS
sembly in 1872 and 1873 were or
were not repealed.
Lost Laws" Cited.
They also took particularly
pointed judicial notice Of the
term ''lost laws" They wanted
to know why the laws were not
located until 1947 and whether
they were ever enforced.
District Government and JUS
tice Department lawyers urged
the Supreme Court to find that
the 1928 laws were valid when
passed and are still enforceable.
Attorneys for John R. Thompson
Co., Inc, and the Washington
Board of Trade contended that
the old assembly lacked authority
to pass the laws in the first place.
that Congress could not constitu-
tionally delegate such legislative
power, and that the statutes.
even if originally valid, were later
rebealed or died from non-use.
The test case, based on the
disputed laws of 1928, re-
suited from refusal of a Thomp-
sons restaurant in 1850 to give
service to Negroes. Assistant
Corporation Counsel Chester H.
Gray told the tribunal that the
ancient enactments were dis
covered among documents in a
safe in the District building,
They we've really lost laws" un-
til he was asked in 1947 by the
late Charles Houston, a Negro
attorney here, to search for them.
he said.
Vinson Comments.
"They were lost laws" Chief
Justice Vinson commented, III
they were in a safe in your office
and you had the key in your
pocket to find out what the laws
of the District were."
This prompted Justice Frank
furter to comment on a dis
closure by Edward F. Colladay.
attorney representing the Board
of Trade. Mr.. Colladay said a
codiflcation of District laws in
1901 was based to a considerable
extent on a study of an 1894
compilation volume tucked away
in the rare books section of the
Washington Public Library.
Apparently" Justice Frank
furter remarked. "the laws Of
the District are a photographed
rarity"
Mr.. Colladay contended that
the codification. prepared by the
late Judge Walter S. Cox, and
enacted in part, by Congress in
1901. repealed the 1872-72 enact
ments. The latter statutes were
not contained in the new code.
Mr.. Colladay declared Judge
Cox and other jurists, lawyers
and members of Congress at that
time wanted to eliminate fossil
laws" and unenforced statutes.
He also said the legislative as
sembly became known as the
feather duster legislature" be-
cause most of its furniture dis
appeared when it went out OF
existence after three years.
Laws Attacked.
The main attack on the old
laws was made by Ringgold
Hart, attorney for the Thomp-
son company. He emphasized
that he was not arguing against
District home rule as such. He
declared he was arguing against
validity of the laws.
I'VE have a Congress to whom
they could apply every day for
legislation of this kind" Mr..
Hart said, Instead Of doing
that they resurrect this old stat
ute under which there never was
an attempt to prosecute until
now"
When Mr.. Hart developed his
argument against constitutional
power of Congress to delegate
legislative authority Of that kind
to a District governing body.
Justice Frankfurter asked about
daylight saving time legislation
for this city.
Daylight Time Mentioned.
Mr.. Hart agreed that Congress
a few days ago voted to let the
Commissioners determine day
light saving time annually. But
he declared this was a matter
of administrative determination"
by the Commissioners and that
Congress itself did the legislat-
ing.
The principal reference to
home rule came when Mr.. Hart
recalled that Corporation Coun-
sci Vernon E. West in 1947 told
congressional committees that
Congress can delegate power to
the District to make local reg
ulations. Mr.. Hart quoted Mr..
West as saying Congress could
not delegate legislative powers