Evening star., 1954-01-05

beneath are the planes otl
Virginia Challenges
Arlington $ Right 10
Attack Milk Pricing
Arlington County's effort in
the Supreme Court to stop the
Virginia Milk Commission from
fixing prices Of milk sold in Ar
lington by District distributors
today hinged largely on the legal
right of the county board to at
tack the commission.
The question assumed major
proportions as oral arguments
ended late yesterday. It had not
arisen In State court proceed
ings. It had been barely men,
toned in a last-minute para
graph in a brief filed last week
by State officials.
Chief Justice Warren asked
Attorney Roger ]. Whiteford to
submit a supplementary written
statement on that point within
a week. Mr.. Whiteford, a WASH
ington attorney. was retained by
Virginia Attorney General j..
Lindsay Almond to represent the
State.
Mr.. Whiteford promised to
show that ''this little institu-
ton (the county board) that
could be wiped out by the Legis-
lature at any time has no stand
ing to come into this court and
attack the State commission
which is an arm of the legis-
lature."
Original Issue.
The original issue was whether
the Virginia Court of Appeals
properly held that the State
commission in 1851 validly or
dered an increase of half a cent
a quart in prices Of milk sold to
Arlington County consumers by
District distributors. About two
thirds of the milk consumed in
that area comes from District
distributors.
Malcolm D. Miller. attorney
for the county board. contended
that such fixing Of minimum
prices by the State commission
was. Illegal because 1t was an un-
due burden" on interstate COM
merce.
Justice Frankfurter wanted to
know exactly what burden was
placed on interstate commerce
by the State commissions price
order. He remarked that 1t did
not seem to keep out competitors.
discriminate between outsiders
and insiders, or prevent milk
from flowing into Virginia.
Mr.. Miller replied that price
regulation by the State commits
sion in this instance was essen
tally an interference or hin
drance in an interstate commerce
area.
Mr.. Whiteford denied that the
sale of milk by District distribu-
tors to Arlington County con-
sumers was really interstate COM
merce. He declared that the
State has a duty as well as legal
right to regulate prices.
THE county board talks Of
this question as If it were dealing
with pig iron," he protested.
land not with a commodity like
milk and its relationship to the
health and welfare of a commu-
nifty and the responsibility for
regulation. The buying and SELL
ing Of milk in this case is essen
TALLY local business.
Denies Discrimination.
The price order did not dis
criminate against any distributor
or consumer or violate any Fed
eral law. he said.
Discussion of the county's
right to bring suit against the
State commission order devel-
oped from Mr.. Miller's explana-
ton that the attack on the
State commission was brought
in a dual capacity. It was
brought by the county board as
a corporate body and by the
individual board members as
consumers affected by the State
price fixing on milk from Dis
Cr1ct distributors, he noted.
Justice Frankfurter wanted to
know how many quarts Of milk
the board members consumed.
Mr.. Miller replied that it was "a
whole lot" Mr.. Whiteford re-
torted that nothing in the court
record showed that any member
ever saw a gill of that milk"
When Mr.. Miller traced the
earlier proceedings before the
State commission and the State
court, he recalled that witnesses
were questioned at one stage
without being sworn in.
Justice Frankfurter remarked
that this presumably was a
gentlemen's agreement. Justice
Jackson EQUIPPED: "That comes
Of milk drinking in Virginia.
II was referring to Virginia
gentlemen" Justice Frankfurter
shot back.