New Deal Laws and the Courts
The Supreme Court of the United States.
By WILLIAM C. UTLEY
THE New Deul has been tossing
about In stormy political sens
during the last few months in Its
struggle to gain the shore of
economic security, and has at last run
aground on the Constitution of the
United States, front which not even the
throwing over of billions of dollars in
ballast seems likely to he able to lift it.
Court decisions have been falling
thick and fast, now that New Deal leg
islation has had a chance to get into
application, and claims against it have
bad a chance to find their ways to the
tribunals, At one time approximate
ly 400 rases Involving New Deal legis
lation were pending in the courts.
Many of these have already been de
cided upon, some by the lower courts
and a few flnnlly by the Supreme
court. There are about 17 of them
which the concensus of the press has
Imbued with more Importance than all
of the olhers, Of these cases 15 have
been decided against the present ad
ministration and two for It. All de
cisions but one were rendered since
the beginning of the year; eight of
them were Supreme court decisions,
leaving the others to be appealed.
Most Important of nil such decisions
was that which threw out virtually the
entire structure of the NR A, knocking
the props from under New Deal plan
ning. Tills left the President with
three courses of action open: To
build h new and better NBA, to sim
ply suspend action for a while and
“let 'em see how they like it,” or to
campaign for an amendment to the Con
stitution which would further cen
tralize legislative power to aid the ad
ministration in coping with changing
social ami economic conditions.
For a while It looked as if file Presi
dent's policy was to be a combination
of nil three, hut of late weeks the
third lias emerged more and more
clearly. What lias led up to the pres
ent state may be followed through a
resume of the Important eases which
have been decided by Federal District
courts and the Supreme court.
Test New Deal Legislation.
The first Judicial straw which indi
cated the way the storm winds were
blowing was the decision of tbe Su
preme court on January 7 of this year,
when It declared unconstitutional Sec
tion He of the National Industrial lle
covery act. It was t tie first real test
of the legitimacy of New Ileal legisla
tion and blasted high hopes held out
by administration leaders that It would
be upheld.
The court ruled that the Executive
hnd been given legislative powers
which were uncalled for, that proper
rules hnd not been laid down for his
guidance. The section had conferred
upon the President ttie power to pro
hibit the transportation over state
lines of oil which had been produced
in excess of state quotas; the power
was denied.
Mailed ns a victory for the Now
Deal was the ileeision (5 to 4) of the
Supreme court In upholding the gold
clause cases, rendered February 18.
While the decision upheld New Deal
action of denying the gold pay mem
obligation, the opinions of the justices
were in several cases severe rebukes.
In this Instance there were three
issues at stake. The first resulted
from congressional action In setting
aside the obligation in private con
tracts to pay interest or principal in
gold, or other specific coin or currency.
The action was sustained by the ma
jority of five, who confirmed decisions
of lower courts that "congress had
power to adopt the Joint resolution
with respect to these obligations of
railrond companies ami hence that the
gold clauses could not be enforced and
the bonds were payable In legal tender
currency."
From the court of claims came the
second Issue, which Involved the holder
of a federal gold certificate who
claimed that he should be paid ac
cording to the terms of the gold obliga
tion or Its equivalent. In this case the
court simply snid that the plaintiff had
not been able to show any actual dam
ages, so the court of claims hod no
right to entertain the case in tiie first
place.
Much tiie same was the third issue,
also up from the court of claims, In
volving the holder of a liberty bond
who wanted his payment In gold. And
here the court made o peculiar de
cision. It rather hinted that New
Deal legislation was unconstitutional,
but refused to do anything about it.
The dlctums of tiie court said: “We
hold that the joint resolution of June
5, 1933. so far as It attempted to over
ride the obligation of the United
States created by the bond in suit, Is
Invalid. It went beyond t lie constitu
tional authority of congress. Ilut we
hold that the action Is for breach of
contract and that the plaintiff lias
failed to show cause of action for
actual damages. Hence tiie court of
claims could not entertain the suit."
About the same time a Federal court
in Louisville, Ky., denied that tiie
I'WA had the right to condemn land
for slum clearance. A Cincinnati
court di<l tiie same. Another court
held the lumber codes of the NBA
unconstitutional. In some states, state
courts threw out state recovery acts
which were designed to complement
tiie national one.
Labor Relations.
Government power to regulate labor
relations anywhere in 11 to country,
based on the constitutional statement
that congress shall have power to “reg
ulate commerce with foreign nations,
and among the several states and with
tiie Indian tribes,” was discarded by
Judge John Percy Nlelds in the Fed
eral District court at Wilmington,
Del., In Wierton Steel company case.
Another jolt for NKA.
Another blow to NRA labor rela
tions was an Injunction granted by
Federal District Judge Charles Irvin
Dawson at Louisville to 35 soft coal
operators, relieving them f:-om the
rigors of NRA minimum wage require
ments.
Federal District Judge W. L Grubb
in Birmingham took a pot shot at the
TVA when he declared that $1,000,000,
000 experiment unconstitutional, claim
ing that the federal government had no
right to compete with privnte business
In any state. This was, of course, di
rected at the “TVA yardstick." It
was a New Deal defeat which was
turned into a victory when Judge
Grubb’s decision was reversed by the
Circuit Court of Appeals in New Or
leans.
A shadow of the destruction that was
to come to the AAA processing tax
was cast when the Supreme court on
March 4 voided the plans of the New
Deal for stabilization of the milk In
dustry In New York.
In May the Supreme court deliv
ered three death blows to ttie New
Deal. One was the decision which
voided the Itnilroad Retirement act.
In another case the court put a fur
ther crimp in President Roosevelt’s
power by denying him the right to re
move a federal officer from office. The
President had sought to remove Wil
liam E. Humphrey from the Federal
Power commission.
And Another Blow.
The third blow, the one that left
even Franklin L>. Itoosevelt speechless
(for a while) was the decision In the
Schechter poultry case. The decision
was all the more crushing because it
was unanimous. In delivering the
court’s opinion Chief Justice Hughes
declared delinitely that all of the code
making provisions were an unconstitu
tional transfer ot legislative power*
from congress to tlie President find
others who had no constitutional right
to them. About the codes, Chief Jus
tice Hughes said:
". . Section 3 (NKA) of the Ite
covery act Is without precedent. It
supplies no standards for any trade,
industry or activity. It does not un
dertake to prescribe rules of conduct to
be applied to particular states of fact
to he determined by appropriate ad
ministrative procedure. Instead of
prescribing rules of conduct, it author
izes the making of codes to prescribe
them.
“ . We think that the code-mak
ing authority thus prescribed Is an
unconstitutional delegation of legisla
tive power.”
About tlie power of the federal gov
ernment to regulate local wages and
working hours the chief justice said:
“Without in nny way disparaging
(the administration’s) motive, It Is
enough to say that the recuperative
efforts of the federal government must
be made In a manner consistent with
tlie authority granted by the Constitu
tion. •
"We are of the opinion that the at
tempt through provisions of the code
to fix tlie hours and wages of em
ployees of defendants in their Intra
state business was not a valid exercise
of federal power.”
Hits Processing Tax.
On .Ttily 10 the Circuit Court of
Appeals at Boston declared that the
processing tax of AAA was nn unwar
ranted use of the taxing power to reg
ulate and restrict cotton production;
that It was an unwarranted exercise of
federal power to delegnte unlimited
power to the secretary of agriculture
to administer the tax, and that the tax
violates the requirement that taxes
should be uniform throughout the
United States. In Philadelphia a lower
court ruled much the same on the hog
processing tnx from packers. The
whole agricultural program was
“thrown up for grabs.”
It Is now believed that the adminis
tration will seek to push as many of
these test cases through the Supreme
court ns possible, with the view that
if they are there held to he unconsti
tutional, constitutional amendment to
centralize the legislative power of the
nation much more than It Is now will
form the important part of the Demo
cratic platform for 1036. That this is
possible might he Indicated by the fact
that 3,500,000 farmers who have so far
received S-!tO0,lH)il,U00, nre directly af
fected by the AAA ruling. With their
families, they might form a very sub
stantial block of votes to change the
basic law of the land.
One historian, Charles A. Reard. I
points out that three times before lias
the Supreme court “thrown itself
resolutely across currents of powerful
interests and ideas.” Once was In the
Dred Scott case, with Its aftermath
of the Civil war, and later the Thir
teenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth
amendments, effecting important
changes in the federal system. An
other was the court’s attempt during
and after the Civil war to restrain the
President and congress In several de
cisions; its result was a curtailment of
the appellate jurisdiction of the court
and an increase in the number of
justices from seven to nine (the two
new ones to be favorable to the re
versal of a decision which the admin
istration wanted reversed, and the
court reversed it), On the third time
the court In 189o declared invalid the
Income tax law of 1804. The decision
was reversed by amendment.
Of course there Is some question
as to whether a parallel can be drawn
between these decisions and the recent
ones against the New Deal. If such
a parallel can be drawn:
Will history repeat Itself?
C Western Newspaper Union.
For Hours You Beat Those Carpets. At Every Beat More Dust
Seems to Come Out of Them Than Before.
Melancholy uays
By James J. Montague
DON’T believe the sentimentalists
who tell you that youth Is one
grand sweet song. Maybe It Is
more tuneful today than it used to
be. i'ou’ll have to ask somebody
younger than I nbout Jint. I was re
minded of what are sometimes referred
to as the days of happiness when a
man called me on the telephone and
said:
“I’m sending a man around to you to
get ten dollars."
“Listen,” I Inquired, “where would
1 get ten dollars?"
“I don’t care where you get It, as
long as It comes back with the man.”'
“But what is it for?”
“It's for a Boys’ club.”
"A what?”
"A club for boys, you stupe. A club
where they can swim in a pool and
play baseball on a diamond, and play
Indoor games In the winter time. We
can't keep It up without money, so
have your ten ready.”
So perhaps after all tills Is an age
when boys are considered. They were
not seriously considered back In
well, I hate to think how far back that
was.
They had fun, of course, but it wasn’t
supervised fun. They went out to
look for it, and 1 admit that they
found It pretty often, especially if
they lived near a river or creek, with
a stretch of woodland on either side,
or near enough to the railroad so the.'
could make friends with the engl
neers and firemen, und get u ride on
a locomotive now and then.
But they had their troubles—
troubles which, as far as I can see
are today nonexistent. The worst of
them—the very worst, came In house
cleaning time.
People do not clean house today
like they did twenty-five or more years
ago. If a family hasn't a mechanical
cleaner, a machine backs up to the
door once ever so often, runs out a
hose and proceeds to extract the ae
cumulated dust of weeks or months
When chairs and tables get weak in
the knees they are sent to a shop where
tire fractures are reduced and the
varnish is made smooth and shiny
again. A man in a van comes for the
carpet and bedding, , and It is back
the next day practically as good ns
ever. In the process of housedeati
ing nobody misses a meal or u radio
hour. The cool sequestered vale of life
is as comfortable as ever. But years
ago? Gosh!
I would rise from the table at the
sound of “yoo-hoo" filtering In
through the window, almost any day
during the spring vacation, and walk
nonchalantly toward the back door.
After three steps in that direction
a maternal voice would Inquire, in
firm steady tones: “Where are you
going, Willie?”
"Well, I—we—that Is, I mean me
an' Denny—”
“Don't say ‘me and Denny Say
‘Denny and I.’"
“Well, Denny and I were goln’ down
to the crick to hunt for cornelians
to give to the teacher and—"
“And going swimming in the creek, I
suppose."
“Well, yes’rn. We thought if It was
to get hot—the weather I mean, we
might maybe take a little dip."
“Um. 1 can’t spare you this morn
ing. I'm going to start housecleau
Ing."
“Cleaning house!” for almost a year
I had forgotten that horror, or if 1
did think of it had indulged In the
hope that the President or congress or
somebody might abolish It. But no!
Here U had come again. 1 was cut
short In the midst of a lingering long
look at the bright May world outside
while 1 was forced to listen to brlet
but forcible Instructions to start up
stairs that minute and begin to take
down the beds.
Taking down beds Is a wearisome
business, there being only one more
wearisome task, which is putttiug them
together again, which to be well done
requires the art of a cross word puz
zler and the brawn of u blacksmith.
Mattresses, though stuffed with
feathers, ore heavy and unwieldy. To
get a fat one through a narrow win
dow, and aim it so that it will light
squarely on an old strip of carpet put
out to receive It, requires more skill
and strength than the average small
1)0} can summon. When the whole six
were on the ground they had to be
take# to lhe gate wtiere tile renovat
ing man could come and load them on
Ills cart. Sheets and blankets follow
after. Then come two or three toilful
hours of prying up tacks and hanging
up carpets, which are not at all light
ened by the dust that they have been
storing up In their interstices all sum
mer. Finally they are all gently sway
ing on the clothes line, and then the
big job arrives.
For hours you beat those carpets.
At every beat more dust seems to
come out of them than before. Usual
ly it threatens rain, and then the beat
ing must be done at exhausting high
speed. Sometimes I wonder why 1
did not drop, limp and lifeless. 1
should, if I had tlurt job to do over to
day.
When the carpets become so clean
that they only smoke faintly when
cudgelled they are got hack to the
house In some fashion or other and
tacked down again. Then there are
the beds to take down. Taking down
beds is not an enterprise that a per
son who hopes for a happy hereafter
should ever undertake. They stub
bornly resist every effort to rend their
members apart. At last you grow des
perate nnd yank at them. Then some
thin'’ cracks, and you hastily look for
a hammer to repair the damage before
it Is discovered by a maternal eye.
But If taking down a bed Is a feat,
putting one together again Is a labor
of Hercules. In our house all the bed
steads were out of gbnpe. They
creaked as If in pain whenever one
lay down on them. Once, for some
reason I have forgotten, I was told
to take a spring mattress apart. When
I took out the bolts that held the
maze of crlinkly wire to the wooden
frames, the latter flew together like old
friends long separated.
My father, my two brothers and I
spent all ottr spare hoars for the next
week trying to get the thing together
again. We did manage It, after a
fashion. But always thereafter the
mattress remained a rhomboid, whieh
never could he forced Into Its place in
the bedstead, and for that reason had
to remain on top of the rails. To
sleep on that unsteady slightly rocking
affair was like sleeping In one of those
tree houses one sees so often In some
sections of Kurope.
Today wlieu 1 see moving men ap
proaching In great cars fitted with
every possible machine for conducting
the cleansing of the largest houses, I
wonder what the little boys who live
today do with their time. I hope that
they spend it in swimming, playing
baseball and hunting birds’ nests and
following all (lie delightful pursuits
that I would have followed in the
springs of my youth—If it hadn’t been
for housecienning. And I also wornlei
if ttie kids whose play Is supervised,
and who have all manner of swings
and trapezes and hurdles with which
to amuse themselves out of school
can really enjoy themselves as -much
as 1 would have enjoyed myself, If l
never had to take spring mattresses
apart and put them together again.
©. Bell Svudlcatt* —WNIT Service.
From TadpoU to Frog
it takes two years for tadpoles
hatched from eggs, to transform Inti
frogs. It tnkes several years more foi
the frogs to reach market size. Aftei
changing front tadpoles it takes frogs
six or seven years to reach their full
size.