N.R.A. AT NOUGHT

Grey River Argus, 29 May 1935, Page 5

N.R.A. AT NOUGHT

COURT DECISIONS AGAINST ROOSEVELT Win for Employerdom (Aus. and N.Z. (’aide Assn.) WASHINGTON, May 27. The Recovery Act provisions, giving Air Roosevelt the riglr. to proclaim the ('ode rule oxer private industry, a power regarded as lhe heart of h< N.R.A.. was held imconst it ut iona I by the Supreme Court of the I n.ted 'l’lic Frazier-Lemke Ac', granting a five-year moratorium for paying off ( ! a'::i mortgages and affecting billions of dollars of indebtedness, was also held .o be unconstitutional. Congress Blamed COURT'S REASONS. FOR OI'TLAWIXG CODES. (Received Mav 28 at 7.10 p.m.) WASHINGTON Alay 27. The Supreme Court decision holds to be uncon.-litutiona.l those provisions of the N.R.A. under which President Roosevelt was empowered to proclaim the rule of the Codes over private industry. This power was reg:*'(led as being the heart of the Recovery Act. The Supreme Court unanimously declared the Code-making provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act-, under which most of the nation busiirss is operating, were invalid. Sec >n Th; ee of the Act, which gives lhe President ’the power to promulgate the Codes at fair competition for industry, was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power by Congress Io the President. 'rhe Count’s decision has served to set aside a conviction and sentences imposed upon certain poultry cor corns for having violated the Fair ”-bnctice (’odes. The decision has discarded the theory that th-* Code.-’ were vo. viFr.'.y, and stated that they were -a fact, c ule- of law. ('li.ef Justice Hughes, who ra I the Court ’s opinion, fuuther denied to the Government the right to transcend constitutional restrictions simply tyj-.ause of unusual economic conditions.

FURTHER DECISIONS. IN FAVOUR Ob’ MONEY LENDERS. (Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.) (Received Alav 28, at 7.10 pm.) WASHINGTON. May 27. A second decision by the Supreme C< art Jias set aside the Frazier-Lemke rarm Moratorium Act, which granted those farmers who are facing farec osure, a ‘erm of five years in which t-i pay off their mortgages, and which tlso made possible lhe scaling dawn of the mortgages in certain etisetf. The Court maintained unanimously that this law was tantamount Io ‘‘taking rights in specific property.” since the law gave to the farmer the right to remain in possession of his farm, despite default. Moreover. regarding the provision that the mortgage should receive on.lv one per cent, interest during the moratorium, it was held this was pot real interest on the loan. THIRD DECISION. AGAINST PRESIDENT. (Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.) (Received Alay 28 at 7.10 p.m.) WASHINGTON. May 27. The Supreme Court also gave a third decision, over-ruling President Roosevelt in his removal of a Federal Trade Commissioner. The Court held that “the President did not have illimitable power of removal” This case was that of William Humphrey, a Re publican, who was removed by the President. The Court held that the Commissioner could be removed only for inefficiency, neglect of duty and malfeasance. What is Struck At WORKERS’ WAGES AND CONDITIONS. IS GREAT CONFLIFT PRECIPITATED (Received May at 7.2'0' p.m.) WASHINGTON, May 27. Much of the theory ami practice of lhe Roosieveltian political system went by lhe board as the result of the Car.it’;. decisions. The wages, hours and conditions of labour, which it had been assumed could be fixed by the Federal Government, because 'these affect inter state commerce, are now no longer amenable to codification.

The possibilities of industrial conflict apparently .have been multiplied beyond conscience. It is generally regarded that the New Deal and Air Roosevelt have suffered their most serious setback sin<e the inception of the Democratic AdnilnisurnHon. Complete Surprise FOR THE GOVERNMENT. (Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.) (Received Alav 28. at 7.10 p.m.) WASHINGTON, Alay 27. The decision of the Supreme Court declaring invalid the right of the President under the National Recovery Act to proclaim the industrial codes over private industry ihas surprised the Government authorities completely. Among Congressional leaders and Administration officio ls p there was lifitle or no com me lit,, so completely dumbfounded were they by the Supreme Court decision on the N.R.A. codes. Mr Cummings, who had pleaded, the Government’s side during various cases before the Supreme Court, had promised to make a statement immediately after the decision. but he apparently has thought better of it. Later, all the evening, there were conferences at White House. President Roosevelt was apparently consulting his advisers. Air Richbcrg. who as one of Mr Roosevelt’s Brain Trust members-, who allegedly were for much of (the u technique” of the N.R.A.-, would

niter only ll.e single sentence: “The decisions leave us very little.” Looking to President FOR A MAY OUT. (Received Alay 28, at 7.15 p.m.) WASHINGTON, Alay 27. The Congressional leaders, who are groping for some elm* as to how to proceed with legislation on half of a dozen “New Deal’’ measures, were tonight looking exclusively to Wlhite Hous‘e for an answer to the dilemma. The more intransigent leaders advo cated the immediaite passage of a Constitutional Amendment, legalising the NjR.A. instrumentalities. It was pointed out,, howevei; 'that whereas C’ongressional action on such an Amendment of the constitution might be speedy, the ratification of it by 'the State Legislatures or the State Consti tutional Assemblies must, of necessity, be so slow as to militate against the salvaging of any important benefits from the N.R.A. The possibility, in the ineaii’time, of drawing up a new N.R.A. law to mee*: the Supreme Court’s objections is also considered unlikely, as the Court’s condemnation of the N.R.A. concept was so sweeping.

Saving the Codes APPEAL TO EMPLOYERS. NOT TO SABOTAGE ADVANTAGES. (Received Alay 28;. at 7.5 p.m.) WASHINGTON, Alay 27. Air Donald Riehbcrg a co-autihor of the National Recovery Act, has made a plea to the employers to continue (to operate under the C’ode>‘ until a new structure has been formed. He review ed tiie history of the N.R.A.; adding: “In'/defence to (the Supreme Court, all methods for the compulsory enforcement of the Codes have been immediately suspended. We. are faced now witli the question o f maintaining the gainfc which have been made during the past two years, ami of retaining the values which have been created under the N.R.A.’’ ? After pointing out that the- people musti in a short itimej, make their final decision on this question, Mr Richberg’s statement then expressed “the hope -that all of the employers who have been operating under the Codes and all of their employees would cooperate to maintain those standards of fair competition which have been in codes,, with practical universal sanction.