OCR Text |
Show DECISION AGAINST LEVERJOOD LAW SUPREME COURT HOLDS THAT SECTION OF LEVER ACT 18 UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Opinion Rendered In Appeal From Decision of Lower Court In Quashing Quash-ing Indictment Against Alleged Profiteer In 8ugar. 1 r Washington. Tho. supremo court on February 27 held unconstitutional tho sections of tho Lover act under which the government stopped tho coal strike of 1010, nnd subsequently launched Ha campaign to reduco tho cost of living by prosecuting alleged hoarders and of profiteers In foodstuffs 'nnd other necessities. ' The court's opinion wns rendered in an appeal by the government from n decreo In lower courts quashing nn Indictment against nn alleged profiteer In sugar, but It was sweeping InMts terms nnd will hnvo tho effect of ending end-ing all prosecutions instituted by tho department of Justlco In its cost ot living cnmpnlgn, Tho action of tho government in obtaining ob-taining injunctions to stop tho slrlko of miners in November, 1010, waB not before tho court, but department of Justlco officials said it was under sec-tlon sec-tlon 4, which was held Invalid, that tho government had proceeded. Tho opinion' was based largely on tho lndoflnltcncss of thho sections under un-der review. "Chief Justlco Whlto, departing de-parting from his prepared opinion, remarked re-marked that Uid scopo of tho sections apparently was "as broad ns human Imagination," and that tho "degree of criminality was left to ever-changing standards." Associato Justices Brandcls and Pitney Pit-ney dissented as to tho reasoning by which tho court's decision was readied, but concurred In tho result. Tho chief Justlco said In his written writ-ten opinion thnt tho sections under discussion did not "constitute a fixing by congress of nn ascertainable standard stand-ard of guilt," nnd wero not "ndequato to Inform persons accused of violations thereof of .the nnturo nnd causo or tho accusation against them." Tho latitude of posslblo interpretation interpreta-tion was clearly evidenced, ho said, by tho vnrlous cases brought beforo tho court. These cases, numbering ten, ranged from specific convictions to dcnlnl of injunctions sought by retailers retail-ers to restrain government agents from proceeding ugulrst them. In somo quses tho government' appealed from ndverso decisions of lower courts, quashing Indictments, In-dictments, nnd In others It defended decisions In Its favor. The decision will result In tho dismissal dis-missal of profiteering charges brought against soventcen prominent Utnlms in fourteen Indictments found In Utah, Idaho, North Dakota and Montana. Most of the indictments gruw out of alleged al-leged profiteering by tho Utah-Idaho Sugar company, eight of tho directors of which nro named In tho findings of tlm grnnd Juries of tho four states. |