| OCR Text |
Show nal Topics Interpreted OT by William Bruckart JiSfflT ' Washington, - .NP-q-HULi National Press Building Washlng-toa-What f tnehfnttU"' Where are we going now that one of the keystones What to Be of the New Deal n m ., ? the National Done Now? a(Jmla. lstration has been largely outlawed? out-lawed? The national capital never has witnessed" such confusion, even In the midst of the World war, as has prevailed here since the Supreme court of the United States had its final sav as to the constitutionality of the NRA and Frazler-Lemke farm mortgage moratorium law. The lack of constitutional authority for the Frazler-Lemke law was recognized by many but until the highest court In the land had spoken concerning NRA, views were divided and the Blue Eagle continued to fly, albeit in a lower circle. New Dealers generally were confident con-fident to the last. They appeared to expect some unseen force to guide the Supreme court in upholding uphold-ing the fantastic program which they had devised and which the President made a part of his New Deal plans for economic recovery. The adverse ruling made them sick at the stomach. Most of them have not yet recovered. Hence, confusion continues to reign. You have heard much discussion In the past two weeks as to how the breath of life may again be breathed Into the Blue Eagle. As far as I have been able to gather from authoritative quarters in Washington, there Is nothing left to ! do but perform the funeral ceremonies cere-monies for the ill-fated bird and the so-called national plan which it represented. rep-resented. The reports of Presidential Presiden-tial conferences, of meetings of statesmen and executives of the administration, ad-ministration, of this plan and that plan and statements and expressions expres-sions of opinion respecting the future fu-ture course, mean absolutely nothing. noth-ing. When the Supreme court said that the congress had unlawfully delegated to the President power to draft codes of fair practice and enforce en-force them upon private business, it took away the heart and nerve centers of the NRA structure. On top of this body blow, the NRA principle Is looked upon in many quarters, and by men who know and understand the problems of government, as being thoroughly discredited in the public mind. It is not too much to say that when a national law does not hold the confidence of the bulk of the people peo-ple its usefulness has ceased. So it was with the prohibition amendment. amend-ment. Equally, I believe it can be stated, if opinion of statesmen of long training can be trusted, no attempts at-tempts to revise the NRA will get to first base. Even the Brain Trust movement to obtain amendment of the Federal Constitution making such laws as NRA proper cannot win country-wide support Enough Indications already have become visible to warrant a state-ment state-ment that the More Hope summer months for Future wil1 see chiseling, price cutting and other nefarious and improper business busi-ness practices going on and that nation, in the spirit and letter of !. intent let because I was f damentally unsound I never succeed. My w Supreme court by Its ruling case has rendered a great service to American agriculture. North Dakota, was designed to give purely temporary aid to distressed owners of mortgage farm lan The things which apparently neither nei-ther of the co-authors foresaw was the effect the temporary arrangement arrange-ment would have as to the future. By this I mean that, for example, If a farmer wants to buy a home and has only a small amount of cash, he must borrow money from someone else. If the holder of that money were made to feel that at any time during the life of that mortgage congress could pass a law telling the lender he could not force payment of the debt few there would be who would be willing to lend their money. It is not human nature to lend money nnless there Is a reasonable assurance that it will be repaid. Thus, It seems to me the Frazler-Lemke law contained elements of danger that were overlooked in the stress of depressed conditions. Perhaps the worst blow dealt President Roosevelt personally was the Supreme court The Worst decision which Blow ne,d that the Presidential pow er did not extend to removal of a Federal Trade commission member mem-ber except for the reasons prescribed pre-scribed In the law Itself. It will be remembered that Mr. Roosevelt forcibly forc-ibly ousted the late William E. Humphrey from commission membership mem-bership because, It was openly stated at the time, Mr. Humphrey was a conservative Republican and he, therefore, did not see eye to eye with the President and his New Deal plans. Mr. Humphrey sued the government for the salary for his term. After his death his executors ex-ecutors carried on the litigation. It is the principle Involved here that Is Important. The Federal Trade commission was set up as a quasi-judicial body, one endowed with powers to regulate against improper im-proper business practices and to determine de-termine the propriety of general business dealings affecting countrywide country-wide business or the Interests of the public. It takes no stretch of the Imagination Imag-ination to see how Presidential Interference In-terference with the commission personnel per-sonnel would result In changes of commission policy. One business practice might be held proper by a commission whose majority was conservative con-servative while that same practice would be considered Illegal by a commission dominated by a liberal or radical membership. It becomes obvious then that If the President were permitted to disturb the personnel per-sonnel of the commission, especially Judges, there could be no continuity conti-nuity of policy, and business Itself would hardly know from day to day when It was abiding by the law fir njliDn !f mn these will be disastrous to countless count-less business Interests. The congress con-gress will strive In a half-hearted fashion to offset the loss of strength and prestige suffered -by the New Deal at the hands of the Supreme court But the effort plainly will be only half-hearted. So it Is made to appear that the country must submit for several months at least to a bad condition. After that, if the opinions of experienced men are worth while, there ought to be a substantial change for the better. Careful surveys, close examinations of the problems at hand and candid thinking has brought to unbiased observers the conclusion that there is more hope for the future now as regards the economic situation than there was while the Blue Eagle continued con-tinued to soar and ballyhoo artists continued to preach about its powers pow-ers to restore prosperity. I believe this statement which Is the consensus con-sensus ought to be tempered with one suggestion. There Is likely to be a restoration of confidence generally gen-erally if the administration turns aside from Brain Trust theories and employs the practical instead of the theoretical method of government To the agricultural community the decision Invalidating the Fra-r,,f Fra-r,,f zier-Lemke mort- Idle Dream law probably has greater Interest It should not be so. The Frazler-Lemke Frazler-Lemke law from the first was an Idle dream and was predicated upon shortsighted understandings of ba sic economic laws. Everywhere I have Inquired concerning the probable prob-able end or result of the working of that statute, Informed persons declared It meant eventual destruc Uon of credit for agriculture? Supporters of the Frazler-Lemke Idea cannot lean, as do support of the NRA principle, upon an ac cusatlon that the law was badly ad mimstered. It was administered It cording t0 the Farm Credit alin Several months ago, I recall I reported to you In theae columns aaa r something in the Comes nntllre of a vre Next diction that the Supreme court would become better known to "the general public before the current administration had ended than It had been known since It rendered the fanied Dred Scott decision In Civil war days. It was a perfectly obvious circumstance. Sooner or later the questions of a constltu tlonal nature Involved ln the New Dea, procedure obviously were gZ lng to be tested In court Now, I feel warranted In reporting report-ing that the highest court again will be In the public eye ti next momentous decision likely come from the bench of the nine austere Justices will be a rnlL af fectlng the Agricultural Ad stmeni administration and therefo ' of v al Importance to the American farmer. There win be other cases Involving New Doa, plnr)SCas c s on affecting the AAA, ihere Is no possibility of fl rm dozen wending their L 8 through the minor courts S ,," atlon by the slmp; Consider- tn.ll, is' 5 coctnTa0? they Involve con t2 V,)C('n tlons. -niituiional ques- Supremetlrtir is considered1 dtt 1 ""ted that after the nr a t0 1)0 "wed, there was con!? wt' rylng around l S0"r- may points of i.lw Klvon t0 ""re Is doubt. VOr wfch |
