xt7wwp9t2q46_36 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7wwp9t2q46/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7wwp9t2q46/data/59m61.dao.xml American Liberty League 37 linear feet archival material English University of Kentucky This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed.  Permission must be received for subsequent distribution in print or electronically.  Physical rights are retained by the owning repository.  Copyright is retained in accordance with U. S. copyright laws.  For information about permissions to reproduce or publish, contact the Special Collections Research Center. Jouett Shouse Collection (American Liberty League Pamphlets), No. 39 "The New Deal: Its Unsound Theories And Irreconcilable Policies" Address of Ralph M. Shaw before the Georgia Bar Association, May 31, 1935 text No. 39 "The New Deal: Its Unsound Theories And Irreconcilable Policies" Address of Ralph M. Shaw before the Georgia Bar Association, May 31, 1935 2013 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7wwp9t2q46/data/59m61/59m61_39/Am_Lib_Lg_39_001/Am_Lib_Lg_39_001.pdf section false xt7wwp9t2q46_36 xt7wwp9t2q46 Pamphlets Available ak ik
* THE
Copies of the following pamphlets and   `
other League literature may be obtained `xl
upon application to the League’s national   D 
headquarters:
Why, The American Liberty League? ITS UNSOUND THEORIES
The Tenth Conimandment
Statement of Principles and Purposes  
Progress vs. Change——Speech by Jouett Shouse
I{¢E)co\·}ery, Rglief and the Constitution-~Speech    
y ouett ouse
American Liberty League——Its Platform
An Analysis of the President’s Budget Message ·‘
Analysis of the $4,880,000,000 Emergency Relief
Appropriation Act
Economic Security * * *
The Bonus
Inflation ·
Democracy or Bureaucracy‘?——Speech by Jouett .
Shouse .
The Thirty Hour Week Address Of
The Constitution Still Stands—Speech by Jouett
Shouse ·
The Pending Banking Bill RALPH M' SHAW
The Holding Company Bill _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The Legislative siiiieeieii-speech by Jouett y Ghmrman <>f the Iiimms Dwrswn ¤f
Slwuse L; th A ri anLib rt L b »
"What is the Constitution Between Friends?"— F H2;} CG .c By liagua c
Speech by James M. Beck Or? 6 corgm er SS(?Cm'
Where Are We Going?—Speech by James W. t101‘1,atSeaISland,Ge0rg1a,
Wadsworth
Price Control May 3I’ *935
Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
The Labor Relations Bill
Government by Experiment-Speech by Dr.
N eil Carothers
How Inflation Affects the Average F amily—-—
Speech by Dr. Ray Bert Westerfield QE C4
The AAA Amendments Y ima; 4’
Political Banking——Speech by Dr. Walter E. P Q"` 
Spahr E   _   S"
The Bituminous Coal Bill 4** `i'i `"I  
Reimenting the Farn1ers———Speech by Dr. G. W. tr Y Lev
Dyer ·
Extension of the NRA
Human Rights and the Constitution—Speech
by R. E. Desvernine
The Farmers’ Home Bill
The TVA Amendments
AMERICAN LIBERTY LEAGUE
* National Headquarters
NATIONAL PRESS BUILDING
NATIONAL PRESS BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D. C.
ir rk s
¤§..4 Document N0. 39 A

 1
1
  The New Deal
*
1 Its Unsound Theories and Irreconcilable Policies
  "What experience and history teach is this:
1 That peoples and governments never have learned
  anything from history, nor acted on principles
  · deduced from it.” (Hegel)
: The accuracy of the statement contained in
i the foregoing quotation from Hegel could never
Q be more fittingly illustrated than by the condi-
1 tions which obtain in this country at the present
1 time.
l We Americans, and especially the members of
, our profession, are confused, bewildered and dis-
`   mayed, but not because of a mere economic de-
1 pression. Like depressions have existed since
  authentic history began and will doubtless con-
tinue for countless years to come until, if ever,
millennium arrives. But millennium is not yet
here, and in the meantime we are confused, be-
1 1 wildered and dismayed by reason of novel, weird,
1 fantastic and vague legislation in contravention
‘ 1 of all past experience and quite beyond the com-
  prehension of a normal mind.
1 We listen to legislators, executives and dema- y
  gogues who talk in terms of billions of dollars,
1 of millions of families on relief, and we are told
  of hitherto unknown principles, rights, duties,
1 obligations and regulations. These laws and
A   regulations are so complex that they stupefy rea-
.   son. The figures are so stupendous that no one
1 can understand them or apply them, just as
1 years ago when, as children in school, we were
  told that the sun was so many millions of miles
1 away from the earth, we said, "Oh," but it didn’t
' mean anything concrete or tangible to our child-
ish minds.
Accordingly, this morning I propose, if I can,
  to reduce all these grandiose figures and strange
{ and weird concepts of rights, duties, obligations
i and regulations to first principles, and to illus-
1 trate them in such simple terms and phraseology
i that he who runs can read and understand.
1 s
1
1
1

 TWO P0Stulat€S b in the ballroom or in the market place, and that
Without fear of successful contradiction, I ~ lhs I?1`€iia0€ of thenword l‘social" 'to the word
submit to this convention of able lawyers, that a Justlee adds natnmg to 1tS m€a¤1¤g 01‘ ll1St€1‘-
nation is nothing more or less than an accumula- » But neeausetnese empirical idealists aaam to
tion of families; that the family is the basic unit attaah $01119 1mP01“ti11los to thi Word "soc1al" as
of government and that families are composed t a_ pleux te tne ‘Yel_d Justlee» SUPPOSB We 00¤·
· of individuals with interests in common because l slelel tne Pnlase ln lts entn`etY·
of long, intimate and familiar relationship. Fur- _ _
ther, that what is true of "the family" is equally   The New _Deal’s Coneeptlon of usoelal
true of a group of families, and is also equally   In]USt1€€” and “S001Hl .Il1St1C6”
true of tllie glrandtaccumulation of families which   Just what is usociail justice,) or Msoolal lnjus_
constitu e t e na ion. ‘   tice?"
If a family continues to overspend, it goes   Suppcse Wo apply sho phrase to what ls m.dl_
broke and it necessarily follows that if a nation · uarlly oallsd tho soolal sldo of life.
continues to overspend, it must also become   Hors Wo havo on the one hand a beautiful
oanlfl`uPt» lts eleult _destl`oYeu and tne standard t charming, comely woman, or a brilliant, intelli-
of living of the individuals who compose 1t be I gent man, and on sho other hand an unintalls
( l`eu1u};’_eu_to tn; Wantlflevell t _t_ th t I gent, unattractive, dowdy woman, or a shiftless,
ls ls sue a se 'evl en Ploposl len a unkempt, unattractive man. Cert ` l th f -
almost ol`aVe_Youl` §¤d¤ls€¤¤e lon making   _ mer have a great advantage overaiilietilattteroiln
an eonneotlconfvtztlzftniltollcegolni pl`§Plosltlen»   all of the social activities and competitions of
an as a pal o l ol` le We s ou e een‘ l life. Is that a social injustice? Under the the -
sidered jointly), I submit for your consideration l lass of tho Now Deal, ll, Surely must be. Thgrg-
a postulate ol` apnol`lsnl> the aooulaey ot Wnlen 1 fore, according to New Deal theories, society
ls also not open te debate- It ls as follows? should proceed to remedy the injustice by law.
gustice to one is injustic; to no one, l Obviously, however, since society can not pos-
ut mercy te selne may e ln-lusti°° t° ma¤Y·” l sibly enforce a law. which would vest in the
I urge your earnest consideration of these   homely and the unintelligent the qualities of
postulates. If they are constantly borne in mind,   comeliness and intelligence, in order to remedy
then irrespective of how the New Deal is de-   the injustice, the law must find some way to mar
fined—whether it is merely aimed towards recov-   or destroy the charm and intelligence of those
ery, as some of its adherents claim; or whether l who have the advantage. Thus, we obtain so-
it is merely pointed towards reform, as some of   called "social justice." Obviously, however, such
its adherents claim; or whether it has a more   an inhuman process is gross injustice to those
sinister objective (reference to which will be l who are maimed.
made here1nafter)—the fact remains that, bear- l Nevertheless, that’s the logic of the New Deal.
ing these postulates in mind, there will be no ” Transfer the consideration of the phrase "so-
difliculty in analyzing, dissecting and thoroughly cial justice" to the realm of athletics. Here we
allplleciatilig the unsound principles and irrecon— have a ten second man on the university track
cia le po icies of the so-called "New Deal." . team; your Bobby Jones at golf (I would like
Some of the empirical idealists who are spon-   to call him our Bobby Jones because, after all,
soring it predicate their support upon what they   he is a national figure); Ty Cobb, of baseball
call the desirability or necessity of "socia1" jus-   fame, or Dixie Howell as a fullback. Their com-
tice.. Of course, we lawyers know that "justice"   petitors are unable to successfully compete with
is "justice" whether it be in the courtroom or   them. Is that a social injustice? Is it fair that
4   5
!

 one man should run in ten seconds, while his That ie the leeie ef the New Dee].
¤¤mp€l·it¤r cahlt run lh better than twenty? Ie To reverse the situation, here’s an evangelical
t lt tall that  ehee Sheuld have an advantage broadcaster of national reputation with abvoice,
eVel` hle cemhetltele at geltw et Mt`- eebb at a command of rhetoric and an extraordinarv
baseball, er Ml`- Hewell la leethan? capacity for influencing people who can’t think
Obvivusly, if leglc means anythlng tneee gen' for themselves. Others who desire to influence
tlemen have an advantage in competition with y the Same elees ef peeple mey eee eempeee Sue-
thell` celhbetltehe te which they are net entltled cessfully with him. Isn’t that a social injustice?
Accordingly, society pasees a law to remove Z Oughtnq; it be remedied by lew?
the injustice. However, smce society can not Q Aeeerdiee ee th e eeeete ef the New Dee] ie is
enforce a law which would increase the speed of * and it Sheuld. But eieee eeeieey knows Of mi
the twenty eeeend man te ten eeeendev er make S law which will vest in the unskillful the capacity
e- geltel edt ef a ddhw et ¤_b¤ll1¤¤*> baseball 5 to influence and move the unthinking, society
player or fullback out of a th1rd—rate substitute, el proceeds by lew te emeeeulete the Voice Of the
Sggegty, by law, hamstrings the ten S€00¤d mah, ~   evangelical broadcaster of national reputation.
tnanne Mt`- denee>_Mt`· Cebh and Mn eewell te Isn’t that an "injustice" to the broadcaster?
the end that then` exeenenee le nnpaned and Personally, I think it is. Nevertheless that’s th
their superiority is destroyed. Thus, irrespective leei e ef the New Deal ’ B
of the injustice to the gentlemen we have ham- I iueetrete further ` Here er e tl
ams ad mam<·=d» "S¤·=al i¤Sa<=<=" he been in as ima mw They are staertiijg ii? tipilili
eC?1;Ete)1;;h§; logic Of the New Deal-   in the same city block or on adjacent farms or
V Still again-——apply the phrase "social justice"   §lantet1OnS' Each has the ment te plan fer
to the industrial side of life. On the one hand lmsejf as he Wlehee for the future- They each
yee heve e thrifty, embmeue er lueky (if yeu y establish, or ought to establish each for himself,
eleeeey ereup ef mee, in Whatever hee ef ee_ the standard of life which they wish. Certainly,
deever they may be eeeeeed, end ee the ether . even New Dealers would concede that.
a group who are thriftless and indolent and un- 4 _ Number ene is tl`ugal» thrifty and 0011tinent-—-
lucky. The former succeed. They attain an en- T lt Yen Pleaee» lucky- OV€1‘ the years he accumu-
vieble eeeeue ie eeeiety, el eemeeteeeeee nay, even i lates sufficient to take care of himself and his
a vast fortune for themselves and their descend- , family lh his declining years. The next three are
ants, Is that a social injustice? If the tenets l net ee talelghted and lucky (lf y0u please), but
of the New Deal are to be accurately applied, , they dc fairly Well- The fifth has no vision, or
it surely is. So the Legislature passes a law to ‘ if he has, Yelueee tv €X€1`¤lS€ it; H0 energy, 01* if
remedy it.   he has, prefers to spend it in riotous living. He
Obviously, however, since society, by law, can brings a family into the world of such size and
not energize the thriftless and the incompe-   number that there is not the remotest chance of
eelrga Jeeiel eggcgzeecgileen Scgieizteaiggylevi;-hpgalgisgiggfisg his ever being able to provide for them, either in
destm the Ce ece; Of the thrift , th _ _ _ y good times or bad. Then comes depression.
, Y p.   y’ Or at tn A Number one because of h' f ' ht d
centive to exercise it. Thus New Dealers claim . . ’ , IS _Or€S1g an
society has destroyed "social injustice" and i Vlsmn me luck (lf Yau please) IS able te get
Weeded eee the aprivileeedln- Bu,e_ie thee jue_ y through with comparative comfort. Number two,
tice to those whose capacity and incentive have   three and tetn`» by exerclelhg then the Virtues
been destroyed and who have been weeded out?   which number one has exercised always, are able
The New Dealers say that it is.   to pull through, but number five is starving.
6   7

 Now, this diSGuSSiOI1 has nothing whatever to taken for him from somebody else, I don’t believe
do with what any one O1- al] Of the fom- may in the so-called ‘more abundant life’ and no nation
voluntarily do for number five. This discussion °°“ld Surldve under Such a mginia But what is
. . far more important, suppose we discuss the mean-
IS centered only upon what society ought to com- ing of the word .underphvheged_, ,,
pel number one to do for number tive. If the
New Dealers are running eeeiety, by law and It couldn’t be done, and since the abstract was
against his Wiih they take away from nninhei. getting no results, I suggested a switch to the
one the results of his foresight and thrift and i uducrata aud asked him Where he Weuld Place a
give it to number five. Is that justice to number uaitaiu individual Wudm Wu beth ku€W» Wau he
One? IS that not nnniehina nninhei. One iei. his n privileged or underprivileged? The New Dealer
virtue and rewarding number five for his vice? it Said with a Sugar: “Ou> ud is dud of the PI`iVi‘
That, however, is the logic and avowed pur- leged." ‘
pose of the New Deal. ' "Well (I said), where would you have placed him
Just one further illustration before I leave e feay Yeers e€°· when ies I knew the feet to be)
this branch Of this address. j like millions of other citizens, he walked the streets
Last September in California I was arguing if a Image guy lmikiug for a· ]Ob’ with flaw &°.quwi`
ances an no riends, without a dime in his
with a, New Dealer about the ViI‘t11eS of Sill- pockets except the money that he had borrowed-
clair’s EPIC, sometimes called "Ending Poverty Where would you have placed him then?"
in Ceiii01‘¤ie,” elid Seleetiieee Pe»I`ePh¥`e·eed as Both logic and honesty required him to say,
i‘EVe1`Yb0dY Poor 1¤_Ce~i1i0I`me·” We Were mek· "At that time he was one of the underprivileged?
mg no h€8‘dWa’y‘ Flnadly the New Dealer! who “Wcll,” I asked (and I now ask every individual
thoroughly believed iI1 what he WaS defending i in this audience and in this country who is suf-
said, "We are not getting anywhere. Suppose W ficiently interested in the subject to consider the
we begin again. Suppose we start from some- I flu€Sti°“?·_"Wh2:t_WeS it that ieek the eee mee
thing about whichtwe both eeeee. or eeuree I ¥§§€§E§1Z11§i‘§,ZL?.Z§° Ltebrfiatifnthieiiitgiieii
(he Said); you believe in the (mom abundant exclusive grant, no magnificent largess. It was work,
life’ for the (underprivileged., ” character, natural ability and good luck, if you
"Well (I said), not so fast. Suppose you de- please "
fine the phrase ‘the more abundant life’ and Another question necessarily follows: Is it
suppose you define the word ‘underprivileged.’ " i "social justice" to deprive such a man of what
Of course, he couldn’t”do it in any satisfactory he has accomplished and to destroy his incentive
phraseology and neither can any one else, be he to accomplish more, and give it to somebody
ever so blest with a honied vocabulary.· The else? The New Dealer is forced to answer this
phrase "the more abundant life for the under- inquiry "Yes."
privileged" is just a glamorous combination of i That is the logic of the New Deal.
words to lull the thoughtless and the indigent i
into beautiful daydreams of accomplishment and LaF0u€u?€,S R€PYeSemeiiVe
happiness Wiiiheut effort OH their Part- I Some months ago an attractive young man
Then I Said to the New Dealer: j came into my oflice in Chicago and presented his
"If you mean by the more abundant life that   Card. III the lower left-hand corner there ap-
oue would like to See every man who does not Q peared the words, "Special Representative of the
have what he me get it if he ¤¤»¤»_the¤ ere? ; 1-reseeebie aebert M. Lerciiette, Senator from
one believes in the ‘m0re abundant l1fe.’ But if i Wviscansinin I dana, know Whether Senator La-
you mean by the more abundant 11fe that every i _
man whe does net have what he Wants, has the n Follette sent him or not, but the gentleman said
right to demand and take it, or under the guise 5 he did.
of law, either through taxes or by force, have it i After the amenities of the occasion were over,
8 J 9

 he said he had called to enlist me as one of a njzed by laW_ Under that status, somo groups
group in Illinois to sponsor Senator LaFollette’s in the Society had the right, by law, to sxpro-
Social Propaganda in my State- priate the time and labor of other groups. The
Upon inquiry as tn the nature ef his PI`0gI`&m» exploiters were under no legal obligation to the
he Saidi exploited, except as enlightened self-love im-
"Senator LaFollette has a number of planks in posed it. The status was called slaVeI'y.
his program, to the first of which, I am sure, you On the one hand stood the H1aSte1‘S, 8»IT10I1g
Win “§f€°· The nm isi Every man has a fight *0 whom were my ancestors. On the other were the
a ]°b` slaves. _
I asked, “Ar9 you using your tg;-mg ad- Seventy years have since elapsed and accord-
vissd1y?" ¤ ing to the New Dealers a new status in society
He repeated, "Certainly. Every man has a is ¤0W being Created-
right to a job? J Under this new status, it is proposed by taxa-
,,W€u,,, I Said, um me rights Cmmote ,duti€S·, It 4. tion to eonfiscate the property of some citizens;
is inconceivable to think of a right without a cor- nxpmpmate the tlme and labor Of those who Work
relative duty. If every man has a right to a job, and are still willing to work and to give the pro-
th€¤ it is Somf-`b0dY’S duty to give him & i<>b, ceeds thereof to those who don’t work, many of
becadse trights’ are enforceable against those who Whom are unwilling to WOi·k_ The latter have a
Owe duties legal right to enjoy the property, the time and
Continuing, I said, "Here is a supposed tho sorvioo of the former. The former have
SU`3»¤g€I` at the. d0OI`· H6 Wants 8 iob. Is it merely a duty which they may be compelled to
YOU? duty to sive him 3 l0b?” D perform. Those who receive the benefits of the
“C€I`t&i¤lY HOU, Was thé 3·¤SW€1`· property taken and the time and labor expro-
"Well," I asked, "is it my duty to give him a priatod are under no obligation whatever to
job?" those from whom it is taken.
"Certai¤1y ¤¤*=," was the answer. 1 don’t know what you oo.11 at, but 1 oa11 such a
<b?" prior to 1860 is this: That in the present status
. _ _ the inefficient become the masters and the effi-
"No," I said, "a man, by h1s own energy, intel- . .
ligence, thrift, tenacity of purpose, enterprise and ment anti the thrifty am the S1a`V€S'
all of the other virtues which go to make men That IS the lvsw Of the New D€&l·
effieient, must get a job for himself, if he can. A But, says Some one Who is troubled by the
$l€°€¤*> and dsmable SGCWY CM ¤€v€1‘ Survive by logic of this analysis and desires to divert the
imposing duties where there are no correlative mind from mason to Sentiment, you are placing
1'1ghtS OI' 'U’LC6 'U8TSl1.” . U . ,,
too much emphasis on property rights and not
l The logic of the New Deal is that "duties" 1 enough on “human rights."
may be imposed by law upon some and vested l` The answer is simple and convincing. In the
as "rights" in others, but the recipients of the . first place, property has no rights. The correct
"rights" under New Deal law have no obligations t phrase is "rights in property." If there is such
of any kind to those upon whom the duties are T a thing as a human right, I know of no human
imposed. T right which is dearer to civilized man than the
A New Slavery l right to work for, acquire and keep for his own,
Ladies and entlemen rior t th 1860 property. · · ·
th _ 'd _ g * P 9 B Year V Property IS substantially synonymous with
as cxlsm m our °°mT°(fy a wma] Status I`€°°g' j capital. Capital means safety. Nations with
I 11

 capital have high standards of living. Families Selt In ae doing, he added materially to the
with capital have certain freedom from want. Wealth and happiness el mllllena Te take away
Capital has never been acquired by any One from him by law the results of his achievement
except through thrift, frugality, saving, foresight and give lt to Somebody else whe has aeeem_
and vision (with sometimes allittle luck), either pllahed nothing but failure Would be a erlme not
by ine pereen Wne acquired ni er by Seine en' only against him but a crime against society.
eeeeer Wne acquired in fer nine Yet in its ultimate analysis that’s what the
The Unsmmduess of ecslaarlng the Wealthv¤ New Deal advocates. That is the logic of the
Theory · New Deal.
But, says some one gifted with more dema- a Summary of New Deal Theories
g¤gi<> ViSi¤¤ cm with keen PGM ¤f iegicei   Ladies nno gentlemen, 1 here been attempting
tgtittftestlttlyeettttrltatve taken mm the¤th<=ir trotting this nentrott nrtna tlotneet, lnyktiilrttne-
· = ion oro erwise, o u e o IU or ac o o IC
Never was there a more malicious misrepre- Of the New Deal inpsuch plaeu phrases thate a
S<·=¤tet¤¤ ¤f M s<=¤¤<>mi¤ fac meds by an amti- inet tennnr student entre tnonongniy nnoeetene
tious demagogue to thoughtless people incapable and grasp. However the Whole theory Of the
of thinking for ehemeelvee New Deal may be sunimed up in a few sentences.
Such an assertion connotes the concept that in The New Deal is nothing more Or lass than
eeme Weio eemehevt there has been eieeted e an effort sponsored by inexperienced sentimen-
pile of wealth, loaded upon a table, from which talists and damagoguaq to take away from the
eeme peeple eeve eeieed mere them their feet thrifty what the thrifty or their ancestors have
share. Such a suggestion indicates a total want . .
. . . . . accumulated, or may accumulate, and to give it
On the een of the mdmduai making It Wim- to ntnen nn, none not   rt or nnnte  
ever it is made, wherever it is made, or by whom- t h at d .,0 f tl; d h
soever it is made, of the true concept of how eee ere ere; eeme 1. er em’ ee W e
Capital Or Wealth is Created- never wou d nave earned It and never will earn
. . . . 1t, and thus indirectly to destroy the 1ncent1ve
One illustration will suflice. I suppose that if for all f tm acm ulati H S Ch . .
the slogan "Share the Wealth" should ever be u e m. O `   e purpose le le
translated into an actual effort to do so the for- deeeeee ef everything thee eleteeyeeeeeeee eee
. . . . ’ . of the tenets upon which our civilization has
tune which Mr. Ford 1S credited with having b f d d
_ amassed would be taken from him. But the fact eeleh ell";] e ; . ,
is that that wealth would never have existed if eh lee egeelee ef Ieeepeedenee _ree1eee’ and
it had not been for Mr. Ford or some other Ogle W e e   eeey e eeeleey le predicated upon
genius equally as capable. It was not created ie e eeeeepe
by some one else and piled upon the table and "That men are endowed by their Creator with
than Seized by hjm_ On the contrary, he created certain inalienable rights; that among these rights
the wealth himself, and by his genius and ability, r are nfe· liberty end the pursuit of nei’inneee·e
management and vision, he put into operation the AS Children Wa Ware taught that it was tha
ttctivitics which created it- _ _ o right and duty of each man to pursue and ac-
He produced o· cor by thc pr¤d¤¤t¤¤¤ of which ei quire happiness for himself. But the New Deal
he brought itiXiii`Y to mlliwns of homes otiici" says that this is not so; that it is not the duty
wise unobtainable. He gave employment to mil- at Bach (ma tt, acquire happiness aud content-
lions of employees in his own factories and in the maut tut. himself, it he Gah, but that the duty is
and transport the rawmaterial. He made it him- ple happy and turuleh them eeuteatmeht, even
12 13

 ii in na doing na makes innaaaii unhappy and is _Wtthta tha hataht aaat in tha hahah taahtaa that
destroyed. t distinguished counselor and citizen, the Honor-
Thank God, since the decision of the Supreme abi? Forney J°hnS°n> has been aaaaaaaftt in ap'
Court in Railroad Retirement Baaaa V. Alton ahaha tha taaatittttaaat P"l”°lPl€S ta which I
Railroad on May 6th, thoro is grovo doubt as to believe to the Tennessee llalley Authority. I
Whether Such o duty oxisto or may bo imoosod express the hope that he will be equally as suc-
by one group upon another under the Constitu- taaattt m tha S“P"°‘P"’ Court"
mm of tho Unitod Smtoo In Panama Refining Company v. Ryan, 293
U. S. 388, the Oil Code and the legislation pur-
Present Legal Status porting to authorize it have been held unconsti-
I pass to the second branch of this address, ‘• t¤’ti0¤9»l·
to—wit, the legal status and the irreconcilability a In the case of Railroad Retirement Board,
of New Deal legislation. et al. v. The Alton Railroad Co. (already re-
As to its constitutionality: In my judgment, a ferred to), the Railroad Pension Bill has been
it is not fitting at this time for me to indulge in declared unconstitutional.
prophecies as to what the Supreme Court ofthe On Monday, the 27th instant, the Supreme
United States will hold in certain cases involving Court handed down its now two famous deci-
this identical question which have already been, sions in the Frazier-Lemlce and Schechter Cases.
or soon will be, argued before it. In one it held the Frazier-Lemke Act unconstitu-
Suflice it to say that as early as 1866, in Ex tional. In the other, to-wit, the Schechter Case,
parte Milligan, in the 4th of Wallace, on page broadly speaking, it held the N. I. R. A. Act un-
212, referring to the Constitution of the United constitutional. Both decisions were unanimous,
States, the Supreme Court of the United States though in the Schechter Case two Justices, in
used the following language: an opinion especially concurring, expressed the
··Na aaaanna, involving anaaa pernicious aan- thaaaht that tha Chart had saha tha far-
clusions, was ever invented by the wit of man It is much too Soon for a oayofu] lowyoy to
than that any of its (the Constitutions) provisions attompt to onalyzo and disooot tho fm._I.oaohing
. can be suspended during the exigencies of govern- . . .
mont}, effect of these two decisions, but it may be safely
sun again in 1907, an   V. aaiaaaaa, aaa that ln that tha that haa aaaahat th th
when the government was claiming the right to the hlgh ideals of Its past
  a power nan gaantad na in an ana Con- Ta tha had that att aaa th tttt ahh atta-
aainaan, aaa Supreme Court, referring in aaa Stand the aH"mp°"“m“ q“€?“°‘¥S m"°1V°d m
Tomb Amendment, Said On page oo: the Schechter Case, the following is quoted from
"this amendment, which was seemingly adopted the argument Of Mr` Fmlerlck H` W°°d* one
with prescience of just such contention as the pres- Of the Schechter Company S Counsel:
ent, disclosed the widespread fear that the National wpho Congress, thoroforo, affirmatively undortook
Gavaaaaaat mlghtt under tha pressure _°f 8* Sup" _ by this act to authorize the President to regulate
Eiiiif. Sittin ‘§iEZ‘;’..f2‘§§“"'* “’a?§§’§§§..t°‘§.‘i.’§   tha   and   ht h atah ha ahhhahh haha
adopted the Constitution knew that in the nature 4 Elogoscziffo ;;;;b;;}oiio3111i1(?§ort1g§o 2:,; ligxgl; gig
of things. they could not foresee all the questions ; of those oodoo oonmins o_ roguhmoo of hours and
which might arise in the future, all, the circum- Wagoo roouirod to bo oboowod by au tho momboro
stances which m1ght call for the exercise of further of tho industry to which it apolioo, to bo onforood
W national powers than those granted to the United by orimiool prosooutiom
States, and after making provision for an amend- wrho oodoo so opprovod range from tho regulation
H:§;2_ to lthe Constltullgog by Vihglchthany made; of the children’s garment industry, to the regulation
Z", Snttiaiftwiff   n2ag22“aZiaaaaZl.»i€“"° °* "°”°“ "’“g”‘g"d it, the """’“““°° °f “`““’
14

 Zliililsiftdliigif§’lchb`t"$ZlLSa§“Stitl‘§€,°‘iT§$L°’iisSi   POMGS as i° justify the SuS¤i¤i°¤» eee mush
buried——thus literally undertaking to regulate hu- lt may not prove the fa'Ct* that they were not
oman activity from the cradle to the grave, and passed for the Pmliended Pl~ll`P0S€ of I`€f0l`m OT
beyond." the simulated purpose of recovery, but, on the
Th e eeneiudiee Semen e e ef Mr. Weed,e bI,ii_ contrary, as many believe, were and are deliber-
iieni} ereumeet ie ee feiiewei ately calculaotedoand des1gned·to destroy liberty
HH, as many may believe, the Federal GOvem_ and the c1v1l1zat1on which we inherited from our
meet eheuid be eeeveried inte eeme ierm ei ee_ ancestors or, stated 1n other words, were and are
tional socialistic state—whether Soviet, Fascist, or deliberately designed to Sovietize OI` Nazi-ize the
Nazi-—it may be accomplished only by the sub- Republic; but in any event to destroy it.
missioniof a Constitutional amendment, upon which This I new prepeee te dieeueeo I de not think
submission the people of the United States will have l for a moment that I can teii to this audience an _
_ a right to determine whether or not they desire such _ Y
change to be made. It may not be accomplished by thine that you do not already know; but I PTO-
aii Act of Congress? J pose to try and assemble, if possible, somewhat
The Court in its decision in the Schechter gliagiglgcalggéégezarailcl ciilulgins as itdwfun imfny
Gee he eppmny seemed the View S0 an- enactmeiiits of tlieIN(d3v1uIlg;alg1i;S tiinth egllaiivi
quently stated by Mr. Wood, to-wit, that a the utter futile; f th. I .1 tf t B an Ya
change may not be made in the Constitution of . 1 y 0 IS .6glS a' mn O accom? Ish
_ _ its pretended purpose will be clearly recognized
the United States by a mem Wlsh Of a New and the suspicions above suggested will be
geiger enacted into law by a complacent Con- greatly emphasized.
These two cases were pet cases of the New Compilation of Historical Incidents
Dealers. ‘ By its decisions in these cases, the There Wee recently handed te me what pup
Court has delivered another stinging rebuke. ports to be e eepy ei e eempiieiiee in exieteeee
I oxpress the ardent hope that Whell d60lSi0I1S in the Department of Agriculture, prepared by
in other cases yet to 001116 2118 handed down, ln· the librarian of the Bureau of Markets and Crop
volving other fantastic theories of New Dsalsfs, Estimates, of many, if not all, of the attempts
the Court will see no reason for modifying the made by various nations, since authentic history
decisions in the Oil Case, the Pension CGS6, the began to regiment prices, wagos, produotion and
Fm2i€1‘·L€mk€ Case ond the Schéchiw Case- fees. This compilation contains, among other
But suppose we indulge in the assumption that things, the following language;
the COUPE in Some other ca'S€’ for Some mason “In connection with this control it would seem
which S€€m$ logical to lt, gives Some 00nSl?ll#ll' that every possible expedient and lexperiment had
tional encouragement to the New Dealers; or ‘ been tried."
SUPPOSB W6 should indulge in the llnlnlnkabln The compilation discloses the fact that regi-
assumption that the CGUN may be Pnnknd for mentation of the character which presently ob-
1 the express purpose of forcing a constitutional g tains in the United Sieiee tedey Wee tried in
decision, irrespective of reason, logic and ethics. Egypt in 2830 B_C_ end ieiieei
Whei thm may be said? 1 it was tried in Athens»404 no. and {sued.
I submit for your consideration that the con- ·· It Woo tried in Romg during tho ioign of Dio_
gl011