Unemployment in the United States

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1828236179

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-226169

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: Unemployment in the United States

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: United States, Government Printing Office

Year of publication:: 1930

Scope:: II, 193 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Statement of James A. Emery, Washtington, D.C., representing the National Association of Manufacturers, and others

Collection:: Economics Books

Ho 1S 1 7 ¥é UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 115 control and authority of a Federal official in the regulation of a matter of purely internal police. My distinguished friend Mr. Green, for whose views on these very serious matters I have very great respect, presented to you a brief this morning which undertook to anticipate the discussion that I shall present to you, in which he cited various cases that I have called attention to in the course of this brief discussion, as though they questioned the validity of this particular bill. The purpose of those cases were merely to illustrate what I think you will accept as an established fact in law, and that is that the regulation of employment agencies, whether public or private, is a matter for the internal police of the separate States. I think nobody will question that fact, that the regulation of employment agencies within the States is not to be found as a Federal function under any authority of the existing constitution. Mr. Cerier. May I interrupt to ask a question there, Mr. Chairman? The CuarrmaN. Put your questions down and ask them at the conclusion of the statement. Mr. Emery. And preliminary to an examination of these pro- positions, I want to call your attention to the fact that this is not a new proposal in legislation. This bill is identical even in language, with substantially two exceptions, with S. 1142 and H. R. 4305, identical measures proposed in the Sixty-sixth Congress, first session, which were the subject of hearings for nearly six weeks by a joint committee of the House and Senate. Mr. Kenyon introduced the Senate bill, Mr. Nolan of California the House bill, and at the con- clusion of those hearings the matter was abandoned. So this is not a new proposal of legislation but one that has been rejected in the past by Congress, and the two matters that have been introduced mto it and were not found in the original biil were the declaration that in the operation of these agencies they were to be impartial, an excellent thing in itself, to which, of course, no one could make the slightest objection; and furthermore, that in their administration authorization was given for the formation of advisory councils of employers and employees to confer and advise upon employment problems that came up from time to time—an excellent thing in itself, which is being done today. Now, Mr. Chairman, in the discussion of what I may call the legal phases, I take as my text the splendid statement made by the dis- tinguished Senator from New York when he was discussing the con- stitutionality of the flexible tariff in the Senate, and he has put this matter so well that I could not improve upon it, when he said: The Supreme Court is not the only guardian of the Constitution. Each one of us is under a coequal duty with the members of the behch to defend and maintain the Constitution and vote only in favor of legislation that conforms with the re- quirements of that instrument. There are innumerable situations where Con- gress in the last resort is the determinant of consiitutionality and where from its decisions there is no appeal to any court. The standard of constitutionality which each one of us must apply is somewhat different from the standard which the Supreme Court employs in passing on legislation. When the constitutionality of a bill is contested in the courts, every doubt is resolved in favor of its con- stitutionality; every fact which is assumed by Congress to be a fact is not disputed by the court unless the assumption flies violently in the face of reason, and when we in this body pass upon a bill we can not give ourselves the benefit of these doubts. We ought not knowinglv to write into a bill assumptions of fact which

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Unemployment in the United States

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation