UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 159 
JM, 
we 
1S 
sh- 
ose 
on 
nal 
an 
of 
sh- 
am 
for 
as 
aer 
Vy a 
n- 
nb: 
on 
n= 
‘ho 
ve 
On 
me 
1ce 
1te 
as 
cal 
ral 
yFl- 
ONS 
10D 
on; 
the 
ten 
its 
ion 
ar- 
-he 
sal 
10t 
-he 
wd 
nd 
ar- 
IN- 
SB 
mn 
ATS. 
That this is such a Government clearly appears from the Constitution, inde- 
pendently of the amendments, for otherwise there would be an instrument 
granting certain specified things made operative to grant other and distin- 
things. This natural construction of the original body of the Constitution to 
made absolutely certain by the tenth amendment. This amendment, which was 
Seemingly adopted with prescience of just such contention as the present, dis- 
closed the widespread fear that the National Government might, under the 
bressure of a supposed general welfare, attempt to exercise powers which had 
not been granted. With equal determination the framers intended that no 
such assumption should ever find justification in the organic act, and that if in 
the future further powers seemed necessary they should be granted by the 
people in the manner they had provided for amending that act.” 
In Hammer v. Dagenhart (247 U. S. 251 (1918)) the court said: 
“It is further contended that the authority of Congress may be exerted to 
control interstate commerce in the shipment of child-made goods because of the 
effect of the circulation of such goods in other States where the evil of this class 
of labor has been recognized by local legislation, and the right to thus employ 
Sa labor has been more rigorously restrained than in the State of produc- 
ion. * 
“That there should be limitations upon the right to employ children in mines 
and factories in the interest of their own and the public welfare all will admit. 
That such employment is generally deemed to require regulation is shown by 
the fact that the brief of counsel states that every State in the Union has a law 
upon the subject limiting the right to thus employ children. * * * 
. “It may be desirable that such laws be uniforta, but our Federal Government 
1s one of enumerated powers; ‘this principle,” declared Chief Justice Marshall 
in MeCulloch ». Maryland (4 Wheat. 316), ‘is universally admitted.’ 
de * or 
“In interpreting the Constitution it must never be forgotten that the Nation 
is made up of States to which are entrusted the powers of local government. 
And to them and to the people the powers not expressly delegated to the National 
Government are reserved. * * * 
“In our view the necessary effect of this act is, by means of a prohibition 
against the movement in interstate commerce of ordinary commercial commodi- 
ties to regulate the hours of labor of children in factories and mines within the 
States, a purely State authority. Thus the act in a twofold sense is repugnant 
to the Constitution. It not only transcends the authority delegated to Congress 
Over commerce but also exerts a power as to a purely local matter to which the 
Federal authority does not extend. The far-reaching result of upholding the act 
an not be more plainly indicated than by pointing out that if Congress can 
thus regulate matters intrusted to local authority by prohibition of the movement 
of commodities in interstate commerce, all freedom of commerce will be at an 
end, and the power of the States over local matters may be eliminated, and thus 
our system of government be practically destroved.” 
In Baily ». Drexel Furniture Co. (259 U. 8. 20 (1922), the court said: 
“It is the high duty and function of this court in cases regularly brought 
bo its bar to decline to recognize or enforce seeming laws of Congress, dealing 
with subjects not intrusted to Congress but left or committed by the supreme 
law of the land to the control of the States. We can not avoid the duty, even 
though it requires us to refuse to give effect to legislation designed to promote the 
highest good. The good sought in unconstitutional legislation is an isidious 
feature, because it leads citizens and legislators of good purpose to promote it, 
without thought of the serious breach it will make in the ark of our covenant 
or the harm which will come from breaking down recognized standards. In the 
maintenance of local self-government, on the one hand, and the national power, 
on the other, our country has been able to endure and prosper for near a century 
and a half. 
“* ¥ * Grant the validity of this law, and all that Congress would used 
to do, hereafter, in seeking to take over to its control any one of the great number 
of subjects of public interest, jurisdiction of which the States have never parted 
with and which are reserved to them by the tenth amendment, would be to enact 
a detailed measure of complete regulation of the subject and enforce it by a so- 
called tax upon departures from it. To give such magic to the word ‘tax’ would 
be to break down all constitutional limitation of the powers of Congress and 
Completely wipe out the sovereignty of the States.” 
118808—30—srr 11——11 
Ne