Melville
W. Fuller succeeded Morrison R. Waite as Chief Justice
in 1888. In 1891, Congress passed a law that gave each
circuit a court of appeals with power to make a final
decision in a great many cases. This law also ended
the Justices trips on circuit duty. Before long
the Supreme Court was keeping up with its schedules.
But as new laws regulated business and working conditions,
and suits challenging these laws reached the courts,
overloaded dockets plagued the Justices once again.
Congress
had passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in 1890. But time
proved that the legislatures were not to be the "exclusive
judge." The Supreme Court began to set new limits
on state power, although it did not flatly overrule
the Granger decisions.
The
Court also checked Congressional power. In 1895, a depression
year, critics charged that the Court let property rights
govern law. Of the Court that had decided Munn v.
Illinois in 1877, only Justice Stephen J. Field
survived.
When
the Court decided its first antitrust case, the government
lost its suit against a company controlling some 98
percent of all sugar refined in the United States. The
Court conceded that the trust had a monopoly on making
"a necessary of life" but denied that it had
a direct effect on interstate commerce. This ruling
left the Sherman Act weak, the trusts as strong as ever.
In another
case, the Court incurred the wrath of unionized labor.
Federal judges, under the Sherman Act, had issued a
sweeping injunction against union leaders of the Pullman
strike in 1894. Jailed for contempt of court, Eugene
V. Debs applied to the Supreme Court for a writ of habeas
corpus; the Justices denied it unanimously.
In a
third case, the Court heard argument on a new federal
income tax law, which took 2 percent of all incomes
over $4,000. Famous lawyers prophesied communism, anarchy,
and despotism if the law survived. With one Justice
ill, the rest divided four to four on most of the laws
provisions. After reargument a five-to-four vote made
the entire law unconstitutional.
Eugene
Debs, a key union organizer in the Pullman Strike
of 1894 ~
Library of Congress |
|
The
Supreme Court held an attempt by social reformers
to initiate a federal income tax unconstitutional
in 1895 ~
Library
of Congress
|
Bluntly,
the dissenters called this decision "the most disastrous
blow ever struck at the constitutional power of Congress,"
"a surrender of the taxing power to the moneyed
class." John Marshall Harlan (whose grandson of
the same name was to serve on the Court in the 20th
century) spoke out so sharply that the New York Sun
called his "tone and language more appropriate
to a stump address."
On the stump, William Jennings Bryant said the Court
stood with the rich against the poor; other political
figures took up the charge. By 1913, though, the Sixteenth
Amendment would make the income tax constitutional after
all.
To
enforce segregation by color, southern states had begun
passing Jim Crow laws, to require equal but separate
passenger cars on trains. Homer Adolph Plessy challenged
the Louisiana law in 1892, and took his case to the
Supreme Court. Its option cited many state precedents
to show the "reasonableness" of such laws,
and found nothing to stamp "the colored race with
a badge of inferiority." Southern-born Justice
Harlan dissented again.
"Our
Constitution is color-blind," he wrote. "In
respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before
the law." Still, the separate-but-equal doctrine
of Plessy v. Ferguson controlled the law for
years.
The
Court sanctioned legislatively imposed segregation
in the South and border states in its 1892 decision
permitting Louisiana to segregate railroad cars
by race ~
Courtesy
of Louisiana State Museum |
|

The Court decided a series of cases determining
the strength of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which
Congress had passed to break up the unpopular trusts
or monopolies ~
Library
of Congress
|
The Spanish-American War gave the United States several
heroes, including Col. Theodore Roosevelt; many islands,
including Puerto Rico and the Philippines; and one baffling
question: Does the Constitution follow the flag? Across
the American West, it always had; pioneers took their
citizenship with them, and new states joined the Union
as equals.
These
new islandsseparate by ocean, alien by cultureseemed
unfit for self-government or statehood. But the Constitution
said nothing about colonies of subject peoples, unequal
before the law.
In the
famous "Insular Cases" the Supreme Court worked
out a constitutional status for the new possessions;
in effect and by necessity, the Court made law as it
went along. Spectacular as the subject was, the Justices
were doing the duty of every judge, applying the generalities
of law to the demands of the specific case.
In 1898,
a case involving cast-iron pipe ushered in a decade
of dramatic "trust-busting." Circuit Judge
William Howard Taft carefully distinguished the case
of the Addyston Company and other pipe manufacturers
from the sugar-trust case. In the present case, he explained,
the facts were different.
These
companies conspired to fix prices, said Taft, before
they agreed with their customers in 36 states to deliver
shipments of pipe; therefore they were within interstate
commerce and the power of Congress. Price fixing restrained
trade as surely as pipe contained oil, and Congress
had passed the Anti-Trust Act to release trade. Free
enterprise, Taft insisted, meant free competition.
When
the Supreme Court affirmed Tafts ruling, other
judges had a new precedent to follow and the Sherman
Act a new vitality.
Energy
personified, Theodore Roosevelt became President after
William McKinleys assassination, and faced what
he called the "absolutely vital question"whether
the United States Government had the power to control
the giant corporations of the day.
Money
personified, the magnificent J. P. Morgan dominated
finance, the Northern Pacific and other railroads, and
the billion-dollar U.S. Steel Corporation; his ally
James J. Hill had the Great Northern line. E. H. Harriman,
with his Southern Pacific and Union Pacific routes and
his friends in Standard Oil, had challenged Morgan and
Hill for control of a railroad into Chicago.
After
a fight that wrecked the stock market, the three agreed
to combine forces. They organized a holding company,
a New Jersey corporation called Northern Securities,
and leaned back to enjoy their monopoly on transportation
in the Northwest.
Roosevelt
ordered the Attorney General to enforce the Sherman
Act against them. In the Supreme Court their lawyers
argued that only New Jersey could regulate a New Jersey
corporation, that stock transactions were not within
interstate commerce, that having power did not amount
to abusing it.
Justice
Harlan read the Courts opinion in March 1904,
to a crowded courtroom and an anxious country. New Jersey
did not have Congress at its mercy, he ruled; he called
the point about stocks a mere straw man; and Congress,
he said bluntly, meant to prevent the "mere existence"
of such trusts. If the company was secure the Northwest
was not: "the entire commerce of the immense .
. . part of the United States between the Great Lakes
and the Pacific at Puget Sound will be at the mercy
of a single holding corporation. . . ." As the
court below had ordered, the Northern Securities Company
must be dissolved.
After
this victory and others, the government attacked the
Standard Oil empire. More than ten states had moved
against it under their own antitrust laws by 1906, when
federal attorneys filed suit under the Sherman Act.
After 15 months of testimony that filled 21 printed
volumes, federal judges in St. Louis ordered the oil
trust broken up.
"Unreasonable,
unnecessary and arbitrary," a violation of liberty
under the Fourteenth Amendmentthus five members
of the Supreme Court held a New York law unconstitutional.
This law said bakers must not work more than 10 hours
a day or 60 hours a week.
The
Fuller Court ~
Supreme
Court of the United States |
|
Baker
Joseph Lochner; Supreme Court ruled in his favor
striking down a New York state maximum-hour statute
~ |
Joseph Lochner
had a bakery in Utica, and New York fined him $20 for
overworking Frank Couverette. For a second offense,
he drew $50 in fines or 50 days in jail. His case reached
the Court in 1905.
States,
ruled Justice Rufus W. Peckham, must not pass such laws,
"mere meddlesome interferences" to keep grown
men from taking care of themselves. States have a "police
power" to protect the public, but they may not
limit such individual rights as liberty of contract:
A worker must be free to make his own contract with
his employer.
Justice
Harlan dissented, citing evidence that bakers suffered
eye and lung troubles, that New York might protect their
health. And Oliver Wendell Holmes, who had joined the
Court in 1902, dissented separately, to say that "a
constitution is not intended to embody a particular
economic theory," that laws might rest on "novel
and even shocking" ideas and be constitutional.
Oregon
had passed a law to keep women from working more than
10 hours a day in factories and laundries. Curt Muller,
owner of a laundry in Portland, Oregon, was convicted
of breaking it; he fought his conviction through state
courts to the Supreme Court, relying on Peckhams
opinion in Lochner v. New York. He also claimed
that the Oregon statute could not meet the Constitutions
demand for "due process of law."
Historically,
that had meant "a fair trial." But judges
were using it to protect property from laws they found
unreasonable.
One
reform group wanted the best possible lawyer for Oregons
case. Joseph H. Choate of New York turned it down; he
didnt see why a "big husky Irishwoman should
not work more than ten hours if she so desired."
A famous corporation lawyer in Boston acceptedLouis
D. Brandeis.
Studying
Peckhams opinion in the Lochner case, Brandeis
considered its reference to "common knowledge"
that baking was a healthy trade. Boldly and shrewdly,
he devoted only two pages of his brief to legal points;
one hundred cited facts from doctors, health officers,
and factory inspectors to show that overworked women
fell ill, turned to drink, bore sickly children and
then neglected them.
No one
had ever submitted such a brief to the Court. But the
Justices accepted it, and praised him for it in their
unanimous decision to uphold the law of Oregon.
"When
an evil is a national evil, it must be cured by a national
remedy," cried Senator Albert J. Beveridge of Indiana.
Reformers were demanding change in politics, business,
society in general; in response, Congress was assuming
a "police power" for the whole country.
Disturbed
by reports of filth in meat-packing plants, it passed
pure good and drug laws. Shocked by stories of the "white
slave trade," it passed the Mann Act. The Supreme
Court upheld these laws, and others.
After Chief
Justice Fullers death in 1910, President Taft
broke tradition by choosing an Associate Justice, Edward
Douglass White, for Chief.
| |
|
Curt Muller's refusal to comply with an Oregon
law establishing a 10-hour daily work limit for
his laundresses was the subject of a Supreme Court
case ~
|