erable economic power but by virtue of
such power were no longer dependent on the closed shop for survival. He
would therefore leave to the legislatures the determination "whether it
is preferable in the public interest that trade unions should be
subjected to State intervention or left to the free play of social
forces, whether experience has disclosed 'union unfair labor practices,'
and, if so, whether legislative correction is more appropriate than
self-discipline and pressure of public opinion--* * *." 335 U.S. 538,
549-550.
[170] 336 U.S. 245 (1949).
[171] Ibid. 253.
[172] 336 U.S. 490 (1949). Other recent cases regulating picketing are
treated under Amendment I, _see_ p. 781.
[173] 94 U.S. 113 (1877).
[174] Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co. _v._ Minnesota, 134 U.S. 418 (1890).
[175] Wolff Packing Co. _v._ Court of Industrial Relations, 262 U.S.
522, 535-536 (1923).
[176] Munn _v._ Illinois, 94 U.S. 113 (1877); Budd _v._ New York, 143
U.S. 517, 546 (1802); Brass _v._ North Dakota ex rel. Stoeser, 153 U.S.
391 (1894).
[177] Cotting _v._ Godard, 183 U.S. 79 (1901).
[178] Townsend _v._ Yeomans, 301 U.S. 441 (1937).
[179] German Alliance Ins. Co. _v._ Lewis, 233 U.S. 389 (1914); Aetna
Ins. Co. _v._ Hyde, 275 U.S. 440 (1928).
[180] O'Gorman & Young _v._ Hartford F. Ins. Co., 282 U.S. 251 (1931).
[181] Williams _v._ Standard Oil Co., 278 U.S. 235 (1929).
[182] Tyson & Bros.--United Theatre Ticket Offices _v._ Banton, 273 U.S.
418 (1927).
[183] New State Ice Co. _v._ Liebmann, 285 U.S. 262 (1932).
[184] Nebbia _v._ New York, 291 U.S. 502, 531-532, 535-537, 539 (1934).
In reaching this conclusion the Court might be said to have elevated to
the status of prevailing doctrine the views advanced in previous
decisions by dissenting Justices. Thus, Justice Stone, dissenting in
Ribnik _v._ McBride, 277 U.S. 350, 350-360 (1928) had declared: "Price
regulation is within the State's power whenever any combination of
circumstances seriously curtails the regulative force of competition so
that buyers or sellers are placed at such a disadvantage in the
bargaining struggle that a legislature might reasonably anticipate
serious consequences to the community as a whole." In his dissenting
opinion in New State Ice Co. _v._ Liebmann, 285 U.S. 202, 302-303
(1932), Justice Brandeis had also observed that: "The notion of a
distinct category of business 'affected with a public interest'
employing property 'devoted to
|