...Wallace, a packing-house case, states that — "Whatever amounts to more or less constant practice which threatens to obstruct or unduly to burden the freedom...consider and decide the fact of the danger and meet it." I think that the same rule applies here. Mr. GRAHAM. What is that citation? Mr. AITCHISON. Stafford...

...provide regulations to prevent their formation." Then on page 13 : " Whatever amounts to more or less constant practice and threatens to obstruct or unduly...regulatory power of Congress under the commerce clause." Mr. KINCHELOE. Your idea is that inasmuch as they hold in the Packers and Stockyards' case that all...

...provide regulations to prevent their formation." Then on page 13 : " Whatever amounts to more or less constant practice and threatens to obstruct or unduly...regulatory power of Congress under the commerce clause." Mr. KINCHELOE. Your idea is that inasmuch as they hold in the Packers and Stockyards' case that all...

...supra, adopted and applied this principle and said, 258 US 521: " Whatever amounts to more or less constant practice, and threatens to obstruct or unduly...consider and decide the fact of the danger and meet it. This court will certainly not substitute its judgment for that of Congress in such a matter unless...

...U R. 229. Whatever amounts to a more or less constant practice and threatens to obstruct or unduly burden the freedom of interstate commerce is within...regulatory power of Congress under the commerce clause. Id. Congress has neither power nor does it show intention to provide for trial by boards provider!...

...principle that " whatever amounts to a more or less constant practice and threatens to obstruct or unduly burden the freedom of interstate commerce is within...regulatory power of Congress under the commerce clause." In the case of Hill v. Wallace (259 US 44) the court again takes occasion to say that it was upon that...

...that " whatever amounts to n more or less constant practice and threatens •to obstruct or unduly burden the freedom of Interstate commerce is within...regulatory power of Congress under the commerce clause." In the case of Hill T. Wallace (259 US 44) the court again takes occasion to say that it was upon that...

...have that answered. Mr. HAINER (reading) : \V hm ever amounis to мюrе or less constant nruettce nml threatens to obstruct or unduly to burden the freedom of Interstate commerce is within the regulatory (xiwer of Congivss under the commerce chaise, and it is primarily for Congress to consider and decide...

...to liimlcu the freedom of interstate commerce is within the regulatory [>ower of Congress under flic commerce clause, and it is primarily for Congress to consider and decide the facts of the danger and meet it. This court will certainly not substitute its judgment for that of...

...character into the current of interstate commerce for federal restraint. Whatever amounts to more or less constant practice, and threatens to obstruct or unduly...interstate commerce is within the regulatory power of Con-, gress under the commerce clause, and it is primarily for Congress to consider and decide the...