Frankfurter’s Departure, a Near-Decision in Gibson, and the Era’s End

This chapter discusses the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions during its October 1961 term. The number of decisions in “Communist” cases dropped sharply—only three signed decisions compared to fifteen in the preceding term. The signed decisions were in routine cases—another prosecution for filing a false Taft–Hartley affidavit, a challenge to Florida’s loyalty oath for public employees, and a group of contempt-of-Congress cases collected in a single decision. The most significant “Communist” case considered during the term, Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Committee, was not decided, because the justices, divided 4–4 following Whittaker’s retirement, ordered reargument. The case marked a convergence of the Court’s lines of decision in NAACP and “Communist” cases.

Empirical Study on the Determinants of Industrial Research and Development Expenditures

This study focuses on the wide range of manufacturing industries in Japan and hypothesized the numerous factors external to a corporation particularly for abstracting the determinants of research and development (R&D) expenditures. Previous studies primarily dealt with internal corporate factors such as sales, operating profits, or diversification. This study selected, integrated, and performed multiple regression analyses for nine industries based on the panel data concerning R&D expenditures. This resulted in the abstraction of statistically significant factors. R&D expenditures in the preceding term are an internal factor. This could be considered a comprehensive and continuous indicator of the scale of a corporation, its performance, its fixed R&D expenditures and corporate strategies. External factors cited are growth of the market, competitiveness, export dependency, labor intensity, and whether products are directed toward end-customers. This study would especially aid in deciding the R&D strategy as an aspect of the company expenses.

Wiederentstehung und Erneuerung (Tit 3:5) Zu einem erhaltenswerten Aspekt der Soteriologie des Titusbriefs

The soteriological metaphor in Tit 3:5 δια λουτρου παλιγγενεσιαζ και ανακαινωσεωζ seems to be a combination of Pauline and pagan language. The Pauline neologism ανακαινωσιζ describes the individual salvation in the context of the new creation as a universal process, and seems to serve as an explanation of the preceding term παλιγγενεσια. The author of Titus uses the expression παλιγγενεσια, which is probably influenced by the reception of Stoic terminology by Philo, to describe not only the salvation of the individual person, but also of all believers in a universal sense. As the Stoic term παλιγγενεσια is used for the cosmic renewal of the world, this connotation has to be remembered even in Titus. Consequently παλιγγενεσια has to be translated rather with “regeneration” than with “rebirth”.

ACTION DU PROPYL-THIOURACILE DONNÉ À LA RATTE GESTANTE SUR LES PARATHYROÏDES ET SUR LA CALCÉMIE DES FOETUS. REMARQUES SUR LA PHYSIOLOGIE DES PARATHYROÏDES

ABSTRACT Giving propyl-thiouracil to pregnant rats during the 5 days preceding term (50 mg per day), results in the following effects in the foetuses: increase of foetal calcaemia without concomitant change in maternal calcaemia; increase of the »average cellular surface« and of the diameter of the nuclei of the parathyroid cells; decrease of the growth of the parathyroid glands which results at term in a smaller volume of these glands as compared with control foetuses. The significance of these changes is discussed. They seem to correspond to an endocrine hyperfunctioning of the foetal parathyroids. Hypercalcaemia was also observed in rat foetuses in which thyroid functioning was depressed by partial decapitation (hypophysectomy).

Constitutional Law in 1926-1927: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1926

The most conspicuous constitutional decision rendered by the Supreme Court during its 1926 term, or for many a preceding term, was in the case of Myers v. United States. It is here held that the power of the President to remove executive officers appointed by him with the consent of the Senate cannot be restricted by Congress. On the question of the removal of such officers the Constitution is entirely silent. It is an interesting commentary on the process by which we make constitutional law that a problem as important as this, a problem which was debated at length in 1789, upon which presidents have acted and congresses have passed statutes, should now, after 137 years, be definitely settled for the first time, and be settled now only because the late Mr. Myers saw fit to sue the government in the Court of Claims for his salary.The facts in the case are simple. In 1917 President Wilson appointed Myers to a first-class postmastership at Portland, Oregon, for a term of four years. In 1920, by direction of the President, he was removed from office. A statute passed in 1876 and still in force provides that “postmasters of the first, second, and third classes shall be appointed and may be removed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and shall hold their offices for four years unless sooner removed or suspended according to law.” The removal of Myers was never referred to the Senate for its consent.

Constitutional Law in 1925–1926: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1925

The Supreme Court of the United States during its 1925 term seems to have taken a vacation from the solution of major constitutional problems. Its activities provided very little newspaper copy. Most of the more important decisions could have been pretty accurately forecast upon the basis of previous adjudications, while the constitutional questions raised which could be deemed in any sense novel related to more or less technical or trivial matters. A considerable number of the more interesting cases dealt merely with matters of statutory construction and did not present constitutional issues at all. This comparative dullness of the judicial year's work is in sharp contrast with the achievements of the preceding term of 1924, in which at least six cases of genuinely first-rate importance were decided; while the Court has begun its 1926 term by handing down its epoch-making decision in the Myers case relating to the President's power of removal, and has followed it by the far-reaching ruling in the municipal zoning law case. This absence of judicial fireworks in the 1925 term may well serve to emphasize two facts sometimes overlooked in an appraisal of the work of the Supreme Court. The first is that in any judicial year an overwhelming proportion of the work of that tribunal is and must necessarily be of a humdrum and inconspicuous variety; useful and important in the sense that technical, detailed, and even trivial questions need to be answered authoritatively, but certainly not spectacular.

Constitutional Law in 1920–1921. I: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1920

The work of the court last term is chiefly notable for its amplification of certain important results of the preceding term. Thus, the final objection to the validity of the Eighteenth Amendment was refuted; the last great question touching the meaning of the word “income” in the Sixteenth Amendment was answered; the emergency powers of government in war time were brought into contact with more usual sources of public authority—this in the rent law cases; and some minor phases of the problem of freedom of speech and press were disposed of. However, in two cases, both of much interest to the political scientist, somewhat novel questions of national power were raised; and in neither was a certainly final solution offered. Questions of state power were again of decidedly subordinate significance and interest.

X. A method of extracting the root of an infinite equation

For the understanding of this Series, and in order to continue it as far as we please; it is to be observed, 1. That every Capital Letters is equal to the Coefficient of each preceding Term; thus the Letter B is equal to the Coefficient b-bAA / a .