Bursting Boilers and the Federal Power

Abstract

When the United States Food and Drug Administration removes thousands of tins of tuna from supermarket shelves to prevent possible food poisoning, when the Civil Aeronautics Board restricts the speed of certain jets until modifications are completed, or when the Interstate Commerce Commission institutes safety checks of interstate motor carriers, the federal government is expressing its power to regulate dangerous processes or products in interstate commerce. Although particular interests may take issue with a regulatory agency about restrictions placed upon certain products or seek to alleviate what they consider to be unjust directives, few citizens would argue that government regulation of this type constitutes a serious invasion of private property rights.' Though federal regulatory agencies may contribute to the general welfare, they are not expressly sanctioned by any provisions of the U.S. Constitution. In fact, their genesis was due to a marked change in the attitude of many early nineteenth-century Americans who insisted that the federal government exercise its power in a positive way in an area that was non-existent when the Constitution was enacted. At the time, commercial, manufacturing, and business interests were willing to seek the aid of government in such matters as patent rights, land grants, or protective tariffs, but they opposed any action that might smack of governmental interference or control of their internal affairs. The government might act benevolently but never restrictively. The innovation responsible for the changed attitude toward government regulation was the steam engine. The introduction of steam power

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 69 citations exist upstream.