The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1886-05-21
What is a Legal Holiday.
A JUDGMENT ENTERED ON WASHINGTON
BIRTHrAY HELD BY THE COURT TO BE
SOUND AND vALID-IIOw THAT
KIND OF HOLIDAY DIFFERS
FROM SUNDAY THE
DECISION NEW

KIND OF HOLIDAY DIFFERS
FROM SUNDAY THE
DECISION NEW
ONE.
The following interesting opinion
has been given by Judge Woodward
in the Luzerne County Courts:
On Feb. 22 last, WashingtoD's Birth
day, a judgment was entered in the
prothonotary's office against Fesco &
Go. on note dated Feb. 3, 1856. The
defendants subsequently obtained a
rule to show cause why the judgment
should not be stricken off on the sole
ground that Washington's Birthday
was legal holiday and that therefore
no valid legal business could be trans.
acted on that day. The matter was
argued before Judge Woodward and
Monday he handed down an opinion in
which he discharges the rule and holds
the entering Of the judgment TO be
sound ard valid: The opinion says:
The question now presented is new
one, and has never been passed upon
by our Supreme Court, at least in any
reported case. Nor, in our judgment
is it sufficiently analogous to the num-
erous cases which have arisen under
our statute in reference to the obser-
vance of Sunday, to render the author
tiles on that subject pertinent and de-
cisive. The earliest English legislation
on this subject may be found in the de-
crees of William the Conqueror, who
adopted the enactments of the Anglo
Saxon kings forbidding, with certain
specified exceptions, all secular pursuits
on the Lords day. Various subse-
quent statutes recognized Sunday OF
only as a holy day, but also as dies
non ,juridicus. The christian religion
became the acknowledged religion of
the English people, and was held by
Lord Coke to be part of the common
law of England. And in this country
the trainers Of our first constitution
found the Sabbath in existence as
civil institution and recognized it as
such in all their acts. In our own
State the statutes OF 1905, and of 22
| April, 1894, forbids the execution of
any legal process, or the doing of any
worldly employment or business what
soever on the Lords day, commonly
called Sunday, works of nee essty and
charity only excepted, under the penalty
| Of suit for damages in one case and
fine and Imprisonment in the other.
We have called attention to these
facts in reference to the Sabbath as
dies non for the purpose of showing
that what are known as illegal holidays"
bear no resemblance in their character
to the Christian Sunday. These are
wholly the creations of the statute law,
and their effects and force must depend
entirely on the legislative will, as ex-
pressed by the law making power.
And in the construction of statute,
the import of which is not sufficiently
clear to be unquestionable, we must be
guided by those established rules of law
which are uniformly accepted and act
ed upon by the courts of law.
Statutes may be directory or lmpcr-
alive. The former prescribe privileges,
the latter impose duties. The former
leave room for the exercise of choice
or discretion, while the latter are ab-
solute and peremptory. The former
impose no penalties, and contain no
negative words, rendering null and
void acts done in contravention of their
mandates the latter either punish as a
penal offense all infractions of their
terms, or negative and render of no
oil
gagements, or actions which amount to
a violation o. the statute law.
Statutes are also classified as affir-
native and negative statutes, and the
general rule of construction applicable
to this classification, seems to be that
the former are merely directory, while
negative words render the statutory
provisions imperative.
Our statute creating legal holidays,
might, it seems to us, be reasonably
construed as having reference exclus-
lively to commercial paper, its presen-
tation and protest. The doctrine of
the law as expressed in the familiar
maxim, "erpreSsi0 unius erclatsio
alterius" would justify such a con-
struction. "Where a statute expressly
defines what its effect shall be, other
effects are, by complication excluded"
Bishop on written laws s249. "When
a statute assumes to specify the effects
of certain provision, we must pre-
sumo that all the effects intended by
the law makers are stated" Perkins
VS.. Thornburg 10, Col, 1872, "When
an express definition is given in a
statute, il must be generally held to
include all intended, and to exclude
all not intended Bird vs.. Dennison,
7 Col, 3OS As exception strengthens
the force of a law in cases not except
ed, so according TO Lord Bacon, enum-
Grafton weakens it in case not enumer-
ated. Affirmative specifications ex-
cludes implication. Enp, essatna .taca
cessare tdcit,tm. See Dwarris on
Statutes, 22l. Whether such q con-
struction OF the Act of April, 1873,
would be fair one, or not, may be
questionable. But certain it is, the
clause which puts the legal holiday on
the same footing as Sunday, was in
| 'ShoSu w oPPiy w SohiuhciCiai paper
only, and to nothing else. The ques-
tion presented then, is reduced to this
Does the term "legal holiday" imply
an absolute dies non .juridicus If
this question be answered in the aflirma-
tive, then are the entry of judgement
and the issuing of an execution by the
Prothonotary, such judicial acts as are
contrary to the statute, and therefore
voidable at the suggestion of defend
ant, who alleges no other equity or de.
fense whatever.
The conclusions reached by us on
both of these questions may, IN view
of what has already been said, be
briefly stated. We look upon that
portion of the statute which simply
ordains the 22d of February to be a
legal holiday, as directory and not i'm
perative permissive, but not obligatory,
and this for two reasons-frst, because
the statute contains no negative words,
and secondly, because it imposes no
penalty, in both of which respects it