The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-08-25

state. Such is not the purpose of the
constitutional provision, nor do the rights /
OF the people in all reason and Justice re-
qulre such uniformity and equality The
necessities OF legislation are concerned |
with the actual evil and the remedy.
When the evil is confined to persons of a
limited description il is sufficient that the
remedy is CO-eXtensive with the evil and
that it shall apply uniformly 10 all who
at any time may come within, the descrip-
ton. In Georgia IL. Il. vs.. lveY, % Ga. 5O4,
IL was held that the law which made rail
road companies liable to employees for
the negligence of cO-emplOyes was not
special law nor unconstitutional as a gen
eral law although the law APP
applied no other species of mas
ter and servant. Thelegislature in grant,
ing relief has the right to classify the
subject matter of the evil and the indi-
viduals affected by ii regardless of other
classitcatious that are not confined to
the scope of the evil.
QUESTIONS FOR THE LEGISLATURE.
As to whether the evil does or does not
exist, and what classes should be in
Guided and what excluded in the proposed
legislation these are questions for the
| legislature. The statute under consider
| tion is an example 1t was passed in
furtherance of act adopted at the same
| session to prevent blacklisting. In emu
merating the companies, upon whom the
| duties and penalties of the act are i'm
| posed the legislature doubtless had in
mind only those companies with large
| systems of employees in reference to whom
| the evil was supposed to exist. Street
| railroads operated by horsepower were
omitted. Electric street railroads are emu
merated. 1t is a well known fact, of which
| the legislature doubtless took congnizance
| that the former have been almost
4 1,tt
| state, or are destined soon SO to be, except
| possibly, in small country towns where
| the company is a "One-horsen railroad,
and the employees are so few as not to
bring them within the scope of the evil.
| In like manner it might be true that no
corporations and no employers and en-
ployes other than those embraced in the
act, required legislation of this character.
| Upon what ground of reason or justice
| they should be so embraced, we are una
| BILE to understand
IT IS NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
'In one sense no person natural or arti-
| fetal is exempt from the law. At any
| time hereafter that any corporation
| might add to its franchises and functions
| those of any one of the corporations
named in the act, go Instant the law
would apply to it. At any time that any
| individual becomes an employee of one of
/ Sdll COIIOEdUlOlAS luSbdublN buG IGlLCNi1 ID
| available to him All who fall within
| the description of its terms are equally
affected, none are exempt, none unduly
| favored, none unequally preiudiced. In
| this sense the law is of uniform operation
as well as in the more important sense
| intended by the constitution that 1t
| should operate throughout the state"
"As under the decisions first quoted this
is a general law. it does not collide with
| the clause in the constitution which pro-
vides that mo special law shall be en-
| acted for which provision has been made
| by an existing general law And as 1t
is not especial legislation" within the
meaning of the constitution of 1877, 1T is
not under the prohibition contained in the
| last clause of the same paragraph. Code,
| section 5027. We do not, therefore, think
that the law is unconstitutional upon the
| grounds commended.
BUT IT MUST BE DISMISSED.
Another ground of demurrer that
was urged, however, we think is good.
| The request provided for by the act must
| be a request for "a specific statement in
! writing setting forth the reason or rea-
sons which have prompted, caused or in
! duced such discharge or removal" The
! request which is alleged in the declara-
1 tion to have been made by Mr.. Cole was a
| request for "a specific statement in writ
1
| discharge is one thing; statement of the
reasons which prompted, caused or in
duced such discharge is quite another.
! AS the act imposes a penalty, it is to be
strictly construed. In order TO secure its
| benefits the plaintiff must strictly follow
| its directions, and this he has failed to do,
again the request must be a request
upon the company. The language of the
act is that cit shall be the duty of such
| company when requested, etc" No duty
| devolves upon the company unless it is
| requested The request alleged in the
| declaration was not made upon the COM
pany but upon 81 Moultrie Lee, Esq,
| Treasurer Savannah, Florida and Western
Railway Company" 1t is true that the
request may be served by delivery upon
! the president secretary or treasurer of
said company, but the thing to be deliver
ed is request upon the company and not
a request upon the individual who is de-
scribed as being the treasurer of the COM
pany. AS the request upon the company
| is the foundation of the action we think
| that the petition is fatally defective and
should be dismissed"
When the decision was read in court
! Mr.. Cole at once gave notice of his inten-
ton to appeal the case and was given
thirty days in which to file his bill of ex-
captions.