Birmingham state herald., 1896-03-14
COMM|SSAR|ES AND LAW As to the Power to "LegisIate a
 Contract" ANSWER TO MIR. PORTER Other States Have Regulated Occupations and Prescribed Time for the Payment of
 Employees.
To the State Herald;

To the State Herald
 Hon. M. A. Porter is reported in the press to have said in his speech at Pratt City: Relative to commissaries, you cannot legislate a contract between par ties. I wish all of our companies could pay off every week. But you cannot make them do it. Such a law as Dr. Gun ningham suggests to govern commissa- ries has already been declared unconsta- tutional. It is purely a question of law. When he gets down to Montgom- cry and finds out that his commissary law is unconstitutional, Isdon't think he would try to have it enacted"
 It seems to be implied, if not clearly expressed, in the above that the regula- tion of the commissares and the-Payment of wages are beyond the scope and power of legislation and has already been de- clared unconstitutional
 Is this true? The writer is not aware that it has ever been so declared by the courts of this state, and he affrms that it has not been so declared in this state or generally elsewhere.
 In England statutes have been passed at various times to abolish the truck system" or the giving of orders payable in goods or trucks in lieu of cash wages. It appears that the courts there have had no difficulty in upholdng and enforcing such statutes.-23 A. & E. Encyclopaedia of Law, 935-6.
 In Indiana an act of the legislature re- quired the owners of mines to pay for mining coal every two weeks in lawful money of the United States and, prohib- ited the execution of contracts waiving the right to payment in money. This act was held to be constitutional by the su- preme court of that state.-Hancock vs. Yaden 121 Ind. 366.-23 A. & E. Eneyclo- paedia of Law, 937
 A Rhode Island statute declared that raI erary and charitable corporations, etc., shall pay weekly the wages of employees engaged in it's business, unless prevented by inevitable casualty, and that any corporation violating any of the. provi- sions of the act should be punished by fine of not less than $100 nor more than 5000. The constitutionality of this act was assaled on almost every conceiva- ble ground, but the statute was upheld by the supreme court of that state.-29 A. & E. Encyclopaedia of Law, 45.
 In Maryland, when, as in Alabama, the right to alter or amend charters of cor porat tions is reserved to the state by the constitution of the state the supreme court sof Maryland said in Shaffer vs. Union Mining company, 55 Md "A: "There can be no doubt that the legisla- ture could enact a law prohibiting the corpora tion from paying it's employees otherwise than in money, and that it could forbid the corporation from mak- ing contracts with them for payment in anything but money.'-23 A. & E. Ency- clopaedia of Law 937.
 The supreme courts of Arkansas and West Virginia have also held similar leg islation valid.-23 A. & E. Encyclopaedia of Law, 518; 23 Id. 936.
 It is true that such legislation has been condemned as unconstitutional by the supreme courts of several states, not gen erally because the legislatures did not have power to enact such laws, but be- cause the laws were not properly drawn.
 High authority says on the subject that ''in certain instances they fhe Statutes) have been declared unconstitutional, but 1t would seem that the statutes thus ad- Judged unconstitutional were declared to ,he so on the ground that they applied to miners and manufa cturers and there fore attempted to discriminate between classes of employers, instead of being general in their application to all em- ployers. It would seem that legislation general in it's nature, and not adJudged ls class legislation, was within the legit- Innate exercise of the police power, as de- fined in the various cases where its linn its have undergone judicial discussion" .-23 A. & F.. Encyclopaedia of Law, 936.
 However it may be in other states, it As thoroughly established in this state zhat legislation is not objectionable as class legislation if it applies to all of a. particular class, or to all engaged in particular business
 The supreme court of this state says that .:the general power of the 1egisla- Iure to regulate occupations and bus iness of all kinds, keeping within the principle that all members of a particu- lar class proposed to be regulated, must be equally amenable to the regulations made has been time and again declared by this court t"-Youngblood vs. Bir- mingham Trust and Savings company, 95 Ala. 521. CITIZEN.