The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1897-11-19
struments in the hands of ignorant
| opI upakjllpd wOrkmen

struments in the hands of ignorant
and unskilled workmen.
This being true, it seems to the
Court that chapter 1856 of the laws
of 1897 tends to protect the puollc
health against these diseases and has
some relation to the welfare OF So
cleLy.
1t is not to be denied that the evil
| effects of unSkillful barbering are not
as frequent or widespread as atfllc-
tions OF mankind against which the
police power of the State is exercised
AMI we admit the passage or the law
in question, is getting very close TO
| the danger line on the part OF the
| legislature, yet this exercise or the
| police power has some relation to the
welfare of society, and If this position
| is doubtful, il is the duty Of the Court
| to cOnstrue the doubt in favor Of the
cOnstItutionality Of the law. LII the
| Court errS in this, it can be rectlned
! by the supreme court OF the State.
whose Judgment is final and binding
| in such matters.
AS to the second question Of de-
| Tense advanced by the defendant, to-
| wit:
That the complaint does not state
public OtfenSe because it charges a
single or isolated act on part of the
defendant. The Court is constrained
| TO hold that the point is not well
| taken.
To be sure the complaint does
! charge a single act of shaving, but by
reference to the stipulated facts we
| find that the defendant was then and
there engaged in the tccupation of
barber. and performed the single act
of shaving while engaged in his regu-
lar and customary business Of barber
| ing.
The authorities that the defendant
cites in support of this position all go
to acts that were done outside of the
regular and customary business of the
defendant, that is, they were single
isolated acts, and were not done with
the pretense of engaging in or carry
ing on the business forbidden by law.
The Court is of the opinion that the
complaints states public Offense I'M
der the law.
The third point made by the de-
| PENDANT in his offenSe is, that the act
charged was procured and induced by
the connivance, and at the solicitation
| OF public Othcer, tO-Wlt:
| A member Of the board of examln-
eIs for the sole purpose of constitu-
ting this prosecution. 1t is often
that case OF wrongful act on the
part of a person is executed Oy the
law because the party was entrapped
into committing it by the fraud and
deception of those whose business is
to prevent the commission of crime,
but the stipulated facts in this case
does not show that there was any
fraud or deceipt practiced, as the de-
feudant by which he was enJrapped
into the commission of an unlawful
act. The evidence shows at the
time and place charged defendant
was engaged in the occupation of
barber without having first pro-
cured the certificate of regis
tration required by law. The
complaining witness stepped into the
shop and was shaved by the same as
any other customer would do and
paid for such shave. There is no evil
dence in the case that the complain
ant said or did anything that would
amount to deception to induce the
defendant to commit an unlaw act, or
that he did anything that induced
the defendant to do an act that he
| otherwise would not have done.
| The verdict and the decision of the
court is, that chapter one hundred
and eighty-six of the laws of the year
1897 is constitutional, and that the
defendant is guilty as charged in the
complaint and warrant herein.
IRA P. SHIsSLER,
Judge of the Municipal Court for the
City of Mankato, Minnesota.
Dated, MankatO, Nov. 10th, 1897.