Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1900-01-12

| have received copy of the opinion
and decision recently handed down by
Chief Justice McSherry of the Court of
Company Store act of Maryland I'M
constitutional. The opinion is as fol-
lows: "First.-The body of the act, in
stead of being confined to the subject
disclosed in the title, is much broader,
and prohibits the officers and directors
Of railroad and mining companies not
merely from selling goods and wares to
the employees of those companies, but
from selling to anybody else in Allie
gany county, whether an employe of
theirs or not. Under title imposing
very limited prohibition, much
broader and more sweeping prohibit
ton is enacted. This the court holds
to be repugnant to section 29 of article
5 of the state constitution. which de-
clares that every statute shall embrace
but one subject, and that subject must
be described in the title. Second.-The
statute is declared null because it is
in conflict with section ! of the Four
teenth amendment to the federal con-
stitution. BY that amendment the
equal protection of the laws is guaran-
teed to every person. This statute,
the court holds, denies equal protec-
ton. While the officers and projectors
of every other corporation. except rail
road or mining companies, may sell
goods and merchandise to their en-
ployes. the officers and directors of
railroad and mining companies simply
because they are officers or directors
of such companies, are not allowed to
engage in the mercantile business at
all Thrd.-lt is held that indepen-
dent of any specific constitutional pro-
vision the legislation in question is
vicious, because it invades the liberty
of the citizen to engage in a lawful oc-
cupation which is open to every other
citizen in the country. The statute
was not passed in the exercise of the
police power and cannot be upheld as
a police regulation. 1t is declared to
be imperative and invalid
The bill, which was prepared by the
Allegany county delegation in the gen.
eral assembly of 1898, and offered in
the senate by Senator David Z. Dick,
provided that it shall not be lawful
ton doing business in Allegany coun-
ty nor for any officer or director of
such corporation to own or have any
interest in any general store or mer-
chandise business. 1t further provided
that the county clerk should not issue
q license to any one except upon oath
that he was not an officer or member
of such corporation. The Kitchens
Brothers company of Frostburg tested
the law. in speaking of the decision
Senator Dick said: twenty-five or 30
years ago an official of coal company
was shot and killed in Allegany coun-
ty. and 1t was believed it was due to
ill-feeling against the stores then OPP
Grated by the companies. For num-
Der of years following the mine owners
did not encourage company stores.
Within few years they have appeared
again. The evil of company stores is
generally recognized. The act of 1898
was carefully drawn and approved by
an authority on legislation. and the
miners believed it would be upheld by
the courts. The miners. especially will
be greatly disappointed by the deci-
sion, because they believed that the
law prohibited what they consider a
very great evil. 1t is highly probable
that bill meeting the courts objec-
tions and which will attain the desired
end will be drafted and presented to
the general assembly at the coming
session
Above decision and the argument
upon which 1t is based. except the first
point. are substantially identical with
the argument made and decision reach
cd whenever like legislative enact
ments in other states have been re-
viewed by the respective courts of last
resort. And what is more, it appears
to be very difficult IL not impossible,