Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1904-08-01

within the state" was passed upon by
the court OF appeals in a proceeding
similar to that of the Rodgers case.
The court held that the section was
violative of the state constitution, and
that so far as it compelled municipali-
ties and contractors to use in the
construction of public works only such
stone as is cut. carved or dressed in
the state of New York it is reGula-
ton of commerce between the states
which the Legislature has no power to
make, and is void under the commerce
clause of the federal constitution
Judge Parker, following his opinion in
The Rogers case. dissented again. using
he following language:
while the state cannot say to the
citizen that he must have the stone
used in his residence cut and dressed
within the state. neither the federal
nor state constitution prevents him
from deciding that he will not build a
residence unless the stone to ba used
in it are cut and dressed within the
state, nor for the Incorporating into a
contract with d builder a provision
that unless every stone used in the
structure be both cut and dressed with
in the state the contract shall be void
and the contractor deprived of com
penSatiOn.
But the liberty of the contract with
which the citizen is endowed is not
greater than that which the state is in
vested when it enters upon a scheme of
construction for the public good. If.
,r, 90 -,
people of the state acting together are
not greater than one of the units-a
citiZen-thcy are at least as great and
may be as capricious as it is possible
for an individual to be touching the
style of the architecture, quality and
material. character of wOrkmen and
rate of compensation that they will of
fer for work TO be performed"
In 1896 the so-called convict made
goods act" was passed in New York. 1t
required all goods made by convict la
Dor in any penal institution to be la
beled convict made" before being sold
or exposed for sale within the state.
The law was undoubtedly aimed at
convict made goods of other states.
since the product of convict labor of
New York could not. under COnstitu-
tiOnal provision Incorporating it into
the organic law of the state in 1894.
be placed upon the market in, New
York. In the case of People VS.. Hawk
ms. 157 y. Y. l. this law was held by
the court of appeals to be uncOnStitu-
tiGnal, because it was an attempt to
regulate interstate commerce and thus
yioIative of the commerce clause of the
federal constitution.
Fails to Agree.
Judge Parker again could not agree
with the majority of his associates,
and in a dissenting opinion he states
what he believed to he the true pur-
pose of the law in the following words:
The statute neither prohibits nor
attempts to prohibit other states or
citizens of other states from putting
prison made goods upon our markets,
nor does it prohibit our citizens from
buying or selling them; if il did, then.
decidedly, the statute would be viOlat
i've of the commerce clause of the
federal constitution and void; it simply
requires that prison made mCTchan-
!ise shall be so branded that our citi
ems shall know where the goods they
are buying were made"
Another case which Judge Parker's
friends say illustrates his sound con
-titutiOHal reasoning and his indcpcnd-
ence OF thought is that of the Citizens
Savings bank vs.. Town of Grecnburg.
y. Y. 21j. The legislature of the state
passed a statute empowering the SUI
prone court. at special term. or the
county court. to take such action as
would result i'll the building of a high
way at a great expense to a town.
without notice to any officer of the
town and therefore without Grantin"
the town the right 10 he heard. The
question came UP on the validity of the
bonds held by the bank. and the court
of appeals held the law to be constitu-
tiOnaI
The court was divided. four TO three
and again Judge Parker is found in the
minority and expressed his disappro-
val of the law in the following sharp
terms:
"A more arbitrary. undemOcratic use
Of the funds and credit of a town can
not be conceived Of and it would seem
% he uniting that q court should he
made the instrument of working out
such a scheme"
Judge Parker's objection was fur
Their based on the broader ground that
the law offended against the Constitu-
ton of the state in that il attempted to
confer upon the judiciary functions
not judicial but administrative.
An interesting case that was decided
in April. 1903. which attracted general
attention throughout the country. was
hat of Park & Sons VS.. National
Druggists association. The
relief sought by the plaintiff was an
adjudication that the resolutions.
agreements. plans and modes for the
of the business of the sale
Vt proprietary medicines by the associ-
alton were illegal. and that an injunc-
ion issue restraining the members of
he association from continuing TO
make efforts 10 induce any manufac-
uTer or proprietor of patent medicines
rom adopting the rebate or contract
plan for the sale of their goods. or