Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1904-01-24

thts power are admirably stated BY
Chief Justice Shaw in the following
extract from his opinion in Common
wealth v. Anger, Z Cush. So, a.:
I'VE think 1t Is a settled principle,
growing out of the nature of well Or
dered civil society. that every holder
Of property, however absolute and I'M
qualified may be his title, holds It
under the implied liability that its use
may be SO regulated. that it shall not
be injurious to the equal enjoyment Of
others having an equal right
to the enjoyment of their
nor injurious to the
rights of the community. Rights Of
property, like all other social and con-
ventional rights are subject tosuch rea~
sonable limitations in their enjoyment
as shall prevent them from being in
furious. and to such reasonable re-
straints and regulations established
by law as The Legislature, under the
governing and controlling power vest
ed in them by the Constitution, may
think necessary and expeoient
This power legitimately exercised
can neither be limited by contract nor
bartered away by legislation.
While this power is necessarily in
hercnt in every form Of government,
it was, prior to the adoption of the
Constitution, but sparingly used in
this country. AS we were then almost
purely an agricultural people, the oc-
casiOn for any special protection Of
particular class did not exist Certain
profitable emplOyments, such as lot
teries and the sale of intoxicating IL
Quors, which were then considered
to be legitimate, have since fallen
under the ban of public opinion. and
are now either altogether prohibited
or made subject to stringent police
regulations. The power to do this has
been repeatedly affirmed by this court.
Stone v. Mississippi, 101, U. 8. S14:;
Douglas v. Kentucky, 16s U. s. 4Ss;
Giozza v. Tiernan, 14S U. S. 657; Kidd
v. Pierson, 12S u S. 1; Crowley v
Christensen. 1877 U. S. Sc.
while the business of mining coal
and manufacturing iron began in Penn
sylvania as early as 1716. and in Vir-
ginia, North Carolina and Massachu--
sets even earlier than this. both min
ing and manufacturing were carried
on in such a limited way and by such
primitive methods that no special laws
were considered necessary, prior 20
the adoption of the Constitution, for
the protection of the operatives; but,
in the vast proportions which these
industries have since assumed, it has
been found that they can no longer be
carried on with due regard to the safe.
ty and health of those engaged in
them, without special protection az
alnst the dangers necessarily incident
to these employments. In consequence
of this, laws have been enacted in
not ~ fhn 4
these exigencies and to secure the
safety of persons peculiarly exposed
to these dangers. Within this general
category are ordinances providing for
fire escapes from hotels, theatres, fac
tories and other large buildings, a mu-
nicipal inspection Of boilers, and ap-
planes designed to secure passengers
upon railways and steamboats, against
the dangers necessarily incident to
these methods Of transportation In
States where manufacturing is carried
on to large extent, provision is made
for the protection Of dangerous ma
chinery against accidental contact,
for the cleanliness and ven.i'ati0n of
working rooms, for the guarding OF
we'll holes, stairways, elevator shafts
and for the employment of sanitary
appliances. In others where mining is
the principle industry, special provis-
ion is made for the snoring up of dan
gerous walls, for ventilation shafts
bore holes, eScapement shafts, means
of signalling the surface, for the sup
ply Of fresh air and the elimination,
as far as possible, of dangerous gases.
for safe means of hosting and lower.
ing cages, for a limitation upon the
number Of persons permitted TO enter
cage, that cages shall be covered,
and that there shall be fences ard
gates around the top of shafts, besides
other similar precautions.
These statutes have been repeat
eddy enforced by the courts of the sew
eral States; their validity assumed,
and, SO far as We are informed, they
have been uniformly held to be con-
stltutional
In Daniels V. Hilgard, II Illinois,
GAO, it was held that the Legislature.
had power under the Constitution to
establish police regulations for the
operating Of mines and collieries, and
that an act providing for the health
and safety of persons employed in
coal mines, which required the owner
or agent of every coal mine or colliery
employing ten men or more, to make
map or plan of the workings of such
coal mine or colliery, was not unconsti-
tutional; and that the question whe-
tner certain requirements are part
of system of police regulations ad-
opted to aid in the protection of life
and health, was properly one of legis-
latiye determination, and mat court
should not lightly interfere with such
determination unless the Legislature
had manifestly transcribed it's prov
ince. See also Litchfield Coal Co. "
Taylor, 81 Illinois, $50
In Commonwealth V. BonGell ct. al,
Phila. 534, a law providing for the
ventilation of coal mines, for speaking
tubes and the protection of cages
was held to be constitutional and sub
ject to strict enforcement. Common
wealth v. Conyngham &c Penn ST 80;
Durant " Lexington Coal Mining Co..
81 Missouri, 62.
But If it be within the power of
the Legislature to adopt such means
for the protection of 6e lives OF its