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

DuJ 10 COulpCi Gacn JODDeT 10 sell al
the same price by refusing to sell
goods to anyone who would not COM
ply with these requirements. a divided
court, again standing four TO three
held that manufacturers of prOprie-
tary medicines refusing to sell their
goods to a Wholesale dealer except at
the retail price. or to allow commits
siOns or a rebate upon goods puTchas-
ed does not constitute boycott where
the refusal is based upon the dealers
unwiilinSnCsS to maintain the selling
price fixed by the manufacturers.
Judge Parker Assents.
Judge Parker in this case. was with
the majority of the court, and in an as
senting opinion says:
1t will be seen. therefore. that this
is controversy between opponents in
business. neither side trying to- help
the public. PrOprietOrS have to sell
their goods only to wholesalers or job
bling druggists and not to the retail
trade, and the committee on propric-
tary goods, which was composed of
wholesale druggists. members of the
association. agreed to furnish proprie-
wi 1870 vi " iIOlCSttlClS " iiO COIIu ne
depended upon To keep their contracts
and cut off lists of dealers who did not
keep their contracts. or who bought
as a mere cover for dealers who were
known not to keep their contracts"
The court of appeals was again di-
vidCd four to three, in the case OF
Charles II. MOnnier VS.. New York Cen
trail railroad. and the majority includ-
ing Judge Parker, came to the assist
ance of the railroad in defining the
rights of passengers and railroads I'M
der certain conditions.
At the station where Monnicr board.
ed the train the office was closed. he
could not find the agent and had no OPP
portunity to buy a ticket. He rendered
the regular fare to his destination. and
the conductor insisted on collecting
five cents extra imposed by statute as
a penalty for failing to purchase a
ticket at the station. He refused to
pay, and the conductor. with violence.
elected him. He brought suit to recov-
Cr damages for assault and battery
but the court held that the fact that
railroad passenger, by reason of the
absence of the ticket agent, is I'M
able to procure q ticket before enter
ing the train is no justification FOR his
fOrCible resistance to an election there
from when, having refused TO pay the
additional fare required of passenger
without Il ticket by rules of the com
pany, the conductor demands such
payment.
case sustaining another provision
of the labor law of 1897 was that of
Marine vs.. Lehmaicr, decided in Feb
ruary. 1903 and reported in 173 n. Y
$50. AS usual with the court of APP
peals in important cases, the members
were divided. standing five to two. and
Judge Parker was with the majority.
The ruling was that the section in
question. prohibiting the employment
of a child under the age of II in any
factory of the state of New York, in
effect declares that a child under the
age specified presumably does not pos
seSs the judgment, discretion, care
and caution necessary for the manage
mcnt in such dangerous avocation
and therefore is not. as Il matter of
law. chargeablc with cOntributOry
negligence or with having assumed
the risk of the employment. Any viola
ton of this law was declared a mis-
dcmeanOr, and if the plaintiff was in
jurcd the proprietor was not relieved
from civil liability for injuries sus-
tanned
Judge PaTkcr'S ideas OF the growing
custom of big corporations and cor
poratc interests which arc able to
dominate legislatures and secure the
~,
own interests are expressed in the
case of the People OK rel Tyrolcr vs.
Warden of Prison. The railroads ana
transportation companies of New York
in order TO stamp ont ticket scalping
by brokers. had passed in 1897 a stat
ute making il a crime for anyone not
authorized by n common carrier 10 sell
ticket. Any ticket agent in New
York could act as the agent for any
railroad or steamship company in the
world and engage in the business law
fully.
As was usual in important cases
the court of appeals was divided -four
to three, Judge Parker being with the
majority and writing the opinion. It
was held that this remarkable stat
ute dS Judge dIhtI tdlitO IT. Illtu
prohibits and subjects to punishment
as a crime. the selling of tickets for
passage on vessels or railroads trains
by any person except common carriers
and their specially authorized agents.
transccnds the police power and VIC
lates the constitutional guarantees of
civil rights and privileges and liberty
insofar as il undertakes TO prohibit
citizens of the state from engaging in |
the business of brokers of passenger |
tickets.
In his opinion Judge Parker uses the
following language:
1T is asserted that the travelling
public and the transportation com |
Danies have been so defrauded by the I
acts of the brokers in the selling Of /
unused passage tickets. as 10 call FOR !
legislation of a protective character. of (
which this statute IS the outcome. The /
erdenCv Of the times undoubtedly is /
% rush 10 the legislature for
-, - -i~