The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-07-22
LABOR LAW INVALID
NEGRO HELD FOR ITS VIOLA
 TION IS RELEASED.
Supreme Court in Case of Columbus Toney Declares Act of 1901 Con- Ajcts With the Organic
 Law.

One of the contract labor laws en- acted in 1901 was declared to be un- constitutional yesterday by the Su- preme Court and Columbus Toney, Q negro. held in the Russell County jail for violating the act, was ordered 10
 The opinion was written by MT. Justice Sharpe. who did not go into These are the laws which were so sharply criticised by Judge Thomas U |: Jones of the United States Court last summer when he had the peonage cases under consideration.
 Columbus Toney was arrested and placed in jail in Russell county TOT abandoning a contract and making second contract without giving notice of his abandonment of the first con tract His attorney sought his release by writ of habeas corpus before Fro, bate Judge H., T. Benton of Russell nationality of the act. Judge Benton denied relief to the negro. whereupon an appeal was made to the supreme Court.
 The opinion of Mir. Justice Sharpe declares in its opening statement that authority for the warrant under wnlcn Toney Is held does not exist unless 1t be in an act approved March l, l9ol, which Is quoted as follows: That any person who has contract cd In writing to labor for, or serve, an- other for any given time. or any per.
  or rented land from anoth:r for any specified time, or any person who has 1 contracted in writing with party fur. nishing the lands. or the lands ana n ! the labor or the labor and teams to cultivate the lands with stipulatlons, | express or implied, to divide the crops between them in certain proportion, contract and without the consent or the other party, and without sufficient excuse. to be adjudged by the court, shall leave such other party or aoan- don said contract, or leave or abandon | the leased premises. or the land fur | nished as aforesaid, and who shall also make second contract either parol or
 written, of a similar nature or charac- | ter to any of said aforementioned con | tracts, though differing in some par | ticulars in the terms, stipulations or l period of time, with a different person, without first giving notice to such per | son of the existence of the said first contract. shall be guilty of a misde- meanor. and on conviction be fined not | exceeding $50, or sentenced to hard la bor for not exceeding six months. one | or both"
 The opinion says this act cannot op- crate consistently with the guarantees | of equality, liberty and property made by the Federal and also by the State | Constitutions.
 The opinion elaborates the definitions of "eouality," liberty" and property and declares that the terms menn not
 only the right of the citizen to be free | from mere physical restraint but em-
 braces the right of the citizen to be
 free in the enjoyment of all of his fac | ulties.
 "Because of the restrictions 1t pur- | ports to place on the right to make contracts for employment" writes MT
 Justice Sharpe after reviewing numer-
 ous authorities, and concerning the use and cultivation of land, this act Is
 wholly invalid"
 Reference is made to a forceful opin- ion opposed to the constitutionality of this act recently rendered by Judge Thomas G. Jones of the United States Court.
 In conclusion the opinion says: ''rhe act for which petitioner is held was not a criminal offense and therefore the Judgment appealed from will be reversed and it will here be ordered
 that the petitioner be discharged from custody"