Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1905-04-09

AAIOAOSI ia AA0 wOAA0AO AOWSVOA ASNAA-
less he may be. The whole is no
and when the individual health, safety
and welfare are sacrinced or neglected,
,ue State must suffer-" ~ a.s. -e
1t is a matter of common knowledge
that the health of many men is i'm
paired by labor in quartz mills. If
by taking proof that others are not
injured, the Statute is to be declared
void or imperative as to them, We
enter a wide field Of uncertainty and
speculation, and instead of having the
constitutionality of the Act rest upon
solid ground and a sure foundation,
it's enforcement would become subject
to the more or less speculative opin-
ions Of interested parties and Others
and to the conclusions Of varions
justice courts and juries regarding the
probability Of injury to men working
longer or shorter periods in the places
mentioned and witnesses could testify
regarding the consequences to heal'h
from labor in these employments and
thereby indirectly regarding the ne
cessity for legislative action and the
validity of the Statute in each case
as it arose. If exceptions based upon
such proof are to be made to the en-
forcement of the Act. they might de-
! pend not only upon the character Of
| the mill and the distinguishing feat
| ures of the work of the various men
employed, but upon the age, consti-
| tuition, vitality and probable endurance
of the different employees, the in
gradients used in working the ores
such as quicksilver cyanide or othe:.
chemicals injurious to health, the
the quantity and effect Nof dust AMI
fumes, the character of the ores and
whether they contained lead, arsenic
or other harmful substances from
day to day, or upon other conditions
and uncertainties which would multi
ply litigation, and lead to doubt an l
difficulty in securing the benefits In
tented by this legislation.
Although Courts should be careful
not to usurp the powers delegated
to the law making branch of the
government. and should not receive
evidence regarding facts of which they
are satisfied by judicial knowledge ant
although all reasonable doubts SHOULD
be resolved in favor of the action o
J the Legislature and constitutionality
/. of the statute. yet we are not pre-
, pared to say that there is any con
, elusive presumption in favor of an.
fact essential to support the validit.
, of the enactment as being within tn,
, police power Of the State, or that tn
court having proper Jurisdiction ma,
not receive proof regarding any con
. trolling fact which is in doubt.
, review of the decisions indicated tina
the Courts have acted in cases simila
to the one under consideration, ge.
! orally upon judicial cognizance, or .
in doubt have accepted the judgmen
of the legislature or received proof.
;, Chief Judge Parker, speaking 70
, the Court in People v. LOchner, II
, N. Y. las, in an opinion fled one da.
. after ours in the Boyce case. reviewe
;. many Of the authorities, pointed on
the wide scope of the police powe
! which the federal Supreme Court ha
often held to be vested in the legi
o latures of the various states notwitl
!, standing the fourteenth amendmen,
:. cited with approval People v. Havnc
, 149 N. Y. 145 (43 N. E. SAL, 81 L. r.
, 6SS. So A Nj St. r. TOD which uphold
= an act regarding barber shops, an
). found as matter Of judicial knowledg
. that work in bakeries and confecti'
>. ners establishments was unhealth
4 and for that reason sustained the Ne
!. York Statute restricting the hours
. labor in those places.
y Twenty days after the filing of tt
3 opinion in re Boyce and before pu
d LEGATION Of it had likely reached ther
It the Supreme Court of Missouri aft
e careful consideration of the autho
tiles, the case being ON appeal, he
O that the act limiting labor to Gig
q. hours a day in underground mines
"a that State was Constitutional, that Il
"a validity of the statute could not
$ made dependent upon the opinions
n experts as to the necessity for SUI
n enactment, and that the testimony
O. physicians. mining engineer end fol
o. man and of one who had worked thir
"a four years in the mines, could n
Nv be received to prove that such undt
ne ground work was not more inujriO
d to health than laboring the same nu
in Der of hours on the surface. JUST
ns Fox, all the justices concurring, sal
20 Defendant sought to introduce tes
or mOny of expert witnesses tending
ar show that the underground work CT
,d templated by this act Of the Leg
oh lature was not attended with dang
III to the health to those engaged in
.ss performance OF such work. This te:
an mony was excluded ny the Court, al
no in our opinion, correctly SO. 7
=, validity of laws enacted in the ex
ne else of the police power Of the st;
he cannot be made dependent upon
on. views of experts as to the necess
es of such enactment. II the constit
ks ionality of all laws enacted for
Cd promo Ion of pubic health and SAT
ses can be assaulted in this manner, tr
H., and sadly would it be declared t
nd. our laws rest upon a very. weak {
mi, unstable foundation
the State v. Cantwell, 17e Mo. PAS =
ere s. w. 500.
or in Powell v. Pennsylvania 1877 U