Evening journal., 1905-04-18
TEN HOUR LAW
DECLARED INVALID
New York Statute Ruled I'm
constitutional by U. S. Su-
preme Court
FOualtlNIH AMENDMENT

Washington, April 1S.-In an opinion
by Justice Peckham, the supreme court
Of the United States held to be uncon-
stitutonal the New York state law
making 10 hours a days work and so
hours a weeks work in bakeries ia
that state. Justices Harlan, White,
Day and Holmes dissented, and Justice
Harlan declared that no more impor-
tant decision had been rendered in the
last century.
The opinion was handed down in the
case Of Lockner VS.. the state of New
York, and was based on the ground that
the law interferes with the free exer-
else of the rights of contract between
individuals. The court of appeals OF the
state upheld the law and affirmed the
Judgment of the trial court holding
Lockner guilty. Judge Parker wrote
the opinion of the New York court Of
appeals supporting the law, and the
court divided four to three on the ques-
tion of validity.
The law involved in the case is sec
tion 10 Of the New York sSate labor
law prescribing the hours Of labor in
bakeries In the state. Lochner is a
baker in the city of Utica, and was
found guilty of permitting an employe
to work in his bakery more than 60
hours a week and fined $50 The judg-
ment was affirmed by the New York
appellate courts.
The opinion dealt entirely with the
constitutional question involved JUS
tice Peckham said that the law is not
an act merely fixing the number Of
hours which shall constitute a legal
days work. but an absolute prohibition
on the employer permitting under any
circumstances more than 10 hours
work to be done in his establishment
He continued
THE employe may desire to earn the
extra money which would arise from
his working more than the prescribed
time, but this statute forbids the en-
ployer from permitting the employe to
earn it. IL interferes with the contract
between the employer and employees
concerning the number of hours in
which the latter may labor in the bak-
cry of the employer. The genera rights
70 make contract in relation to his
business is part of the liberty of the
Individual protected by the 14th amend
ment to the federal constitution.
"The question whether this act is
valid as a labor law pure and simple
may" he said, "be dismissed in a few
words There is no reasonable ground
for interfering with the liberty of per-
sons or the right of free contract by
determining the hours of labor in the
occupation of a baker Bakers are il
no sense wards of the state. Viewed
in the light of purely labor law, with
no reference whatever to the question
of health, we think that a law like the
one before us involves neither the safe
ty, the morals nor the welfare of the
public, and that interest of the public
is not in the slightest degree affected
by such an act"
He concluded: 1T seems to us thai
the real object and purpose was simpl,
/ to regulate the hours of labor between
the master and his employees. all being
men sui juris. in a private business
not dangerous in any degree to moral'
or in any real and substantial degree
to the health of the employees. Under
such circumstances the freedom of mas
ter and employe to contract with eacl
other in relation to their employmeu
and in defining the same cannot b.
prohibited or interfered with withou
violating the federal constitution"