Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1905-04-20
ABRIDGES RIGHTS.
new YORK TEN.HOUR DAY Law
Held Void.
Federal Supreme Court Hands Down
Opinion Which Is Regarded as
Highly lmpOrtant-OeCiSiOn Rem
dered Entirely on Constitutional
Grounds.

Washington, April 1S.-In an opin-
ION by Justice Peckham the supreme
cour: Of the United States has held to
be unconstitutional the New York
State law making ten hours days
work and sixty hours week g work in
bakeries in that state. Justices Har-
Ian, White, Day and Holmes dissented,
and Justice Harlan declared that no
more important decision had been rem
dered 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
exercise Of the right of contract be-
tween individuals. The court of ap-
peals Of the state upheld the law and
affirmed the Judgment of the trial
court, holding Lockner gully. Judge
Parker wrote the opinion of the New
York court of appeals supporting the
law and the court divided four to
three on the question Of its validity.
The law involved in the case is Sec
ton ITO Of the New York state labor
law prescribing the hours of labor in
bakeries of the state. Lochner is
baker in the city of Utica and was
found guilty Of permitting an employee
to work in his bakery more than 60
hours in week and fined $50. The
judgment was affirmed by the New
York Appellate courts.
Judge PeCkham'S Decision.
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 legal
days work, but an absolute prohibi-
ton upon the employer permitting un-
der any circumstances more than ten
hours work to DO done in his estab-
iishment. He continued:
THE employe may desire to earn
the extra money which would arise
from his working more than the pre-
scribed time, but this statute forbids
the employer from permitting the en-
ploye to earn it. 1t necessarily inter-
feres with the right of contract be-
tween the employer and the employed
concerning the number of hours in
which the latter may labor in the bak-
cry Of the employer. The general
right to make contract in relation to
his business is part of the liberty of
the individual protected by the -Four
tenth amendment to the federal con-
stitution. Under that provision no
state can deprive any person Of life,
liberty or property without due process
of law. The right to purchase or cell
the labor is part of the liberty protect
ed by this amendment unless there are
circumstances that exclude the right"
Dissenting Opinion.
Justice Holmes and Justice Harlan
both delivered dissenting opinions and
Justices White and Day concurred in
Justice Harlan's views. He said in
part:
81 do not stop to consider whether
any particular view of this economic
question presents the sounder theory.
The question is one about which there
is room for debate and for an honest
difference of opinion. No one can
doubt that there are many reasons,
based on the experience of mankind,
in support Of the theory that all things
considered, more than ten hours steady
work each day from week to week, in
a bakery or confectionery establish
ment may endanger the health and
shorten the lives of workmen.
III such reasons exist, that ought
to be the end of this case, for the state
is not amensble to the judiciary in re-
spect Of its legislative enactments, I'M.
less such enactments are plainly, pal.
pably, beyond all question, inconsist-
emit with the constitution of the United
States.
"Our duty, then, is to sustain the
statute as not being in conflict with
the federal constitution for the reason
and such is an all sufficient reason
it is not shown to be plainly and pal
pably inconsistent with that instru-
ment. Let the state alone in the man
agement of its purely domestic affairs,
so long as it does not appear beyond
all question that it has. violated the
federal constitution. This view nee
essarily results from the principle that
the health and safety of a state are
primarily for the state to guard and
protect, and is not a matter of ordi-
nary concern to the national govern
ment.'