The daily silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1903-1907, 1905-05-05
WHAT IS A DAYS WORK?

Only a short time ago the Supreme
Court of Nevada decided that the eight
hour law of this State is constitutional
and punished a man who had voluntariy
worked ten hours a day. Now comes
the Supreme Court of the United States
with an entirely different opinion. b.
the latter decision it would seem that the
work of the labor unions in having re
stricted by law the number of hours con-
stituting a days work has been builded
on sand. The inference appears to be
that all such legislation is void in Itself,
as it undermines a fundamental principle
of individual liberty.
The case before the highest ribunal
was Decided by a vote of five to four.
1t declared unconstitutional the law pass
ed by the New York legislature five years
ago, restricting work in bakeries to ten
hours a day and sixty hours a week. TIE
law had been uphed by the New York
and the Court of Appeals. In handing
down the majority decision Justice Peck
ham said in part: 1.-THE general right 10
make a contract in relation to his busi-
ness is part of the liberty of the individ-
ual protected by the fourteenth amend
ment to the Federal Constitution. Under
III provision no State can deprive any
person of life, liberty or property with
out due process of law. The right 10
purchase or to sell labor is part of the
liberty protected by this amendment UNI
less there are circumstances which ex-
clude the right. The question whether
this act is valid as a labor Jaw pure anu
simple may be dismissed in a few words.
There is no Ieasonab e grou4d for in.er-
fering with the liberty Of persons or the
right of free contract by determining the
hours of labor in the occupation of a
baker. Bakers are in no sense wards CT
the State. Viewed in the light of a pure
ly labor law, with no reference whatever
to the question of health, we think lhas
a law like the one before US invo vts
neither neither the safety, the morals,
nor the welfare of the pubic and that
the interest of the pubic is not in the
slightest degree affected by such an act.
In a dissenting opinion Justice Harlan
said in part: Il do not stop to consider
whether any particular view of this eco
nomic question presents the sounder the
Dry. The question is one about which
there is room for debate, and for an hon
est difference of opinion. No one can
doubt hat there are many reasons, based
upon the experience of mankind in SUP
port of the theory that. all things con-
sidered. more than ten hours steady
work each day, from week to week, In a
bakery or confectionery establishment.
may ~endanger the health. impair the use
fulness and shorten the lives of the work
men. 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-suficient reason-it is not
shown to be plainly and palpably incon-
si5tent with that instrument. Let the
State alone in the management of is
purely domestic affairs. SO long as it dos
not appear beyond all question that 1t
has violated the Federal Constitution.
This view necessarily results from the
principle that the health and safety of
the people of a State are primarily for
the State to guard and protect. and is
not a matter ordinarily of concern to the
national government"
The question of what number of hours
constitutes a days work appears to he
a matter to be decided directly between
the parties most Neutrality-suspicious. and
employe. and not by legislatures or Con-
gress.