The Marlboro democrat. [volume] (Bennettsville, S.C.) 1882-1908, 1907-04-12
MAY BE KNOCKED GUT
iabcrers Contract Law 10 Be Re-
viewed By ttiis. Courts.
It is Said that the Law is Productive
of Pconago and Fails to Provide
Equal Penalties.

Equal Penalties.
A case is now pending In the Uni
ted States Court at Charleston that
Is of much interest to the farmers of
South Carolina, and the final disposi-
ton OF the case is being watched
with great Interest. The case Is in
reference to the labor contract law
OF this State. About a month ago
w negroes we're sentenced to terms
OF imprisonment in the Charleston
county jail for the violation OF this
law. Their attorneys obtained q writ
or haDeas corpus from judge Braw-
10y, alleging that these me were un-
lawfully detained and deprived OF
their liberties In violation Of the con-
stitution Of the United States.
me principal ground Of attack on
inc law seems to be that the labor
contract law violates that provision
or the federal constitution which for
Dlds class legislation: thus, it Is
claimed, if the violation of a e]ontract
TO buy goods or obtain advances in
money which are to be paid for in la
Dor is to be penalized and punished
as q crime then other contracts must
De likewise penalized and punished.
In words, the claim Is made
mat the lobOr contract law of this
State provides punishment for the
nonpayment Of advances made under
the labor law, or the noncompliance
with the terms Of a labor contract. q,
strictly civil contract, and fails to
provide punishment for other civil
contracts when violated. It is said
some of our best lawyers think the
law unconstitutional and that the I'm
tied States Court will so declare it.
when the question first came uD
before Judge Brawley he postponed
a final dcision until Mr.. Lyon, the
Acknowledgement Of the State, could
be heard. Last Monday was set for
the hearing, but it did not come up.
IT VIII be heard some time this week.
The case was brought by Messre Lo-
gan and Grace, two Charleston law
yers. They allege hat the State
law is class Legislation and a form of
peonage, and, therefore, In conflict
with the federal constitution. A few
days ago, on instructions from Attor-
ney Genera ~BOnaparte, United States
District Attorney Cochran filed q pc
tltion to be permitted to intervene in
Dehalf OF the government and Judge
Brawley granted the motion, which
makes the government a party to the
suit.
Pending a final decision Of the
case, Judge Brawlcy is understood to
have discharged the two Charleston
negroes from Jail until the case could
be fully heard and finally decided,
n the magistrates over the State
have held up all prosecutions for VIC
lating the labor contract law pending
Judge Brawley's decision. The Fed
eraf authorities seem to regard the
law somewhat as a system Of peonage
The labor contract law was enacted
several years ago and at first pro-
Tide that any laborer violating q
written contract should be punished
criminally by fine or Imprisonment
III the case of the State against VIII.
liams the supreme court OF this State
declared the law unconstitutional
because punishment was provided
against only the laborer and not the
farmer in case Of a violation Of the
contl act to perform farm labor.
The legislature at it's mex session
amended the law SO hat either the
farmer or laborer violating a con.
tract should be punished by fine or
Imprisonment. In this shape the law
stood for some time. A few years
uSo llt law WAS again dIllcIlQeu SO
that Il verbal contract was made pun
ishablc, If violated, provided such
contract was witnessed by two dis
interested witnesses.
This law has beer attacked sever
al times in the state supreme court
but without success. In the case of
the state against Chapman it's consti-
tutionalty was directly up held. Again
in the case of the state against Eas-
terlin, wherein the law was attacked
upon the ground that while it did In
a II allow Imprisonment for debt,
yet the constitution did not forbid
Imprisonment for debt in case of
fraud, and that the violation of such
a contract, after obtaining advances
against future labor, was a species of
fraud.
This law is n good one, and has
been very helpful in retaining labor
on the farms, but in some cases it
has been abused. 1t seems to us
that some such law is absolutely es-
Scntiai to the successful management
OF Our farms under our present labor
conditions, and should it be declared
unconstitutional 1T will cause consid-
cradle trouble to our farmers by dis
organizing their plans and in many
cases dcmoraliZing the labor. With
out some such law our farmers would
be at the mercy OF those who they
may have hired to work on their
farms