Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1908-10-23
The Reason OF the Law.

tons were began under a statute
which reads rs follows
Section lg,1-li any person shall kc,
open any store. shop. grocery, ball alley
'5.iiard room or tipplin. house for III
purpose 81 labor or traffic, or any p'ac
II amusement, on the first day II tn
week. commonly called SUNDAY or tn
Lord : iiN. -nch person upon conviction
tI-Crt7T ~TItfi t'' punished nv titTr Il
not lr-> than - or more than $50 Pro
li.lcd that the above provision shall 10
apply - ihrater>, the keepers oil dru.
stores. doctor shops. undcTtakers, liver
stable keel per, butchers and bakers
and all circumstances Of necessity an,
mercy may be pleaded in defense, whicl
shall be treated as questions Of fact 70
the jury To- determine when the oiiitns,
is tried by jury.
Some Of the parties prosecuted flee
complaint in the State Circuit Court
for Multnomah county against the
District Attorney and other officials
asking for an Injunction restraining
such prosecutions. \ temporary
writ was allowed; afterwards tn,
Suiiiciency of the complaint was chal-
lcnged by demurrer filed on behalf
of the defendants (thc otiicials). Al
the hearing. the Court observed:
Ordinarily criminal prosecution can
not be enjoined by suit in equity.
There is however. well-recognized *
ception to this rule laid down in Sandys
vs.. Williams, 4G Oregon, 3271, in which
the court SAYS:
Where criminal prosecutions under
color of 4 void law are threatened, which
act, if enforced. would deprive Il party
OF property right. preliminary injnnc-
ton may properly be issued to prevent
the menaced injury. Equity has juris-
dlctiOn to interpose an injunction where
public officers, under a claim of right,
are proceeding Illegally to injure the
property of individuals or corporations.
The Court went into the history
of this law back to the Territorial
days of 1854, and the subsequent
thereto, all of which are
in the above section 1865.
The presiding Judge ruled that this
law is unconstitutional, because it
violates the provisions of the United
States and State constitutions guar
religious freedom, and UNI
justly discriminates, that the eX-
of theaterS from its opera
ton is unfair and arbitrary. Such
laws in furtherance of police regula
tons must operate equally. The in
junction was made perpetual.
The saloons and barber shops with
regard to Sunday closing come under
the operation of another law, found in
the Oregon Criminal Code. A ques-
ion arises whether this decision
loes not prove too much for the men
al and moral digestion of would
" refOrmcrs? Why discriminate
against barber shops and saloons,
t we grant the reasoning of this rule
% be sound? Undoubtedly BARRIERS
'ould enforce Sunday closing of their
business, if they only desired to do
20, through or by cooperation of
heir unions, or by cooperation that
las been secured in many commur-
ties wherein there was no law on
he subject; resting their action on
10Th economic and moral cOnsidera-
ions, and making it uncomfortable |
or viOlatOrs among the craft.
AS regards saloons, they are recog-
lized by law and pay high licenses;
he situation is different from that
If BARRIERS and many other Occupa-
ions in which high money tribute
o the public is not exacted. What |
sound principle can BE- invoked to
make q distinction between a saloon,
,igar-stands or theaters. on this Sun
lay question? If you say disturb
Inces are liable to rise where liquor
S sold, do they not occur sometimes
n restaurants, hotels. lodging houses
md places of business on, week days
md Sundays? Our laws are ample
o protect the public peace. The
may be found in popular
sentiment which is liable to be pre-
udiced and perverted. This is a |
historic fact which requires no argu-
nents to sustain it. Mr.. Dooley said
he was unable to tell whether the
constitution followed the flag, but he
vas convinced that the decisions of
courts followed the latest election
'eturnS.
This decision by the Oregon court
'ests upon unreasOnableness of the
statute under consideration. Such
'ullngS are calculated to cause disre-
pect for statutory law; leaving Judge
% determine when a given enact
nent is void for want of equity, tenta-
lively makes him legislator to pre-
scribe his own rules PERTAINING to
human conduct. On the other hand
many laws are SO effectively framed,
when presented to court for inter
'retatiOn, it would seem almost nee
ssary for the judiciary to intrude
lpon the domain of the Legislature
n order to read any sense into them
r. to prevent them from operating
lnjustly. OF course when such is
he situation, it makes it all the more
EMBARRASSING for lawyers and laymen
o say what is or is not the law.
ret, we are told: Ignorance of |
he law excuses nobody"
HIGH STAKE op Capno .ur |