The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1910-10-19
PEONAGE FOUGHT
BY GOVERNMENT
An Alabama Case Will Be
Brought Before Supreme
Court This Week.
A TELLING BLOW PLANNED
LABOR CONTRACT LAW OPPOSED,
ALLEGING THAT " REDUCES
THE LAsoRERs TO THE coNDl.
TON OF SLAVES.

Washington, Oct. l9.-Believing that
hundreds OF southern negroes are be-
ing deprived OF their liberty by big
planters, under forms OF law. the fed
eral government will endeavor this
week to induct the supreme court OF
the United States to strike q telling
blow at the alleged evil. It will ask
the court to declare unconstitutional
the so-called Alabama labor contract
law. Similar laws have been passed
by several of the southern states, and
the decision is expected to apply to
them all.
The treatment Of negro farmhands
under this law Is interpreted by the
department Of justice as a reduction
OF these laborers to state Of peon-
age. Compulsory service in satisfac-
ton Of debt is taken by Attorney
General Wickersham as the object to
be accomplished by the legislation.
Tho state OF Alabama will appear
In court to defend Its enactment. 1t
10 claimed by Attorney-General Gar
Der OF that state, that the law In
question Is not aimed at the negro as
Q class, and, anyway, that this Is q
proper exercise Of the police power
OF the state to stop fraudulent prac.
tices from which the south has suf-
fered severely.
The case comes to court on the ap-
peal OF . negro. Alonzo Bailey. from
the decision Of the supreme court OF
Alabama, which held the law consti-
tutional and punished Bailey for VIC
lating II by assessing fine equivalent
TO 1876 days hard labor for the county.
The Case In Detail.
Bailey entered into . contract to
work a. Q farm hand for the River
side company during the year 1908 for
the sum OF 912 per month, the con.
tract reciting that Bailey had receiv.
ed SIS In advance and was to receive
the balance due him at the rate of
3iO.75 per month. He worked q
month and . few days. and then quit.
It II claimed. without just cause. He
had failed, the record alleges. to re-
fund the money advanced him.
The negro was arrested under the
labor contract law" This law pro.
vidAs that In contracts of service. en-.
tered into by . laborer with intent to
defraud, where money was advanced
the contract broken without just cause
and the money not refunded. the Ia
borer should be guilty of q misdemean-
or.
An amendment to the law In 1903
providing that failure to perform the
service and to refund the money
should be prima facie evidence Of in.
tent to defraud.
Attorneys for Bailey and the attor.
ney generals OF the state and the fed
eral government have filed briefs with
the supreme court In the case in ad
vance Of the oral argument expected
this week.
Wlekersham's Argument.
Attorney General Wickersham lays
stress particularly upon the argument
that the natural and reasonable effect
OF the statute was not to stop fraud
sorry services on negroes who made
UP he bulk Of farm labor In the state
In satisfaction OF debt.
II the statute 10 q bona fide at
tempt to punish fraud" the govern
ment asks, "Why limit II to the case
where the debtor fails to perform the
service or return the advance? What
would be said Of Q statute which, while
purporting to prevent theft provided
that there should be no offense II the
property. were returned?"
In reply Attorney General CARRIER
and his associates argue that on the
face Of the statute the clerk in the
store 10 a. much within the terms
~ the farm laborer, and that there
Ia no discrimination in the statute as
to race or color.
Indeed. the only possible field O.
operation Of this suggestion, reads the
states brief. would be to engender q
prejudice against the statute"
The Federal Contention.
Probably the argument chiefly re-
lied upon to defeat the statute ia the
one that the rules Of evidence adopted
by the statute under the law OF Ala
bama, work to condemn the accused
without . hearing. The government
contends that the automatic and ell
ementary principle" OF presumption o.
innocence In q criminal procedure II
supplanted by the statute by a pre-
sumption Of guilt.
In answer the state says that Bailey
has no right to complain because h,
never took the stand TO rebute the pre-
sumption OF his fraudulent intention
The government. In turn. replies tina
the laws OF Alabama closed his moutl
by declaring that he could not testif,
as to his accommodated intent
II II expected that the oral argu
ments will be based on these conten
lions. The case will be presented I,
the court probably On Wednesday.