The Detroit times., 1912-04-02

cow Of his lot--or the direct restrain
. ing ofshis physical liberty. Nor did
~ occur to our forefathers when they
took Il from England and incorpor-
ated IL into those fundamental in
Shipments OF government In this coun.
try, state and national. which we call
constitutions. that any meaning would
ever be given to II except that which
II then had 1t had then only d.
rect meaning In respect or the taking
OF mans property or the depriying
him OF his liberty. Moreover, II was
q check on the executive branch OF
government only I'm England, and not
into our constitutions I'm that sense.
No one anticipated that II would ever
he Interpreted as check on legisla-.
tive power also, although that inter
pfetation has naturally followed from
our system or government. But the
carrying OF II TO extremes by casu-
istry Is another thing. This tobacco
case, In which the court showed so
much constituencies for the rights or
property and liberty, and SO little for
physical. mental and moral health,
was the Anal and fal4 outcome or a
course OF constitutional exegesis
which had set In in this country not
many years before, and had for its
object TO embrace In the said con-
stitutional guaranty every Legislative
enactment which by its operation
might indirectly or remotely restrict
the use OF property or liberty in its
widest sense. Its development was
rapid, and finally reached that point
which has enabled the courts to stand
in the way OF measures for the public
happiness. welfare. morals and pro-
gress, which are grown common all
over the world. and finally become ex.
pressed in statute Law here.
Another Law Knocked Out.
Some years later similar good and
intelligent influences brought about
the enactment or statute in the leg
islature OF this state for the sanitary
regulation OF underground bakeries,
for the sake OF the health OF those
employed in them and of the com,
munity generally. The statute recog-
nized the hot and uncomfortable con-
ditions of these bakeries and how
easy II was for them to become un-
sanitary and result In unsanitary
bread II therefore prescribed list
ofgsanitary safeguards. such as drain
age. plumbing, furniture, utensils,
Mushrooms, closets and the like. ana
also that employees therein should not
work more than 10 hours day, the
work being principally done in the
night time. The supreme court or
the United States declared this 10
hour requirement to be unconstitu-l
'tional, as depriving workmen, with
out due process OF law, OF the lib
erty. TO work as long hours az they
saw fit in underground bakeries
Uochner v. New York, 1913 United
States Reports, page 49,. The learn
ed court stood five to four. That d.
vision certainly showed that the mat
ter was one of great doubt. And yet,
Notwithstanding a rule which Is often
repeated by the courts, that they will
declare a statute unconstitutional
only in a case free from doubt, they
declared this statute unconstitutional.
The same court has often done the
like by vote OF TO 4. What Is
to but q state of doubt in the courty
The reasoning In this decision is sub
stantially the same as that in the
tenement house tobacco case.
infringement Of Liberty"
In 1898 the legislature Of this state
passed a statute that women should
not work in factories between the
hours OF 8 at night and 6 in the morn
ing. This statute was intended to
protect the health of women, and
hence Of their offspring. Surely, said
the great majority of Intelligent pee=
pie, II 10 enough that women work in
factories between the hours of 6 in