Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1913-04-03
THURSDAY. APR. ). 1913.


NO OBJECTION TO A TEST.
=, AMt-EI c Bond one of the foremost foes OF tho
y Mooney TenAIour Law in this State, suggests
That the constitutionay OF tho law, passed by the
LEGISLATURE and approved by Governor Miller, he
tested We have no doubt that, In view of the de-
cision Of the United states supreme Court, of the
supreme Court of the state OF Illinois, and Of seven
or eight other courts the friends OF the Mooney law
win welcome any such test In fact we know that
some of them incline TO the opinion that they rather
would have it than not because the inevitable re-
spit would be to add ono decision in favor of
tcn-bour work-day legislation and thereby strengthen
tho foundation OF the general movement Louis
Brandcs of Boston one of the abest lawyers IN the
rnitod states has offered his services free for the
defense OF any such law has been passed in Della
ware and it goes without saying that there VIII be
other able lawyers brought into such fight il 1t be
precpitatod
The opinion Of the supreme Court OF the United
States was delivered in the case of Muller VS. the
state of Oregon In that case il had been contend
ed that the Ten-Hour Law violated the Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, which
is as follows
no state shall make OF enforce any law which
shall abridgc the privilege immunues of citizens
Of the United States; nor shall any State deprive
person Of life liberty, property without due pro-
cess of law; nor deny 10 any person within it's iurs-
diction the equal protection of the laws"
Other contentious made with regard to the Ore
ron law we're that the statute did not apply equally
to all persons similarly situated and class legis
latlon, and that t not valid exercise of the po-
lice power.
INC highest court In the land decided that it I'M
doubtedy is true that the general right contract
in relation TO ones business is part OF the liberty
of the individual protected by the Fourteenth Amend
ment to the Constitutions yet IL is equally well set
tied that this liberty is not absolute and extending
to all contracts, and that State may, without con-
hlctng with the provisions Of the fourteenth Amend
ment restrict in many respects the individuals power
of contract Il also held that differentiated from the
other SEX is properly placed in class by
herself and legislation designed for her protection
may be sustained, even when like legislation is not
necessary for men and could not be sustained. The
court said IL is impossible to close ones eyes to
the fact that stil looks brother and de-
ponds upon him. Even though all restrictions
POLITICAL personal and contractual rights taken
away and she stood. statutes concerned,
upon an absolutely equal plane with him. still
would be- true the cour. said that she is so const-
tuted that she viii upon and look 10 him for
protection: that her physical structure and proper
DISCHARGE OF her maternal Misunderstanding IN view
not only her own health but the well-being Of the
race-justify legislation protect her from the greed
as well the passion Of man. u said speaking Of
the Oregon law that the limitations which the stat
ute placed upon her contractual powers. upon her
right agree with her employer as 10 the time she
shall labor imposed solely for her benefit but
also largely for the benefit OF all The Supreme
Court OF the nation held that the differ in
structure OF body the functions performed by each
in the amount OF physical strength in the capacity for
long-contnued labor particularly when done stand
ing the influence Of vigorous health upon the future
wel-beng Of the race, tho self-sacrihce which en-
ables one to assert full rights and in the capacity
to maintain the struggle for subsistence.
'This difference iustihes a difference in legislation
and upholds that which is designed to compensate
for some Of the burdens which rest upon her" the
court concluded 'The reason rests upon the inner
difference between the sexes and in the differ
ent functions in life which they perform. For these
reasons and without questioning in any respect th'
decision in Lochner VS. New York. we of th'
opinion that it cannot be adiudged that the act il
question is in conflict with the Federal Constitution
SO far as Il affects the work OF a female in laun
dry and the judgment OF the Supreme Court Of Oregon
is affirmed"
The Supreme Court Of Illinois decided that the
Ten-Hour Law not only constitutional, but clear,
within the exercise Of the police powers Of State
In view of these and other decisions equally per
tnent if Mr. Bond and his friends desire TO attaol
the constutionality of the Mooney law and to spen
their money in such hopeless fight, do not ;hiul
that anyone interested in the law will object Per
haps it would be as well for them to do it and adj
another decision in favor Of ten-hour legislation to tn
decisions which already exist