Arizona republican., 1913-02-21

Under the guisc of defining and prohibiting the blacklist in this state, Senate Bill No. 45 proposes 10 drop an impenetrabIe veil over the criminal past of applicants for employment; to draw herring across the trail of legitimate inquiry concerning the antecedents or the seeker of a position, how ever responsible it may be-
 Section of the bill proyides
 Any employer boss superintendent
 manager officer or other agent of any com-l
 pany. corporation, syndicate, partnership or
 society who shall allow, command per
 suade any person to give d photograph or
 fill out any written printed
 make any verbal statements 'or any other
 method means of identification to who
 his former employer Was any
 ployer boss, superintendent manager, officer
 other agent who shall discharge any per
 persons account of his her
 affiliation with membership in cor
 poration, organization or society. or because
 of former discharge of because of any
 blacklist of any former employer shall be
 guilty of q misdemeanor and upon conviction
 shall be imprisoned not more than one year.
 and shall be liable in damages to any person
 persons injured by such violation ot the
 amount not less than thousand
 C$1ooo00) dollars, to be recovered by civil
 action.
 We do not know whether there is such law as this anywhere in the world; dp know whether it ever before occurred to lawmaker to propose such an act. Section leaves every em- poyer the helpless purchaser of a pig in poke" The merchant the banker may not inquire whether the who answers his advertisement for a bookkeeper or cashier has had any eX- perience as bookkeeper or cashier. He may not inquire whether not the applicant has just com peted in the pententiary for theft or em- bezzlement in his last position.
 However competent and honest the applicant may be, the employer is forbidden under the pen aty of imprisonment for one year. to ALLOW him to furnish references to his ability and honesty. yvT,, little more rigid without having been made in consistent. It might have made it d felony for the applicant for a position present his record or to offer any reason employer why it would be the advantage of the latter hire him.
 It is impossible to suppose that this bill will be- come a law. If it should, however, it would cer- tainly fail to meet the expectations of it's pro- ponents. It might prevent employer from 'commanding" or "persuadng" d applicant to make a verbal or other statement regarding his past and qualifications but do not believe that any law give private person such authority over another allow" that is forcibly pre- him from giving references as to his qualifi- cations a position ne may be seeking.
 Such a law as this would be detrimental to the very class Iaborers designed protect. those who would be likely to be blacklists il blacklists permitted They would be less likely than any others be possession of letters o reference which the law could not prevent appli- cant voluntarily offering.
 Here is proposed interference with persona liberty with vengeance. We do not think tha since the dark ages any despot has sought tc curtail human rights this bill proposes, in tn, of the people, do.
 The blacklist the exchange of backlists h prohibited by the constitution and the legislature E authorized to give effect to that prohibition. This is right, for the blacklist may be made instru ment for the oppression of the laborer. As such i may be abolished without interference with an! right for corporation has a right to thu possession of instrument of oppression. A law defining the blacklist and fixing penalty for tn exchange solicitation of backlists would b proper and sufficient