Arizona republican., 1914-06-26
QUALIFICATION l LAW VOID MAYBE
U. $. Supreme Court De cides Against a Nearly Identical Texas Statute on Experience and Ser vice of Railroad Men.

A, matter of great interest has been drawn to the attention of la" yers and lawmakers during the past week, in d decision that was recently hand ed down by the supreme cogr cf Ghe United States, relative t. Ilie stat ,tes in the state of Texas regulatir:, the qualifications of engineers and conductors. The supreme court of :ile nation, after review of z case appealed from the Lone Star st3te reversed the judgment of the court i hel0W-the court of criminal appeals vf TeXas-and ordered further pro. ceed;ngs not inconsistent with the 1 opinion
 l The interest in the case to Ari- i zona is that the statute in this state upon the same subject is word | ed almost identically with that of i the state of Texas, dealing with the 1 subject in tie same way and pre- scribine the same qualifications for engineers and conductors, and as ] sessing the same penalties for a con
 of the statute.
 The act in both Texas and Arizona differs from much railroad legislation in that it works to the injury of the employe, assessing the penalty against him for working under con ditiOns drowned on by the law. It has however one difference from the Texas statute, 1t also sets d penalty against the railroad company or any organization that shall engage any man to so work
 The penalty named is the same ir | both states, d fine of not less thal $25 nor more than $500, each day being considered d separate offense Under the provisions of the law nc engineer can work who has not served previously two years as s fireman. No conductor may work unless he has served two years p-e- viously as d brakeman.
 In the case in Texas referred {, above, q man named Smith who ha, teen q fireman and engineer fol many years, acted as conductor on freight train running between tw, Texas towns. He was found guilt, of violating the statute. not havins hCen q brakeman for LWo years pre- viously and sentenced to pay d fine He appealed the case through ever, ! court until he reached the suprem, court of the United states where th, opi1i.H ? of Justice Lamar makes sh, following assertion in declaring tn, act unconstitutional
 Life liberty. property, and tn, equal protection of the law. groupe, together in the constitution. are $, related that the deprivation of anl of those separate and independen
 ights may lessen or extinguish tn value of the other thee In so far a q man is deprived of the right t. labor. his liberty is restricted. hi 1 capacity to cam wages and acquir property is lessened and he is de
 nIed the protection which the la, affords those who are permitted t, Wotk. Liberty means moe thai freedom from servitude. and the con
 stitutional guaranty is an assuranc
 tiat the citizen shall he protectc
 in the right to use his powers O
 mind and body in any lawful call
 ine"
 The court further says that If ;h business be public the state has tn
 right to prescribe qualifications. if
 he private the employer may likewis
 fix standards and tests. Tn the cas of public business tine public in
 terest Is the basis of legislation an
 such tests and prohibitions shoul
 be enacted with reference to th
 public veal so as not to yndulv in
 terfere with private business or i'm 1 pose unusual or unnecessary restrit tons upon lawful occupations. The Arizona statute was passed \ 1912 and is chapter A. of those law ! After it's passage by the legislatur ! the referendum was filed against i but the voters overwhelmingly al \ proved the measure. Recently tl ! supreme court of the state ove, \ turned the three cent fare law on th S'ound that the state constitutio and the corporation code gave to th corporation commission the power { | regulate rates. In like manner yes terday none of the judges would tai | of the decision of the United State \ supreme court on the ground ths they might in turn be called upo \ later to pass upon this very act is generally conceded, however. tha | should the matter come up the Ari
 zona statute may suffer the sam
 late as the similar Texas law