The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1915-09-04

did not. come within that: ruling O.

In ,Adair VS.. United States, an act
Of congress making It q criminal OF
Tense against the United states for a
carrier engaged In interstate COM
merce, or an agent or officer thereof,
to discharge an employe simply be
cause he was q member OF a labor
organization, was held an Invasion
of personal liberty, as well as OF the
right to property guaranteed BY tho
nth amendment. to the constitution,
and therefore uncomfortable as repug-
nant to the, declaration !, Of that
amendment that no. person shall be
deprived Of liberty or property with
out due process OF law. Harlan, T.,
! in delivering the opinion Of the court,
said: = Z.
Such liberty and. right embraoes
the right to mako contracts for the
purchase of the labor Of others, and
equally the right to make contracts
for the sale of ones own labor; each
right, however, being subject to the
fundamental condition that no con-
tract whatever its snb5ect-natter,
can be sustained which the law upon
reasonable grounds forbids. AZ neon
sistent with the public interest or al
hurtful to: the public order Or as de-
trimental to the common good. - :
While, as already suggested. the right
OF liberty and property guaranteed
by the constitution against depr1va-
ton without due process Of law is
subject to, such reasonable. restraints
as the common good or general well
fare may require, it is not within the
functions Of government-ats least in
the absence Of contract between the
parties compel any person in the
course Of his business and against his
will, to accept or retain the personal
services Of another or to compel any
person against his will to perform
personal services for another. This
on such terms as he deems proper
is, in essence, the. same as the right
of the purchaser Of, labor to prescribe
I conditions upon which he will accept
:; such labor from the person offering
| to sell it. So. the right of the en-
ploye to quit the service of the en-
| ployer, for whatever reason, is the
same as the right of the employer,
for whatever reason, to dispense with
the services of such employe.
In all such particulars, the employer
and the employe have equality :: of
right. and any legislation which dis
turbs that equality is an arbitrary in
reference with the, liberty of con-
tract which no government can legal
1y justify in a free land
The learned justice then considered
quite deliberately the question wheth.
er or not the statute could be justi-
fed as regulation .ofsinterstate CON-
MERGE, but found that there is no le-
gal or logical connection between an
! employees membership in a labor. or
sanization and the carrying on of in
terstate oo1nmerce,. - * :.
1T results. on, the whole case. that
the provision 81 tie statute >, ,nde,
which the defendant was convicted
must be held TO be repugqant to- the
NTH amendment and r not sembrac.
ed = by or within the 5owera of : con
gress to regulate Interstate commerce
but under the guise of regulating in
terstate commerce and as applied tc
this case, it arbitrarily sanctions an
illegal invasion of the personal lib.
erty, as we'll as Of the right: Of prop.
erty Of the defendant Adair."'
liberty of Contract. ~
OF course, the court said, liberty OF
contract is not unlimited, but is sub.
ject to the exercise of the police pow.
er Of the state, but 49,. r.
none Of the cases sustains the prop.
osition that under the power to Sc.
cure the public safety a privileged
class can be created and be then Civ.
en- a monopoly of, the right to work
In a special or favored position. Suct
a statute, would shut the door without
a hearing upon many persons and
classes Of persons who were compe,
tent to serve, and would deprive
them Of the liberty to work in a call.
ing they were, qualified to fill with
safety to the public and benefit tc
themselves" - .. -,
l.. Justices McKenna and Holmes dis:
sented from this decision. the lattel
upon the ground frequently expressed
him in varying language, that The
court should not be astute: to Inter.
fere with what the legislature deems
is the public interest, upon thu
i ground Of invasion of a constitutions.
right, unless such invasion is gfarinf
and unacceptable. II confess,''<. ht
I~~Sos s4A0A = SA&4AN eA&4& rku0 EfIl&SAkj u
make contracts at will that. has beer
derived from the word liberty In tn
amendments has been stretched *
the extreme by. the decisions blu,
they agree; that sometimes the RICH,
may be restrained. When there is
or generally is believed TO- ben an I'M.
portant ground Of public policy fol
restraint the constitution does y no,
forbid it. whether this court agree.
or disasrees with the l. policy pur.
sued" - And he. states II the only
effect Of the Law under consideration
were to tend to bring about the com.
plete unionizing Of such railroad lab,
orers as congress could deal with
! that object alone. iii >, his opinion
would Justify the. act. II quite agre.
that the question what, and how
much good labor unions do ii one or
which intelligent people may differ7-
I think that laboring men some time,
attribute to them advantages, j al
many attribute to Combinations j 5,
capital DISADVANTAGES, that really ar,
due to economic conditions Of 8 fal