Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-06-11
SABBATH LABOR CASES
WILL DELUGE COURTS
Next Sunday Expected to Witness
Many Violations OF Old
Blue" Laws.
"ousTER BILL" GOES IN EFFECT
Lid VIII BE CIamped Down Tight.
Those Who Work Will Encounter
Police-Tribunals Must Establish
Question of Necessity"


After the passing of virginia's first
blue" Sunday, when, as result of
the ouster law. tho lid will be
clamped down so tight that the corner
drug store man must be quite sure that
a prospective customer is in search of
physic rather than the accustomed
after dinner cigar before he will even
open the door TO him. the State courts
are likely to be de1uged with cases OF
alleged violations of the Sabbath.
An exhaustive examination of the
Virginia reports discloses the fact that
the courts Of this State. or rather the
Supreme Court OF Appeals, the final
arbiter in matters Of law construction,
have seldom been called upon TO deter
mine the question of what constitutes
necessary labor on the first day OF the
week In fact. until after the begin
ming Of the twentieth century. Vir-
ginia's appellate court had never con-
sidered but one case Of violation, and
that involved simply the right OF a
Jewish retail merchant. Oscar Marx
to My his trade on the Sabbath day
With no presidents Of any conse-
quence. no cases i'm point to guide them
in the construction of the law. the
courts will find themselves facing the
necessity of d!nercntiatine for the first
time between those things which con-
stitute necessary labor on the day of
rest and those things which may not
be done matter Of necessity
What this determination will be is
awaited with no little interest b.! every
citizen Of the State whose business is
likely TO he affected by the edic, of
the moral forces.
VIOLATIONS NOW ARE
HELD As MiSDEMEASORS
Until after the legislative session OF
1905. violation Of the sabbath law in
virginia was not deemed misde.
meanor. and the alleged offender could
be proceeded against only on 4 civil
warrant. \ forfeiture of the sum OF
81 To the State constituted the only pun
ishment melted out to the convicted per-
son The issue Mas raised in the cage
Of Wells against the lth.
in which the plaintiff in error. who was
then president Of the Richmond Amuse-
ment Corporation. and who had been
convicted Of giving performance on
sunday. felt himself aggrieved because
the Circuit Court Of Henrico County.
Ia which he had appealed, had refused
TO sustain motion 20 quash the war
rant on the ground that the forfeiture
imposed hy the statute could be re-
covered only by civil warrant
The substance of the courts opinion
in tina, case. from which Judges Bu-
chanan and Harrison dissented. was
that the violation OF the Sabbath law.
as contained in section 1899 OF the Code.
is not misdemeanor, and the forfeiture
imposed therefor is recovered only by
civil warrant. and not by criminal
warrant, against the offender" That
was on June -. 1907.
During the session Of the Legislature
which convened the following year. the
law was amended TO mako violation a
msdemeanor. punishable by fine
Of S..
a person is guilty of violation OF the
law IL he be found laboring at any
trade or calling or employ his appren-
tices or servants or other business,
except in household or other work OF
necessity or charity" Every day any
person or servant or apprentice is so
employed shall constitute a distinct
offense
QUESTION OF NECESSITY
RAISES FINE POINT
While the Supreme Court Of Appeals
has never heen called upon 10 decide
definitely just what Is work Of neces-
sity or charity and what Is not, there
is this construction OF the statute in
the Virginia Law Register Volume VI,
page 500. written during the latter part
of December, 1900:
The language of the Virginia stat
ute seems directed toward the proven
ton of manual labor. or the conduct
of business OF such a nature and in
such open and notorious manner as 10
disturb the tranquility of the sabbath
or offend the religious sensibilities Of
the community, and bring the Sabbath
day into contempt. The language is If
eny person be found indicating public
display of his contempt for the sanctity
of the day. and, further, he found
laborinE. suggesting manual labor,
rather than intellectual or other en-
ployment. Again, laboring at any
trade or calling the latter. seeming
to exclude isolated transactions, and
scarcely suggesting pursuits higher
than manual occupation. or at least
sz-.-.<n.<.@----.