The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1917-06-15

that the United States Supreme
Court had declared unconstitutional
the law passed by the people of this
state through the Initiative prohibit
ing the collection of fees from work
ers for obtaining employment. 1t
was another of the Give to four"
decisions of that honorable body
which has marked it's sessions for
three score years. 1t is another in
dictment against a system of juris-
prudence which allows courts to pass
upon the constitutionality of laws
duly passed by the people, a right
which it is claimed was never grant
ed the courts by the constitution
but is an usurped power.
The system Of extracting fees
from workers in this state had given
rise to grave abuses. Unscrupulous
men saw in the employment agency
game "get-rich-quick" scheme of
which they were not slow to take
advantage The wronged workman
had but little chance for redress.
In many cases he found himself
stranded, remote from the city in
which he bought his job. The
amount of which he had been de-
frauded was hardly worth suing for
and large percentage of the men
who frequented private employment
agencies mistrusted the legal pro-
fession anyhow. Many men bought
their jobs without reading or under
standing the slips given them and
found eventually they had assumed
all the responsibility, the employ
ment agent, none. So widespread
was the injustice of the system that
the people generally became dis
gusted and determined to wipe out
the evil.
The initiative campaign of 1914
gave the people the opportunity to
strike at the private employment
graft. The State Federation of La
Dor prepared an initiative bill pro-
hibiting the collection of fees from
workmen by any person or persons,
directly or indirectly, for furnishing
employment The law was carefully
drawn and small doubt expressed
as to its constitutionality by able
lawyers consulted in its framing.
Word for word it was modelled after
a federal law passed years previously
protecting seamen from Involuntary
servitude. 1t was felt that if this
was good law for seamen, it was
good for any class of labor, and the
same phraseology was used, substi-
tuting workers" for "seamen."
Now mark the popularity of this
measure. In the campaign of 1914
the organized farmers and organ
lied tradesmen through their Joint
Legislative Committee succeeded in
placing five initiative measures upon
the ballot. After bitterly fought
campaign, all measures were defeat
ed EXCEPT THE ONE AIMED AT
THE PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT
AGENCIES. Upon this measure
30G,59 votes were cast. Voting for
the measure, 162,054; against, l44,-
544; majority for the bill, 1870. The
majority for the bill was decisive.
Only widespread abuse could have
brought about such a vote in the
face of the result of other meas
ures.
The law was promptly taken into
the courts. C. J.. France assisted
the attorney general in defending
the law while the State Employ
ers' Association took up the legal
attack. The case was brought be-
fore the Federal Circuit Court of
Appeals, Federal Judges Neterer,
Cushman and Gilbert sitting The
employment agencies asked a re-
stiaining order, setting up the
time worn plea of "confiscation of
property without due process
of law" 1t was our con-
tention that regulation of en-
ployment agencies had failed and
the police power of the state was
invoked in the statute to prevent
extortion and fraud by eliminating
the payment of fee by the work
er. Judges Neterer and Gilbert up
held the law. The language in the
opinion handed down is quoted in
part herewith:
"a strong preponderant opinion be-
ing prevalent among the electors
of the state, and they having ex
pressed at a general election that
the public welfare required the reg
ulation proposed, and having de-
clared that the evil existed which
shall be met by prohibiting the col
lection of fees from a class, the
4