Evening journal., 1918-09-06
Continued from First Page.

ants.
Through an agreement when the cast
was FIRST before the court. the players
and others involved IN .he case s%er,
not In court today
Tho men found guilty OF the oirons'
today are; Frank Baird. Joseph Reed
William Caster, John Ralncy. Thoma.
Reilly, Walter Rollins, Albert j. Leach
John w. Cole, Byrn Lynn, Edward
Charity, George Mangus, Carl Ray
Candy w. Smith. Raymond J.. Pagan
Alfred ]. Mccormick. George KOpshaw
William A. McGowan. John 7. Gsrlin
Harry Lake Zinn Beck. Augustus Rcis-
man, Fred T. Payne, Gus Cots, John A
MCGOWAN. otto G. Wagner, Milton A,
Walker, William +. Conroy Lee A
Dresser, Howard Bartlow, Thomas
Steele, George Dumont Joseph Hyde,
Hugh Lenox, Abe praisman, Samuel
Lenox, William J. Walters. John r,
Collyer, Harry Bleineder. George l..
Winters, Clement A. Carney. William
C. Martin. Herbert McGlnley and Albert
Chersein.
Judge Churchman'S opinion covered
70 typewritten pages. 10 stated the
| facts agreed upon, the contentious in
volved, quoting the statutes and deci-
sions in other States at great length,
including the New York decisions TO
the effect that ut is a remedial statute
and should be literally construed"
Getting down to the constitution OF
Delaware statutes, including the Sunday
observance law, Judge Churchman con-
tinued:
The same ruling has been made In
our State In SPAIN V. William, Penn.
1876 the late Chief Justice Lore, In
charging the jury Up. 1876; said:
ut is claimed, however, that II there
was a contract specifically and clearly
made, yet that being made on the Sab
bath day, it was not a valid contract
that II cannot be enforced, and that no
damages whatever could be recovered
for its breach
Upon the question Of the contract
itself, we have 10 say 10 you, that any
worldly employment In the ordinary
transaction OF the business Of life on
the Sabbath day is forbidden by the
laws OF Delaware. All civilized ma
tions have recognized the propriety and
necessity OF one day OF rest in seven,
and the laws OF this State have sane
toned that necessity by prohibiting the
transaction OF ordinary business on that
day. and a contract made on the Sab
bath day is void II II be executory, as
this contract was. that is, an agree
ment made today to be executed in the
future.
"The law Is so we'll expressed on this
subject in the American and Eng
Encyclopedia Of Law, Vol 2i, 500. that
il is impossible for me to express it
better
THE doctrine now excepted is that
in all contracts entered into on Sunday,
Sabbath parties are In pari delicto,
neither can assert rights under the con-
tract: the policy OF the law Is that OF
absolute non-actlon; 10 leaves the parties
exactly where they happen to be. The
result is that the contract, being eX-
ecutory. is for all practical purposes
void: the maxims in parl delicto potior
set condltlo defendentis and eX turpe
causa non orltur actio preclude recov-
cry by either party in an action based
upon the contract"
The SPAIN case was followed In
Terry V. Platt ct al in 1 Penn. 1855. The
Court said. (p. 1922 in charging the
jury:
Again: It is objected by the defend
ant. Elkinton, that the note signed
Platt & Elkinson, dated January 81, 1892,
was made and delivered on that day,
which was Sunday, and for that rea-
son no action can be maintained there
on.
This court, at the last November
term thereof, in this County, in the case
Of SPAIN VS. Whitman, ruled that a con-
tract made on Sunday Is void, and no
action could be maintained to enforce
IT,"
The cases holding the contrary doc
trine are as follows:
st. Louis SO v. Delano, iOs Mo.
2i7;
Ex parte Meet. i57 Mo. 527
Melvin y. Easley Jones L. IN.
c. 356;
Bloom V. Richards 2 Ohio ST., l05.
Flanagan v Meyer a Ala. 1876.
The Courts. In these cases. merely
hold that as the statute IS ponal 1t must
be strictly construed. IL is therefore.
unnecessary TO quote from the cases.
The weight. and preponderance OF the
authorities, beyond question, oblige
me TO give the Sunday law OF this State
what is called the liberal construction.
And in so doing / follow the ruling OF
Chief Justice Lore, in the cases quoted, |
for in those cases, he adopted that
construction. and in so doing, neces-
sary did so under the Sunday statute
Of this state, for there is no other
law Of this State under which he could
otherwise have acted.
Upon the question OF the intent OF
the Jaw, as to what is worldly employ
menr | again quote Chief Justice
Booth in Hall v. supra SUPRA, when
he states:
THE answer is, no other than such |
as openly profsnes the sancity Of the !
day, and violates public order and de- i
corum. The law intended to compel
the external observance OF the day, by
preventing the open show, hustle and
tumult OF business"
And what is meant by this liberal
construction To attain the purpose
for which the law was passed What
are the objects OF Sunday laws?
The objects are that the Lords day
shall remain holy. for rest and worship.
and its desecration prevented for the
preservation Of the public peace and the
good order of civilized society: that the
outward respect and observance may
protect the religion OF the country
from contempt: that the liberty Of quiet
worship may remain inviolate and also
the public morals improved. Our stat
ute as enacted is entitled:
zzEkzzozEaxuzEuxzzzs