The Cordova daily times., 1918-10-01
(By Chas. A. Oerry)

The decision in the ci"htA"ur 'as" printed lu the Daily Times yesterday should be read and studied carefully by all who would inform themselves as to the true status of such lcgiSla. tion II appears that there is a we'll organized propaganda whose purpos" is to make 1t appear that Democratic officials are responsible for nulliiyinE the eight hour law. The fact h that this law was passed by tn" Alaska legislature in response to reiereh- dunn vote which it was impossible to comply with legally. and every mem Der ol that legislature understood this when it was passed. They merely passed the buck" up to the judi ciary. And when the case came up for trial it was dealt with by judge who knew the law and was not pol troon enough to shirk the duty i'm posed upon him.
 There ls not q lawyer m tEc ter ritory of Alaska who values his pro lcssional reputation who will take issue with Judge Bunncll on his con clusions as to the validity Of the law III question. and the attorney general of the United States. through tEe &2- licitor general, announced that 'th!s department does not see any ground upon which argument could be basel in support of the validity of ,ha statute"
 Yet James Wickersham, who is q lawyer, attempts to make political capital out of this incident, by an nouncing that Judge Bunnell "obHgingly" declared it invalid Had Judge Wickersham been on the bench himself. could he have rendered any other decision?
 Anyone who has followed the his tory of such legislation in the country knows that the only excuse for gov ernment intervention between em- ployer and employe in the matter Of hours of labor is on the ground oi protection to men, women and chil- dren working at hazardous or un- healthy occupations In the exercise of the police power the state and na- ton have taken it upon themselves to enact laws shortening the hours of labor in underground mines, especially coal and quartz mines; in factories where poisonous substances are han dlcd, on railroads. where there is con stant danger to life and limb; and oC- casionally there have been instances where laws were enacted in the inter est of future generations by restrict children Time and again courts have ruled, and been sustained, that to limit the hours of labor on any other grounds than these is an invasion of the right of private contract expressly guaranteed by the constitution of the United States.
 So well known is the status of such legislation in the labor world, and so generally conceded is this interpreta' tion of the consultation, that a year or more ago Samuel Gompers, presi' dent of the American Federation ot Labor urged trades unionists through out the country to cease agitation for these special laws. pointing out that were this constitutional guaranty overridden in the supposed interest ot labor 1t might very well be used to its detriment. For if it Is possible for legislature friendly to labor tc shorten the hours of service it would be quite as feasible for law-making body hostile to the workers to enact legislation lengthening those hours.
 Gompers and the Federation of La bor urged that the unions devote their efforts to securing shorter hours through organization and agreement as has been done in numerous trades affiliated with the great central body
 There is already on the statute books of this territory q law limiting tnp numDpr or hours Oi llllHtiS, Sliltll ermen and millmen to eight in one day There are other dangerous and unhealthy occupations that from time to time may be added to this; but Il is the diCtum of the supreme court which is the final arbiter in matters of constitutional interpretation, tho limiting the hours of labor other thar those of public servants. except fol the reasons noted above, is an in fringement of guaranteed individIa rights And this rule is borne out by numerous decisions.
 Any attempt Co mislead the labor ing men of this territory on this sub ject is regrettabe, especially by those who do so knowingly. It is the par of good citizenship to give due respec to the rulings of the courts; If the, are erroneous there is always an ap peal to the higher court. But to abuse