The Wolf Point herald. (Wolf Point, Mont.) 1913-1940, 1920-01-22

VI Cue ldCCer. II dissenting justices
were not so persuaded.
Mercantile Business Private.
"But in all cases all the justices
were in accord that while Legislative
power of price regulation exists il
business and callings of public in.
t%erest, concern and consequences, il
does not exist in ordinary mercantile
business and common callings, and be-
cause they are purely private; because
in respect to them such regulation is
unreasonable and contrary to the
fourteenth amendment, it is emphasiz-
ed that whenever the court was only
because after a struggle it was able
to view the instances as not an ordi-
nary business or calling, but of pub
lie interest, concern and
In defining what is the public interest
that renders legislative regulation of
prices reasonable, and in what bust
ness it exists, the supreme court says
it "a be best explained by examples.
And thereupon it cites those herein
before mentioned. 1t further says
that though there is some public in
terest and concern in every transac-
ton by every person, that is not the
public interest in respect to which
alone there is legislative power to
regulate prices; that this latter public
interest exists only when it is a broad
and definite public interest arising by
reason of the nature of the business,
wherein its proper conduct concerns
more than the parties to any single
transaction, wherein by reason of Pc
culiar circumstances the business suS-
foTyoC cT1nlN r~nlnfJA,o ~ 4Ln ,1,I1,1 4I.4
they are affected by its consequences;
and in substance that this public inter
est does not exist in ordinary mercan-
tile business, because therein transac-
tons are independent, individual, and
of no material consequence to anyone
save the immediate parties to them,
upon whom alone their effect falls.
"See: Germania, etc., Co., VS.. Kan
sas, 233 U. S. 406.
"In answer to the argument that the
reasoning of the decision would sane
ton Legislative regulation of every act
of labor and price of every article of
use, the court significantly says, we
without much concern, leave
our discussion to take ARE of itself
against such misunderstanding or
deductions. : < +
Both. by the expression of the prin-
and the citation of examples we
have tried to confine our decision to
the regulation of the business of in
surance, it having become clothed with
a public interest, and therefore sub
iect to be controlled by the public for
the common good
Public Utilities Different.
UA,aJ +ln oo,,1+ ,ooin+c orb Iorr -,
surance creates interdependence be-
tween all policy holders in connection
With other peculiar features, creating
1 public interest. Ordinary shop
keepers are not of public calling.
Terminal etc., Co. VS.. District, 241 U.
256. Congress has more power
,ver the district than any legislature
las over a state, but though it can re-
prices for phones of companies
levoting them to public service, it
.annot regulate prices for phones by
he companies restricted to a single
not connected with a public
exchange, and so purely private.
chesapeake etc. Co. VS.. Manning,
SO u. S. 247.
Congress has extensive power over
ailroads in interstate commerce, but
hough in an emergency, to avoid in
eruption of traffic, it may for a linn
ted time and to give opportunity for
'perators and employees to agree, fix
wages, it cannot otherwise because of
he due process clause, to which the
States is subject. For such
r primarily of private agree
nent not subject to be controlled or
'revented by public authority
"Wilson v. New, 243 u. S. 383.
"It would seem the public interest
n railroads ought to warrant con-
ressional wage regulation. Upon like
rinciple, clearly enough the court
ustains legislative regulation of a
minimum wage for women and minors.
See: Stettler v. O'Mara, ct al, 243
+. S. 629.
"In many other cases the court in
identally refers to and invariably ap-
roves the principle that forbade
.gislative regulation of prices in or !
mary mercantile business and COM
ION callings.
Defendants further contend that, I
owever, it be in ordinary times, the /
ar, world conditions, diminished sup !
lies, prof1teering and the like justify ]
III NdlludCt Iulo dCI NOW. 4
"And they cite like legislation, state !
nd congressional, in support thereof. !
his is the argument of public opin- !
IN, morality and emergency in speci- i
C form, and needs no additional con- I
deration. 1t may be suggested,
owever, that congress proceeds under !
S power to carry on war, and that |
herein the United States is sub !
ct to the due process clause of the 4
fifth amendment, so far as liberty I
I'd property are concerned, save in Z
'spect to that destroyed by military !
,erations. I
"See: Hamilton v. company, supra. !
"And if it may be further suggested 4
at however it might be, had the act /
zen limited to the prime necessities /
fuel, flour meats, shoes, woolens, I
I'd could war, supplies prices public /
Union and emergency be allowed to A
ntrol it is in~conceivable that this all
attracting act could be sustained as !
'cessary for public health, peace and !
fety. 1t ranges from the street 4
rner vendor of popcorn and bananas ]
the merchant prince, from coal to /
almonds from the babes first swad- 1
-