Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1921-04-25
SUPREME COURT DECISION
MARKS PASSING OF CONTRACT
CLAUSE OF CONSTITUTION
Action Reverses Finding of Same Tribunal in Case Of
Stmges vs. CroWnnsheild and That of Dartmouth
College-l-atter Made Historic 1919 Term of BODY.

teenth. arc forbidden to deprive any
person of lin. liberty or uropcrtv
Without due process OF law \ rur
tner provision of the fifth amend
h me.. Is mat private property cannot
conversation And there is Il spccia,
security TO contracts in Paragraph
~ OF Article in the provision that
law impairi H the ob,i PASS any 90,
.Iacts. These provisions are li,mitn-
lions upon the national lcr:slntion
win which this case is concerned
ton, with which Marcus Brown IIniJ-
ccrncG"
continuing. Justice McKcnna de-
:. We may ask: OF what concern is
II to the public health or the opera.
lions of the Federal govcrnmcn, as
10 VINO snail occupy cellar or room
above IL Tor business purposes in the
city OF Washington? Ohc question in
this easel; and why Is il that soliri-
tudc OF the police power of the state
OF New York To Keep from comucti-
non I'm apartment in the city of New
lork! thc question in the other
caSc.)
The. answer is. to supply homes 90
he homeless. 1t does not satisfy. If
the statute keeps tcnan; in. il
Keeps tenant out: indeed. this is it's
assumption. It's only basis is that
tenants are more numerous than
landlords; that in some way this dis
proportion. il is assumed. makes a
tyranny in the landlord and an op-
preston to the tenant. notWithstand-
ing mat the tenant is only required
TO perform contract entered into
not under the statute. but before the
statute. and that the conditions are
rcmedied 10y rent liking Cvalu" adj
ernmcnt. And this. il is the view Of
the opinion. has Justification. because
space in Washington is lii:itcd' and
housing * necessary of life
" rauS;lttNc and remedial relation
IN the circumstances We are unable
to see. We do see that the effect and
evil of the statute is that il with
draws the dominion OF property from
| It's owner, SupcrSednG the contract
| that he confidently made under the
| law then existing. and Suhjcctinr
| them To the fiat Of II subsequent law.
! \ The statute permits II lessee to
| continue in possession OF leased
| promises after the expiration Of his
| lease. This is contrary TO every CON
| cepti"n Of lenses the world has ever
| entertained.
IF such exercise Of government be
| lcral what exercise Of government is
| illegal" Houses are Il necessity OF
life, but other things are as n"ces-
sary. May they too. be taken from
the direction of their owners and dis
! posed of by the government" Who
supplies them. and upon what induce
| mcnt? And when supplied, may those
| Who got them under promise of re
| turn and who had no hand or 'N-
| pensc in their supply. diCtat" the
| terms Of retention or nee and hc
| ound by no agreement concerning
| them?
III the public interest can on.
| tend lease. ii can force a lease:
| ;hc difference is only in degree and
| holiness. Th" prospect expands and
| Iismays when we pass outside OF con
81 al 10
marrow conditions of the District OF
! columbia.
! 'Nas 1t I;hc Constitution students
| become weak HAS /; become an
| ra"hronism, and is II To become AN
! archaeological 'rr.:r, something to on
gaze and entertain the study of am
| ,!qUariaHsH
There can nc no conception OF
| property aside from its control ami
use. Protection 10 il has been re-
| Garded as 81 Vital principle Of repuh-