Askov American. [volume] (Askov, Pine County, Minn.) 1914-current, 1937-04-22

preme Court was specifically asked
to reconsider and reverse it's decis-
ion in the Adkins case, and by g
vote of five to four it did reverse
that decision. This, in our opinion
was one of the most important de-
cisions ever rendered by the Su-
preme Court. Prior to that decision
there existed in the constitutional
structure of this nation ''No Mans
land in which neither state nor ma.
ton could legislate. Prior to tina
decision neither state nor natiOr
could exercise governmental power
over a matter as important as thu
regulation of wages of adult women
That power is now open to every
state
Justice Explains Decision.
| Chief Justice Hughes, in his ad
mirable statement of the reasons TO
the courts decision, points out tina
the fact that the parties are of full
age does not deprive the state of thu
right to interfere where they do no
stand in a position of equality O
where the public health demands tina
one party shall be protected agains
himself
The Chief Justice continues:
at is manifest that this eStab-
lished principle is peculiarly APP
plicable in relation to the en-
ployment of women in whose
protection the state has spe-
cial interest. That phase of the
subject received elaborate con-
Sideration in Muller " Oregon
(1908), 208 U. S. 412, where the
constitutional authority of the
state to limit the working hours
of women was sustained. We
emphasized the consideration
that 'woman's physical structure
and the performance of maternal
functions place her at diSad-
vantage in the struggle for sub
sistence' and that her physical
well being becomes an object
of public interest and care in
order to preserve the strength
and vigor Of the race We en-
phaSized the need of protecting
women against oppression des-
pite her possession of contractual
rights. We said that though
limitation upon personal and
contractual rights may be re-
moved by legislation, there is
that in her disposition and habits
of life which will operate against
full assertion of those rights
She will still be where some leg
iSlation to protect her seems nee
essary to secure real equality
of right"
Legislature Within Rights.
In later paragraph the court fur
Their emphasizes the great importanc
to the state of adequately protectin
the health and well-being of its WON
anhood, saying:
with full recognition of the
|
characterize the prevailing opin-
ion in the Adkins case, we find
it impossible to reconcile that
ruling with these well-considered
declarations. What can be closer
to the public interest than the
health of women and their pro-
lection from INSCRIPTIONS and
overreaching employers? And
| if the protection of women is a
| legitimate end of the exercise
of state power, how can it be
said that the requirement of the
| payment of a minimum wage
fairly fixed in order to meet the
very necessities of existence is
not an admissible means to that
end? The legislature of the state
was clearly entitled to consider
the situation of women in en-
| ployment, the fact that they are
in the class receiving the least
| pay, that their bargaining power
is relatively weak, and that they
are ready victims of those who
would take advantage of their
necessitous circumstances. The
legislature was entitled to adopt
measures to reduce the evils of
the sweating SYSTEM the ex-
plotting of workers at wages so
low as to be insufficient to meet
the bare cost of living thus MAX
ing their very helplessness the
occasion of most injurious COM
petition. The legislature had the
right to consider that its mini
mum wage requirements would
be an important aid in carrying
out its policy of protection"
The court further points out tina
there is now further compellin
reason for permitting state inter
| ference in wage contracts paroo1x