Montana labor news., 1938-02-17
Excerpts from Rankin's
Argument on (onsfiiu-
~iiOnaliiy Of 8-Hour Law
Wellington ID. Rankin, Speaking
in Behalf Of the Montana Fed
Grafton of Labor in Favor of
the Constitutionality of the
Eight-Hour Law, Argued Be-
fore the Supreme Court of
Montana, in Part As Follows:

Hayes V. State of Missouri, 21O
U. S. 60, involved a law permitting
the state more peremptory chal-
lenges in criminal cases in cities of
over 100000. The law was held not
to be discriminatory and the court
said:
In our large cities there is such
a mixed population; there is such
a tendency of the criminal classes
to resort to them, and such an I'M
fortunate disposition on the part of
business men to escape from jury
duty, that it requires special care
on the part of the government to
secure their competent and i'm
partial jurors. And to that end it
may be a wise proceeding on the
part of the legislature to enlarge the
number of peremptory challenges
in criminal cases tried in those
cities"
Of course there would be a point
on the border line where conditions
will approach similarity in consid-
ering a town of 2,450 as against a
town of $500. However as the
court said in Dominion Hotel V. Ari-
iona, 249 U. S. 265:
IF, in its theory, the distinction
is justifiable, as, for all that we
know, it is, the fact that some cases,
including the plaintiffs, are very
near to the line, makes it none the
worse. That is the inevitable result
of drawing a line where the distinc-
tons are distinctions of degree; and
the constant business of the law is
to draw such lines. UNFOLDING the
act as embodying a principle gen
orally fair and doing as nearly equal
justice as can be expected seems to
import that if a particular case of
hardship arises under it in its nat
ural and ordinary application, that
hardship must be borne as n of
the im%perfections of human beings"
In Stettler ". O'Hara (Ore.), 1879
Pac. 743 (affirmed without opinion
243 U. S. 629), it was argued that
a maximum hours law for women
was discriminatory because a com
mission was to determine whether
the law should be applied and fix
minimum wages, ETC., which in fact
had been done in Portland only.
The court o~verruled the contention
and said:s
'There is nothing in the record
suggesting that there is a substantial
number of women workers in the
same occupation as those included
in the order complained of here
working unreasonably long hours
or for an inadequate wage in any
other locality than Portland. Other
cases as they are discovered are to
be remedied as provided therefor,
but the law is statewide, and it
does not give to plaintiff unequal
protection of the law, nor grant to
others privileges denied to him;
neither does it delegate legislative
power to the commission. It is
authorized only to ascertain facts
that will determine the localities,
businesses, hours, and wages to
which the law shall apply"
Surely if there the commission
could determine the locality in
which the necessity for application
Of the law existed, the legislature
could itself determine as here, that
a law was needed in certain locali-
ties, that is in cities of $500 or over.
In State v. Ehr IN. d. 221 N. W,
1888, the court held valid a law linn
ting the hours Of labor for women
in cities and towns of over 500. The
contention that the classification
was unreasonable and discrimina-
tory was o%verruled. The court
merely said:
I'VE are also of the opinion that
legislation limiting the hours of Ia
Dor for females in any manufacture
ing, mechanical, or mercantile estab-
lishment, laundry, hotel, or restau-
rant, or telephone or telegraph
establishment, or in any express OF
transportation company to eight anc
one-half (81S) hours in one day, anc
forty-eight (48) hours in one week
is a reasonable limitation in cite!
and towns of five hundred (500) Oh
more inhabitants, and therefore lie.
gal"
The Supreme Court of the United
States in Lindsey v. Natural Car
bonic Gas Co., 22O U. S. 81, the
court said:
when the classification in such
a law is called in question, if any
state of facts reasonably can be con.
ceived that would sustain it, the
existence of that state of facts a
the time the law was enacted mus
be assumed"
From the foregoing authorities i
is to be noted that the courts have
consistently recognized that classifi
cations based upon differences il
population are reasonable. There
is a difference in environment anC
in surrounding circumstances which
govern the manner of doing worl
in a city as compared to condition
in a small town. Likewise the I'm
employment problem was likel,
considered as being more pressing