MEMORANDA OF DECISIONS JUST HANDED DOWN. In the Court of Appeals in regard to the Eight Hour Law, chapter 415, Laws 1897, Court of Appeals, declaring it unconstitutional. New York Reports, volume , page In the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, in relation to release exacted by employers from employes entering their employ, contrary to public policy and void. Appellate Reports, volume , page These decisions having just been handed down, and being of great importance, it has been thought best to put them in this volume so that the public would have every decision to date. ALBANY, N. Y., December 1, 1904. 2 The Labor Law, chapter 415 of the Laws of 1897, prohibiting a contractor from employing his men more than eight hours a day on city, county or State work, declared unconstitutional. In an action brought by Harry Cossey to compel payment by the city of New York for scows manufactured for the street cleaning department. Payment was refused on the ground that the terms of the contract had been violated by him in employing his men over eight hours a day, which was not denied, but it was claimed that the law was unconstitutional. Held, Cullen, Chief Judge, with Werner, Judge, concurring, in his opinion as to the law's unconstitutionality, bases his opinion on the Rogers case, and takes the ground that the principle involved in this case is similar to that in People ex rel. Rogers against Coler, in which case it was held that the statute was unconstitutional in so far as it involves the question of the prevailing rate of wages. That the difference in circumstances would not justify a distinction in principle, and that the Rogers case has not been overthrown by subsequent cases in this court or in the Supreme Court of the United States, and that the Rogers case stands and applies in this case. The chief judge further says: "I fear that the many outrages of labor organizations or of some of their members have not only excited just indignation, but at times have frightened courts into plain legal inconsistencies and into the enunciation of doctrines which, if asserted in litigations arising under any other subject than that of labor legislation would meet with scant courtesy or consideration. The decision, therefore, can stand only on one ground, the unconstitutional interference by the legislature with the right of the municipality. That proposition having been explicitly decided in the Rogers case, I feel it my duty to follow it, regardless of my own opinion upon the question." 3 Judges O'Brien, Martin and Vann hold that the law is unconstitutional in that it deprives an individual of property without due process of law. Judge O'Brien says: " One of the grounds upon which the Rogers case rests is that the statute there considered, and now before us, deprived the contractor of his property without due process of law, and the learned chief judge, as I understand the opinion, asserts that this ground has been entirely swept away by the case of Atkins v. Kansas, in which the United States Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of a contractor for violating the Eight Hour Law of that State. I do not concur in that view. In my opinion the Kansas case does not decide or sweep away what was held in the Rogers case and should hold in this case, namely, that the statute in question violates the Constitution of the State in that it deprives the relator in this case as it did in the Rogers case of his property without due process of law.” Judge Haight dissents and holds that the constitutionality of the law can be sustained by the fact that it is a police regulation in the interest of public health and morality. Cossey, Appellant, v. Grout, Comptroller of the City of New York, Court of Appeals, November 29, 1904, reversing App. Div. and trial court. A release exacted by employers from employes entering their employ contrary to public policy and void. An employe of American Express Company, while engaged with others in lowering sleighs from the second floor of the company's barn, one side of the elevator floor fell and he was precipitated, causing injuries, for which he sued for damages. It was claimed by the defendant that the appliance was not out of order, and that if it was the plaintiff ought to have known as much about it as the defendant; that he assumed the risk incident thereto and that he was guilty of carelessness. Held, that these were questions of fact on which the jury had a right to find as it did, and that no error in ruling on evidence was committed by the trial court. 4 The release taken by the company from Johnson, which by its terms released the company from liability for injury. Held, that upon the evidence the court is compelled to sustain the judgment upon the ground that the release was void as a matter of public policy, and that the tendency of legislation in recent years is in the interest of better protection for employes. Johnson v. Fargo, as President of the American Express Company, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, November, 1904. LABOR, LAWS AND DECISIONS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. LAWS OF 1897. CHAPTER 415. IN EFFECT JUNE 1. AN ACT in relation to labor, constituting chapter thirty-two of the General Laws. CHAPTER XXXII OF THE GENERAL LAWS. THE LABOR LAW. Article I. General provisions. (Sections 1-21.) II. Commissioner of labor statistics. (Sections 30-32.) Repealed. See Chapter 9 of Laws of 1901. III. Public employment bureaus. (Sections 40-43.) IV. Convict-made goods and duties of commissioner of labor rela- V. Factory inspector, assistant and deputies. (Sections 60-67.) VI. Factories. (Sections 70-93.) VII. Tenement-made articles. (Sections 100-105.) VIII. Bakery and confectionery establishments. (Sections 110115.) IX. Mines and their inspection. (Sections 120-129.) X. State board of mediation and arbitration. (Sections 140-149.) XI. Employment of women and children in mercantile establish- XII. Employment of children in street trades. (Sections 174– 179a.) XIII. Examination and registration of horseshoers. (Sections 180– 184.) |