Worker safety and hours laws In re Boyce – Nevada, 1904 (71 P. 1); In re Kair – Nevada, 1905 (80 P. 463); Keefe v. People – Colorado, 1906 (87 P. 791); State v. Livingston Concrete Building & Manufacturing Co. – Montana, 1906 (87 P. 980)
“It may have been the purpose of the state to stamp with its approval the view now entertained by many, that … the restriction of a day’s work to that number of hours will so far promote the morality and improve the physical and intellectual condition of workingmen as to enable them the better to discharge the duties of citizenship.” - Justice _, in Livingston Concrete
Home on the Range Sweet v. Ballentine – Idaho, 1902 (69 P. 995); Pyramid Land & Stock Co. v. Pierce – Nevada, 1908 (95 P. 210); State v. Omaechevviaria - Idaho, 1915 (159 P. 280), affirmed, 246 U.S. 343 (1918); Bountiful City v. De Luca – Utah, 1930 (292 P. 194); Allen v. Bailey – Colorado, 1932 (14 P.2d 1087)
Workers compensation Cunningham v. Northwestern Improvement Co. – Montana, 1911 (119 P. 554)
Resource conservation Gas Products Co. v. Rankin – Montana, 1922 (207 P. 993); Chambers v. McCollum – Idaho, 1928 (272 P. 708)
| “It is not difficult to distinguish between employments which in principle are not unhealthy or injurious, as a class, and those which are … Many of the most ardent opponents of any limitation to the time for labor in unhealthy or unsafe pursuits are actuated more by anxiety to profit by the long hours of toil of others than by any desire to labor so long themselves. … the strained [decision] in Re Morgan … led to so much trouble, suffering, and loss of life in Colorado.” – Justice _ in Kair
“It is a matter of public history in this state that conflicts between sheep owners and cattlemen and settlers were of frequent occurrence, resulting in violent beaches of the peace. … Sheep are not only able to hold their own on the public ranges with other livestock, but will in the end drive other stock off the range, and … the herding of sheep upon certain territory is an appropriation of it almost as fully as if it was actually inclosed by fences … [Without laws restricting sheep grazing,] the result will be, in the end, that isolated settlements must be abandoned, and the land in the state become one immense sheep pasture, to the detriment of the farming and mining interest; and settlement of the public lands will be retarded; the building up of homes on the public domain will almost stop.” - Justice _, in Ballentine
“It will not suffice to say that because the theory or design of the lawmaking power, as evidenced by the act, is one which is not only new in principle, but revolutionary of certain preconceived and deeply rooted notions of lawyers, therefore the act is unconstitutional … In our judgment, the general scheme of this act is well within the police power of the state. If the people … are of opinion that the public interests demand that industrial ins ought to be substituted, in whole or in part, for actions for wrongs, this court certainly cannot say that they are in error.” - Justice _, in Cunningham
“We are living in a free government, with definite guaranties of property rights, not under the rule of an emperor or czar. Such legislation is paternalistic in character and conflicts with the guaranties of the national and state Constitution and is contrary to the theory upon which our government was formed. The paternal theory of government is odious, and we should not treat lightly or disregard the sacred rights of prop recognized and guaranteed by this govt.” – Justice _, in Rankin |
EMPIRE OF LAWS - The Legal History of the 50 American States > 9. ROCKY MOUNTAIN LEGAL HISTORY > 9.2. The Progressive Era (1900-1930) > 9.2.1 Rocky Mountains (1900-1930): Water Law > 9.2.2 Rocky Mountains (1900-1930): The Specter of Syndicalism > 9.2.3 Rocky Mountains (1900-1930): Coping with Diversity >