Substantive due process during the Progressive Era: the struggle for reasonable wages and hours People ex rel. Rodgers v. Coler – New York, 1901 (59 N.E. 716); People ex rel. Hoelderlin v. Kane – New York, 1914 (146 N.Y.S. 1105); Commonwealth v. Wormser – Pennsylvania, 1918 (103 A. 500)
Substantive due process during the Progressive Era: workers compensation laws Ives v. South Buffalo Railroad Co. – New York, 1911 (94 N.E. 431); Anderson v. Carnegie Steel Co. – Pennsylvania, 1916 (99 A. 215)
Substantive due process during the Progressive Era: workplace safety laws People v. Lochner – New York, 1904 (69 N.E. 373), reversed, 198 U.S. 45 (1904); Commonwealth v. Plymouth Coal Co. – Pennsylvania, 1911 (81 A. 148), affirmed, 232 U.S. 531 (1914); Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon – Pennsylvania, 1922 (118 A. 491), reversed, 260 U.S. 393 (1922)
Substantive due process during the Progressive Era: “no” to yellow-dog laws but “yes” to union parity: Jacobs v. Cohen – New York, 1905 (76 N.E. 5); People v. Marcus – New York, 1906 (77 N.E. 1073); Cyrus Currier & Sons v. Int’l Molders Union – New Jersey, 1921 (115 A. 66); Exchange Bakery & Restaurant, Inc. v. Rifkin – New York, 1927 (157 N.E. 130)
“This [yellow-dog contract] was a form of slavery, even if voluntarily submitted to; for whoever controls the means by which a man lives controls the man himself.” – Justice Irving Vann (dissenting), in Jacobs | Lewis Hine - 14-year-old worker in paper box factory (1913) - courtesy New York Public LIbrary “It was once a political maxim that the government governs best which governs the least. It is possible that we have not outgrown it but … it is proper for courts to bear it in mind … The power to deprive master and servant of the right to agree upon the rate of wages which the latter was to receive is one of the things which can be regarded as impliedly prohibited by the fundamental law.” – Justice Denis O’Brien, in Coler ”The argument that the risk to an employee should be borne by the employer, because it is inherent in the employment, may be economically sound; but it is at war with the legal principle that no employer can be compelled to assume a risk which is inseparable from the work of the employee, and which may exist in spite of a degree of care by the employer far greater than may be exacted by the most drastic law … [I]n everything within the sphere of human activity the risks which are inherent and unavoidable must fall upon those who are exposed to them.” – Justice William Werner, in Ives
“The courts are frequently confronted with the temptation to substitute their judgment for that of the Legislature. A given statute, though plainly within the legislative power, seems to repugnant to a sound public policy as to strongly tempt the court to set aside the statute, instead of waiting, as the spirit of our institutions require, until the people can compel their representatives to repeal the obnoxious statute.” – Chief Justice Alton Parker, in Lochner “It is obviously one of those paternal laws, enacted doubtless with the best intentions, but which in its operation must inevitably put enmity and strife between master and servant. They are not left free to make their own bargains in their own way.” – Justice Denis O’Brien, in Lochner “ Constitutional mandates and protections are swept aside, and the Legislature is supreme, while acting within any pretended scope of this power, so long as the state … asserts, ‘This is for the public good.’ … [I]t legalizes the division of property plan, a socialistic idea that nay yet be the law.” - Justice John Kephart (dissenting), in Mahon“The right of each [employer and union] to lawfully prosecute his affairs is equally within the protection of the law, and if in their competition for labor harm falls to one from the lawful promotion of the other’s business, the injury is an inevitable incident, legitimately inflicted and excusable.” – Justice __ Backes, in Currier “[E]ven had it been a valid [yellow-dog] contract, … there is as yet no precedent in this court for the conclusion that a union may not persuade its members or others to end contracts of employment where the final intent lying behind the attempt is to extend its influence.” – Justice William Andrews, in Exchange Bakery |
EMPIRE OF LAWS - The Legal History of the 50 American States > 2. MID-ATLANTIC LEGAL HISTORY > 2.5. The Mid-Atlantic States: The Progressive Era and Its Aftermath (1900-1925) >