 The act does not meddle with anything belonging to the States. They may regulate their internal affairs and their domestic commerce as they like. But when they seek to send their products across the State line they are no longer within their rights. If...  The Child Labor Bulletin - Page 921917Full view - About this book
 | Encyclopedias and dictionaries - 1919 - 904 pages
...McReynolds. Four justices dissented: Holmes, Brandéis, Clarke, and McKenna. Justice Holmes declared, "The act does not meddle with anything belonging to...State line they are no longer within their rights." Plans were at once begun to renew the restrictions under some other power of Congress, such as the... | |
 | Thomas Reed Powell - 1919 - 472 pages
...manufacture was one of the reserved powers of the states. The answer of the minority was as follows: "The Act does not meddle with anything belonging to...State line they are no longer within their rights. If there were no Constitution and no Congress their power to cross the line would depend upon their... | |
 | Michigan State Bar Association - 1917 - 662 pages
...necessary, to say that it is permissible as against strong and not as against the product of ruined lives. The act does not meddle with anything belonging to the states. They may regulate and inter-link affairs and their domestic commerce as they like, but when they seek to send their products... | |
 | United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics - Labor laws and legislation - 1918 - 1442 pages
...transportation. It is enough that in the opinion of Congress the transportation encourages the evil. The act does not meddle with anything belonging to...State line they are no longer within their rights. If there were no Constitution and no Congress their power to cross the line would depend upon their... | |
 | Electronic journals - 1918 - 508 pages
...federal authority does not extend." The view of the minority is thus expressed by Mr. Justice Holmes : "The act does not meddle with anything belonging to...state line they are no longer within their rights. If there were no Constitution and no » Scharrenberg v. Dollar SS Co. (1917), 245 US 122, 126, 38 Sup.... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1918 - 624 pages
...as against strong drink but not as against the product of ruined lives. 251. HOLMES, J., dissenting. The act does not meddle with anything belonging to...state line they are no longer within their rights. If there were no Constitution and no Congress their power to cross the line would depend upon their... | |
 | Printing - 1918 - 1126 pages
...be forbidden interstate shipment. Of the state's rights theory, Justice Holmes says : The act doei not meddle with anything belonging to the states....state line they are no longer within their rights. If there were no constitution and no congress their power to cross the line would depend upon their... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1918 - 628 pages
...against strong drink but not as against the product of ruined lives. 251. HOLMES, .!., dissenting. The act does not meddle with anything belonging to...commerce as they like. But when they seek to send then- products across the state line they are no longer within their rights. If there were no Constitution... | |
 | 1919 - 1804 pages
...say that it is permissible as against strong drink, but not as against the product of ruined lives. The act does not meddle with anything belonging to...state line they are no longer within their rights. If there were no Constitution and no Congress their power to cross the line would depend upon their... | |
 | Encyclopedias and dictionaries - 1919 - 896 pages
...McRcynolds. Four justices dissented: Holmes, Brandéis, Clarke, and McKenna. Justice Holmes declared, "The act does not meddle with anything belonging to...State line they are no longer within their rights." Plans were at once begun to renew the restrictions under some other power of Congress, such as the... | |
| |
