Dayton Coal Iron Company v. Barton
| Decision Date | 21 October 1901 |
| Docket Number | No. 26,26 |
| Citation | 22 S.Ct. 5,183 U.S. 23,46 L.Ed. 61 |
| Parties | DAYTON COAL & IRON COMPANY (Limited), Plff. in Err. , v. T. A. BARTON |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This was an action tried in the circuit court of Rhea county, Tennessee, wherein T. A. Barton, a citizen of Tennessee, sought to recover from the Dayton Coal & Iron Company (Limited), a corporation organized under the laws of Great Britain, and doing business as a manufacturer of pig iron and coke in said county. The company owns a store, where it sells goods to its employees and other persons. The company also has a monthly pay day, and settles in cash with its employees on said pay day. In the meantime, and to such of its employees as see fit to request the same, it issues orders on its storekeeper for goods.
On March 17, 1899, the legislature of Tennessee passed an act requiring 'all persons, firms, corporations, and companies using coupons, scrip, punchouts, store orders, or other evidences of indebtedness to pay laborers and employees for labor or otherwise, to redeem the same in good and lawful money of the United States in the hands of their employees, laborers, or a bona fide holder, and to provide a legal remedy for collection of same in favor of said laborers, employees, and such bona fide holders.'
This was a suit brought by said Barton to recover as a bona fide holder of certain store orders that had been issued by the defendant company to some of its laborers in payment for labor. The defendant company denied the validity of the legislation, as well under the laws and Constitution of Tennessee as the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. The plaintiff recovered a judgment against the company in the circuit court of Rhea county, and this judgment was affirmed by the supreme court of Tennessee, whereupon a writ of error from this court was allowed by the chief justice of the state supreme court.
Mr. F. L. Mansfield for plaintiff in error.
Mr. B. G. McKenzie for defendant in error.
The only question presented for our consideration in this record is the validity, under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, of the act of the legislature of the state of Tennessee prescribing that corporations and other persons issuing store orders in payment for labor shall redeem them in cash, and providing a legal remedy for bona fide holders of such orders.
In the case of Knoxville Iron Co. v. Harbison, in error to the supreme court of Tennessee, decided at the present term, 183 U. S. 13, ante...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McGuire v. Chi., B. & Q. R. Co.
...U. S. 648, 15 Sup. Ct. 209, 39 L. Ed. 297;Insurance Co. v. Daggs, 172 U. S. 557, 19 Sup. Ct. 281, 43 L. Ed. 552;Dayton v. Iron Co., 183 U. S. 23, 22 Sup. Ct. 5, 46 L. Ed. 61;Insurance Co. v. Needles, 113 U. S. 574, 5 Sup. Ct. 681, 28 L. Ed. 1084;Sinking Fund Cases, 99 U. S. 700, 25 L. Ed. 4......
-
Ribnik v. Bride, 569
...employers who paid their men in store orders to redeem them in cash, Knoxville Iron Co. v. Harbison, supra; Dayton Coal Co. v. Barton, 183 U. S. 23, 22 S. Ct. 5, 46 L. Ed. 61; Keokee Coke Co. v. Taylor, 234 U. S. 224, 34 S. Ct. 856, 58 L. Ed. 1288; or fixed the fees chargeable by attorneys ......
-
McGuire v. Chicago, B. & Q.R. Co.
... ... THE CHICAGO, BURLINGTON & QUINCY RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellee Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines July 14, 1906 ... of coal as a basis of miner's wages, for compulsory ... payment of ... Harbison v. Iron Co. , 103 Tenn. 421 (53 S.W. 955, 56 ... L. R. A. 316, 76 ... 557 (19 ... S.Ct. 281, 43 L.Ed. 552); Dayton ... [108 N.W. 912] ... v. Iron Co. , 183 U.S. 23 (22 ... 557 (19 S.Ct. 281, 43 L.Ed. 552); Dayton v ... Barton , 183 U.S. 23 (22 S.Ct. 5, 46 L.Ed. 61). In the ... Hooper ... ...
-
The State ex rel. Standard Tank Car Company v. Sullivan
... ... of the common law." [Citing Dayton Co. v ... Barton, 183 U.S. 23, ... [221 S.W. 737] ... 46 L.Ed. 61, ... ...
-
Constituting Workers, Protecting Women: Gender, Law, and Labor in the Progressive Era and New Deal Years.
...v. Kansas, 191 U.S. 207 (1903) (upholding a law regulating employment on public works projects); Dayton Coal & Iron Co. v. Barton, 183 U.S. 23 (1901) (upholding a law requiring mining companies to pay their workers in cash); Knoxville Iron Co. v. Harbison, 183 U.S. 13 (1901) (37.) 198 U......