Shortall v. Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Co.

• Citation: 88 P. 212,45 Wash. 290
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Washington
• Decision Date: 09 January 1907
• Parties: SHORTALL v. PUGET SOUND BRIDGE & DREDGING CO.

88 P. 212

45 Wash. 290

SHORTALL v. PUGET SOUND BRIDGE & DREDGING CO.

Supreme Court of Washington

January 9, 1907

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; R. B. Albertson, Judge.

Action by John Shortall against the Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Ballinger Ronald, Battle & Tennant, for appellant.

Dudley G. Wooten, for respondent.

FULLERTON J.

This is an action brought by the respondent, who was plaintiff below to recover of the appellant the sum of $21.36 claimed to be due as wages. The facts were stipulated, and are, in substance, these: The appellant is a corporation of the state of Nevada, authorized to do business in the state of Washington, and engaged in business at Bremerton. On August 31, 1905, it employed the respondent as a laborer, at a stipulated wage, taking from him a written promise in the following words: 'Know all men by these presents, that the undersigned, in accepting employment from the Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Company, a corporation of the state of Nevada, agrees to be bound by the rules governing the employés of said company in every respect, and specifically agrees to be bound by the rules in regard to payment for wages, to wit: That payment for labor performed in one month shall be made on the regular pay day, the 15th of the month following, unless in case of being discharged, or laid off on completion of work on hand, in which case I agree to wait for payment until reports can be made to the office, of time employed and rate of payment, when the said Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Company agree to make payment within ten days thereafter in full for services rendered. Every employé injured while in performance of his duties will be entitled to medical attendance for which a hospital fee of $1.00 per month will be deducted from the wages of each employé. Further and more specifically, the undersigned agrees not to leave the employ of the said Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Company except upon due notice to them, and upon voluntarily leaving their employ agrees to await payment of wages until the fifteenth of the following month; as aforesaid. Dated at Bremerton this 31st day of August, 1905. John Shortall.' The respondent continued in the employ of the appellant from the date of the execution of the writing up to and including October 15, 1905, voluntarily quitting such employment on the morning of the next day. He had been paid at that time in full for all of his earnings prior to October 1, 1905, leaving unpaid only the amount earned by him between the 1st and the 16th of that month. This sum, it is agreed, amounted, after making all proper deductions, to $21.36. On quitting the appellant's employment the respondent demanded immediate payment of this sum, but was refused on the ground that it was not due and payable, under the terms of the contract, until November 15, 1905. This action was begun on October 18, 1905, two days after the respondent quit the services of the appellant. The respondent bases his right to recover on the act approved February 2, 1888 (Laws 1887-88, p. 234, c. 128), and the act amendatory thereof, approved March 9, 1905 (Laws 1905, p 219, c. 112). The appellant concedes that these acts, if valid, allow a recovery on the part of the respondent, but he contends that they are void, because being in contravention of both the state and federal Constitutions. The act of February 2, 1888, was entitled, 'An act to provide for the payment of wages of labor in the lawful money of the United States and to punish violation of the same.' The first section thereof read as follows: 'That it shall not be lawful for any corporation, person or firm engaged in manufacturing of any kind in this territory, minning railroading, constructing railroads, or any business or enterprise of whatsoever kind in this territory, to issue, pay out or circulate for payment of wages of any labor, any order, check, memorandum, token or evidence of indebtedness, payable in whole or in part otherwise than in lawful money of the United States, unless the same is negotiable and redeemable at its face value, without discount, in cash or [on] demand, at the store or other place of business of such firm, person or corporation when the same issued, and the person who, or company which may issue any such order, check, memorandum, token or other evidence of indebtedness shall upon presentation and demand redeem the same in lawful money of the United States.' Laws 1887-88, p. 234, c. 128. The amendatory act was entitled 'An act amending section 1 of an act entitled 'An act to provide for the payment of wages of labor in lawful money of the United States and to punish violations of the same,' approved February 2, 1888, being section 3305 of Ballinger's Annotated Codes and Statutes of the state of Washington.' It amended the section above quoted so as to make the same read as follows: 'Section 1. That it shall not be lawful for any corporation, person or firm engaged in manufacturing of any kind in this state, mining, railroading, constructing railroads, or any business or enterprise of whatsoever kind in this state, to issue, pay out or circulate for payment of wages of any labor, any order, check, memorandum, token or evidence of indebtedness, payable in whole or in part otherwise than in lawful money of the United States, unless the same is negotiable and redeemable at its face value, without discount, in cash or on demand, at the store or other place of business of such firm, person, or corporation when the same is issued, and the person who, or company which may issue any such...