State v. Herald

• Decision Date: 13 November 1907
• Citation: 47 Wash. 538,92 P. 376
• Parties: STATE v. HERALD.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

92 P. 376

47 Wash. 538

STATE v. HERALD.

Supreme Court of Washington

November 13, 1907

Appeal from Superior Court, Pierce County; W. H. Snell, Judge.

Charles Herald was charged with keeping open a place of amusement on Sunday. From an order sustaining a demurrer to the information, the state appeals. Reversed and remanded.

H. G Rowland and Robert M. Davis, for appellant.

McBridge Stratton & Dalton and Ellis & Eletcher, for respondent.

ROOT J.

Respondent was informed against by the prosecuting attorney of Pierce county by an information charging him with having violated section 7250, Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. (section 1886 Pierce's Code), which reads as follows: 'Any person who shall keep open any playhouse or theater race ground, cock pit, or play at any game of chance for gain, or engage in any noisy amusements, or keep open any drinking or billiard saloon, or sell or dispose of any intoxicating liquors as a beverage, on the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday, shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine not less than thirty dollars nor more than two hundred and fifty dollars. All fines collected for violation of this section shall be paid into the common school fund.' A demurrer was interposed to the information, and sustained by the trial court, upon the ground that the statute was unconstitutional as being in conflict with section 12, art. 1, of the state Constitution, and section 1 of the fourteenth amendment to the federal Constitution.

It is urged by respondent that this statute prevents the opening of a theater building for any purpose whatever on Sunday; that the opening of such theater building for church, Sunday school, ordinary lecture, memorial service, or other legitimate, quiet, and proper service, would be invalid as much as if opened for the purposes of giving a theatrical play or dramatic performance; that the attempt to prevent such a building from being opened for such religious or other orderly and quiet exercises is an infringement of the rights of the individual and is consequently in contravention of the constitutional guarantees above referred to. The question depends upon the construction to be given the statute. If it be given a narrow, technical construction, respondent's position may be upheld. But if it be given what we regard as a reasonable and a common-sense interpretation, to wit, that a theater building or playhouse should not be...