WEST COAST HOTEL CO v PARRISH Case Briefs

WEST COAST HOTEL CO v PARRISH Case Briefs

WEST COAST ttOTEL CO. v. PARRISH ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON.
No. 293. Argued December 16, 17, 1936.-Decided March 29, 1937.
1. Deprivation of liberty to contract is forbidden by the Constitution
if without due process of law; but restraint or regulation of this
liberty, if reasonable in relation to its subject and if adopted for
the protection of the community against evils menacing the health,
safety, morals and welfare of the people, is due process. P. 391.
2. In dealing with the relation of employer and employed, the legislature has necessarily a wide field of discretion in order that there
may be suitable protection of health and safety, and that peace
and good order may be promoted through regulations designed
to insure wholesome conditions of work .and freedom from oppression. P. 393.
3. The State has a, special interest in protecting women against employment contracts which through poor working conditions, long
hours or scant wages may leave them inadequately supported and
un(lermine their health; because:
(1) The health of wbmen is peculiarly related to the vigor of
the race;
(2) Women are especially liable to be overreached and exploited by unscrupulous emlployers; and
(3) This exploitation and denial of a living wage is not only
detrimental to the health and well being of the women affected but
casts a direct burden for their support upon the community.
Pp. 394, 398, et seq.
4. Judicial notice is taken of the unparalleled demands for relief
which arose during the recent period of depression and still continue to an alarming extent despite the degree of economic recovery which has been achieved. P. 399.
5. A state law for the setting of minimum wages for women is not an
arbitrary discrimination because it does not extend to men. P. 400.
6. A statute of the State of Washington (Laws, 1913, c. 174; Remington’s Rev. Stats., 1932, § 7623 et seq.) providing for the establishment of minimum wages for women, held valid. Adkins v.
Children’s Hospital, 261 U. S. 525, is overruled; Morehead v. New
York ex rel. Tipaldo, 29S U. S. 587, distinguished. P. 400.
185 Wash. 5S1; 55 P. (2d) 1083, affirmed.