|
Ellis v. United States, 206 U.S. 246 (1907)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Ellis v. United States, 206 U.S. 246 (1907)
Ellis v. United States Nos. 567 , 664-669 Argued April 23, 24, 1907 Decided May 13, 1907 206 U.S. 246
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Syllabus
The provisions in the Act of August 1, 1892, 27 Stat. 340, limiting the hours of laborers and mechanics employed by the United States or any contractor or subcontractor upon any of the public works of the United States to eight hours per day except in cases of extraordinary emergency, and imposing penalties for the violation thereof, are constitutional and within the powers of Congress. In this respect, Congress has the same power as a state has over the construction of its public works. Atkin v. Kansas, 191 U.S. 207.
An act of Congress otherwise valid is not unconstitutional because the motive in enacting it was to secure certain advantages for conditions of labor not subject to the general control of Congress.
Although, in the absence of special laws, the government, purely as a contractor, may stand like a private person, it does not, by making a contract, waive its sovereignty or give up its power to make laws which render criminal a breach of the contract.
The disappointment of a contractor with regard to obtaining some of his materials did not, under the circumstances of this case, amount to an extraordinary emergency within the meaning of the statute and justify him in having laborers work more than eight hours.
One who intentionally adopts certain conduct in certain circumstances known to him, which conduct is unlawful, intentionally breaks the law.
Persons employed on dredges and scows in dredging a channel in a harbor are not within the meaning of the Act of August 1, 1892, laborers or mechanics employed on any of the public works of the United States.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Ellis v. United States, 206 U.S. 246 (1907) in 206 U.S. 246 206 U.S. 254. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=I2Z3G6XS7DQXLLI.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Ellis v. United States, 206 U.S. 246 (1907), in 206 U.S. 246, page 206 U.S. 254. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=I2Z3G6XS7DQXLLI.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Ellis v. United States, 206 U.S. 246 (1907). cited in 1907, 206 U.S. 246, pp.206 U.S. 254. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=I2Z3G6XS7DQXLLI.
|