Williams v. Arkansas

Citations

• 217 U.S. 79
• 30 S. Ct. 493
• 54 L. Ed. 673
• 1910 U.S. LEXIS 1945
• 18 Am. Ann. Cas. 865

Syllabus

<p>State legislation which in carrying out a public purpose is limited in its application, is not a denial of equal protection of the laws within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment if within the sphere of its operation it affects alike all persons similarly situated. Bar-bier v. Connolly, 113 U. S. 27.</p> <p>When a state legislature has declared that, in its opinion, the policy of the State requires a certain measure, its action should not be disturbed by the courts under the Fourteenth Amendment, unless they can clearly see that there is no reason why the law should not be extended to classes left untouched. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. May, 194 U. S. 267.</p> <p>A classification in a state statute prohibiting drumming or soliciting on trains for business for any “ hotels, lodging houses,- eating houses, bath houses, physicians, masseurs, surgeon or other medical practitioner” will not be held by this court to be unreasonable and amounting to denial of equal protection of the laws, after it has been sustained by the state court as meeting an existing condition which was required to be met; and so held that the anti-drumming or soliciting law of Arkansas of 1907 is not unconstitutional because it relates to the above classes alone and does not prohibit drumming . and soliciting for other purposes.</p> <p>85 Arkansas, 470, affirmed.</p>