The State’s Battle to License Horseshoers
Olympia attorney T. M. Vance challenges the constitutionality of a law requiring professional registration for blacksmiths.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Attorney T. M. Vance of Olympia is representing defendants Aubry and Needles in a case challenging the constitutionality of the state law regulating the profession of horseshoeing. The defendants were arrested in Tacoma for violating the law by failing to register. They surrendered themselves to the sheriff specifically to bring habeas corpus proceedings to test the law's validity. 'We intend to attack the law as being class legislation,' said Mr. Vance. The case is expected to reach the supreme court for final settlement, as the defense argues that the state's regulation of this manual trade constitutes an overreach.
“We intend to attack the law as being class legislation.”
This 1903 dispute reflects the Progressive Era's push for professional licensing versus the period's skepticism regarding the state's power to restrict entry into labor trades. Such 'class legislation' arguments remain a standard refrain in modern debates over occupational licensing requirements.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.