While sustaining the power of congress to regulate commerce among the states, the su preme court has steadily adhered to the prin ciple that the states possess, because they have never surrendered, the power to pro tect the public health, morals and safety by any legislation appropriate to that end which does not . encroach upon the rights guar anteed by the national constitution nor come in conflict with acts of Congress ; Missouri, k. & T. Ry. Co. v. Haber, 169 U. S. 628, 18 Sup. Ct. 488, 42 L. Ed. 878. The line of dis tinction may well be illustrated by the case of laws for the inspection of articles of food brought into a state; legislature may prescribe how animals may be killed to be used for food and may fix the time and places and manner of such killing; State v. Davis, 72 N. J. L. 345, 61 Atl. 2; and pro vide for the inspection of hides and animals; Limburger v. Barker, 17 Tex. Civ. App. 602, 43 S. W. 616. But a state inspection law must not substantially hamper or burden the constitutional right to make and to re ceive an interstate shipment; Vance v. W. A. Vandercook Co., 170 U. S. 438, 18 Sup. Ct. 674, 42 L. Ed. 1100; and a statute requiring, as a condition of sales of meats in a state, that all animals from which such meats are taken shall have been inspected in that state before being slaughtered, is in violation of the commercial clause of the constitution of the United States and void ; Minnesota v. Barber, 136 U. S. 313, Sup. Ct. 862, 34 14 Ed. 455. See Schmidt v. People, 18 Colo. 78, 31 Pac. 498.
An act regulating the domestic sale of food for animals is within the police power, even though it may affect incidentally in terstate commerce ; Savage v. Jones, 225 U.
S. 501, 32 Sup. Ct. 715, 56 L. Ed. 1182; ard Stock Food Co. v. Wright, 225 U. S. 540, 32 Sup. Ct. 784, 56 L. Ed. 1197.
State quarantine laws, prohibiting the entry of persons or cargoes which might bring contagious aiseases, are constitutional; and the national government also has ju risdiction in quarantine to prohibit improp er immigrants and injurious traffic between the states ; Morgan's Louisiana S. S. Co. v. Board of Health, 118U. S. 464, 6 Sup. Ct. 1114, 30 L. Ed. 237; Crutcher v. Kentucky, 141 U. S. 47, 11 Sup. Ct. 851, 35 L. Ed. 649. Cattle infected with pleuro-pneumonia, dan gerous persons, Chinese, coolies, contract laborers, and rags may be kept out of the country ; Morgan's Louisiana S. S. Co. v. Louisiana Board of Health, 118 U. S. 465, 6 Sup. Ct. 1114, 30 L. Ed. 237 ; Chae Chan Ping v. U. S., 130 U. S. 581, 9 Sup. Ct. 623, 32 L. Ed. 1068; Wan Sbing v. U. S., 140 U. S. 424, 11 Sup. Ct. 729, 35 L. Ed. 503; Fong Yue Ting v. U. S., 149 U. S. 698, 13 Sup. Ct. 1016, 37 L. Ed. 905; Missouri, K. & T. R. Co. v. Haber, 169 U. S. 613, 18 Sup. et 488, 42 L. Ed. 878; peach trees may be de stroyed, when affected with peach yellows; State v. Wordin, 56 Conn. 216, 14 Ad. 801; adulteration of food prohibited ; State v. Marshall, 64 N. H. 549, 15 Atl. 210, 1 L. IL A: 51; and the manufacture of oleomargarine; Powell v. Cora., 114 Pa. 265, 7 Atl. 913, 60 Am. Rep. 350; where it was held that the
legislature might prohibit, if it saw fit, the manufacture of a wholesome article of food; but see People v. Marx, 99 N. Y. 377, where the decision is criticised, and in Dorsey v. State, 38 Tex. Cr. R. 527, 44 S. W. 514, 40 L. R. A. 201, 70 Am. St. Rep. 762, it is held that the state cannot constitute it a crime to mix wholesome and nutritious articles of food. See OLEOMARGARINE; FOOD AND Dane ACTS.
The legislature may require all oleomar garine to be stamped as such; Pierce v. State, 63 Md. 592 ; or to be colored pink ; Armour Packing Co. v. Snyder, 84 Fed. 136; or prohibit artificially coloring it ; Plumley v. Massachusetts, 155 U. S. 461, 15 Sup. Ct. 154, 39 L. Ed. 223 ; prescribe the price at which bread should be sold; Mobile v. Yuille, 3 Ala. 140, 36 Am. Dec. 441; suppress gam bling and opium dens, and lotteries ; Stone v. Mississippi, 101 U. S. 814, 25 L. Ed. 1079; and carrying on offensive manufactures; Coe v. Schultz, 47 Barb. (N. Y.) 64; regulate laundries; Soon Fling v. Crowley, 113 U. S. 703, 5 Sup. Ct. 730, 28 L. Ed. 1145 ; Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356, 6 Sup. Ct. 1064, 30 L. Ed. 220; and pawn-brokers, hawkers, and peddlers; Com. v. Brinton, 132 Pa. 69, 18 Atl. 1092 ; and require a license fee, where no discrimination is made between residents or products of the state and those of another state; Emert v. Missouri, 156 U.
S. 296, 15 Sup. Ct. 367, 39 L. Ed. 430; enact laws for the preservation of game and fish; Lawton v. Steele, 152 U. S. 133, 14 Sup. Ct. 499, 38 L. Ed. 385 ; see GAME LAWS ; to pre vent the waste of natural gas; Townsend v. State, 147 Incl. 624, 47 N. E. 19, 37 L. R. A. 294, 62 Am. St. Rep. 477; the sale or manu facture of intoxicating liquors ; Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U. S. 623, 8 Sup, Ct. 273, 31 L. Ed. 205; Vandercook Co. v. Vance, 80 Fed. 786; close cemeteries within the built-up parts of a city ; Craig v. Presbyterian Church, 88 Pa. 42, 32 Am. Rep. 417 ; and forbid the, pollution of streams; State v. Wheeler, 44 N. J. L. 88; the keeping of gun powder in cities or villages; Fisher v. Mc Girr, 1 Gray (Mass.) 27, 61 Am. Dec. 381; the erection of wooden buildings in populous cities; Brady v. Ins. Co., 11 Mich. 425; or the keeping of swine therein ; Com. v. Patch, 97 Mass. 221; or of a slaughter house ; Wa tertown v. Mayo, 109 Mass. 315, 12 Am. Rep. 694; Villavaso v. Barthet, 39 La. Ann. 247, 1 South. 599; or a bone boiling factory ; People v. Rosenberg, 67 Hun 52, 22 N. Y. Supp. 56; or any other business injurious to the public ; Taylor v. State, 35 Wis. 298; Lawton v. Steele, 152 U. S. 133, 14 Sup. Ct. 499, 38 L. Ed. 385; restrain the employ ment of children at theatrical exhibitions; In re Stevens, 70 Hun 243, 24 N. Y. Supp. 780; or prohibit their employment altogether when below a specified age. Similarly there seems to be no doubt that the hours of labor of women and children and the wages, to be paid them may be controlled through the police power ; Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113, 24 L. Ed. 77; People v. King, 110 N. Y. 418,