*1 15,904 Assignee (2d] April Ralph. Loeb, Messrs. Lutz, & Davis Thomas E. Gregory, Boyles, Messrs. Thurmon for defendants
En Banc. Burke
Mr. Chief
court. same order trial
These parties appear there, court and referred to or as are hereinafter Isaak, Cobb, Perry, and Mrs. Clark, Perry respectively; and one B. as Rogers. Charles *2 assignee of this action Rogers, brought against $2,500 for “mer- for approximately chandise and denied gen- services rendered.” Defendants erally and Perry further that and were alleged convicts in the- in the state penitentiary partners questioned of transactions; that as a act benevo- simple lence Cobb and Clark receive and agreed to of dispose goods certain for them, inmates, and other without com- pensation; that later was under released, but the rules of the could penitentiary not receive such as- hence signments, defendants had permitted shipments delivered the of at residence Mrs. until Perry, finally all on hand, amounting $1,500, merchandise to had been Perry; to had that defendants never to agreed pay Rogers or Perry, anyone else, or for such mer- chandise and owed consequently nothing.- further They pleaded the property goods” involved was “convict and that alleged dealings the in were violation of state and federal statutes. Plaintiff moved de- strike the to. of fense “convict goods” and that motion was overruled. reply No filed. moved Defendants the pleadings. That motion was sustained to review the judgment against costs him entered accordingly plaintiff prosecutes writ, this four assigning points for the go reversal. These to same question,, which is the one i. the only argued, e., correctness of the court’s rul- to strike the of ing refusing defense goods.” “convict The facts are pleaded undisputed. The sole question the is whether transaction presented disclosed by the under record enforceable the statute. 107, Section ’35 C. volume S. A. chapter provides, inter alia: * * * * * * any “It shall be unlawful person sell or store in this or goods, wares merchandise man- * * ufactured produced *, wholly or in part, by [or] * * * any prisoners penal institution or . convicts * * preceding, section this state For violation of thé exceeding provides penalty, one a a fine not 109, id., exceeding imprisonment one thousand dollars or not year, plain explicit. both. Said sections are plain depart mean from the will not
“Courts legislative ing intention a in search of of words definitely express plainly and words themselves' * * Mooney, People Pac. 271. 87 Colo. public policy of are a declaration of the Said sections legislature policy the final and as to that state authority. 278 Pac. 86 Colo. Walton, Walton v. Sigel-Campion 125 Pac. Nesbit v. public contrary to the declared transactions Of re If notice. policy will take the court no the state promptly sought action will be be lief thereunder properly advised the court is as soon as dismissed they position leaving parties in which *3 fact, have p. §440; Russell placed J., 13 C. themselves. Potter 95 Pac. 43 Courier P. P. v. (2d) 149. P. Colo. Swinehart, v. judgment affirmed.
The Justice Hilliard dissents.
Mr. Hilliard dissenting.
Mr. chapter 107 and l convinced that sections am upon court’s which the A., ’35 S. the statutes C. “goods, mer- wares or have to do with based, by produced or indi- mined” manufactured,
chandise working pres- themselves, as vidual convicts purpose leg- I conceive, ent case. Rather, solely prevent such, so, islation, by through proceeding unpaid mass convict and manufacturing goods, producing wares labor, from competition or merchandise to be offered for sale in by production merchandise of like manufacture or with private industry, necessarily burdened with the cost of labor. I think the been on case should have tried merits, ought pleadings to be reversed. 15,964. doing Realty
Shelton, as Jack business Shelton Company Clymer [2d] April 12, Per Curiam. affirmed en banc
Judgment without written opinion. J. Theodore Adams, A. Paul Ruston,