Defendant was prosecuted in an Ohio court for selling in original packages goods shipped to him from an Alabama prison in which they were manufactured. The prosecution was under an Ohio statute prohibiting sale on the open market of goods, wares, or merchandise manufactured or mined wholly or in part in any other state by convicts or prisoners except those on parole or probation. Other Ohio statutes impose a like prohibition on the sale of convict-made goods manufactured in Ohio. The federal Hawes-Cooper Act provides that all goods, wares, and merchandise manufactured, produced, or mined wholly or in part by convicts or prisoners, except those on parole or probation or in federal institutions, transported into another state shall be subject to the laws of such state on arrival to the same extent as though manufactured therein. The Supreme Court of Ohio dismissed an appeal from a conviction and on certiorari the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the judgment, holding that since Ohio law applied equally to prison-made goods manufactured in and out of the state the state statute does not violate the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, that the Hawes-Cooper Act permits such a state statute, 2nd that the Hawes-Cooper Act is not an unconstitutional delegation of Congressional power. Whitfield v. State of Ohio, 296 U. S. 561, 56 S. Ct. 532 (1936).
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-VALIDITY OF STATE STATUTE FORBIDDING SALE OF PRISON-MADE GOODS MANUFACTURED IN OTHER STATES-VALIDITY OF FEDERAL STATUTE PERMITTING STATE CONTROL OF GOODS IN INTERSTATE
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol34/iss8/22