palm is a most essential one.
It reassures patrons to see it and gives them a present stimulus for
standing upon their right to good service for one payment.

THE COURTS AND TIPPING

The courts, in declaring such laws unconstitutional have proceeded upon
the common law right of one citizen to give away his goods or property
in the form of money to any other citizen. A tip, the judges say,
represents a gift within the meaning of this common law right. But the
instances of such altruism are exceedingly rare.

Even the judges who so decide know that the tips they give are not bona
fide gifts out of the goodness of a generous heart. Tips are given, by
the devotees of the custom, from a sense of obligation. They pretend to
feel that the servitor actually has rendered a service for which the tip
is payment. The proof of this is found in the fact that such persons
never go about giving money gifts indiscriminately. Their gifts are
exclusively to the employees of public service enterprises, showing that
no thought of charity or generosity enters their minds.

The courts some day will come to the conclusion that a gift of money to
any serving person is a special relation that is subject to the police
power of the State. The special circumstances surrounding the gift will
be taken into consideration. Then it will be seen that the gift was made
for something the patron did not receive; for something for which he is
required to pay twice and that the motives of the gift were pride, or
fear or a sense of obligation falsely aroused.

While the courts are so scrupulous in preserving the common law right to
make gifts, they might give consideration to the equally indubitable
right of a patron to receive full value for his money, and to receive
such value for one payment.

It may be, that to write an anti-tipping law that will stand the test of
judges educated in the old school of thought about gratuities,
legislators will have to approach the subject from this viewpoint of
preserving a patron's common law right to satisfactory service for one
payment. For instance, a law specifically defining the right of a patron
to have food served, or to use a hotel room or sleeping car facilities,
in short to patronize any public service place, with only one charge,
and that to be paid exclusively to the proprietor, might strike an
effective blow at "the universal heart of Flunkyism."

The courts will assert that the foregoing right exist