The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1902-09-23


and methods as Is the Alabama cniio-
labor pamphlet, the growing intent OF the
South, an intent emphasized by deeds, 10
rid itself Of its burden and curse IN
manner best conducive TO the welfare
and happiness Of slave owners, of slaves
and of the great mass of whites hamp.
cred by the presence OF slavery would
not have been turned into not SO much
a defence of the institution as into pas
sionate defiance of interference from out
side in social matters best understood at
| first hand; we would not now have the
grfevous problem of the negro which
the betterment Of the whites Of the
South"
After taking a good long breath, your
readers may wish to test the accuracy OF
this suggestion. Now, If there Is an
soutside'' influence back of this agita-
| ton for a child-labor Law, [ do not know
where IL Is. 1t Is true !aat outside In
terest has been awakened, but this leg
islation was demanded by representative
bodies in Alabama long before such In.
terest was aroused. If we have carried
| this war into New England 1t has BEEN
solely with the request that she would
| control, not the South, but the New Eng
land man, who, in using the labor of our
children under II, is doing at the South
what he.caunot and dare not do at home
He Is the only representative of the
New England conscience" that we nave
thus far found in the lobby. of our Leg
with you that ''the New England con-
science has never exerted itself in the
direction of the South without dire re-
suits" :.
tee are Thos. G.. Jones, Ex-Governor OF
the State, and Confederate soldier OF
noble distinction; Judge J. Il. CASTOR OF
Montgomery, one of the wlsest ana most
conservative of men; Dr.. j. II. Philips
the Superintendent of Schools for Blrm-
| ingham, and Alabamians like Mess 8.
| Macdonald. Craft and Reilly. The Chair.
| man of the Committee, the, writer OF
| these lines, was born, reared and edu-
| Gated at the South, and has not a hops
nor an interest apart from the service
| Of its people. Since the last session or
| the Legislature the two strongest local
| opponents of legislation have frankly
| Withdrawn their opposition. and State re-
striction of child-labor has had the earn
est and aggressive approval of the repre-
| sentative journals of Alabama, including
| the leading papers of Birmingham, ana
! such influential organs as The Mobile
| Register and The Montgomery Adver-
| tiser.
| In Georgia, among those identified with
| the movement for legislation are tho
| Governor of the State, Judge Henry b.
| Tompkins of Atlanta, Bishop Nelson,
Bishop Gambler, of the Methodist Church;
the Hon. Hoke Smith, Gen. John II.
| Gordon, Burton Smith. c. b. Wilmer,
| W. w. Landrun and Hooper Alexander
You doubtless know that In South Car-
| olina the Governor of the State. the State
| Superintendent of Education and Bishop
| Capers, an honored and gallant soldier OIL
| the Confederacy, are but fair representa-
| tives of that strong local sentiment which
has voiced itself In the pledge OF the
| Democratic Party to prohibit the labor OF
4 children under IL in the manufacturing
| establishments OF the State. 1t is the
| same local demand which is voiced in
| the similar declaration Of the Demo-
/ pty N
| In North Carolina the sentiment In Ia
| vor of legislation is equally strong ana
| equally creditable. This is now frankly
recognized by such an organ as The OBJ
J server of Charlotte, paper owned by
| Hon. D. A. Tompkins, one of the ablest
| and most distinguished representatives of
the industrial South. After dwelling
wisely and rightly on the generous pro-
| visions of some of the mills for their
child operatives, The News and Observer
august 11th) says:
These manufacturers have gained
wisdom by the experience of their faith
ers with slavery. They have not under
taken and will not undertake to oppose
civilization in another matter where fall
| ure would be as sure as 1t was with
slavery. They are working In good faith
to solve this pending problem. 1t Is prac-
tically certain that number of child
labor bills will be introduced in the next
| Legislature of North Carolina. The
agreement of the mills, year and half
ago. to discontinue the employment of
| children has not been lived up to. Leg
islation Will, therefore, be invoked. and
| some measure having for its purpose the
eradication of this evil will pass.
Says The Atlanta Constitution DULY
23): 1T IS idle to think that factory leg
islation can be much longer excluded
from the Southern mill problem" l know
| that many important editorials of the
| Southern press have escaped my atten-
ton; but l have before me. in addition
/ 60 h. ais dxr Tod
more explicit editorial approval of child
labor legislation from such representa-
| tive Southern papers as The Chattanooga
Times, The Charleston News and Cour'
| Ter, The Charleston Post. The Columbia
State, The Beaufort. s. c., Gazette, The
| Raleigh, N. c., News, The Ashevile. N.
c., Citizen. The Norfolk Va, Landmark,
The Washington Times. The Washington
Richmond. Va, Leader, Chattanooga
News, Knoxville, Tenn, Sentinel; Thu
| Savannah News, The Louisville Post.
The Montgomery Advertiser, The Mobile
Register, The Nashville News, The Menu
phis. Scimitar, The Memphis Commercial
The Houston, Texas. Post, and The New
| Orleans Times-Democrat. So much for
the declaration that the agitation for
| cfild-labor is IAN agitation which has
| been planned and which Is being pushed
along identically the same lines as the
! agitation against the ownership of ne
| groes."
| But I trespass upon your space. If 1
here conclude. 1t is not because / prefer
| to leave untouched the other criticisms
| of your review. To these l shall reply
| in my own way: for the argument which
| YOU have presented has afforded me so
| much interest and satisfaction that
shall gladly reprint 1t, with your kind
permission, for general circulation at my
| own expense.
| Finally, however, and turning from
| this passage in debate, / wish to express
| in your own columns my<very sincere and
| serious regard for the long and effective
| service which has been rendered by The
| Manufacturers Record to the industrial
progress of the South.
Edgar Gardner Murphy.
| September 1. A. D., 1902.
| In reprintlng this discussion. Mr.. Muir
| ply wishes to say that he has little in
of the debate He wishes, rather, to lay
| the greater emphasis upon two consider
| atoms. The first of these is the obvious
| truth that while the real interests of
| cotton manufacture should be conserved.
| yet the fundamental interest of the South
must lie not in her factories, but in her
children. 1t is now granted in this dis
| cussion that ,inasmuch as the total num-
| her of operatives has doubled since the
period covered by the last census of the
| United States. there are now in the fac
| tories of the South $1,000 children under
| Is years of age. If the number under Is
| has thus doubled in four years. we may
| assume that within another four years
| (unless legislation intervenes to check the
| employment of the younger children) our
army OF 100000 souls. What will be the
| total in ten years? In twenty?
| The questions themselves point to the
| second consideratton-the thought that
| such calculation will hardly be neces-
sary. IL the South has a duty to her
l nh dRRV, I- a1r fr,sn 4I.rA D.