The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1902-05-21

CHILD LAB0R IN TORIES.


sshes State 81 Tiiday contained g
SIengshy editorial, With q number 81
asctsfrom New York magazine,
IA m she above subj 8 have moi
aseffor the entire article, but copy
q. LIE nsh portion Of The editorial
ssish some sc the extracts tosshoW ouz
srsaden IS being said Of us BY
s s{ Snaof The British cotton manufac-
urerWho have been visiGing nerl=
n cotton factories, and especially
IS aose essouth said TO- q reporter
Sotne State affser going t1rough Co-
M splendid mill that 81 time i411s
southern IL 8: people would come 20
Sssalizesthe eziil off the child laborss sys-
perniicious ID the eNx- e
ssI slne 6 said be, and viii surely
eadtosa genera. ysical and mental
Weskening off the people from whose
s .kcolne tie min operatives You q
illeyentuall hare among yen asa as 2
ssrofsy your ppo,pu1at ton 8 race sof peo-;
5, ssle anaenic tied and not over
SECT inches III height.
these mannfactur admitted
condi ditions the south
eonld lead the world q cotton mann
Seeming, ana as We all fun expect
ssthiss can hhardly besasserted that
ach Outside c:iism IS prompted By
aGre to handicap the southern
afsl Is industry IN the race for inter
ssnat5onaI markets. tt IS well known,
mo sEnoreoger lat despite child labor
ssiaas and the strength off trade unions
sssnhe British texttiile le mills. and their
sssSHstancefrorn the sources Of cotton
upply they have held their own 81 q
sssmlpeftion with y the United States
SIS Sbea5er than almost any other class Of
ai5sh mannfactories Our exports
oKcotton goods are quite Insignificant
sanseomparison with England s.
TheEordso Of the British rnanu1ac- llil1 lL[
sSrner are quoted merely as prellml11e
sry rs j far fuller and more severe
from the pen OF q New s'
Sroker TWo correspond in dis:
sEs ant states have ten Us asking
|siEl sfba ne should give attention to an
=, ft51,a fay number Of the
hihstine, By It's editor, Elbert Hub
Sl,a.s 5,ar On White Slavery IN The
sSouth such slavery being the
s,fl,lI working 81 infant children ii the cot
ss Son u,il We comply with their sug-
- estion FOR more than one reason In
he frst place Il VIII be well for Us
Ss stoseeourtet peculiar instit tution las It
sssass,ould haYe, Seen we'll for Us to have
saeen another and an earlier such lnstl-
.ssaz,s Trough the eyes Of the outside
ssuorld in the second place, because
aThe PhiIstine, s periodical OF pro-
holds a unique position IN
american iournalisn and has a circu-
sssafson of over 100, 900 copies among cnl
si sss,ta,ed 8 people the country over, being
4 therefore a not siderable factor
IN maxi public opinion
Hubbard's article IS strenuous
md sweeping TOO sweeping IN it's e1-
spressions to be wholly Just. He feels
sssitnz,ongly regarding this evil Of child
|lahor and has fallen into error IN gene
raizing too Sfreely We do notsquote
him because We approve of all he says
hut because it is 5expedient for South
sGarolinians 60 know what he says and,
by putting themselves in the place ot
outsiders, conceive how they would
feel H the ike words were addressed
ssto them regarding abuses here. we
uens item to reach the outside view
sspoiint; that is the 6rst essential te
reform at home.
Ne do not need to point out to the
people Of South Carolina the many
ss.a1aggeratons Of speech and the various
Inaccuracies which this article con
st7ans. The evil of child labor is, as
ne All know, considerable and 9
groging one, but, thank God it i
not as bad as the Roycrofter AYERS.
Nor IS It half as strongly entreachec
he and others in the north imagine.
a bill prohibiting the employment O
young children in the textile mills o
sSonth Carolina passed the senate ane
was defeated in the house OF repre-
sentatives last winter by only tWt
Yotes1and this after but Is month:
agitation for reform
South Carolira is taken by Mr.
Hubbard as type Of the southern
child-working State. We do not know
just how be got his information, bu
he visited Columbia on lecture ton:
last winter and doubtless made his IN
Z then Some extracts follow =