The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1902-11-19
"A BOOMERANG COMPARISON
oficial Figures from Cotton Mills as
to Emplovrnsnt Of Child Labor.

ty to LEGISLATION. 1t passed the conven-
ton by a majority Of more than two
thirds The following is an editorial from
The State Of November 18th:
This editorial paragraph from The
Evening Record of this city challenges
considerations:
1T has been frequently asserted that
the discussion of the child labor situation
Is sectional. and figures indicate that 1t
is For year magazines and Northern
newspapers have been filled with long
articles about child slavery In the South.
but hardly a word about conditions In
New England and Eastern States But
what do the facts show? In South Caro-
lima there are 975 children employed In
the cotton mills. In Pennsylvania facto.
ries there are 5000 in New York 1901
and in Illinois 10000. If child labor is an
evil. the larger evil in the North does
not justify the smaller one in the South.
but the figures show that the evil of the
system Is not what is worrying the North
ern agitators, else they would begin at
home to remedy 1t.
I'VE are not the keeper of our neigh
boris consciences, nor DO we undertake
to regulate It's reasoning processes, SO
we would not take cognizance Of the fore
going statistical assertion were 1t not that
they impugn statements made heretofore
by this newspaper and convey a wholly
erroneous idea Of the facts in case Of
great importance to the people Of South
Carolina.
Where our contemporary obtained its
alleged facts we cannot conceive. They
certainly do not come from the United
States census office, the one absolute au-
thority on Industrial statistics. We hap
pen to have at hand census bulletin No.
215, issued June 2S 1902, giving the statis-
tics of cotton manufactures for the United
StateA and from it we present figures
which will show the truth as to child la
Dor In cotton mills at the time the CEN
sus was taken in the summer of 1900. 1t
will be seen that instead Of 975 children
there were employed in the cotton mills
OF South Carolina at that time LILO, while
In Pennsylvania there were 1,Sl7 in New
York 81 and in Illinois SO. These figures
are sufficient of themselves to refute The
Records claim, but we shall go farther
and show that the employment of child
labor has steadily decreased in New Eng
land under tine operation of wise and hui
name laws while in South Carolina and
the other important manufacturing States
Of the South 1t has greatly increased
In South Carolina cotton mills there
were employed in 1900 $40 children un-
der 16 years out Of total Of 30,2M opera
tives
In North Carolina there were employed
1929 children under 16 years out of a total
Of 30,273 operatives.
In Georgia there were employed $500
children under 16 out Of total Of 1888
In Alabama there were employed 2437
children under Is out of total of 1882
operatives.
Turning to New England we find these
figures:
In Massachusetts there were employed
5.972 children under 16 out of 92,515 opera
tives.
In Rhode Island there were employed
2,4S3 children under Is out Of 24,032 opera
tives.
In New Hampshire there were employed
1853 children under is out of 20454 opera
tives.
In Maine there were employed 766 chill
| dren under 16 out Of 1923 operatives
In Connecticut there were employed 932
| children under 16 out of 1926 operatives
Taking UP now the States of New York,
Pennsylvania and Illinois mentioned by
our contemporary we find these to be the
facts:
In New York there were employed s11
children under 16 out Of $3.50 operatives.
In Pennsylvania there were employed
| 1877 children under Is out of 17.011 opera
| tives.
In Illinois there were employed 80 chill
| dren under Is out of 4s0 operatives.
Now, as to- the extent to which the evil
| OF child labor Is increasing or diminish
| ing in the representative States of the
two important cotton manufacturing sec
| tions-the South and New England:
In South Carolina the number of chill
| dren under 16 employed in the cotton
| 1900.
In North Carolina the number increased
| from TAI in 1880 to 1929 in 1900
In Georgia the number increased from
| 1,411 in 1880 to $500 in 1900
| In Alabama the number increased from
| 433 in 1880 to 2.437 in 1900.
In all the Southern States the number
of children under 16 employed in the cot
| ton mills increased from 4,C9S out of a
total of 1874 operatives in 1880 to "a. 459
out of total of 1859 operatives in 1900.
In all the New England States the num-
| Der of children under 16 decreased from
| 7720 out of total of 1N.1S5 operatives in
1880 to 1104S out of total of 1894 OPP
| eratives in 1900.
1t Is not necessary for us to figure out
| the per centages. The difference between
| the two sections Is so great that it will
strike the sense on the most casual glance
| at these figures.
Yet the case as presented above is not
as strongly against the South as an
enumeration at this time would prove;
| for since the summer of 1900 the number
| of spindles and looms in the South has
| almost doubled-in South Carolina the
| increase Is shown to be over 100 per cent
while in New England the gain has been
| relatively small Hence, on the basis of
| the figures of 1900 this State is now en-
ploying over 5000 children under 16 years
and the Southern States, taken together,
| nearly $4,000.
Another consideration, and the most
vital one of the matter under discussion
| by the people of. this State and of the
| South. the employment of infant labor in
the cotton mills. Is this: The New Eng
land States have laws restricting and
| regulating the employment OF children
| in textile mills while the more important
cotton manufacturing States of the South
| have none. In Massachusetts, for exam
| pie. no child under IA can be employed
in a cotton mill. while in South Carolina
| North Carolina Georgia and Alabama
| the only present effort is to prohibit the
| work OF children under II years. 1t is the
| operation of such restrictive laws that
| has in the last twenty years so reduced
the number of children under 16 in the
| mills of New England; and it is evident
| thu. those under that age reported to be
employed are all over II years of age and
most of them over IA.
In making comparisons, therefore, be-
| tW cen New England and the South the
United States census figures do not show
the case as creditably for the former sec
| ton as they would do had an enumera-
ton been made of the number of child
workers under II. On that basis, the ba-
| sis of child labor as we commonly under
stand 1t in this section, the New England
ly a clean record: while in the South. if
observation counts for anything many
more children under II were employed
than between II and 16
1t Is both useless and absurd to pre-
| tend that New England is not in advance
of the South in this matter. Child labor
| laws exist in New England and are en-
| forced-or If they are not enforced the
men responsible for the dereliction are
| punished by the people, as in the very re-
| cent case of Rhode Island. where a Dem
ocrat was elected Governor, according
| to his own admission, because the Repub-
| lican Governor had not carried out faith
| fully the child labor regulations on the
| statute books. We are trying in this
| State in North Carolina, Georgia and
| Alabama. to protect our little children
by laws admittedly less stringent, less