New-York tribune., 1905-02-01
TRYING ITO JUMP THE LAW"
Fraudulent Age Certificates" for Children
Sold to Parents

There seems to be considerable misapprehension
among employers and parents of children regarding
the value Of afidavits of the age of children who
oeslre employment In factories and mercantile
adjustments. Particularly on the East Side the
Chhd LABOR Committee has found that unscrupulous
notaries selling so-called employment af1da-
Wits or certificates which prepared by these
iotaries ana which are supposed to he of value to
children who desire employment. 1t cannot be
stated too clearly that these affidavits abso-
lutely worthless either to the parent or 10 the en-
ployer. They comply with law and constitute
no excuse for the employment of any child under
sixteen years of age; it makes difference wheth-
er the affidavit is the effect that the child
sixteen years of age or not
A factory mercantile establishment which en-
ploys child actually under sixteen years of age
ooes so at its peril. unless the child produces an
employment certificate issued by the Board of
Health The Board of Health is required oy the
Child Labor law to ascertain the age of the child
py appropriate evidence furnished ii and to make
an examination Of the child itself as TO its health
The board will not issue this employment certificate
until IT has had filed with it also the school record
of the child. showing that the child has had a GER
tain definite amount of fundamental education. The
constant effort Of employers and greedy parents Ito
jump the law by using affidavits either of the
parent of the child cannot succeed under the
present law If child is sixteen years of age
the employer needs affidavit because the Child
Labor law applies only to children under that
II child is actually under sixteen years OF age.
suCn afndaVlt is substitute for the Child LABOR
law certificate issued by the Board of Health.
1T has been definitely settled in a long line OF
cases that employer who employs a child under
sixteen years of age gain protection by any
claim that he acted in good faith and by relying
false affidavit" said George W. Alger counsel Of
| the Child Labor Committee, yesterday. The Court
| of Appeals in New-York and other States
| throughout the country have decided repeatedly.
| for example, that in prosecutions against liquor
dealers for selling liquor minors it is no defence
hat he 1aaIar I-7ou ~ hp
| lieve that the child to whom the liquor was sold
was under age. The defence that the employer re-
lied on a false affidavit of age and employed in
good faith was set by the Chelsea Jute Mills in
brought against 1t by the city for employing
children in violation of the compulsory education
| law. This is a good sample of what some
employers are willing to do to try and beat
| the Child Labor law. The jute mills produced on
! trial affidavit, with enormous red seal at
tached. sworn to by a parent. that an undersized,
undeveloped Italian girl. actually eleven years OF
age. was over sixteen The Chelsea Jute Mills was
fined Notwithstanding the affidavit The Judge who
tried the case said IN his opinion. that the Child
tween fourteen and sixteen six years Of age If a Ger
| filed in the office OF the employer. The affidavit
in question would not even answer the requirement
Our committee stands ready to prosecute the
unscruRu!6us n0taTies VINO prepare these af1daylIs
parents charging extortionate and illegal fees for
lcity cannot be given to the opinion Of the Ator-
ney General the precise matter of these afida-
in the opinion. says in response to question by
| the Commissioner of Labor, where children are
employed under sixteen years Of age without a
certificate Of the Board of Health the employer is
liable under this act, and his liability exists ire
spectiye of his intent or his belief that he was
right in what he did.
THE employment of children under sixteen years
of age without the legal employment certificate is
offence against the Penal Code, punishable for
the first offence by a fine of not less than $40 or
more than 800 and for second offence by less
than $50 more than $500 and for third offence
by not less than $3.50. with alternatives of i'm
prisonment. When child seeks employment whose
appearance is such that the employer has doubt
to its being old enough to be entitled to work.
the safest thing for him do is require the pro-
duction of employment certificate from the
Board of Health before giving the child employ
rnent: for 1t is definitely settled beyond Ques-
ton that these irregular affidavits Of age which
nullifed the Child Labor law years ago. as found
by the old Reinhard committee, of no
value whatever as a means Of avoiding the Child
Labor law.
so far as the notaries are concerned. the Penal
Code provides that public officer who asks
ceVes a fee IN excess of the fee allowed by the
statute commits extorton and is guilty Of misde-
meanor The fee which notarles have for
taking an affidavit is II cents and for an ac-
acknowledgement % cents. great many of these
notaries who charge from 81 TO s. for taking these
false affdavits within the Penal Code. They
are further liable 10 removal from office"