New-York tribune., 1906-04-04
LABOR LAWS FOR WOMEN.

Two cases have Just been brought into the
| Court of Special Sessions of this county which
are likely to lead to further important definition
| of the right of the state with reference TO hours
of labor. Section - of the labor law fOrbids
the employment of women In factories between
| 0 o'clock at night and o'clock in the morning
| and limits their work TO sixty hours week.
Complaint was made against the employment all
night of women in boOkbinderies. and the de-
| fendant manufacturers demur on the ground
! that the law IS unconstitutional. Attorney Gen
eral Mayer will present on Friday Il brief on the
point which will probably go To the Court of
Appeals. 1t is TO be hoped that he will make
out the strongest possible case for the protection
OK the women workers of this state. at least
under the present constitution. from burden
dangerous TO society is at stake. After long
delay a constitutional amendment might over
come an adverse decision, as II has overcome the
decision that the ten hour law for public con-
tracts was unconstitutional; but meantime the
example and influence of New York would be
preiudicial 10 the relief OF women workers. con-
cernng whose condition President Roosevelt has
felt ii necessary to ask for national inveStiga-
ton.
The decisions in other states on this question
are conflicting. The Supreme Court of Illinois
in Ritchie VS.. the People declared uncOnstitu-
tional law limiting the hours of labor for
women and on this the manufacturers here
will lay great stress. On the other hand, in the
Commonwealth vs.. the Hamilton Manufacturing
Company the Massachusetts Supreme Court has
held as follows
A statute prohibiting the employment of all
persons under the age of eighteen, and of all
women laboring in any manufacturing estab-
lishment more than sixty hours per week, ViO-
| lates contract OF the commonwealth implied
in the granting of charter to a manufacturing
company. nor any right reserved under the con-
stitution to any individual citizen. and may be
maintained as a health and police regulation.
The United States Supreme Court has clearly
drawn the line with respect TO this class OF legsla
| ton. Ii has drawn 1t between socialism and san
itation. In Holden VS.. Hardy the court sustained
the Utah statute restricting the labor OF men
| in mines TO eight hours day a proper police
protection to workers In a dangerous occupation.
In its opinion on that case occurs the significant
sentence: I'm other states laws have been en-
"acted limiting the hours during which women.
land children shall be employed in factories
land while their constitutiOnalty, at least as
| applied 10 women has been doubted I'm some of
the states, they have generally been upheld"
Last April the court by vote Of TO set
strict limit upon the police power ire IOchner
VS.. New York. by declaring unconstitutional
the law fOrbidding a man to work more than ten
hours in Il bakery. It held that baking was
a private business, mot dangerous in any degree
ito morals, I'm any real substantial degree
ito the health OF the employees" The police
power could not be used a cover for merely
social and economic restrictions on the freedom
of the individual
Is restriction on the night work of women
| sOcialistic or sanitary? That is the question
really at issue, and we believe that even con-
servative opponents OF the general movement to
make the state a regulator of hours of labor will
feel that long hours of factory work, especially
at night. is substantial menace To the health
OF women. and consequently To the welfare OF
the community whole. The protection of
children is pretty we'll conceded 10 be a proper
exercise OF the police power. The protection of
women is the protection of the children of the
next generation II the great body of young
women in industry are morally and physically
| injured 10y AN excessive strain and made unfit
| for motherhood the state is endangered A