The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-01-13

large, uneSIended margins of moral visor with ~lich to assume the hu- mane responsibilities of the States? Does the personnel of Congress show. from session to session, an increasing | moral height? Does it reveal an in creasing moral capacity to respond to the new tasks and responsibilities
 which our new Federalistic tendencies
 are bringing to 1t? I would make no sweeping accusations. In both the Senate and the House we all know men who are worthy of the nations conf dence and applause. But, take the delegations in the Senate and the House. one by one, and compare the men of today with those of fifteen and
 twenty years aga TsompaIs NsW fogK now | with New York, New Jersey and Mas sachusetts then. Is 1t obvious that the Congress is becoming so increasingly re- sponsive to the moral interests of the people that this is the time to take our form and make them. primarily, Feder-
 al questions rather than State ques- tions?
 Double System Unwfse.
 Should they then be both? Is It
 feasible to make our local questions in- to Federal questions and yet retain the vigor and efficiency of local interest? Fortunately or unfortunately our pup l lic life Is presenting so many moral is- sues that 1t would seem wise to con- tinue that division of labor which the constitution, apart from recent clever interpretations. has provided; mere are enough reform issues Tor con gress, there are enough for the States. without those Implications and con fusions of administration which so often arise when two powers attempt the
 same ends within the same territory. This, moreover, Is the verdict Of our
 practical experience. Questions of nor
 al or humane reform do not usually
 hold their popular vitality both as State
 questions and Federal questions. They
 have tendency to become the one or
 the other. It is natural that 1t should
 he so, The social cinscience does not
 work without regard to those econo-
 mics of effort which govern the em-
 ciency of other forces round us. This
 conscience is not likely to make sus-
 tained and efficient effort to build up in
 all their complexity, two separate ana
 overlapping systems of child lapor ieg- islation-~with age limits, limitations or
 the hours of labor, regulation or night
 work, educational tests, compulsory at
 tendance laws, and systems of inspec-
 tfon and enforcement Human nature
 does not work that way. TO
 some observers the Federal sys- tenn will seem to offer certain tempor-
 ary advantages but these advantages seem to me to be more than onset py
 the more solid advantages which TOT
 low . to the nation and 10 tne
 children through the closer more
 thorough processes Of puonc
 education involved in the enact
 ment of local laws.
 "But are there really two ways 10 do this thing? Is any such system Of pro tection possible under the Federal au- thortty? What does the Beveridge oii offer us after all7 A bare age-limit Tor children under If years. Very sooo as far as 1t goes-but that isn't very far to go. For every tyro m the stuoy of such legislation knows that a mere age-limit unsupported by any other pro visions is but an almost futile begin ming. has already been suggested, is we'll
 balanced sssytem of protection beveled at other evils beside the one evil or immaturity. What about the duestlon of elementary schooling? What about the question of adequate inspection or law enforcement? Unless there be some method of enforcement the stand ard of the better mills is at the mercy of the worst mills. What about the hours of labor? It is more cruel to work a child of 14 for fourteen or six teen hours A udy Lhdh tO WI n ~ Ss"No inst under 14' for ten hours. What about night work? It is far more cruel to work a child of 14 or 15 all night in A mill, than to work a child just under 14' all day. Yet the Beveridge bill applies solely to children under IA with no reference to night work, to the hours of labor, or to law enforcement.
 Double System Impossible.
 why these glaring deficiencies? Is IA Ioaonaa onv affarnDf tO touch the question of the periods or the hours Of labor Is confessedly unconstitutional? -confessedly and forever beyond the scope of the Federal power? Undoubt- edIy 1t is. And what does this involve but the further confession that just because the Federal authority cannot touch the questions of compulsory ed ucation and the hours of labor, 1t can never. in the very nature of the case, establish a well rounded, comprehen- sive system of child labor legislation. The adeauate protection of our children in industry is not matter Of an iso- lated solitary law about an age limit. Child protection Is not a law but system, a system of laws mutually sup porting and re-enforcing one another. Such a system the Federal Government under our present National Constitu- tion can never supply. Such system is possible only under the slower but freer processes of local State legisla- tion. At infinite cost of thought and labor it is being gradually brought tn- to existence Much remains to be done, chiefly in the South, but also in the North. But 1t is confessedly both prac- tIcabIe and possible to do it. We are now asked, however, to follow the at- tempt of the impossible, to seek one isolated feature of such system at the hands of the Federal power, turning much of our energy from those local methods. which hold every promise of a comprehensive system, into wholly new channels, in order to secure a law which is in itself of doubtful con and which, under the plain mandate of the constitution, can never be surrounded and re-enforced by any adequate general system of pro- tection. We are being asked to follow down a blind alley.
 Uniformity ImpractlcabIe.
 But" 1t Is argued, this is an effort for uniformity. Granting for the mo- ment, that other phases of protection could be added, no real uniformity can be secured by the external process of a uniform law. Conditions are them selves against it. The whole environ- ment of labor and of life. the factors of personal and social habit. climate. fuel. clothing. food. etc, are so differ ent in an old manufacturing State from those which obtain in the new manu- featuring States that no mere unform- But it is obvious that the Federal authority can provide no gen eral system of protection, no effective group of laws. mutually re-enforcing one another. in the care of the child worker. A mere age limit, therefore,