The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1910-04-28
WIN HERE-LosE At YANkT0N
Dakota Wesleyan Broke Even on the
Two Debates, Winning at Home,
Losing at Yankton.

! y wv ~ VI ~. dul, III tulS Guy. 1uS
subject for debate was practically the
same at both places, and was: 'Re-
solved, THAT the federal government
should enact a law forbidding the
carriers of interstate commerce to
transport or accept for transportation
the products of any factory or mine
in which children under IA years of
age are employed or allowed to wo1k.
This to apply to Interstate commerce
only. Constitutionality granted"
The debate in this city was won
but at Yankton the debaters were lot
SO fortunate. as they were defeated
by unanimous vote of the judges
at that place. Dakota Wesleyan's de-
baters had the negative side of the
question at both Debates. Lawrence
Todnem, Herbert Hardy and Willard
-. Kennedy. were at the Yankton de-
bate.
The local debate, held IN The city
hall, was we'll attended by the stu
dents and down town people. Presi-
dent S. f. kerfoot acted as the pre-
siding officer. Although Dakota Wes-
leyan showed an evident superiority
over her Minnesota opponent, the de-
bate was interesting from he first
constructive speech till tie conclus-
ion of the rebuttal.
The first speaker for the atfirma-
tive upheld by Hamliae was Ray Irle.
Mr.. lrle has a good stage presence
and impressed the audience with his
sincerity and mastery of the cues
l non 1S. 2rpl1mnnT u-o~ -1o,r~+DlL r~
the patriotic issue at stake in the
question of child Labor. The resolu-
ton was embodied in the bill offered
by Senator Beverage, of Indiana,
two ears ago and much of his speech
was devoted to the support of The
measure.
AS a reason for this falling
under the Jurisdiction of tie federal
government the argument was ad-
vanced that as yet the states have
taken but minor steps toward over
coming this most undesirable evil.
what state laws existed We're held to
be not enforced hence che necessity
for something stringent.
The next speaker Wallace Nidder
on the affirmative gave the testimony
OF a number of experts and physicians
to the effect of labor upon children
under the age of IA years.
The children of the south we're
described as they worked in 1hen num-
erous cotton mills, illustrative of the
pernicious effects Of such an indus
trial system. This same thing works
vast evils in lowering the moral in
fuences surrounding children. The
economic effect is also very disas-
trous, both in lowering wages in gen
eral and the standard OF
ship.
Harry Hanson, the last speaker on
the affirmative, directed his atten-
ton to the inefficiency of the existent
state laws. A number of the proyis-
ions Of the Beveridge bill We're lis
cussed in their bearing upon the
points at issue, especially the liabil-
lty OF manufacturers violating it's pro-
visions. The Beveridge bill was held
TO be broad enough to carry the var
lous KINDS OF manufacturing in which
children are commonly employed.
The debate for the negative was
opened by John S. Chap Aan. In en-
aiming the scope Of the question
this speaker emphasized it's deficien-
cies, especially for what it failed to
provide in the way of the physical
limitations, employment of crl pples
and consumptives, night hours for
laborlng' n proper ventilation end
sanitary conditions. The greatest
problem Of all, education for the
problem of all, education for the
young, is totally ignored in this oues-
ton. Mr.. Chapman e%nuphaticauy
maintained that if the government
was to prevent a child working, it
should at least compel him to 20 to
school. Dangerous sorts of labor
should be ~safeguarded and every pro-
vision made for the health of the
youthful laborer, as there are many
occupations which are not Inherently
harmful. The sum of the speakers
argument laid stress upon the total
lnadequacy of the remedy offered for
debate.
Walter Grill, the second speaker
on the negative agreed as to the ,,r-
gent need of some law ~ameliorati,g
the condition of laboring children.
However, the application of the de-
bated resolution laid stress upon the
transportation companies for the
avoidance of child labor. The re-
sponsibility did not rest upon the
only guilty party, the manufacturer.
put upon the carrier who TRANSPORTED
the goods. This was the crux of the
whole question, the fixing of the re-
sponsible party. Mr.. Grill's argument
showed the necessity for some law
which would effect the direct and not
the accessory parties.
The closing speaker on the nega-
tive was Bernie B. Dean. His
ment was forcefully presented and
drove home the points of indirect
ness, inefficiency, and needlessness of
such a law being enacted with the
states taking the stand that they
were shown to have. At the present
time 38 states have laws which in a
large measure are working out the
solution of the question and the mat
ter is being taken out Of the hands
of fine federal pOvornmon% rho