Perth Amboy evening news., 1921-09-19
THE B TAX
BY Frederic j. Haskin.

WASHINGTON. Sept. 19.-Thousands of dol
lars may be involved in the question of how
old a child is, under the Child Labor section OF
the Internal Revenue act, which is now in force
and is said by officials of the Bureau of Internal
Revenue to be practically abolishing the employ
ment Of children under fourteen years of age in
the industries to which it applies. The validity
of the law is yet to be decided by a decision of
the supreme court which will probably be made
some time this fall.
The law provides that a tax of 10 per cent.
may be collected on the net profits of an en-
.ployer who employs children below a certain age.
No employer can afford to pay such a tax. The
law is said to work like a charm. Employers
can take every possible precaution to avoid en-
ploying such children.
In thirty-seven states the state laws against
child labor require the child to have a certif-
cate showing his age, and this is accepted by the
Federal inspectors. In other states the federal
inspector must ascertain the child's age by what
means he can. Where vital statistics are prop
erly kept, it is easy. In other cases baptismal
records are available, but sometimes the par
ents or employers of the children are put to in
genious devices to prove a child's age.
In one case in Georgia no written evidence can
be found to prove the age of a boy, who, his
mother claimed, was fourteen years old. She
took the inspector to her home, called forth her
family and stood it in a row. There were four
teen children, the youngest a babe in arms.
Count 'em yourself, lady," she invited.
There's you evidence"
Tombstone Proof.
The tombstone of a dead twin proved the date
of birth of a boy who was trying to prove him
self fourteen years old. One family was found
which had prepared a tombstone and set 1t in
the cemetery for their daughter when she was
born. The date of her birth was carved on the
stone, and a space left for recording her death.
Decorated mugs presented to children and in
scribed with the dates of their births have some
times been offered in evidence, and many fam
lilies have been found which had framed rec
ords of all the family births hanging on the
wall. One father had dispensed with the frame
merely written the record on the wall paper.
The family record kept in a Bible Is of course
the commonest form, and many persons seem
to have thought that any record written in a
Bible would be accepted. One inspected was
to be confronted by a long file of
women and children bearing conspicuously new
Bibles.
The effort to abolish child labor, of which this
tax law is the latest manifestation, is a good
example of how we legislate in this country.
Ten or fifteen years ago child labor was one of
the crying abuses of American industry. Chill
dren from ten to fourteen years of age were
in a number of industries and for long
u MAIL VI { WeIt
and killed. A great deal of publicity was given
the subject. Newspaper editorials, magazine
articles and cartoons aroused the public to the
abuse. AS a result many state were passed pro-
hibiting or restricting child labor, and a great
majority of the states now have such laws.
Many of those that have not are agricultural
states in which there is little or no factory labor
of any kind. The serious abuse has for some
years been confined to a few states where the
interests employing child labor were strong
enough to influence the legislatures.
To those who were working for the abolition
of child labor, a federal law prohibiting III IN
the whole country seemed the only means. They
were opposed by the believers in states rights.
who see a threat of the complete destruction or
local autonomy in the rapid spread of federal
which recent years has witnessed.
These persons declared that the United States is
fast becoming a huge paternalistic bureaucracy:
The other side stands largely on the merits OF
the law they are advocating. The same battle
has been waged in the same words a score OF
times.
At any rate, the opponents of child labor fl
nally obtained the passage of federal law against
it. Immediately the employers of child labor
brought suit on the ground that 1t was uncon-
stitutiona1. Thus the ancient farce was repeated
by which a law is passed and put into erect be.
fore the supreme court has decided whether it
is a law or not. Most of the manufacturers
gambled that it was not a law and prazenly
broke it as far as they cared to do so. Never
action an elaborate machinery for IT'S ENFORCE.
ment, which was entrusted to the Department
of Labor. In 1918 the supreme court fulfilled the
hopes of the employers of child labor by declar-
ing the act unconstitutional.
The New Law.
Immediately the agitation was renewed, and
in the revenue bill of 1918 was inserted the pro-
vision by which a prohibitory tax is levied on
employers of child labor. This accomplished
exactly the same thing that the child labor law
was intended to accomplish. and 1t stands on
the constitutional ground right OF the 1eoeral
to levy taxes. Even as there are
others ways to kill a cat than choking 1t with
butter, so there are more ways of getting around
the dear old constitution than the founding
fathers even dreamed of. -,
Now this tax law is being enforced and with
good effect, it is claimed. The census figures on
child labor for 1920 are not out yet, and only
they will prove just how much has been &C
But there seems to be little dount
that the tax law has abolished child labor In
many industries.
Now IL remains to be seen once more whether
II Is really a law or not. The customary suit has
been filed attacking the constitutionality OF tne
preme court docket. 1t will in all probability De
heard and decided this fall.
The lawyers will have a fine time. Those on
behalf of the law will point out that the federai