The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1921-10-13
TOPEKA STATE JOURNAL
Information Bureau
FREDERIC j. HASKIN, Director.
Washington, D. G.
THE CHnD LABOR TAX.

the question of how old a child is. I'M
der the child labor section of the in
! ternal revenue act, which is now in
farce and is said by officials of the
bureau OF internal revenue to be prac-
tically abolishing the employment of
children under IA years of age in the
industries to which it applies. The
validity of the law is yet to be decid-
| ed by a decision of the supreme court
which will probably be made some
time this fall.N
The law provides that a tax of 10
per cent may be collected on the net
profits of an employer 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 take every posi-
! Bile precaution to avoid employing
| such children.
In thirty-seven of the states the
| state laws against child labor require
! the child to have certificate showing
! his age, and this is accepted by the
| federal inspectors. In other states the
! federal inspector must ascertain the
! ch1lds age by what means he can.
/ Where vital statistics are properly
| Rept, i is easy. In other cases bap-
/ tismal records are available, but some
| times the parents or employees of the
\ children are put to ingenious devices
/ to prove a child's age.
In one case in Georgia no written
evidence could be found to prove the
| age Of boy, who, his mother claimed
was 10 years old. She took the in
/ spector to her home, called forth her
! family and stood it in a row. There
Were fourteen children, the youngest a
( babe in arms.
Count 'em yourself, lady" she in
vited. There's your evidence"
Tombstone Proof
The tombstone of a dead twin
proved the date of birth of a boy who
was trying to prove himself IA years
old One family was found which had
| prepared a tombstone and set it 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. Deco
rated mugs presented to children and
inscribed with the dates of their births
have sometimes been offered in evil
! dence, and many families have been
| found which had framed records of all
| the family births hanging on the wall.
| One father had dispensed with the
frame and merely written the record
| on the wall paper. The family record
kept in a Bible is of course the COM
monest form, and many persons seem
| to have thought that any record writ
| ten in a Bible would be accepted. One
| inspector was surprised to be con-
fronted 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 mani
! festation, 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 in
dustry. Children from 10 to II years
of age were employed in a number of
/ Ind nd
of them were undoubtedly stunted and
killed. A great deal of publicity was
given the subject. Newspaper edi-
| torials, magazine articles and cartoons
aroused the public to the abuse. AS
| a result many state laws were passed
| prohibiting or restricting child labor
and a great ma jority 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 Few
states where the interests employing
child labor were strong enough to IN
fluence the legislatures.
! To those who were working for the
abolition of child labor, a federal law
prohibiting it in the whole country
| seemed the only means. They were
| opposed by the believers in state
| rights who see a threat of the COM
| pIete destruction of local autonomy in
| the rapid spread of federal authority
| which recent years has witnessed.
These persons declared that the
| United States is rapidly 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 finally obtained the passage of
federal law against it. Immediately
the employers of child labor brought
| suit on the ground that it was uncon-
stitutional. Thus the ancient farce
| was repeated by which law is passed
and put into effect before the supreme
court has decided whether it is a law
or not Most of the manufacturers
| gambled that it was not a law and
| brazenly broke it as far as they cared
to do so. Nevertheless the taxpayer
money was spent to put in action an
elaborate machinery for it's enforce
ment, which was entrusted to the de-
| partment of labor. In 1913 the su
preme court fulfilled the hopes of the
employers of child labor by declaring
the act unconstitutional.
The New Law.
Immediately the agitation, was re-
! neWed, and in the revenue bill of 1918
was inserted the provision by which a
prohibttory tax is levied on employers
of child labor. This accomplished ex-
actIy the same thing that the child Ia
Dor law was intended to accomplish
and it stands on the constitutional
ground right of the federal govern
ment to levy taxes. Even as there are
other ways to kill a cat than choking
it with butter, so there are more ways
of getting around the dear old Con-
stitution than the founding fathers
ever 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
accomplished. But there seems to be
little doubt that the tax law has abol-
ished child labor in many industries.
Now it remains to be seen once
more whether it is really a law or not
The customary suit has been filed at
| lacking the constitutionality of the