Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1922-06-06
Rock Hin. May 2!

p j. u, =.
tlolrAIn the Charlotte observeroof Nay
-. II 4 noticed .an article entitled Court
20, Decision ePleases South" with sub
head, "Child Labor Ruling Getting
ria iatBack to Democracy" which set forth
2Sf - the views of Winston D., Adams re-
garding the child labor law recently
declared unc Institutional by the Unit
ed States supreme court, and which
~ ~ were as follows:
a. This decision is gratifying since
business men and broad-visoned
economists generally for years h' ''e
viewed with increasing concern lie
~ growing tendency toward governm; 1t
regulation in industry through as
~ sumption by congress of powers not
80, /, specifically delegated, to IT by the
constitution, and this decision by the
bns gtihanimous vote of the highest tribunal
in the land will go q long way toward
t reasslirngN the business interests of
the country. Had this decision been
~ ~ other than as it was, then the next
step doubtless would have been
national eS-hour work weeks then pos-
81 tsiblysa 44-hour work week, and there
.s ~. after, almost anything that might
- have been proposed. The decision
carries the country back to that basis
49, of safe and sane conservatism that is
really the backbone and support Of
the constitution ,f..,,,s,l
1t is no. secret that the southern
NyTtextile manufacturers are opposed TO
the child labor law, and since Mr..
Adams is secretary and treasurer Of
istfie American Cotton Manufacturers
association that they, with himself,
should consider this decision of the
court sas 'most fortunate and crafty
.,..,,,.rs ing
but we cannot but take exception
X tt tthis presumption of Mr.. Adams in
declaring the sentiments of himself
and his associates as representing
those of the entire south. For how
ever much it should be to the con-
trary so long as the textile manu-
fastufers are antagonistic to- or dis
"a : regard the welfare of their employees,
Il / GAthat which is gratifying to them is not
always for the interest of bettermsrt
of their co-partners in industry, the
workers
Does Mr.. Adams contend that the
working of our children Culture citi-
zens of America) during a tender age
isss,; in the textile mills, depriving them of
,5i4d % the God given gifts that alone make
arc7sy hfe worth living; liberty. sunlight,
lav fresh air. education and recreation,
HsYaz are for our best interests or theirs?
z Would he deprive his own children of
-ar. dbose benefits? -
'The child labor law is against the
true principles of democracy" says
Mr.. Adams, who, like the most of his
ilk, is steeped in hypocrisy and rants
4 Of patriotism" and democracy" 10
a. cover it. Which to sensible people is
~ las the sounding of brass and clash
ingNof cymbals." The fathers of those
children we would wrong fought for
= democracy. Is this the reward they
receive that through low wages and
lack of protection from the law they
& fought to uphold, their children shall
= he forced by such men as Mr.. Adams
., into an, existence better if not,
worse than slavery? >~lT
1t seems that the textile manufac-
turers also feared that the ppholding,
of the child labor law by the supreme
q court would ,have ,beens followed by n
national 4S-hOur work week. Since
4 this might curtail some of their ex-
3 cess profits. Mr.. Adams and his asso-
ciates look. upon the probability Of
'''~ ~sueh lay with apprehension, de
claring it No be detrimental to the
nDJM~TI