The Holly chieftain., 1922-01-12

tutional amendment upon welfare legislation al
ready secured through action of state legislatures.
The amendment is indorsed among others by
George Gordon Battle of New York, Shippen Lew
Is of Philadelphia, secretary Of the legal educa-
ton committee of the American Bar association |;
Charles w. Needham, solicitor for the interstate
commerce commission and former president Of
George Washington university. Robert Il. Scott,
former assistant TO the attorney general Frank
l. walsh, Matthew Hale, and Miss Gall Laughlin.
Frank p Walsh, former chairman Of the Indus
trial Relations commission, appointed by former
president Wilson, and former Joint chairman with
Chief Justice Taft Of the National War Labor
board, gives 1t as his unqualified opinion that
the passage of the amendment will "in no way
AFFECT welfare legislation for women. either that
which is upon the statute books at the present
time. or which may be enacted in future" He
warns that there is no anticipating the action Of
court in the face of many differing opinions COW
erng points which appear quite obvious. He, how
ever, shows that long line of judicial precedents
have protected the validity of and constitutiOna-
ty of womens welfare legislation Mr. Walsh con
cludes
i can see no way of apprOxmating justice, as
affecting the sexes. except by the passage OF such
an amendment MS your organization has proposed.
Indeed without such IN amendment In my opin-
ion, the late amendment guaranteeing women the
right of suffrage would become a mere abstrac-
tion.'
Mr. Walsh admits" says Mrs. Edward p. Co.'S
tigan Of Chicago, vice president Of the National
Consumers league, that the problems in their
final settlement will have to go before n court
the result of whose decision is clearly in doubt
1t would he terrible to deprive poor working wom-
en- of safeguards that have been attained by and
for them with long struggles, and in return give
them privileges they can never use. The thing
to do is to push the specified changes In the
state legislatures"
In support of this view Prof Felix Frankfurter
of Harvard Law school, counsel for the Minimum
Wage board of the District Of Columbia says in
part:
The various measures dealing with women in
industry-limitation Of hours of employment, pro-
hibiton or regulation OF night work, regulation Of
employment OF women before and after cOnfine.
ments, minimum wage legislation-haye all been
sustained by the courts upon physical, social and
economic factors peculiar to women. All such
legislation necessarily circumscribes the freedom
of action of the individual affected For instance
wherever legislation limits the periods when a
woman may work before after confinement
she may not work within the prohibited periods
even II she wants to.
For reasons of policy, societys welfare Is
deemed more important than the desire of the
rare individual who would insist on working un
der such circumstances. In other words she is
under disability on account of sex, which does
not hamper man engaged In similar employment; ;
she cannot contract freely; the man can. In the
same way, minimum wage legislation and the
other types of law which have enumerated are
in one aspect disabilities and treated as such by
the courts. At the very best the proposed amend.
ment writes into the Constitution OF the United
States a dangerous lawsuit, jeopardizlng the ef-
forts Of the nation and the states to deal Justly
with Its women workers. Undoubtedly 1t will
largely retard, If not render impossible, every
effort Of legislation protective of women work.
ers, for all such efforts will encounter the oppos.
ton OF alleged unconstitutiOnality"