The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1922-06-03
COURTS WEAK APOIOGY::a'

the Child Labor case reveals the
fact that the court failed to make a
single reference to that provision
of the federal constitution which
empowers congress to provide for
the general welfare" of the United
States, by authority of which every
bit OF national social legislation We
have has been enacted.
The court emphasizes the Tenth
amendment to the constitution and
appeared alarmed lest the rights of
the states be violated by recogniz-
ing the right of congress to tax the
products of child labor shipped in
interstate commerce. That amend
nlent, it will be remembered, re-
serves to the states powers not dele
gated to the United" States by the
constitution, nor prohibited by it to
the statc2
There would have been Just as
good logic in UNFOLDING the Child
Labor law under the general well
fare provision of the constitution
a. there was in Hoiding that law. un-
der the Tenth amendment.
If the courts conclusions were
given nj; lute study and wide circu-
lation by the workers, other propa-
"ganda would hardly be necessary to
/ Indicate the courts disregard for
Fhuman welfare as against profits.
The court found fault with con-
sress for penalizing, rather than
taxing, >employers Of child labor,
though acknowledgements is made
that it lis sometimes difficult to de-
fine the difference" Objection is
also made to what appears to be the
clear intention of congress to tax
hid labor products out of exist
! encc.
Cautious reference is made to
several decisions which are in direct
opposition to the courts present
reasoning.
The state bank law, which levies
10 per cent tax on these banks,
was upheld by the supreme court.
congress. the court ruled, can tax
.hese banks out of existence to Sc
cure "a sound and uniform cur
rency,"-
Chief Justice Taft approves this
decision, but outlaws a child labor
!c:w that can be defended under the
general welfare" clause of the con-
stitution to provide for sound man
hood and womanhood.
In the yellow oleomargarine tax
he supreme court upheld congress
when it raised the tax from cents
pound to 10 cents pound. - The
purpose Of the cleo tax is as clear
Is the child labor tax of 10 per
cent of the employers profits when
children under IA are employed.
If child labor comes under the
states rights clause of the consti-
luton, who will say that this does
not also apply to the manufacture
Of Oleomarsarine?
TO layman it would appear
strange that if congress can tax a
state product known as oleo out of
existence, why the state, rights doe
!rine should be applied to the child
labor law. This thin ice is passed
- ,yer rapidly by the supreme court,
which almost flippantly claims that
neither the state bank nor the oleo
AK showed on their face "the de-
JAILED specifications of regulation
Vi q state commerce.
The court, unfortunately, failed to
state that the enforcement of a state
bank tax and an oleo tax does not
:all for ''the detailed specifications
that are necessary to circumvent
.xploiters of child labor.
These detailed specifications" SO
Objectionable TO the court, are found
n the narcotic drug act, which is a
/ marvel Of red tape. In upholdine
Z his lew the supreme court declared
hat even if the purpose of the act
lz vas other than taxation, and did not
pa, show. on the face of the act, the law
u legal.
Or, in other words, if congress
wants to tax an evil out of existence
without saying so, it has the ap
-~,roval of the court.
" In the child labor act the supreme
:ourt expounds at length on the
workings of the act. 1t seems to sud
h lenly discover that congress wanted
10 penslize child labor. The cour
,g$ hen thunders: ..,
&"In tho light of these features q
the act, IL court must be blind no
.E.z..o sec that the so-callcd tax is i'm
q nOssd TO stop tho employment %
Ii .5g D. II. q 4. ....;;>