The Connecticut labor news., 1924-02-23

committee presided over by Senator Richard P. Ernst of Kentucky on the Woman's Party so-called equal rights blanket amendment to the United States Constitution, have given great encour- agement to the Labor forces opposing the proposed amendment.
 The Wo1nans Party had bee nnoti- fled to present witnesses for hearing on Feba 6, but declined to, giving as an excuse that it was the day of President Wilson's funeral That the refusal was one dictated by political expediency IS believed by many who have watched Woman's Party tactics.
 L Trade Union Women Appear L
 On the following day the trade union women, together with other delegations. appeared and apparently registered high with the Senatorial committee.
 1t is believed that there Is better than an even chance that the proposed amend ment will not get a favorable committee report.
 Miss Belle Sherwin, vice president of the National League of Women Voters, introduced the speakers at the hearing, having first read to the committee state rnents from Mrs. Harriet Haylor Upton vice chairman of the Republican Ma tional Committee, and Mrs. Emily New ell Blair, vice chairman of the Demo- cratic National Committee, both of whom declared that their contacts with women in every state in the Union re- vealed little support for the proposed amendment and much opposition.
 Miss Mary Van Kleeck, of New York, dire, tor of industrial Studies for the Russell Sage Foundation, pointed out that no constitutional obstacle now ex- ;sts to obtaining equal rights for men and women by means of congressional or state enactment. "As matter of fact" said Mi $ all kle" X, since .ornen were given the vote ly consti- tutional amendment ratified in 1920, they have secured in 28 States as many as 68 discriminations or granting new rights to women. There being no constitutional obstacle, why should we have constitu tional amendment for equal rights?
 Intinates Proposal Is Foolish
 Miss Nelle Swartz, chief of the Bureau of Women ill Industry of the New York Department of Labor, said :: "New York has laws enacted Ill the in terests of its million women who are gainfully employed, 80 per cent. of those being women of child-bearing age. To invalidate the laws affecting those women and to prevent the enactment of additional laws for which we are now working would be to throw those women upon tie open market to bargain for their labor under the pressure of their necessities, and witt. nc protection what ever. It seems to me that the National Womans Party, to secure few rights which could be obtained III another way, are like the man who to remove a swal- lows nest would burn down his barn. !"
 Miss Anna Merry, of Baltimore,
 Md, orgdniser for tue American
 Federation of Labor, stated tue posi-
 tion of the Federation IT obbosition
 to the proposed anendment and d.
 yected attention to the loss Of the
 nsinimuDr zUdge ta1U for aVomen Of
 he District of Colnmbia by c Snr
 breme Court decision as an example
 of the mbortanee to 1gorking a0onl-
 en of keeping the lazUS z0hich ina-
 brove their aOages aud aVorking con-
 ditions.L Immediately foAoaVing the
 ipValiddtion Of the la7e, Miss Neary
 pointed out, the zVage Stdndards in
 the District began 10 fall. L
 Plan Would Be Destructia,e
 Mis- Melinda Scott, of Newark, N J., organizer for the United Textile Work CTS, said: What if 1t would take longer to secure equal rights for women by dealing with discriminations separately. longer than to infict upon millions of working women the suffering that would be involved by the destruction of the laws which now give them decent hours and working conditions ?"
 Miss Agnes Nestor, of Chicago, Ill.,, chairman of the legislative committee of the National Women's Trade Union League, said: We have worked for many years to get our labor laws for women, an dwe have had muc Mitigation to establish them. We do not want to have to do all that over again. especially when all that this amendment purports to do can be done without mourning such consequences. This matter is the more serious because the 1egislatio nproposed is a federal constitutional amendment In the states where laws work harm they can be repealed, but we have never re- pealed a constitutional amendment"
 Mrs. Maude Swartz, of New York