Evening star., 1924-04-25

child-labor regulations in one state
give an industrial advantage over
and perfect regulatory statutes" AS
quoted by Representative Graham,
Mr. Rackemann testified in the hear
ings as follows:
This is theoretically true, as /
happen to know, being president of
New England cotton mill, that if
all child labor, so called, were per-
manently abolished in other states
the TACT of such step would hardly be
appreciable to the New England
mills" o.
1t is found that many of the New
England cotton manufacturers who have
mills In New England also own stiH
more extensive interests in the cotton
belt Mr.. Rackemann may not be of
that number, but it does not so specify
IN the records. The opposition to fed
eral limitation on child labor does not
quote any mothers nor any leaders OF
union labor, nor any woman's welfare
organizations. The recomm endation is
urged, however, that since the Depart
fnent or Labor has children'S welfare
bureau, which reports that eighteen
states have risen to high degree Of
regulation, the bureau might go on with
ITS excellent work of influencing the
other thirty states to rise to the same
standard-a standard which seems Su-
pererogation to the opposition. The
fact that a large number Of woman's
organizations are the proponents of this
measure is not a sufficient argument"
says Representative Graham.
+ 4 X
The first effort to secure child labor
federal regulation came in 1906 when
Senator Beveridge introduced bill ito
prevent the employment of children in
factories and mines, and Senator Lodge
proposed to prohibit the employment
of children in the manufacture of ar
ticles intended for interstate commerce.
Both laws were found unconstitutional
by the Supreme Court. In 1919 Con-
cent on the net profits of establish
ments which employed children, and
this law was in operation from April
%, 1919, to May 10, 1922, when it, too,
was declared unconstitutional.
These laws. which were declared
unconstitutional, did not prohibit or
regulate the employment of children,
but simply established minimum
standards and imposed a tax on child
labor. The fact that all congressional
action has been ruled as unconStitu-
tional leads to the only step now
open, which is to ask that not less
than three quarters of the states so
broaden the Constitution as to give
Congress the power now prohibited by
it's limitations. Some of the states
which are the strongest adherentS OF
state rights already have legisla-
ton even Of a higher standard than
Congress would enact If given the
power. But other states have no
such protection for their children,
and. arguments to the contrary not
withstanding, it is urged that no
industry in any state can meet COM
petition unless put upon the same
basis Of cost of production as its
competitors The products of all
factories enter into interstate COM
merce and know no state lines in
trade. In thirty-fve states children
are permitted to go 10 work without
any schooling. Is it any wonder that
our percentage of illiteracy is % per
cent. and ranks almost the worst
amongst civilized nations?
The head of the children's bureau,
Miss Abbott, testified:
"A number of the nations Of Eu-
rope have ratified the child labor
conventions which established a
fourteen-year minimum age stand
ard The United States has elected
not TO go into these agreements.
Is our Union so loose that
the matter Of what happens TO the
children Of one Eart Of the country
is not of concern to the rest of the
country l think we are concerned
with children everywhere. We have
poured out millions for children in
other countries the world around, and
il is time that we considered the well
fare of our children at home.
l am sorry to say that in many of
the states they do not have better
opportunities than in any other coun-
try. Our death rate amongst babies
is about twice what it is in New
Zealand. There are four countries,
that have a lower death rate among
babies than we have. There are eigh-
teen countries that have lower ma
ternal mortality rate than We have"
Copyright. 1924, by Paul V. Collins)