Southwest Washington labor press. [volume] (Hoquiam, Wash.) 19??-19??, 1925-01-23

nation urging them to join IN his
campaign that the amendment will
mot affect manufacturers appreciably,
kDNt that it aimed at children on the
Afms. The author of the letter is
too well informed not to know that
both child labor laws enacted by Con-
gress expressly excluded from their
operation farm labor because Il was
deemed not injurious to children, and
that there is no sentiment whatever
either in or out of Congress in favor
of a departure from the policy so
indicated and no purpose to place any
restraints upon the ordinary labor Of
children on farms or in the house
hold.
"Any attempt to prohibit such
wholesome labor by Congress under
the authority Of the amendment would
fall under the condemnation Of the
courts just as would a state Law Of
like character enacted under its pien-
AIRY power TO hmitf regulhte, or pros
hibit child labor. The reference Of
the writer Of the letter for the truth
may be accurately estimated from his
statement therein that Industrial
concern in the proposed amendment
and its effect upon factory labor,
as we may state, is minor character,
in that actual eehild labor" IN factor
les is practically nonresident" The
census Of 1920, as heretofore stated,
shows that there are 175,OO0 persons
between 10 and Is years employed in
factories.
Anyway, the National Association
of Manufacturers as such has no
special interest in children except to
make money out Of their labor. 1t
is not an eleemosynary institution.
It's purposes are not strictly human
itarian. It is no discredit to it to
say that it exists for the purpose Of
promoting the financial interests Of
its members. Its opposition to the
child labor amendment is sordidly
and sickeningly selfish. Doubtless
there are among its members many
high minded men, men with hearts
in bosoms who do not coin. cash out
Of the lives robbed of the joys aad
opportunities Of childhood, who know
no more about It's present hypocritical
pretenses about being concerned for
the sanctity of the American home
than they did about the employment
of MulhalI. The open appearance Of
this champion Of childhood, whose
President is q textile mill owner, in
the lists serve admirably to character
ize the campaign against the amend
ment. Having annual revenues Of
approximating $350,O0O year, it is
in situation to do quite lot to up
hold the sacred doctrine of states
rights and preserve the sancity Of the
home.
Preference has been made to the
activities Of the National Association
Of Manufacturers to enlist the sup
port Of farmers. In this effort it has
been aided by one David Clark Of
Charlotte. N. c., who instigated the
suits In which the federal child labor
acts were held unconstitutional. Mr..
Clark, the editor of the Southern Tex
tile Bulletin published at that city,
who reports that 'ever since the
amendment passed 1.-THE Congressl
we have been laying groundwork for
the situation that is now rapidly de-
veIoping." AS a part Of that ground
work he and those associated with him
had distributed fully $4,000 pieces
Of literature in rural sections'--"to
show the farmer"
AT every turn in the road the
sordid nature Of the organized OPP
position to the amendment is revolt
inely made manifest. Here and there
some conservative minds welded to
the past regardless Of the march Of
events and the revelation in industry
find themselves unable 70 accept the
amendment. but the driving force be-
hind the opposition is the desire 70
exploit the children Of the natien."