Evening star., 1933-07-28
Letter on Child Labor
Brings Two Reioinders


In . letter TO- The Star July "a
Luther x. Long again takes another
crack" ct the new administration. II
I read his letter correctly the two
things which now stick In his "craw''
are repeal and codes. He starts Oh
by voicing his hearty approval Of Presi-
dent Roosevelt's radio address Monday
night, then proceeds to find fault With
It. He asks: Docs Mr.. Roosevelt sup
pose that the textile code will perma-
nently abolish child labor?" He also
asks: "Will the owners Of the Carolina
mills never agin overreach In their
desire for cheap labor?" As to his
flrst question, Whatever Mr.. Roosevelt
sition. But all fair-minded people are
satisfied that If this textile code helps
to spur the necessary number Of States
on to ratify the child labor amend
ment, then this code will not have
been born In vain. At least 1t is q
step forward and not backward.
As to his second question, that re-
mains to be seen, depending, of course,
on whether the American people make
another serious mistake Of trusting their
future and the welfare Of their country
in the hands of Republicans. To am
plify this mean that although the Re-
publican leaders say they abhor cheap
labor, they always have their fingers
crossed when they say 1t. As an ZAP
praiser" Of codes, Mr.. Long comes to
worth only what It Is worth" That
is also true Of q glass Of mix or shall
I say beer.
Maybe prohibition did come in on
wave Of war idealism, but be that as
1t may, 1t Is making q rapid exit ON
. tidal wave Of failure and unpopu-
lartty." He says taking the liquor con-
troll out Of the Federal Government and
turning 1t over to the States will not
settle 1t, but neither did taking It way
from the States and turning It over to
the Federal Government settle it. He
says much Of the dissatisfaction with
prohibition has been planted and cul-
tivated.
The repeal movement moves speedily
on. In Tennessee It Is reported Re-
publicans voted solid against repeal.
Probably they see q shortage of issues
and want to keep the old prohibition
foot ball" still in the game. There
drys to do, colonize In the Sahara
Desert. It is surely dry there at least
geographically" J. J. CRAWFORD.
TO the Editor Of The star:
In reading your editorial page We'd
needay I could not help but notice IN
article puhlished by you and signed BY
Luther K. Long. Why does Mr.. Long
try TO connect In his mind the child
LABOR ruling or agreement and the repeal
OF the eighteenth amendment The
two have absolutely no relationship
whatsoever. Mr.. Long doubts the work.
ability Of non-employment Of child
labor. Did not the cotton and other
manufacturers Of similar commodities
sign and agree to abide by this rule?
Is their word or bond worth nothing at
all? Non-employment Of child labor is
q wish Of President Roosevelt for the
best Of reasons, and In that respect his
wish can be very easily construed as q
command, particularly In these trying
times.
Comparing the liquor question and
the child labor regulation, no President
ever wished or commanded prohibition
on the country. President Woodrow
Wilson vetoed the bill and his veto was
overridden by q lot Of poorly advised
politicians. who were stricken with one
OF the worst diseases Of mankind, called
fear, being threatened by so-caIled dry
country and life savers. There was no
wave VI WAL lOcdiaSIu 6UOuL II.
Coming to Mr.. Longs nth paragraph
I want to state here and without the
slightest fear Of contradiction that
President Franklin D. Roosevelt was
neither ecstatic nor hysterical in as
suming the responsibility to try to help
crush the head Of one Of the most vile
serpents that ever crawled on Gods
green footstool, with the support Of the
Democratic party's resolution, 30 ably
written by Alfred e. Smith.
In Mr.. Longs sixth paragraph he has
had the presumption to ask our Presi-
dent II he "supposes" something. Mr..
Roosevelt does not suppose anything.
He knows whereof he speaks and acts
better than any other man who ever
occupied the presidential chair.
The child labor ruling need never be
ratified by the various States to make
it stick. Gould 1t not be enacted By
the viii Of the people?
The prohibition law never could be
enforced, because 1t was decidedly not
the viii Of the people and was not based
on common sense.
On the other hand, the child labor
ruling is based on common sense, which
Is the foundation Of all laws. rules and
regulations. JAMES M. COX.