Imágenes de páginas

Leafie Long, aged 13 in June, has worked one year; earns 50 cents a day. Has three older sisters and one brother who earn, respectively, $1, 90 cents, $1, and 70 cents. There are three younger children. Father, C. W. Long, does not work. Rent, 50 cents a week.

Ardrey Straught, aged 14 in July, has worked two years; earns 75 cents a day. Has two older sisters, one of whom works, and one older brother. There is one younger child. Father, P. T. Straught, is unable to work. Rent, 50 cents a week.

Gus Keener, aged 14 in December, has worked two years; earns 75 cents a day. Youngest of seven children; others earning, respectively, $1.30, $1.30, 92 cents, 78 cents, and 80 cents. Claude, aged 20, is in school. Mother, Mrs. Emma Keener. Rent, 90 cents a week.

Purvie McQueen, aged 12 in May, has worked two years; earns 60 cents a day. Has two older sisters, who earn, respectively, $1.25 and 78 cents a day. There are four younger children. Mother, Mrs. J. M. McQueen. Rent, 60 cents a week.

Hall Fisher, aged 13 in February, has worked two years; earns 80 cents a day. Has three older sisters, two of whom work, and there are three younger children. Father, D. P. Fisher, earns $1.69 a day. Rent six-room house at 75 cents a week.

Egbert Cloninger, aged 14. earns 60 cents a day. Has three older sisters who work. There are three younger children. Father, S. W. Cloninger, has done the housework since the death of the mother seven years ago.

NOTE.—The natural situation of this village is excellent. Most of the homes are grouped on the hillside, where the air and drainage are above reproach. This is evidenced by general good health. I remarked especially the good color of the faces, a most unusual occurrence among cotton-mill families. The school facilities are good, the houses are in good repair, and the mill authorities appear to have an active interest in the welfare of the people. They employ child labor, however, and are strongly opposed to any improved legislation with regard to labor conditions.


Irvin Wilson, aged 14 in July, has worked two years; earns 75 cents a day as doffer. Roy Wilson, aged 12 in August, has worked six months; earns 50 cents a day. Father, Robert Wilson, is blacksmith. Older sister, Ethel Wilson, earns $1.25 a day. There is one younger child. Have two boarders, who pay $3.50 a week each.

Noie Curlee, aged 14 in May, has worked two years; earns 75 cents a day; completed third grade. Esther Curlee, aged 13 in A ugust, has worked one year, with exception of two months in school, third grade; earns 45 cents a day. Father, Ben Curlee, sweeps in mill, earning $1 a day. There are five younger children. Rent, $1 a week; insurance, 65 cents a week.

Edna Sells, aged 13, has worked two years; earns $1 a day. Finished second grade, Has two older sisters, who earn $1 a day each. Father, Frank Sells, works in railroad shops, earning $2.75 a day. There are four younger children.

Daisy Kincaid, aged 12, at work. Father, George Kincaid. Mother refused further information.

Bertha Deaton, aged 13, has worked four months; earns 90 cents a day. Completed fifth grade (in sixth). Has two older brothers and one sister who work, the two former earning, respectively, $1.40 a night and 75 cents a day; There are four younger children. Father, J. H. Deaton, clerks, earning $1 a day. Rent, $5 a month.

Vanhoy Kepler, aged 13 in November, has worked one month; earns 50 cents a day. Older sister a cripple; older brother earns 75 cents a day. Father, John Kepler, works in engine room.

Ruth Taylor, aged 13 in March, has worked one year. There are four younger children. Take two boarders, $3 a week. Father, John Taylor, does hauling for company.

Claudie Blackwell, aged 13 in July, has worked one year; earns 75 cents a day, Completed fifth grade. Has two older brothers, who earn, respectively, $1 and 75 cents a day. There is one younger child. Father, A. P. Blackwell, earns $1.35 a day. Rent, $1 a week. Insurance, $1.15 a week.

Elsie Brown, aged 13, has worked two years; earns 75 cents a day. There are four younger children. Father, Charles Brown. earns $1.35 a day. One boarder, $3 a week.

Nora Stokley, aged 13 in August, has worked one year; earns 60 cents a day. Completed first grade (in second). Two older brothers, each earn $1.90 a night. Father, C. A. Stokley, earns $1.25 a day. One younger child. Rent, 75 cents a week. Insurance. 90 cents a week.

Carrie Torrence, aged 13 in July, has worked one month; earns 30 cents a day. Completed sixth grade (in seventh). Older sister earns 30 cents a day. Two younger children. Father, E. M. Torrence, carpenter. Rent; 75 cents a week. Insurance, 62} cents a week.

Claude Emy, aged 12 in March, has worked two months; earns 75 cents a day. Completed third grade (in fourth). Older sister earns $1.10 a day. One younger child. Father, E. M. Emy, earns $1 a day. Rent, $1 a week.


Mr. McKELWAY. Mr. Chairman, the National Child Labor Committee was organized about 12 years ago to accomplish what could be done in the way of arousing public sentiment against the evils of child labor and to secure legislative protection for working children in the various States of the Union, in the hope of following that program with a constructive program toward industrial education and vocational training. It has been very successful in State legislation. There is not a State in the Union without some protection for working children. When we began there were a good many without any child-labor laws at all, some in the South; but progress has been made, of course, on the right line, with an occasional setback.

We are emphatically in favor of State legislation. Child labor is a national problem. It exists in every State of the Union. Now, it happened that our general secretary, Mr. 0. R. Lovejoy, could not be at this meeting. I hoped that Mr. Clopper, the secretary for the Northern States, could remain over to-day, that he might try to lift away a little bit this sectional prejudice that the work of the National Child Labor Committee is in some way directed against the South, or in some way directed against a particular industry in the South. This is perfectly ridiculous. In the State of Pennsylvania we have just the same controversy with the glass manufacturers, the same in the State of Ohio, and the same conflict in Massachusetts with the textile mills that we have had in the Southern States. As I say, it is a national problem, and it takes a national committee representing all the States to do something with it.

My work has been in the Southern States. I am a Southern man and am fairly familiar with the Southern situation. I have been studying this problem for 12 years and I think I know something about it. It happens that in every Southern State-except one, Arizona, where they have no cotton mills, opposition to child-labor legislation has come from the cotton-mill industry and in most States this has been its only opposition. There was only one exception-I thought I had another-in Florida. There was an oyster packer down there who was very adroit; he was influential with the legislature, and finally I went on a tour of investigation to his oysterpacking plants and found that he had not been employing anybody for a term of years. I found out that he was a large stockholder in a cotton mill in Georgia, and his object seemed to be to prevent Florida setting a good example to Georgia in passing a good childlabor law.

So this industry has been the one, and generally the only one, that has opposed child-labor legislation by the Southern States.

According to the census of 1900 “more than any other mechanical or manufacturing industry in this country the cotton mill is the employer of children.” The figures for the census of 1910 show that this industry is still most conspicuous in the number of children employed.

The first section of this bill relates to mines. It says that children under 16 years of age shall not be employed in mines. Nothing has been said about that here, and it is quite an important problem. For instance, in the United States now there are 2,208 children from 10 to 13 years of age-which means between 10 and 14, according to the census classification-employed in mines, and 15,403 from 14 to 15—under 16. Now, I would like to put into the record, in case this question is raised anywhere, an editorial from the Outlook concerning the Cherry Mine disaster in Illinois some years ago, about which, perhaps, you gentlemen have heard. It is as follows:

After the explosion in the mine at Cherry, Ill., among the first of the dead bodies brought to the surface were those of boys under 16 years of age. Had the presence of such boys in the mine anything to do with the cause of the disaster? Those who have worked in coal mines and have intelligently thought about the matter are strongly convinced that lack of skill and proper training in the miners themselves is a fruitful cause of accidents. Boys under 16 years of age can not have the skill, the training, or the judgment of their elders. They take chances that a grown man would regard as foolhardy. They are often reckless and irresponsible. Such a law as that of Illinois which forbids the employment of boys under 16 years of age in the mines is a safeguard not only to the boys but also to all the mine workers. °It has long been established that in all dangerous occupations accidents to children form a much larger percentage than accidents to adults. It might almost be regarded as a corollary that accidents caused by children form a larger percentage than those caused by adults. There is thus good ground for raising the question whether this accident at Cherry, Ill., might not be due to the employment of boys. At the coroner's inquest testimony was given which shows clearly that such a question is pertinent. Á 15year-old boy testified that he and another lad had pushed a car with hay on it up to a flaming torch. According to the Chicago Tribune, he was asked, “Did you ever see any burning oil dripping from these torches?” “Yes,” he replied: "the torch on the other side of us was dripping burning oil.” “When you were working down there, did Rosenjack ever give you any orders what to do?” (Rosenjack is the miner who has assumed blame for the accident.) “No," the boy replied: "he did not tell me anything to do, or anybody else that I know of.” “You left the car of hay up against the torch?” “Yes.” “You knew that it was standing right up against the torch?” “It was pretty close to it.” “Did you ever pay any attention to those open torches down there, or think that they were dangerous?" "No." When you first saw the fire, was the car of hay standing close to the torch?" "Yes: just where we left it. “How close?” “About half a foot.” The hoy testified that Rosenjack tried to put out the fire with water that the two boys brought to him, and that all three were cut off by the fire from reaching the air-shaft cage. Rosenjack has disappeared, together with the other of these two boys, and it is understood that the mine officials have opposed any attempt to shift the blame from Rosenjack's shoulders. If the accident was due to a violation of the law in the employment of boys under the legal age limit, they have good reason for suppressing the testimony concerning it. We do not, however, wish to lay upon these mine officials any heavier burden than they are already bearing, for that in all conscience is heavy enough. These facts, however, emphasize the need not only of stricter laws regarding dangerous occupation, but also of more vigorous and effective measures for their enforcement. The Outlook wishes to repeat what it has already said in connection with this disaster, that the law should permit only those men whose skill has been proved by adequate examination to be employed in mining. The custom which has been followed by many mining concerns of employing unskilled foreign labor because it is cheap has not only cost many lives but has not even achieved its own purpose of economy. So, too, it seems clear that the employment of young boys in the mines has been hurtful to mining property, as it has been also a menace to human life. (The Outlook, Dec. 25, 1909.)

Now undoubtedly that great disaster was caused by a boy illegally employed.


ܕ ܙ

The CHAIRMAN. Who is the writer of that article?

Mr. McKELWAY. This is an editorial in the Outlook. I do not know who wrote it.

I was in New Mexico during their constitutional convention to get something into the constitution relating to the welfare of children. While I was there a terrible explosion occurred in the Trinidad (Colo.] mines, and a man came from Trinidad to Santa Fe who told me it was caused by a boy's striking a match to light a cigarette. The boys were searched every morning, or it was attempted to search them, but it was fourd impossible to prevent their carrying matches into the mines. So it is not only for the boys under 16 but for the older miners that we ask that this 16-year limit for coal mines be adopted.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you want us to infer if that were adopted all accidents of this kind would be erded?

Mr. McKELWAY. No; I do not think I am quite so illogical, I think it would tend to the elimination of accidents now occasioned by reckless, immature boys, under 16 years, in the coal mines.

The other standards of this bill you are familiar with; the 14 year age limit for children working in factories, canneries, etc., and for children between 12 and 14 othe 8-hour day and no night work. Perhaps it would be of interest to you to know how generally these standards have been adopted.

In the first place they are the standards recognized by the American Bar Association in the uniform child-labor law, which was unanimously adopted by that distinguished body and recommended to all of the States for adoption.

The General Federation of Women's Clubs, through its executive board, has recently indorsed this measure.

According to the House report in this bill: The Farmers' Educational and Cooperative Union, representing all the States of the South, in national convention assembled, unanimously adopted the following resolution: "Whereas the National Farmers' Union believes in properly protecting the physical

mental, and moral welfare of the child in order that its younger years may be devoted to the securing of that degree of education which befits American citizens

and enables the child to be properly prepared for the duties of life; - Whereas there is now pending in the National Congress H. R. No. 12292, known as

the Palmer-Owen bill, which prohibits manufactured goods from being admitted to interstste commerce which have been made in factories which employ children under the age of 14 years, or which work children under the age of 16 years more than eight hours per day, or at night; Therefore be it

Resolved, That we indorse this bill and demand its passage by the present Congress, and that copies of this resolution be sent to the Clerks of the House and Senate, the chairman of the Committee on Labor, and the President of the United States.

("Unanimously adopted and recommended by the committee on resolutions, and unanimously adopted by the Farmers' National Congress, Fort Worth convention, Sept. 2, 1914.)”

The American Federation of Labor is another organization which has indorsed this measure: and the organizations favoring it contain a great number of State child labor committees, women's clubs, and humane organizations of all kinds.

Evidence of popular sentiment.--The States whose age limit for the employment of children in factories is below 14, in all cases, have a population of only 4,244,952, while the States that have adopted the 14-year age limit with or without exemptions have a population of 87,727,314. The States that have refused to adopt a law prohibiting night work for children under 16 have a population of 11,475,572, as compared with a population of 80,496,694 who have said through State legislation that they desire the protection of children under 16 years of age from the evils of night work. As to the 16-year age standard for children employed in mines, taking the States recognized as mining States, those having a population of 41,837,431 have laws prohibiting the


employment of children under 16 in mines, as compared with those having a population of 11,728,486 which have not yet reached this standard in State legisalation In this connection it should be noted that Texas has an age limit of 17 years for the employment of boys in mines.

With regard to the 8-hour day for the employment of children under 16 in factories, while many of the largest industrial States of the Union, such as Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania (wherever the provisions for vocational education are put into effect), Ohio, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin, etc., the population of all the States making this provision for the protection of children is 52,551,796, while the population of the States not having this provision is 39,420,470. No objection has been manifested before our committee to the establishment of the 8-hour day except by the cotton manufacturers before mentioned. And while it affects a good many other industries, the objection vanishes when it is realized that the Federal law will mean an equal, just, and nation-wide enforcement, so that there will be no possibility of putting one State at a disadvantage as compared with another.

Tables sħowing state legislation. The tables showing the States which have and have not attained the standards provided in the pending bill are printed below. It will be seen from these tables that only one southern State has not reached the 14-year age limit for the employment of children in factories; that only three of them have not reached the 16-year age limit for night work in factories; that Arizona, Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, and Oklahoma are among the States that have reached the 8hourday for the employment of children under 16 in factories; that Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas have reached the 16-year age limit for the employment of children in mines and quarries. It seems, therefore, that the attempt to make this measure for the protection of the working children of the Nation a sectional measure aimed at the South is groundless.

TABLE I. --States having standard provisions without exemptions.
(a) Fourteen-year limit in factories and canneries:

New York.


North Dakota. Arkansas.

Michigan (15 years; 14, Ohio (16, girls; 15, boys). Connecticut.





Montana (16 years).

Rhode Island.


South Carolina.
New Hampshire.


New Jersey. (b) Sixteen-year limit for night work in factories and canneries: All States listed under I (a) except Maine, and, in additionCalifornia.


South Carolina.

District of Columbia.

North Carolina. (c) Eight-hour day under 16 in factories and canneries: Arizona.


New York.

North Dakota.


District of Columbia.



Wisconsin. Iowa.

Nevada. Kansas.

New Jersey (NOTE.-Montana forbids the employment of children under 16 in factories.)

(d) Sixteen-year limit in mines and quarries: Alabama.


Oklahoma. Arizona.


Tennessee. Arkansas.


Texas (17 years). California.

New York.

Wisconsin (18 years). Connecticut.

Ohio. (e) Sixteen-year limit in mines but not in quarries: Colorado.


Washington. Illinois.


« AnteriorContinuar »