etc., except farm labor in summer; Colorado, to labor for corporations, firms, or persons; the other State laws to any work.]
And the age limit fixed for such general employment is (without regard to schooling) under twelve, in Idaho and Maryland; under fourteen in Delaware, Illinois, and Wisconsin; and under fourteen for boys and sixteen for girls in Washington, if without permit, and under fifteen, for more than sixty days without the consent of the parent or guardian in Florida; in other States the prohibition rests on educational reasons, and covers only the time of year during which schools are in session; thus, under eight during school hours, or fourteen without certificate (Missouri); under fourteen during the time or term of school sessions (Connecticut, Colorado,[1] Ma.s.sachusetts, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, New York, North Dakota); or under fourteen during actual school hours (Arizona,[2] Kentucky, Nebraska, Oregon); or under fifteen in Washington,[1] and under sixteen as to those who cannot read and write (Colorado, Connecticut,[3]
Illinois,[3],[4]) or have not the required school instruction (Idaho, New York[1],[4]), or during school hours (Arkansas, Montana[1]), or who have not a labor permit (Maryland, Minnesota, Wisconsin). This resume shows a pretty general agreement on the absolute prohibition of child labor under fourteen, or under sixteen as to the uneducated; and the penalty is in most States only a fine inflicted on the employer, or, in some cases, the parent; but in Florida and Wisconsin it may be imprisonment; as it is in Alabama for a second offence.
[Footnote 1: Without schooling certificate.]
[Footnote 2: Without certificate of excuse.]
[Footnote 3: Unless the child attends a night school.]
[Footnote 4: Without age certificate.]
But more States fix a limit of age in the employment of children in factories or workshops, and particularly in mines; not so usually, however, in stores.[1] The age of absolute prohibition is usually fixed at fourteen or at sixteen in the absence of a certain amount of common-school education. These States are: Alabama,[2] Arkansas,[3,9]
California,[4,9] Colorado,[5] Connecticut,[5] Delaware,[5,6]
District of Columbia,[7,9] Florida,[3,9] Georgia,[8] Illinois,[5,9]
Indiana,[9,10] Iowa.[11,9] Kansas and Kentucky[8] forbid factory labor for children under fourteen or between fourteen and sixteen without an age certificate or an employment certificate; Louisiana[9] has the usual statute, that is, absolute prohibition under fourteen and age certificate required for those between fourteen and sixteen, or, in the case of girls, between fourteen and eighteen, and the law applies to mercantile occupations where more than five persons are employed; the Maine statute is similar, but children above fifteen may work in mercantile establishments without age or schooling certificate, which is required of all those under sixteen in manufacturing or mechanical employment; in Maryland,[12] the prohibition age is still twelve, and the law applies to any business except farm labor in the summer; in Ma.s.sachusetts,[12] absolute prohibition below fourteen, fourteen to sixteen without age or schooling certificate, and fourteen to eighteen, who cannot read and write; in Michigan,[12] absolute prohibition under fourteen, or sixteen without written permit; in Minnesota, the same ages, but the law applies to any employment; in Mississippi the ages are twelve and sixteen; in Missouri, absolute prohibition under eight, or fourteen without school certificate. New Hampshire[12] lags behind and has only an absolute prohibition to children under twelve, or during school under fourteen, or under sixteen without schooling certificate. In New Jersey, under fourteen, or sixteen with medical certificate; Nebraska[l2] and New York,[12]
the usual absolute prohibition under fourteen, or under sixteen without employment certificate; North Carolina, under twelve, with an exception of oyster industries; North Dakota,[12] fourteen, or from fourteen to sixteen without employment certificate. In Ohio,[12]
Oklahoma, Oregon,[12] Pennsylvania,[12] and Rhode Island,[12] the laws are practically identical, fourteen, or sixteen with certificate of schooling. South Carolina, absolute prohibition only under twelve, and not even then in textile establishments if the child has a dependency certificate. South Dakota,[12] under fifteen when school is in session; Tennessee, absolute under fourteen; Texas, under twelve, or under fourteen to those who cannot read and write unless the child has a parent to support. Vermont"s limitation is purely educational; no child under sixteen can be employed in factories or mines who has not completed nine years of study. In Virginia[12] from March 1, 1910, there is absolute prohibition under fourteen except as to children between twelve and fourteen with a dependency certificate; Washington, under fifteen without schooling certificate, or in stores, etc., twelve. West Virginia, twelve, or fourteen when school is in session.
Utah and Wyoming have no legislation except as to mines, nor do Colorado and Idaho protect women in them. Yet these are the four woman-suffrage States.
[Footnote 1: The law does apply to "mercantile establishments"
(Alabama, Arkansas, California, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Ma.s.sachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, West Virginia).]
[Footnote 2: Absolute prohibition only under twelve. School and age certificate from twelve to sixteen; age certificate from sixteen to eighteen.]
[Footnote 3: The ages are fourteen and eighteen respectively, or sixteen in stores during school hours; in Florida, twelve, or when school is not in session, without an age, schooling, and medical certificate.]
[Footnote 4: Absolute prohibition under twelve or from twelve to fourteen during the school term or under sixteen to those who cannot read and write, and the law applies to mercantile establishments, hotel and messenger work, etc., making expressly the usual exemption of agricultural or domestic labor.]
[Footnote 5: Absolute prohibition under fourteen; from fourteen to sixteen without certificate (Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky), and medical certificate if demanded (Delaware).]
[Footnote 6: Any gainful occupation under fourteen. Except canning fruit, etc. (Delaware).]
[Footnote 7: Any business or occupation during school hours, except in the United States Senate, and the age is absolute prohibition under twelve; twelve to fourteen without a dependency permit, and fourteen to sixteen without schooling certificate.]
[Footnote 8: Absolute under twelve; twelve to fourteen without schooling certificate; fourteen to eighteen without age and schooling certificate except as to those who have already entered into employment. Does not apply to mines.]
[Footnote 9: This law applies to mercantile establishments, etc., as well.]
[Footnote 10: Absolute under fourteen, or under sixteen to those who cannot read and write.]
[Footnote 11: Prohibition is absolute under the age of fourteen, and applies to employment in mercantile establishments as well, or stores where more than eight people are employed.]
[Footnote 12: This law applies to mercantile establishments, etc., as well.]
The laws as to labor in mines are naturally more severe; although in some they are covered by the ordinary factory laws (Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin). Female labor is absolutely forbidden in mines or works underground in Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, and West Virginia,--in short, in most of the States except Idaho, Kansas, Iowa, Kentucky, Virginia, Wyoming, where mines exist; and the limit of male labor is usually put at from fourteen. (Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Missouri, Ohio,[1] South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming) to sixteen (Illinois, Missouri,[2] Montana, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Washington); or twelve (North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia), even in States which have no such legislation as to factories.
[Footnote 1: Fifteen during school year.]
[Footnote 2: Of those who can read and write.]
The laws as to elevators,[1] dangerous machinery,[2] or dangerous employment generally,[3] are even stricter, and as a rule apply to children of both s.e.xes; the Ma.s.sachusetts standard being, in the management of rapid elevators, the age of eighteen, in cleaning machinery in motion, fourteen, etc.; in other States, sixteen to eighteen.[4] The labor of all women in some States, and of girls or women under sixteen or eighteen in other States, is forbidden in occupations which require continual standing.[5] Females,[6] or minors,[7] or young children[8] are very generally forbidden from working or waiting in bar-rooms or restaurants where liquor is sold, and in a few States girls are prohibited from selling newspapers or acting as messengers.[9] The Northern States have a usual age limit for the employment of children in ordinary theatrical performances, and an absolute prohibition of such employment or of acrobatic, immoral, or mendicant employment. But in some States it appears there is only an age limit as to these.[10]
[Footnote 1: Indiana, Ma.s.sachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Kansas, Oregon.]
[Footnote 2: Connecticut, Iowa, Missouri, Oregon, Louisiana, New York.]
[Footnote 3: Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Ma.s.sachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.]
[Footnote 4: Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina.]
[Footnote 5: Illinois (under sixteen), Michigan (all), Minnesota (sixteen), Missouri (all), New York (sixteen), Ohio (all), Oklahoma (sixteen), Wisconsin (sixteen), Colorado (all over sixteen).]
[Footnote 6: Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Washington (except the wife of the proprietor or a member of the family).]
[Footnote 7: Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Vermont.]
[Footnote 8: Florida, Illinois, Ma.s.sachusetts, Missouri, Nebraska.]
[Footnote 9: New York, Oklahoma, Wisconsin.]
[Footnote 10: California, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, (sixteen years); Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, New Hampshire, Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming (fourteen); Connecticut, Georgia, (twelve); Delaware, Indiana, Louisiana, Ma.s.sachusetts, West Virginia (fifteen); Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Washington (eighteen).]
The hours for railroad and telegraph operators are limited in several States, but rather for the purpose of protecting the public safety than the employees themselves.[1] The following other trades are prohibited to women or girls: Boot-blacking,[2] or street trades generally;[3] work upon emery wheels, or wheels of any description in factories (Michigan), and in New York no female is allowed to operate or use abrasives, buffing wheels, or many other processes of polishing the baser metals, or iridium; selling magazines or newspapers in any public place, as to girls under sixteen,[4] public messenger service for telegraph and telephone companies as to girls under nineteen.[5]
[Footnote 1: Colorado, New York.]
[Footnote 2: District of Columbia, Wisconsin.]
[Footnote 3: District of Columbia, Wisconsin.]
[Footnote 4: New York, Oklahoma, Wisconsin.]
[Footnote 5: Washington.]
Leaving now the question of general employment, where no general laws limiting time or price would seem to be const.i.tutional, except in certain cases as to the employment of women and in all cases that of children, and going to special occupations, we shall find quite a different principle; for in a special occupation known to be dangerous or unhealthy, certainly if dangerous or unhealthy to the general public, it has always been the custom and has always been const.i.tutional with us to control conditions by statute. The question of what is a dangerous or unhealthy occupation to the public rather than merely to the persons employed is, of course, a difficult one; and the Supreme Court of the United States have split so closely on this point that they have in Utah decided that mining was an occupation dangerous to the public health, and in New York that the baking of bread was not. That is to say, that the condition of bakeshops bore no relation to the general health of the community. One might, perhaps, have expected that they would have decided each case the other way; but we must take our decisions as we get them from the Supreme Court, reserving our dissent for the text-books. In any event, it can be seen that the line is very close, certainly in the case of adult male labor. The same statute as to mines existed in Colorado that the United States Supreme Court sustained in Utah. The Colorado Supreme Court had declared it unconst.i.tutional, and after the decision of the United States Supreme Court they continued to declare it unconst.i.tutional, simply saying that the United States Supreme Court was wrong. Anyhow, it is obvious that in trades which involve a great ma.s.s of the people, or affect the whole community, or particularly where there are definite dangers, such as noxious vapors or tuberculosis-breeding dust, it will be const.i.tutional, as it is common sense, to limit the conditions and even the hours of labor of women or men, as well as children. Students interested in such matters will find the universal legislation of the civilized world set forth in the invaluable labor-laws collection of the government of Belgium; and he will find that all countries of the world do regulate the hours of labor as well as the conditions, in all such trades, and we should not remain alone in refusing to do so.
The difficulty of regulating the hours of farm labor is, of course, obvious, and so far as I know, no attempt has yet been made. The same thing remains still true of domestic labor, though it has been more questioned. It should be noted that both domestic labor and farm labor belong to the cla.s.s of what we call indefinite service. Now, indefinite service must always be regulated very carefully as to the length of the contract, which is never to be indefinite; that is to say, if it be both indefinite in the services rendered and in the time during which they are to last, it is in no way distinguishable from slavery. For instance, in Indiana, many years before the Civil War, there was an old negro woman who was induced to sign a contract to serve in a general way for life; that, of course, was held to be slavery. More recently the United States Supreme Court has held that a contract imposed upon a sailor whereby he agreed to ship as a mariner on the Pacific coast for a voyage to various other parts of the world and thence back was a contract so indefinite in length of time as to be unenforceable under free principles, although a sailor"s contract is one which in a peculiar way carries with it indefinite service. And a contract "_a tout faire_" even for a week might be held void.
In all these matters the labor of women, and even that of children, will very often control the hours of labor of men; for instance, in the mills of New England, more than half the labor is not adult male; yet when any large cla.s.s of the mill"s operatives stop, the whole mill must stop; consequently, a law limiting the labor of women and children to fifty-six hours a week will be in practice enforced upon the adult males employed in the same mill.
Continental legislation has gone far beyond us in all these important particulars. In most countries the conditions surrounding the labor of women, particularly married women, are carefully regulated by law.
She is not allowed to go back to the mill for a certain period after childbirth, and in many more particular respects her health is carefully looked after. Such legislation would possibly be impossible to enforce with our notions in America. The most interesting of all is perhaps the attempt made in the State of Connecticut within a few years to improve social conditions by providing that no married woman should be employed in factories at all. The bill was not, of course, carried, but it raises a most interesting sociological question.
Ruskin probably would have been in favor of it. He described as the very last act of modern barbarism for the woman to be made "to shriek for a hold of the mattock herself." It was argued in Connecticut that the employment of married women injured the health of the children, which is perfectly true. Indeed, the death-rate in England is very largely determined by the fact whether their mothers are employed in mills or not. It was also argued that her compet.i.tion with man merely halved his wages; that if no women were employed, the men would get much higher wages. On the other side it was argued that the effect of the law would be largely immoral because it would simply prevent women from getting married. Knowing that after marriage they would get no employment, they would simply dispense with the marriage ceremony; for it is obvious that under such legislation a man living with a woman unmarried could get double wages, which would be halved the moment he made her his wife. This last was evidently the view which prevailed; and so far as I know, no such law has in the civilized world yet been enacted, though there is doubtless a much stronger social prejudice against women entering ordinary employments in some countries than in others.
The const.i.tutional question underlying all this discussion was perhaps best set forth by an experiment of the late Mr. Edward Atkinson, which he always threatened to bring into the courts, but I believe did not do so. "An Englishman"s house is his castle"; an English woman"s house is her castle. Atkinson proposed that a woman of full age, living in her own house, should connect her loom or spindles by electric wire to the nearest mill or factory, and then proceed to weave or spin _more_ than the legal limit of nine hours per day. Would the state, under the broadest principles of English const.i.tutional liberty, have the right to come in and tell her not to do so; particularly when the man in the next house remained free? Up to this time there is no doubt that a factory, a large congregation of labor, under peculiar conditions, presents a different question and a different const.i.tutional aspect from that of the individual. This, indeed, is the principle which must justify the const.i.tutional regulation of sweat-shops, as to which we will speak next.
The sweat-shop is the modern phrase for a house, frequently a dwelling, tenement, or home, not a factory, and not under the ownership or control of the person giving out the employment.