legal working hours per week in the various States range from 58 to 72, a variation which creates conditions of discrimination as between the citizens of the several States.39

The only remedy for this condition, they declare, is an amendment to the Federal Constitution granting power to Congress to regulate hours of labor. They feel safe that if Congress is given control over hours of labor it will establish the 8-hour day as the standard." At any rate, labor leaders will find it easier to deal exclusively with one legislature (Congress) than with 48 separate legislatures, and they will thus be able to concentrate their efforts for the 8-hour day, or lower, at one place.

The first amendment in this respect was introduced by Mr. Davis, of Massachusetts, in 1884, and proposed to give Congress power to regulate the hours of labor "which persons may be employed in the manufacture of textile fabrics and in other industries." 41 He reintroduced this amendment in 1886 and 1888.42 From 1896 to 1913, 14 attempts have been made to amend the Constitution so as to give Congress power to fix the hours of labor, but no one of them has been favorably reported.

43

An amendment introduced in 1894 by Mr. George, of Mississippi, definitely proposed to make the 8-hour day

89 Preamble to H. J. Res. 20, 57th Cong., 1st sess. App., No. 328. 40 Congress has been committed to an 8-hour working day as the standard day's labor in the Government service: Ames, p. 273. Also, Congress in 1916 passed the Adamson law declaring 8 hours the working day on railroads: U. S. Statutes at Large, XXXIX, pt. 1, D. 721-722.

pp.

41 Ames, p. 273.

42 Ibid.

43

48 App., Nos. 197, 211, 236, 263, 268, 328, 329, 384, 413, 459, 510, 629, 670, 709.

for persons doing manual labor a part of the Constitution.44

The last two amendments of this series, both introduced in 1918, went further than any of the others in declaring the control to be exercised by the Federal Government over labor. The first one, which was presented by Mr. Watson, of Pennsylvania, was designed to empower Congress to regulate wages and hours of labor and prices of commodities throughout the United States.*5 The second, submitted by Mr. Dallinger, of Massachusetts, was to give Congress power to regulate the hours and conditions of labor.46

51. Child labor.

In 1906 the first bills proposing a Federal child-labor law were introduced in Congress. Nearly 10 years later, September 1, 1916, the first Federal child-labor law was passed. Basing its authority on the power of Congress to regulate interstate and foreign commerce, this act of September 1, 1916, closed the channels of interstate and foreign commerce to the products of child labor.

The day before the act took effect-August 31, 1917— an injunction was granted by the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina enjoining the United States attorney of that district from enforcing the act on the ground that it was unconstitutional, and in June, 1918, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the decision of this district court in the case of Hammer v. Dagenhart."

44App., No. 151.

45 App., No. 957.

47

46 App., No. 961.

47 247 U. S. 251.

Congress then sought to take advantage of another power, that of laying and collecting taxes, and provided for a tax upon the profits of industries employing child labor. This was also declared unconstitutional.48 In its opinion as to the first law, the Supreme Court was divided 5 to 4; the second was an 8 to 1 decision. The court therefore made the issue clear; either Congress must give up the plan of a Federal minimum and rely solely upon the States, or there must be adopted a Federal amendment definitely giving to Congress the power to pass a child-labor law, since it is plain that under the present Constitution it does not have that power.

49

This inability on the part of Congress to pass a childlabor law was perhaps foreseen by Mr. Rogers, of Massachusetts, who introduced the first amendment touching the subject of child labor. His resolution was presented in 1914 and was designed to give Congress power to regulate the employment of women and all others under 21 years of age.50 He reintroduced this same measure in 1918 and again in 1919.51

In 1918 Mr. Farr, of Pennsylvania, introduced an amendment conferring upon Congress power to regulate the employment of child labor whose products moved in interstate commerce,52 and Mr. Mason, of Illinois, introduced an amendment giving Congress authority to prohibit or regulate the employment of all children under

48 Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 42 Sup. Ct. 449 (1922). 49 67th Cong., 4th sess., House Rept. No. 1694.

50App., No. 759.

51App., Nos. 955, 976.

52 App., No. 956.

16
years
of age.
ment in 1919.54

53

Mr. Mason reintroduced his amend

Since then 54 amendments have been proposed providing for Federal regulation and prohibition of child labor. Four of these gave 16 years of age generally and the minimum age for employment.55 One provided that the labor of children under the age of 16 years in any mine, mill, factory, or workshop shall be prohibited and that Congress shall have power to regulate the employment of persons under 18 years of age engaged in any other employment; 56 two contained the same provisions except that it gave the regulatory powers as of persons over the age of 16 years.57 Two declared that Congress should have the power to regulate the employment of all persons under the age of 21 years.68 One attempted to give Congress the power to prohibit the employment of children "under such ages as Congress may from time to time determine, ‚” 59 another generally to regulate child labor within all territory of the United States, and one more permitting Congress to prohibit the transportation in interstate commerce of all products of child labor.61 The other 42 stipulated in varying language that Congress shall have power to regulate the employment and the hours of labor

58

60

V.

and conditions of employment of persons under 18 years of age." 62 Twelve of these resolutions included an understanding that power is also reserved to the several States to limit or prohibit child labor in any way which would not lessen any limitation of such labor or prohibition thereof by Congress.

During the fourth session of the Sixty-seventh Congress Mr. Foster, of Ohio, and Senator Shortridge, of California, introduced in the House of Representatives and Senate, respectively, amendments providing that "Congress shall have power concurrent with that of the several States to limit and to prohibit the labor of persons under the age of 18 years." (H. J. Res. 458, S. J. Res. 285.) These were reported on favorably by the House and Senate Committees on the Judiciary, respectively, but did not reach any point of deliberation in the House or Senate.

68

At the beginning of the Sixty-eighth Congress these two men reintroduced resolutions on the subject, the measures taking the respective titles of House Joint Resolution 184 and Senate Joint Resolution 1. The House resolution being adopted first, it was, when it reached the Senate, substituted for Senate Joint Resolution 1, and under the former title passed the Senate. It read as follows:

SECTION 1. The Congress shall have power to limit, regulate, and prohibit the labor of persons under 18 years of age.

SEC. 2. The power of the several States is unimpaired by this article except that the operation of State laws shall be suspended to the extent necessary to give effect to the legislation enacted by Congress.

62 App., Nos. 1097, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1104, 1105, 1107, 1108, 1110, 1113, 1114, 1115, 1118, 1119, 1128, 1131, 1132, 1135, 1143, 1144, 1145, 1148, 1150, 1152, 1154, 1155, 1159, 1167, 1169, 1174, 1182, 1183, 1185, 1193, 1198, 1202, 1204, 1206, 1210, 1211, 1214, 1238.

63App., Nos. 1144, 1145.