vailed in American industry to a greater extent than now, the operatives of New England were working thirteen hours a day. In Connecticut the employees of one factory worked fifteen hours and ten minutes. In Paterson, New Jersey, women and children went to work at half-past four in the morning and if they wearied the master used a lash.1 It is absurd to speak of the freedom of necessity.

But the employer invokes the courts in behalf of freedom of contract when legislation interferes in his relations with his men. "No state therefore can limit a man's right to sell his labor or to hire labor on his own terms except so far as the good police of society may require." 2 But such police requires much interference in the relations of industry. Daniel Webster said: "The freest government if it could exist, would not be long acceptable if the tendency of the laws were to create a rapid accumulation of property in few hands, and render the great mass of the population dependent and penniless. Stimson notes and classifies approximately 1639 laws passed between 1887 and 1897 affecting labor interests in 43 lines.*

Laws in benefit of labor may be divided into those protecting men from oppression in employment, and those tending to secure men in the employment itself. Neither of these objects can be achieved without infringement of the liberty of private property in industry. Hence they become a form of economic property to the laborer.

The health and safety of laborers is sought in a multitude of sanitary and precautionary regulations of factories,

1 Ely, Evolution of Ind. Society, p. 59.

2 State vs. Julow, 129 Missouri, 171.

3 Quoted in Loria, Economic Foundations of Society, p. 337.

4 "Democracy and the Laboring Man," Atlantic Monthly, Nov., 1897.

mines and railroads. The government interferes with the laborer's contracting to his own hurt. "A man may contract to use such machinery or to perform dangerous services and have no remedy for injury, but we are not aware that the police power is limited by such contract. "The fact that both parties are of full age and competent to contract does not necessarily deprive the state of the power to interfere where the parties do not stand on an equality or where the public health demands that one party to the contract be protected against himself. The state still retains an interest in his welfare, however reckless he may be. The whole is no greater than the sum of all its parts and when an individual's health, safety and welfare are sacrificed or neglected the state must suffer." 2

Massachusetts and New York are the most advanced in labor legislation, while more than half the states have such laws and the more distinctly agricultural states are adding to them. These laws usually provide for one or more factory inspectors, who shall have the right to enter and inspect all factories at all times. Laws prescribe fire escapes, dust fans, guards, doors that open outward and the like appliances. Machinery must not be cleaned while in motion, nor by women or minors under a certain age. The engine room must be connected with the machine rooms by tubes; a certain amount of cubic air space must be allowed; walls must be limed or painted; toilet rooms, screened stairways with handrails and many other conveniences and comforts have been prescribed by various laws. Sanitary laws are re-enforced by building laws. Thus in Massachusetts the plans for new factories must be submitted for inspection. Sweat-shop legislation is increasing. Special conditions.

1 People vs. Smith, 65 Mo., 382.

2 Holden vs. Hardy, 169 U. S., 380.

receive special protection. Thus in several states bakeries are particularly restricted. In Wisconsin (1903) the use of cellars is prohibited; proper ventilation, drainage and sanitation is required; sleeping rooms are separated from the store rooms for flour or meal. The mining states have elaborate laws for the construction, ventilation and inspection of mines. Railroads require especial attention. Thus in 1893 the federal law required power brakes, automatic couplers, grab irons or hand holds on freight cars. Between 1885 and 1890 various states required automatic couplers, proper blocking of frogs and switches, bridge guards, safety switches and the like. Illinois (1903) requires street railway companies to provide vestibules or screens on their cars to protect motormen from November to March.

The labor of women and children has always been considered a proper subject of legislation. The hours of women's labor are limited in many states, usually to sixty hours a week, sometimes to forty-eight, as in Wisconsin. Five states prohibit night work by women. Some prohibit women from certain kinds of work. In 1903 legislation against child labor was strengthened in many states. Thus Illinois limited the hours of labor of children of fourteen to sixteen to eight hours and prohibited employment of children under sixteen in a long list of employments.3 "What with factory and mining and compulsory attendance laws, it may be said that all of the northern states except Delaware try to keep children out of employment during at least a considerable portion of the year till they have reached the age of fourteen years." The attitude of those who would 2 Ibid., 22q22.

1 N. Y. Lib. Bul. Leg., 22 q.

3 Whittelsey, Factory Legislation, Annals of the American Academy, July, 1902.

1 66

have absolute ownership in trade was expressed by Hamilton: Women and children are rendered more useful and the latter more early useful" by the protection to home industry.

Some effort has been made to secure men as well from oppression. Workmen are secured from oppressive hours on public works. The hours of men engaged on public works were limited to ten in 1840. In 1868 they were limited to eight. About fifteen states have passed similar laws. Such legislation is sustained. Some effort has been made to limit the hours of men in private employment. Fifteen states limit the number of hours that railway men may work continuously. The hours of coal miners have been limited to eight in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania, and in Utah and Colorado. The Utah eight-hour law was sustained by the United States Supreme Court.3 Thirteen states attempt to regulate the time of wage payments and to prohibit extortion by company stores. teen states outside of New England have passed anti-truck laws. Indiana and Ohio have attempted to prevent the withholding of wages or the imposition of fines by employers for imperfect work.*

Six

There is a tendency toward greater liability of employers in case of accident. The English Employers' Liability Act to extend employer's liability to workmen for injuries has been copied in many states. This abrogates the former fellow servant doctrine by which an employe might have no compensation for injury by a fellow employe. Some states forbid "contracting out" of this liability. Thus

1 Report on Manufactures, 1791.

2 Adams and Sumner, op. cit., p. 410.

3 Holden vs. Hardy, 169 U. S., 397.

+ Whittelsey, op. cit., p. 237.

Maryland (1903) makes the employer liable in every case where the workman is not at fault. Ohio (1904) does away with the common law rule that the employer is not liable for negligence when the employe continues in the employment with knowledge of the neglect on the part of the employer. A national act (1906) provides: "In all actions hereafter brought against any common carriers to recover damages for personal injuries to an employe, or where such injuries have resulted in his death, the fact that the employe may have been guilty of contributory negligence shall not bar a recovery where his contributory negligence was slight and that of the employer was gross in comparison, but the damages shall be diminished by the jury in proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to such employe."

There are indications of the establishment of some claim to employment. If so, this would be a partial right in ownership of industry corresponding to tenant rights in land. Massachusetts says: "A person who being engaged in manufacturing, requires from persons in his employ, under penalty of forfeiture of a part of the wages earned by them, a notice of intention to leave such employ shall be liable to a like forfeiture if without similar notice, he discharge a person in his employ.' There are similar laws in other states. Laws of like effect are those against alien

contract labor.

"2

An effective instrument of control over their employment in the hands of laborers is the strike. It is estimated that 50.77 per cent of strikes have succeeded and 13.14 per cent have been partially successful. In 1905 there were 1157

1 N. Y. Lib. Bul. Leg., 22 q6.

3

2 Mass. Labor Laws, ch. 106, sec. 10.

3 Ely, Evol. of Ind. Society, p. 114.