Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:43:25.762Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tendencies of the Labor Legislation of 1910

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Irene Osgood Andrews
Irene Osgood Andrews
Affiliation:
American Association for Labor Legislation
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A leading English economist once said, “It matters nothing to the seller of bricks whether they are to be used in building a palace or a sewer; but it matters a great deal to the seller of labor, who undertakes to perform a task of given difficulty, whether or not the place in which it is to be done is a wholesome and a pleasant one, and whether or not his associates will be such as he cares to have.”

This statement strikes the keynote of the activity in the field of labor legislation during 1910. All down the ages the worker has been protesting against being required to sell his life or his health in addition to his labor, even though he was assured by most political economists that he was getting higher money rewards for dangerous or disagreeable work; and the moralist, too, was telling him that accident and disease were acts of God to be met by prayer and fasting.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , May 1911 , pp. 224 - 234
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1911

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a complete review of the labor legislation of 1910 see Publications of the American Association for Labor Legislation, No. 11.

2 Commissions appointed in 1909: Wisconsin, Minnesota, New York.

3 In the case of Ives v. South Buffalo R. R. Co., March 24, 1911, this law was declared unconstitutional by the New York Court of Appeals on the ground that it took away the property rights of the employer without due process of law.

4 Report published by the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics, January, 1911. The Cost of Retirement Systems for State and County Employees in Massachusetts. By F. Spencer Baldwin.

5 Bulletin 86, United States Bureau of Labor, “Phosphorus Poisoning in the Match Industry,” by John B. Andrews.

6 W. C. Ritchie & Co., et al., Appellees, v. John E. W. Wayman et al., Appellants.

7 Withey v. Bloem, 128 N. W. 913.

8 Massachusetts has just enacted the first American law of this kind.

9 Godcharles v. Wigeman, 113 Pa. St. 437, 1886.

10 Opinion of Justices, 163 Mass. 589, 1895.

11 N. Y. C & H. R. R. R. Co. v. Williams.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.