The decision of the United States supreme court declaring unconstitutional the minimum wage laws for women in the District of Columbia will add force to the agitation against decisions reached by a bare majority of one in this tribunal. The decision was rendered by a vote of five to three, but Justice Brandeis did not participate, having been counsel some years ago in an Oregon case of a similar character. His individual opinions leave no doubt that, had he been sitting, he would have voted with the minority, making the decision one of those five-to-four verdicts which so seriously are disquieting the American mind.
The decision is based upon the constitutional prescription of inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness includes the right of a woman to sell her labor for less than the cost of subsistence, and the right of an employer to enforce not merely a starvation wage, but any conditions of employment which may contribute to his profit and which through his control of the labor market he can establish.
In rendering the decision Justice Sutherland tersely stated that: “In principle there can be no difference between the case of selling labor and the case of selling goods.” This may be a five-to-four construction of the law, but it is a principle that rubs the average American the wrong way, for no American, Christian or Pagan, will endorse the argument that men, women and children must labor for any price the “market” condition warrants, regardless of the cost of living. Many of the thinking men and women of this country long ago determined that any institution that did not or could not pay its labor sufficiently to live decently and honestly was a curse to the community and to society. Many towns and cities have refused to help manufacturers looking for new locations when it was found the average wage paid was below the cost of living.
The effect of the decision will be far-reaching. In at least 14 states there are laws for the protection of women and children that may be annulled. Another and equally important effect of the decision will be a knock-out blow to any proposition by farmers for stabilizing commodity prices. Under this decision any such legislation would be declared unconstitutional.
Another effect of the decision may be to stimulate labor organizations and in the end result in an amendment to the constitution along the lines proposed by Senators Borah, LaFollette, Norris and others, restricting the power of the supreme court in reversing any act of Congress.
The fact of the matter is that minimum wage laws and child labor laws ought to be unnecessary in this nation of peace and plenty. But unfortunately there are those who have less regard or interest in human life than they have for mine mules and knitting machines.
The decision involves the question of the right to live right.
From the editorial page of the Harnett County News, Lillington, N.C., Thursday, April 26, 1923, Henderson Steele, publisher.
No comments:
Post a Comment