Sidor som bilder

Used by Courtesy Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce

WASHINGTON, THE YOUNG MAN The dedication of a bronze statue of George Washington at Waterford, Erie County, Pennsylvania, took place Wednesday, Aug. 1, 1922. The statue has been erected in the public square of the town on the site of Lord LeBoeuf. It commemorates the visit of Washington to the French forts in December, 1753, to deliver the demand from Governor Dinwiddie of Virginia that the French evacuate the territory claimed by Virginia.



Deepest and strongest of all the circles of love, save the love of God and of home, is love of country.

“Breathes there a man with soul so dead
He never to himself hath said,
‘This is my own, my native land’;
Whose heart hath ne'er within him burned
As home his footsteps he hath turned
From wandering on some foreign strand?"

A certain degree of patriotism develops almost instinctively, but families grow more patriotic when the Government, by good laws and good enforcement, eminently fulfills its avowed purpose, to “establish justice” and "promote the general welfare."

Those who thoughtfully seek the fullest safeguarding of childhood soon find that city and State can not deal finally with the greatest moral foes of the home. Down to the year 1882 laws for protection of public morals were made by city and State governments only. In 1774, two years before the Declaration of Independence, the Continental Congress declared for an "end" of the distilling of grain, that is, of the very manufacture of all liquors then regarded as intoxicating, but action for this purpose was recommended to the States. No one thought of such moral legislation as a proper function of the national government.

The nation was driven to enter the moral field in 1882 because Utah would not suppress polygamy, which was becoming a national peril. Thus the nation made the

first break into national moral legislation. Then again in 1890, when Louisiana would not suppress the famous Louisiana Lottery, which was robbing the nation, Congress was driven to act; and in 1892 again when it was felt that Illinois would not enforce its Sunday rest law in the Columbian Fair. Then in 1898 in the SpanishAmerican War, prohibition was seen to be necessary to protect the health and efficiency of soldiers, and the first national prohibition law for white men was accordingly passed—the acorn of universal prohibition. As General Carlin said, “If it is bad to sell liquors in the army, it is bad everywhere.” A little later when State prohibition laws were nullified by interstate shipments to "speakeasies” from "wet” border States that would not prevent their citizens from invading other States, Congress was driven first to interstate prohibition, and later to national Constitutional prohibition.'

The failure of many States to deal effectively with the smuggling of morphia and cocaine drove the nation to enact first the Harrison Law, and later, in 1922, the Jones-Miller Law.2

1 Dr. Frank Crane, in an editorial entitled, “The Little Church on Main Street,” in Current Opinion, New York, of June, 1922, showed that the decisive part in winning national prohibition in a campaign of three-fourths of a century was not any of the social forces that are commonly labelled “influential”—not the politicians, not the collegians, not the social or the commercial leaders, not even the conservative churches usually regarded as most "weighty" for political ends, but the prayer-meeting crowd of the evangelical churches, who represent what the British call “the non-conformist conscience. It was their religious fervor, branding license of the liquor traffic as a “sin," rather than the showing of its economic waste, he says, that proved the decisive factor in the long fight. The publishers will reprint the article separately if there is renewed demand for it. The International Reform Bureau, Washington, D. C., has a few copies for pastors only. The Reform Bureau also has a pamphlet, “History of Prohibition,” by W. F. Crafts, sold at 25 cents, postpaid.

2 It is an amazing instance of commercial interests holding back justice to the Indians for years that Congress had not (up to September, 1922), prohibited the drugging of Indians with the poison bean, peyote, kindred to cocaine. Those who profiteer in this poisoning of the Indian hypocritically cry out it is both a "medicine” and a “sacrament, but the only reasons it is spared are, first, that it is commercially profitable; second, that the moral forces have not sufficiently exerted themselves to enlist the better element of Congress against this wrong. The Commissioner of Indian Affairs is for the prohibition of peyote, and those interested in this or any other matter relating to Indians should write to him.


The easy divorces allowed in 1922 in Nevada, Oregon, and even in Virginia, under State laws which menaced the homes of all States, and the unfair competition of States that shamefully tolerated child labor with States that protected the children, pointed straight to the need of new constitutional amendments to give Congress the power to establish minimum standards both in child labor and in divorce, in protection of the nation's homes and children.

The Tragic Story of Child Labor in 1922 This was Collier's concise but vivid picture of the crime of child labor, in an editorial dated August 5, 1922:

"In certain States children of six top sugar beets all day in the cold autumn winds, wielding big sharp knives with numbed fingers. In the cotton belt the National Child Labor Committee found a five-year-old poor white who was called too young for school, but ‘kin pick his ten to twenty pounds a day. In the cotton-growing district of a Western State they found cotton pickers hard at work as young as four. In shrimp and oyster canneries along the Gulf the Department of Labor recently found children under six doing a day's work under conditions that break the stamina of adults. Is it any wonder that child labor has no more friends than scarlet fever has ?

"Its lone champion is greed. Its enemies represent all the intelligence and decency in the land. For sound, hardheaded reasons, doctors, health officials, insurance companies, juvenile and criminal courts and police, educators, labor unions, all are death on this theft of youth and future.

"Yet there still are States where it is rife. Not all of them are in the South. Many of them have laws supposed to bar it. But in some those laws leave loopholes, while in others so many "exemptions" are made that the law is all but a dead letter.

"What can be done? The Supreme Court knocked out as unconstitutional the second Federal Law carefully

« FöregåendeFortsätt »