VOL. LV.

I

F you should walk down Main Street, Concord, you would probably see from time to time little groups of men gathered together in heated conversation. If you are curious and should want to know what they are talking about you don't need to inquire. It is about the fortyeight hour law. For there is no public question that has called forth more discussion, none over which opinions have varied more radically and none which more intimately touches the welfare and prosperity of the state.

We in New Hampshire have a law limiting women to fifty-four hours per week and ten and one-fourth hours per day. In comparing this law with those of some other states we find that five states: California, Massachusetts, Utah, North Dakota and Oregon, have forty-eight hour weeks for women in industry, while Ohio has a fifty hour week. Nine states limit the work of women to eight hours per day, ten to nine hours per day. All the government employees are on an eight hour day. On the other side of the water we find that France and Belgium have universal forty-eight hour weeks. Germany has a universal eight hour day, while in England the cotton spinning and manufacturing industry is on a forty-eight hour week by agreement between the employers and employees. On the other hand, the great cotton-growing states, those states which are the main competitors of our principal industry, the textile, permit their women to work from

No. 1

fifty-six to sixty hours per week and from ten to twelve hours per day.

When the nine months' strike in the textile industry ended last month, the principal point at issue, the fortyeight hour week for women and children versus the fifty-four hour week, was not settled. The workers, to be sure, went back on a fifty-four hour schedule, with, however, the public announcement that as far as they were concerned it was but a temporary truce, pending the decision of the legislature.

What will the legislature do? 417 men sit in the House of Representatives. Of these 221 are Democrats pledged to the immediate enactment of a forty-eight hour law, 196 are Republicans who, while pledging themselves to a national fortyeight hour law and expressing sympathy "for all those who would put an end to all forms of child labor and who work to abridge the hours of women employed in industry," demand, before any action be taken in regard to a state forty-eight hour law, an investigation of the possible effects on New Hampshire industry of the passage of such a law with a report to be made to this legislature before adjournment. In the Senate we find a Republican majority. The Governor's Council, too, is Republican, while the Governor is a Democrat and a very keen and ardent believer in the forty-eight hour week.

It is probable that most of the Democrats will support with vigor the forty-eight hour law. It was in

their platform, and on this issue they largely made and won their campaign.

Just what the Republicans will do is not so certain. Senator Moses, on being asked this question, said, "The Republican members of the New Hampshire Legislature should attend to their duties in man fashion and on the forty-eight hour law should abide by the platform adopted by the Republican State Convention." The Manchester Union speaks in even stronger terms. "Sight should never be lost by Republicans," it declares, "of the fact that the Republican party of this state is definitely and unequivocally on record in favor of the principle of the forty-eight hour working week for women engaged in industry --it is also on record in favor of a most searching, impartial and candid examination of some of the probable effects of the enactment of the fortyeight hour law in this state.... Under this pledge and taking into consideration the proportion of the vote on November 7th which may be properly interpreted as an assumption on the part of the public that such a law should be passed unless it can be definitely and clearly shown that enforcement of such a statute would be disastrous to manufacturing industries, the Republican party which is in clear control of the Senate can do no other than promptly and without hesitation to set up the machinery to get........the facts before the public-and let the issue of the fortyeight hour law proposal stand or fall on this showing."

THERE are, however, powerful in

terests opposing the forty-eight hour week, interests whose views and wishes, in spite of party platforms, cannot help but have a profound in fluence on many. The New Hamp

shire State Grange for instance, has gone on record as against the fortyeight hour week. At their convention last month a resolution condemning the principle of the forty-eight hour law was unanimously adopted and farmers for the most part are undoubtedly opposed to this law. They say that it is well nigh impossible to keep help on the farm at sixty hours per week when occupation can be found in the city at a living wage of a forty-eight hour week and that during the war when industry operated largely on a forty-eight hour schedule, there was an acute and actual shortage of farm help. The farmer, they believe, labors under a great financial disadvantage when he has to produce his goods on a week of sixty hours while he buys goods produced on a forty-eight hour week.

The manufacturing and business interests of New Hampshire are also in general most vigorously opposed to this measure. Eaton D. Sargent, president of the New Hampshire Manufacturers' Association, which represent three hundred thirty New Hampshire industries, writes that the forty-eight hour week is "distinctly an economic issue......I believe that I voice not only my own but also the opinion of the great body of manufacturers large and small when I express my belief that a maximum forty-eight hours for women and minors should not be fixed by legislative enactment."

The principal organizations and groups of people who are fighting for the forty-eight hour week are the Labor Unions and the Industrial Workers. They have, however, a strong ally in public opinion, which in the state and nationally is becoming increasingly sympathetic to the principle of the forty-eight hour week. The recent and rather

dramatic Democratic victory is an indication of the public sentiment.

The Paris Peace Conference in 1919 recommended "the adoption of an eight hour day and a forty-eight hour week as a standard to be aimed at where it has not already been attained." And the Congress of the United States "has established the eight hour day as the standard in government service for workers in profitable employment engaged government contracts." Among the prominent men who have come out for the forty-eight hour law is John D. Rockfeller, Jr., who says: "Subjest only to the demands of national emergency, modern industry is justified in accepting the eight hour day and the six day week. While the adoption of these standards may and doubtless will at first entail increased costs of production, I am confident that in the long run, greater efficiency and economy will result."

Another rather striking indication of the growth of the forty-eight hour week is shown in a recent announcement of the Department of Commerce which states that "the returns of the 1919 census of manufacturers indicates a general and marked decrease in the prevailing hours of labor. Of the 9,096,372 wage earners reported......48.6 per cent. were employed in establishments where the prevailing hours of labor per week were forty-eight or under, while in

....the year 1914, the number employed in this class of establishment was......11.8 per cent. of the total number of wage earners."

AND so the legislator, whose duty

it is to represent the public and who desires to help pass those measures which may do the greatest good to the greatest number, finds himself face to face with a problem which at

every step seems to become more and more perplexing and more and more difficult to solve.

On the one hand, he is told that while mills in a cotton state increased two and one-half times in twenty years, textile mills in New England only increased one-third and that New Hampshire industries on a forty-eight hour schedule cannot continue to survive in competition with the southern textile mills with their advantage in cheaper cost of living, cheaper power and raw maerial, their cheaper labor and a fiftysix to sixty hour schedule. Presiedent J. H. Hustis, of the Boston & Maine Railroad writes: "There are constantly coming to our attention cases of industries seeking locations, many of which fail to locate within New England because of what are regarded as certain already severe restrictive laws." And the president of the New Hampshire Manufacturing Association makes the statement that "New Hampshire cannot enjoy a reasonable prosperity unless her manufacturing industries are prosperous. It is for the best interests of the state to

encourage manufacuring rather than to discourage it by the enactment of any law which will make successful enterprises more difficult if not impossible."

On the other hand, the supporters of the forty-eight hour schedule flatly deny most of these contentions. They deny that southern competition necessitates an increase in hours beyond the forty-eight hour week. They cite figures showing a steady and remarkable increase in the earnings and profits of the Amoskeag Corporation during the last twenty years, the last three years operated on a forty-eight hour schedule being the most profitable of all. They point to Massachusetts which,

with a forty-eight hour schedule for the last four years, has been able to compete very successfully with the south.

They also argue that from the sociological point of of view women should not be permitted to work more than forty-eight hours per week. "We must concede" says Mrs. Arnold Yantis, Republican member of the House from Manchester "that eight hours is a long enough time for a woman or child to toil at hard labor. When anyone works to the point of fatigue, the quality of the work suffers and the health of the worker is injured. Women and children are not machines...... Our high infant mortality in Manchester is due in part to our present industrial conditions, according to the report of the Children's Bureau in the Department of Labor." And Dr. George W. Webster of the Illinois Industrial Survey, appointed by Governor Lowden in 1918, says: "Surely it is not enough that a woman is able to endure the hardships and fatigue of a ten hour day and not die— women should and do mean more to our country than mere machines. The science of physiology and psychology, the law, the decisions of the courts, the example of Congress, the Peace Conference, the joint interests of both employer and employee, the right of society expressed in the voice of an enlightened social conscience all unite in favoring the establishment of the eight hour day as the maximum which should be required of women in industry. For upon women depends the vigor of the race, and the vigor of the race must not be exploited for present day purposes instead of for racial conversation."

Among the supporters of the principle of the forty-eight hour week

for women are those who believe that if the forty-eight hour schedule will be, under present conditions, a handicap to New England industry, then Our industries must change these conditions. They believe the fortyeight hour schedule from a sociological point of view must come and they believe that New England industry, through increased efficiency, through that initiative and resource heretofore characteristic of our business men, must and can overcome any economic handicap which may at present exist.

IT is easy to imagine, with all these

radical difference of opinion, how difficult will be the task of the legislature in trying to make a wise decision and one which will be for the best interests of New Hampshire as a whole.

One grave menace to the public welfare, according to Ex-Gov. Bass is the danger that the next legislature may become involved in an disastrous class struggle with the workers aligned against the farmers, the city against the country. Powerful interests he believes, will bitterly oppose not only the forty-eight hour law but also the tax reform that the farmer SO vigorously advocates. There is no way he says, "that these interests could so effectively accomplish their purpose as to align the farmer against the industrial worker, hoping thereby to create a deadlock and prevent any action on either issue."

That such an alignment may possibly develop is clearly indicated by a recent statement of Horace A. Riviere, organizer for the United Textile Workers of America, who says: "The labor interest, in the next legislature are going to stage the bitterest fight ever made in this state for

the reduction of working hours, and if they do not gain their point, and the farm district members are responsible for the reverse, then I predict there will be few if any bills passed in the legislature which will aid the agriculturists."

"Such a class alignment," declares Ex-Gov. Bass, "would have a most harmful and far-reaching effect. Measures would then be acted upon not on merits but as a solution of the blind opposition of one class of people to another...... To dispose of legislative measures by this device is to sacrifice public interests for private personal advantage. I feel sure that the mature judgment and hard. common sense of our people of New Hampshire will not sanction such a procedure. Neither do I believe

that the rank and file of legislators will approve of it. They will approach these important matters in an open-minded attitude, securing fullest information....before they make up their minds and then take such action as is for the best interests of the state as a whole. Above all, we should not support or countenance any class alignment or any trading of support or opposition to important measures. As a member of the legislature, I shall consider each question separately on its merits after weighing all the evidence. I shall act as a representative of no one class, but will try to give fair and unprejudiced consideration to all elements and support such bills as will

promote the best interests of the average man and woman throughout the state."

After reviewing all these conflicting arguments and statements it is not hard to prophesy that the next session of the legislature will be one of the liveliest and most agitating in many a year. A wise decision in this matter is so vital to the welfare of so many people and so important to the prosperity of the state, that feeling is bound to run high with many becoming extremely bitter. Very timely indeed is the meeting in Concord on January 11 of the New Hampshire Civic Organization to discuss the forty-eight hour law for women and children engaged in industry. Henry Dennison of Dennison Manufacturing Co. will give a talk on the problem of the fortyeight hour law. Representatives of organized labor and of the manufacturing association will discuss their points of view, while agricultural interests will be represented by Richard Pattee, Director of the New England Milk Producers' Association and once Master of the New Hampshire State Grange. It is expected that this meeting will be largely attended and it is hoped the discussions will help clear up some of the more radical differences of opinion and be a means of bringing people nearer to a better and more enlightened understanding of the problem as a whole.