in Georgia which is a great deal more effective than legislation would be." When the working of this "gentlemen's agreement" was looked into the violation of it was found to be so notorious that one was left to wonder whether there might not be a new conception of what a gentleman was and what an agreement was. So instead of helping in 1905 to pass the child labor bill that was offered in the Legislature that year, the Massachusetts Mill at Lindale was represented in the Manufacturer's Lobby before the Georgia Legislature in opposition to any legislation at all. It does rather "rile" a Southern man to have a Massachusetts Corporation with good laws in its home state, come to Georgia, employ children at tender ages and for long hours, such as would not be permitted in Massachusetts, and then resist the effort of the Georgia Legislature to pass an effective child labor law!

The foregoing cut shows a photograph from the Massachusetts Mills of Lowell, Massachusetts, reproducing the smallest children that could be found in that mill; on page 60 is one of several similar groups from the Massachusetts Mills of Lindale, Georgia. This is an example of the only kind of "New England inter

ference" we have ever had with regard to improving child labor conditions in Georgia. It should be stated in fairness that the general conditions of the Lindale Mills are excellent and it is only of the employment of children and the violation of the child labor laws that we are complaining, together with the attitude of opposition to any effective reform.

From Mr. Hine's report we quote the following:

"First impressions are often lasting. Mine, as I entered the village of Lindale were distinctly favorable. Here was the group of well-built mills, surrounded by well-kept grounds-homes that were, externally, at least, well planned and cared for a school building and a church that pleased the eye-Everything provided for-apparently.

All Workers.

"This was deepened as I went through the mill-weave-rooms and card-rooms up-to-date-no use to look for Child Labor here, I thought. Upon entering the spinning-room, however, I met a real setback-youngsters by the dozen, tiny little chaps, sweeping, doffing, spinning-there were 25 of them that I judged to be under 12 years of age in the three spinning rooms alone (and I found some more in the weave rooms, helping). These little ones were all well-trained-answering to the age of 12 and 14, no matter how youthful their appearance. Surely, I thought-Not a Thing Neglected-Except the Children.

"I recorded some of my impressions by means of photographs during the noon periods, outside and also inside the mill (which see), and in order that I might be more sure of my age estimates, I made some visits to the homes of the people, where some of them showed me their family records, life insurance papers, etc. From these sources and from conversations with parents and children themselves, I proved nearly a dozen children to be working now, or during the past year at 10 and 11 years of age-some of them having begun before they were 10. I found that many children who say they are 12 are really "going on" twelve and too often,

have a long way to go before reaching 12. Others, who were 12 now, had been working one, two or three years, beginning at ten or before.

"Why is it that a Corporation should have in Georgia (for native children) an age limit of ten years and an eleven-hour day-while in Massachusetts it employs immigrant children for a ten-hour day, with an age-limit that is practically 16. Does it not reflect primarily upon the public opinion in the state that will be content with such low standards.

"The two hosiery mills in Rome employed more and younger children than the spinning mills, although the latter were not fully living up to the requirements of the law."

It is gratifying to witness the attitude of the press in Georgia toward this question of child labor, as indicated by the following from the Atlanta Ruralist of June 15th, 1913. The item relates to the death of a thirteen year old girl who was murdered last spring in Atlanta in the basement of the building where she was employed and where she had gone on her holiday to get the small balance of wages due her. The Ruralist says:

"The crime is not the sin of an individual, however dastardly. It is the deed of the public who permitted social conditions which made the final act possible.

In behalf of innocent childhood and intelligent, well-developed fathers and mothers of generations yet to come, we demand laws which will effectually prevent continuous child labor. Every Southern legislator who hereafter votes against the enactment of such protective measures we brand as a potential murderer accessory before the fact."