Hitherto only three states, Massachusetts, Indiana and Nebraska, have enacted in their statutes the principle of assuring to working women a fixed period of rest at night—a principle adopted by England as long ago as 1847 in the first factory legislation.
In this country, usage has so blunted our perception of the effects of work carried on to midnight or all night, that the establishment of a legal closing hour is one of the last steps taken even by progressive states. Yet in Massachusetts 10 P. M. has been the legal closing hour in factories for almost twenty-five years, and the great textile trade has flourished with an even earlier closing hour for women, set by law at 6 P. M. since 1907.
In recommending the enactment of the nightwork bill, the Factory Investigating Commission carefully considered the adverse opinion of the New York Court of Appeals, which five years ago, in the Williams case, declared unconstitutional a similar law prohibiting the night work of women. The commission concluded that two new circumstances justified the enactment of a new law and the reargument of the principle at stake before the highest court of New York—the only court of last resort which has rendered a decision on this subject.
These two circumstances are, first, the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States upholding the Oregon ten-hour law for women, handed down since the decision in the Williams case was rendered; and second, the existence of many “facts of common knowledge” regarding the physical, moral and economic effects of night work, facts which were not brought to the attention of the New York Court of Appeals when it decided that Katie Mead was not likely to be injured by working at 10.20 P. M. in a given occupation.
When the new case comes up for argument it is reasonable to hope that the New York court will follow the lead of the Supreme Court of the United States in taking “judicial cognizance” of those ascertained facts which go far beyond the single case at bar, and present to the court the world’s experience as to legislation of this character.
CALIFORNIA WOMEN AND THE VICE SITUATION
A red light injunction and abatement bill, not essentially different from the law now in effect in Iowa and Nebraska, passed both houses of the California Legislature with good majorities and was signed by Governor Hiram W. Johnson on April 7. The law declares houses of prostitution and assignation to be nuisances and holds responsible both the proprietor of the house and the owner of the building. It enables any citizen, whether personally damaged or not, to bring action; and it levies a fine against the property itself and forbids its use at any future time for such purpose.[[2]]
The bill has had a somewhat dramatic history. In 1911 it was introduced at the request of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union by Assemblyman Wyllie, but though favorably reported from the Public Morals Committee it was killed by re-reference to the Judiciary Committee too late to be returned to the floor.
The tremendous general awakening since then on the subject of the social evil and the exposure in San Francisco of the enormous sums reaped by organized vice under the Schmitz-Ruef regime, led to the formation of a society of social hygiene. The efforts of the United States Department of Justice to suppress the traffic in girls led to the establishment of an anti-slavery society; and the State Board of Health, under the leadership of Dr. William F. Snow, made venereal, like other contagious diseases, reportable, though only by case numbers.
Attention has been gradually focussed upon the question of the desirability of segregation of vice or “red light” districts which exist in nearly all the cities of California except Los Angeles, and in most of the larger towns. San Francisco is the only city to make an attempt at systematic regulation and medical examination and this city has been the object of repeated criticism on the part of those who do not believe in the European system of regimentation. It has also done its part in preparing the public mind for a more intelligent discussion of such measures as the injunction and abatement bill, the requirement of a health certificate for marriage, and the several bills limiting the liquor traffic which were offered in the present Legislature.