The following acts are also in force:

To prohibit the misuse of vessels used in the sale of milk (Acts 1906,

chapter 116).

To establish a standard for cream (Acts 1907, chapter 217).

To establish the standard of milk (Acts 1908, chapter 643).

To provide for the proper marking of heated milk (Acts 1908, chapter

570).

Relative to licensing dealers in milk (Acts 1909, chapter 443).

To provide for the appointment of inspectors and collectors of milk by

Boards of Health (Acts 1909, chapter 405).

Relative to the liability of producers of milk (Acts 1910, chapter 641).

To provide for the inspection and regulation of places where neat

cattle, their ruminants or swine are kept (Acts 1911, chapter 381).

To authorize the incorporation of medical milk commissions (Acts 1911,

chapter 506).

Relative to the establishing of milk distributing stations in cities and

certain towns (Acts 1911, chapter 278).

Relative to the labelling of evaporated, concentrated, or condensed milk

(Acts 1911, chapter 610).

To regulate the use of utensils for testing the composition or value of

milk and cream (Acts 1912, chapter 218).

To safeguard the public health against unclean milk containers and

appliances used in the treatment and mixing of milk (Acts 1913, chapter

761). Relative to the production and sale of milk (Acts 1914, chapter

744).

To prohibit charges for the inspection of live stock, dairies, or farm

buildings (Acts 1915, chapter 109).

The State is divided into eight health districts, with an inspector for

each in the State employ. Each city has its board of health; each town

administers the laws through its selectmen. The City of Lynn has a

board of health; also health inspectors, who do much of their work

before we are up--from 2 to 5 o'clock. They inspect all the milk

stations; take samples from milk wagons; inspect dairies that sell milk

in Lynn, wherever those dairies may be, even out of the State--as, for

instance, the Turner Centre Creamery in Maine. All that doesn't look as

if the milk situation was being neglected.

Massachusetts is doing a great deal for the children. There are over

5,800 wards in the care of the State Minor Wards Department. I do not

need to tell you what a great work is being done for the care and

education of these little ones; it speaks for itself.

Our opponents do not say much about the work women are doing on State

Boards. There are plenty of positions already held by women who are

doing inconspicuous and unexciting work, yet, nevertheless, most useful

to the Commonwealth. Here are some of them, with the number of women on

each board:

The State Board of Health, Lunacy and Charity was organized in 1879,

with 2 women on the board.

The work is now divided among different departments.

The State Board of Education had 1 woman member as far back as 1880; it

now has 2.

The State Board of Charity has 2.

The Free Public Library Commission has 2.

The Commission for the Blind has 2.

The Homestead Commission has 1.

The Minimum Wage Commission has 1.

The Board of Registration of Nurses has 3.

The Prison Commission has 2, who also serve on the Board of Parole for

the Reformatory for Women.

The Board of Trustees of the State Infirmary and State Farm has 2.

The Board of Trustees of the Hospitals for Consumptives has 1.

The State Hospitals at Worcester, Taunton, Northampton, Danvers,

Westboro, Medfield, Monson, Boston, Foxboro, have 2 each.

The Gardner State Colony has 2.

The Wrentham State School has 2.

The Massachusetts Training School Trustees has 2.

The Massachusetts General Hospital has 1.

The Perkins Institution for the Blind has 1.

The Hospital Cottages for Children has 1.

Here are forty-five women doing voluntary work on these Boards, all

appointed by the Governor and working under laws passed by the _men_ in

the Legislature.

Take another line. The manual of the labor laws enforced by the State

Board of Labor and Industries, covers the enforcement of the laws

relative to the education of minors, employment of minors, hours of

labor, apprenticeship, hours of labor for women, health inspection,

lighting, ventilation, cleanliness, guarding against dangerous

machinery, work in tenement houses, etc.

The little book entitled "Woman Suffrage, History, Arguments, Results,"

tells all about the suffrage states and gives the good laws that have

been enacted since women voted. It gives the impression that none such

are passed in male suffrage States. It has just two words about

Massachusetts; under the heading of "School Suffrage," it says,

"Massachusetts--1879." Under California, however, it gives a list of the

following laws and institutions:

Mothers' Pensions.

Minimum Wage.

Juvenile Court.

State Training School for Girls.

Teachers' Pension.

Weights and Measures.

Civil Service.

State Housing Commission.

Milk Inspection.

Tuberculosis.

Workingmen's Compensation

Psychopathic Parole.

But it carefully omits to mention that Massachusetts has all of these,

that some of them are much broader in scope, and that many are of longer

years standing.

You go into the Western States, and you find that legislation is

conducted on a different basis from what it is in Massachusetts.

Altogether too frequently, bills are pigeon-holed; the bills can't be

reported out of committee unless the chairman consents; and the result

is that many bills never see the light. Here in Massachusetts

law-making is better managed. The number of bills presented is large;

3,459 were printed during the session of 1914, and 2,802 were printed

during the last session. Some of these were offered by women. A woman,

as well as a man, can petition the Legislature. Every bill is referred

to a committee; it is given a public hearing, is reported upon and

action taken, one way or another; not one bill is pigeon-holed. The

Massachusetts system of legislative procedure is not surpassed anywhere

in the United States, and there are competent boards and officers who

carry out the various laws. Many of the things the suffragists agitate

about and think they need the franchise to bring to pass, they would

find are already being administered at the present time if they would

only look into the facts.

V

HOW MASSACHUSETTS FOSTERS PUBLIC WELFARE

MONICA FOLEY

_Miss Monica Foley, was educated in the Boston schools, graduating

from the Boston Academy of Notre Dame; is a member of the

Massachusetts Bar and Secretary of the Massachusetts Association

of Women Lawyers. She is a director of the Notre Dame Alumni

Association of Boston, and is connected with the State Commission

on Economy and Efficiency._

_J. A. H._

In the suffrage campaign just closed so much was heard of the

greatness of some of our states, including Utah and Nevada, Colorado

and Wyoming, that one was tempted to inquire, "Is there no good now in

Massachusetts?" It seemed passing strange that our Commonwealth, which

had always been the leader in every great turning point of the policy of

the nation, should have so signally failed that it ceased to exist as a

model to be extolled; it was stranger still that her worthy record was

ignored by her own sons and daughters. And yet the facts are that while

we may hold high in memory the examples of those who have gone before

us, we may also rejoice that the men of our own time not only uphold

the best ideals and lofty purposes of our State, but are day by day

working out her problems in such a way that her position is still secure

as a pioneer in sane legislation, her laws are still models for all

states (particularly woman suffrage states) her name is still cherished

in the wildernesses where her sons are pioneers, still venerated on her

own soil where her people stand at the gateways and welcome the

oppressed.

Proud as we are of her traditions, glorying as we do in her present

achievements, we are unafraid that the future will see her fall from her

eminence, from the dignity which has always characterized her statehood

and made her name a synonym for the best in government in the nation,

our Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

While this paper deals almost wholly with the executive functions of the

state, to make no mention of our judiciary would be to omit reference to

one of the brightest pages of our history. Massachusetts law and

Massachusetts judiciary decisions have always been and are now quoted

and respected in the greatest courts of the country. This splendid

system is being maintained at an annual cost exceeding $600,000.

Hand in hand with the establishment of a great judiciary system,

Massachusetts has devoted herself to the highest ideals of human

charity, and her enormous expenditures show that selfish materialism

plays no part in her legislation. Year by year the calls for charity are

more insistent, and year by year the State responds more generously.

The State Board of Charity was first organized in 1863, and at the

present time is an unpaid board of nine members, two of whom are women.

The institutions under their supervision are governed by unpaid boards

of seven members, two of whom are women, this latter being provided by

law, except in the instance noted below. The institutions under the

supervision of the board are the State Infirmary for the sick poor at

Tewksbury, and the State Farm at Bridgewater for misdemeanants and

insane criminals, both opened in 1854 and costing the state nearly

$1,000,000 annually. The training schools for delinquent children are

the Lyman School for Boys at Westborough (1848) and the Industrial

School for Boys at Shirley (1909) and for Girls at Lancaster (1856)

costing over $300,000 annually. The hospitals for consumptives are

located at Rutland (1898), North Reading (1909), Lakeville and

Westfield, both the latter being opened in 1910. Upon these suffering

poor the State spends over a half million dollars each year. The Norfolk

State Hospital at Walpole was opened in 1911 for inebriates and drug

habitues. There are no women on this board of trustees, there being no

women inmates of the hospital. There has also been located at Canton

since 1907 a Hospital School for crippled children. A hospital for

lepers has been maintained at Penikese Island since 1905.

Under the direction of the Board of Charity, aid is given mothers with

dependent children, the support of poor babies is undertaken, and the

tuition of poor children is paid. The board places the children in

homes wherever possible--institutional life being approved only when

necessary. Certain suffragists (of the Socialist persuasion) would give

the children to the State under the new order. In 1914 the Board

together with the institutions under their direction expended over three

million dollars and cared for more than 7000 persons in the institutions

alone. Is there anything here in the State's charity work which would

make any woman other than proud of its record?

The State's care of her insane is under the direction of a paid board of

three members, each hospital having a board of seven unpaid trustees,

including two women. The hospitals for the insane are at Worcester

(1833), Boston (Dorchester, 1839), Taunton (1854), Northampton (1858),

Danvers (1878), Westborough (1886), Foxboro (1893) and Medford (1896),

Gardner (1902.) There is a hospital for epileptics at Monson with

schools for the feeble-minded at Waltham (1848), with a colony at

Templeton since 1900 and a school at Wrentham (1907). In 1914 the State

cared for over 14,000 of these unfortunates and expended over three and

one-quarter millions of dollars for their maintenance.

The reformatory and correctional work of the Commonwealth (other than

exercised over the training schools) is under the direction of a board

of five prison commissioners (two women), only the chairman being paid.

Four institutions comprise this group; the State Prison at Charlestown

since 1805, but first established in 1785; the Reformatory at Concord

(1884); the Women's Reformatory at Sherborn (1877); and the Prison Camp

and Hospital at West Rutland, the camp being opened in 1904, the

hospital in 1907. Massachusetts has the distinction of being the first

state in the union to separate its women offenders from the men, by

establishing the Sherborn Reformatory. No child is born at this

institution. A mere man a few years ago, realizing the needless handicap

an innocent child would suffer through life if born in a prison,

petitioned the legislature to prevent the possibility. A law accordingly

was passed, and these unfortunate women are placed in a state hospital

until after their children are born. In 1914 over 1500 persons were

cared for in our prisons at a cost of more than a half million dollars.

Two boards of parole now study the histories of prisoners and recommend

certain persons for parole, the men's board in addition recommends

persons to be pardoned to the governor and council.

In no other sphere of the State's activities is the great throbbing

heart of the Commonwealth shown with such poignant fervor as in the case

of her unfortunates, and this phase of her work alone would entitle her

to the homage of all our people--but she does not stop here. She

dominates the educational field, and stands preeminent before the nation

and the world for the superiority of her educational institutions.

Massachusetts has given abundantly to the great university at Cambridge,

still endows freely the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and gives

annually of her funds to the Worcester Polytechnic Institute, the

Textile Schools at New Bedford, Lowell, and Fall River, and other

independent industrial schools. She practically maintains the

Agricultural College at Amherst, and gives to other agricultural

schools, and also aids certain cities and small towns.

In aiding the deaf, dumb, and blind in 1914, Massachusetts spent over

$200,000. In 1891 she opened a nautical school to train her young men in

seamanship, navigation, and marine engineering. In 1839 Massachusetts

founded the first Normal school in this country, and today ten of these

schools are open throughout the State. In this line of endeavor in 1914

the State expended over one and one-half millions of dollars.

The Commonwealth maintains a Department of Health, established in 1869,

expending in 1914 over $350,000. In Massachusetts also was passed the

first pure food law in the country.

The Metropolitan Water Works have cost the State since 1901 over

$50,000,000. Our park system is one of the finest in the world, and is

maintained at an annual cost of over half a million dollars. In addition

to the parks in the Metropolitan District, there are six other

reservations throughout the State. These parks represent an outlay of

over $20,000,000.

Our Homestead Commission was established to investigate defective

housing conditions and study building and tenement house laws. Its

members are unpaid, though the labor representative is reimbursed for

any loss he may suffer from absence from his regular occupation.

It can truly be said that no State in the union shows such grateful and

worthy appreciation to its veterans as does Massachusetts. In 1914 over

$700,000 was given to the veterans of our Civil War and to certain of

their dependent relatives, and to women army nurses. Under a special

gratuities act of 1912 she gave each living veteran of the war the sum

of $125, this one act alone costing over $500,000.

Among other of her good works, she appropriates each year $15,000 for

the relief of injured firemen and families of firemen killed in the

performance of their duty, and since the fund was established has

expended $270,000 for this work. The State also provides under a

contributory system for its employes.

Nowhere in the country are the people's savings and insurance more

zealously guarded than by Massachusetts, and here again she is leading

the way in the savings bank life insurance legislation. The bank

commission was established in 1838, the insurance commission in 1855,

the savings bank life insurance board in 1907, these three departments

costing in 1914 almost $200,000.

In dealing with her labor problems Massachusetts maintains a Department

of Labor and Industries (1913) which investigates industrial conditions

and enforces the labor laws; an Industrial Accident Board (1912) which

enforces law compensating injured employes. These two boards together

constitute a joint board for the prevention of industrial accidents and

diseases. There is also a Board of Conciliation and Arbitration (1886)

which mediates and arbitrates industrial disputes, and a Minimum Wage

Commission (the first in the country), which investigates the wages of

women and minors, and forms boards to recommend scales of wages in low

paid industries. Over $200,000 was expended by these boards in 1914.

On encouraging farming and caring for her forests, fisheries, and game,

was spent over $600,000 in 1914. This was distributed in many ways, some

being in form of bounties to children and youths, to agricultural

societies to encourage orcharding, poultry raising, for the purchase of

forest lands, the prevention of forest fires, the propagation of wild

birds and animals.

Preparedness was not overlooked, over half a million dollars being

expended on the militia in 1914. On highways and harbors nearly a

million dollars was spent.

Over a million and a quarter dollars was spent on public buildings, the

total valuation of state properties being over $8,300,000, the State

capitol and land itself being valued at over five and one-half million

dollars.

This is the record of Massachusetts. The suffragists have shown wisdom

in avoiding reference to these facts. They could not well do otherwise,

however, since they are allied with those detestable groups in our midst

who are preaching anarchy and revolution as a means to better

government. Better government where? This record is one that the men of

the State may well be proud of; it is a record that its women will

continue to make possible by their non-partisan influence in government,

by the training of its future citizens, by the teaching of those lessons

of civic honesty and uprightness that make for national integrity as

exemplified in the history of our Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

VI

MASSACHUSETTS COMPARED WITH SUFFRAGE STATES

CATHERINE ROBINSON

_Miss Catherine Robinson was a student at Radcliffe in 1911;

graduated from Miss Wheelock's Kindergarten Training School in

1915; has worked two winters among the children in the cotton

mills of Georgia, and has been affiliated with Neighborhood

House in East Boston, and with the Associated Charities in the

Co-operative Workrooms. She is now connected with the Social

Service Department of the Massachusetts General Hospital, her work

being in the Orthopaedic Clinic for Children. Miss Robinson was

formerly a suffragist, but after studying the question decided

that the suffragists' claims are illusions which never become

realities. She says: "Everything I do along these lines (Social

Service) convinces me more than ever what a detriment the vote

would be to our sex."_

_J. A. H._

Not long ago I heard Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, the President of the National

Woman Suffrage Association, say at Springfield:

"Laws have nothing to do with this question of woman suffrage; facts

have nothing to do with it. I shall not answer facts. We do not promise

to do great things for women; why should we? All we ask is the right to

vote."

All suffrage speakers are not so frank about their inability to answer

facts as Dr. Shaw is, nor do they cease from claiming that good laws for

women exist chiefly in suffrage states.

Massachusetts gives to her women the best protection of any state in the

Union. In January, 1915, New York ranked first, but since our

legislative enactments of 1915, Massachusetts is again in the lead. We

have, in the first place, the Maternity Act. Then we have the law

prohibiting women in industry from working more than fifty-four hours

per week. We have the absolute prohibition of night-work for our women

in textile, mercantile, and manufacturing establishments. We are one of

the five states in the Union to have such a law. All the five states are

male suffrage states. Not a single woman suffrage state prohibits the

night employment of its women; and yet among the laws safeguarding the

health of women workers, the prohibition of night work is of the most

fundamental importance.

Some women suffrage states do not even set a limit to the hours a woman

may work. In Wyoming, Nevada, and Kansas--all woman suffrage states, you

note--there is no limitation of hours of labor and no prohibition of

night work. Some one may say that Colorado, California, Oregon and

Washington have an eight-hour limitation. They have; but in each case

the canneries are excepted, so that in those states where the cannery

business is of vast importance, the women therein employed may work any

number of hours and any time of the day or night. Not long ago in New

York a similar law was proposed, allowing women and children to work

seventy-two hours a week in canneries, but the bill was defeated.

Colorado, to be sure, has the eight-hour law, but it does not prohibit

night work for women, so that the eight hours can be at night; neither

does Colorado require one day of rest in every seven. In Massachusetts

and New York there is a law specifically requiring one day of rest in

every seven for employees in factories, workshops, and all mercantile

establishments.

Another way in which we can protect women is by early closing hours, and

prohibition of work before a certain hour in the morning. Again we find

that it is in the male suffrage states that women have acquired such

protection, for New York sets an early closing hour of 5 p. m. for her

women in factories, mercantile, and manufacturing establishments, and

Massachusetts sets 6 p. m. Fourteen other male suffrage states set 10

p. m. as the closing hour; and all these states prohibit work before 6

a. m. What do we find in the woman suffrage states? Simply that out of

the eleven suffrage states, one state, California, sets a 10 p. m.

limit, but it does not apply to canneries.

As women enter further into the industrial field, more and more laws are

made for their protection. The men have done wonderfully for our women.

Whenever the public conscience is aroused to the need of a law, that

law is passed. Women do much, in fact, nearly everything, towards

arousing that public conscience, but we find when we study the laws as

they exist in our state that our men have made better laws for the

protection of our women than the men and women have made together in any

suffrage state. Let me add some of the other good laws we have in

Massachusetts. We have the Mothers' Pension Bill. This law was

originated by a man in a male suffrage state. We have the Equal

Guardianship Law. There are suffrage states where neither of these laws

exist.

Anti-Suffrage Essays · 第 2 / 8 段