Compulsory attendance makes discipline in the schools more difficult because of the discord occasioned by pupils who are unwilling to attend. Parents also occasion discord if their children are forced to attend against their will. Such extension of the law would result in further over-crowding of school houses and classes. Unless more money is provided for the schools the present number of teachers could not teach the increased numbers. This would result in very inefficient teaching. During 1913, in some counties in North Carolina, it was difficult to secure sufficient teachers for all the schools. Unless better salaries are paid, this condition would be intensified under the proposed measure. Other measures than the one proposed are in part responsible for the lack of attendance. School houses could be more centrally located; greater interest could be taken in the school by the committee and leading citizens; the teacher could study local conditions more carefully and become more closely allied with the interests of the community. This would count for more than enforced, involuntary attendance. REFERENCES Public Laws of North Carolina, 1913. Chapter 173. Superintendent of Public Instruction of North Carolina. Report 1908-'10, pp. 39-44; Report 1910-'12, pp. 23-24. Southern Educational Association. Proceedings, 1904, pp. 78-94, Compulsory Education; Proceedings, 1907, pp. 97-108, Compulsory Attendance; Proceedings, 1908, pp. 174-83, Result of Compulsory Attendance Laws in Asheville, with discussion; Proceedings, 1910, pp. 6673, Compulsory Education. Conference for Education in the South, Sixth Conference, pp. 203-6, Responsibility of the Government for Public Education; Ninth Conference, pp. 74-76, Compulsory Attendance Law in West Virginia; Eleventh Conference, pp. 147-76, Eleven Discussions of Compulsory Education; Fifteenth Conference, pp. 55-70, Need of Compulsory Education in the South. Virginia Department of Public Instruction. Biennial Report, 1907-8, 1908-9. United States Commissioner of Education. Report, 1898-99, Vol. 1, pp. 147-64, Methods and Results in Central Europe; Report, 1899, Vol. 2, pp. 1311-18, Compulsory Education in Relation to Crimes and Social Morals; Report, 1906, Vol. 2, pp. 1263-90, Welfare of the Child. National Education Association. Proceedings, 1871, pp. 16-25, Compulsory Education; Proceedings, 1883, pp. 76-78, Discussions on Compulsory Education; Proceedings, 1891, pp. 294-7, Report of Committee on State School Systems; also pp. 297-305, Discussion; also pp. 393-401, Compulsory Education in Illinois and Wisconsin; also pp. 401-3, Dis cussion; also pp. 403-12, Compulsory Education in Massachusetts; Proceedings, 1904, pp. 244-9, The Factory Child; Proceedings, 1905, pp. 103-13, Compulsory Education and Child Labor; Proceedings, 1908, pp. 1229-31, Compulsory School Attendance in the South. Annals of the American Academy. 32: sup. pp. 40-56, July, 1908, Compulsory Education the Solution of the Child Labor Problem. Annals of the American Academy. 32: sup. pp. 57-66, July, 1908, Compulsory Education in the South. Annals of the American Academy. 33: sup. pp. 100-3, March, 1909, Scholarship for Working Children. Charities. 15:822-24, Legalized Ignorance in the National Capital. Charities. 21:670-3, Price Law in New Jersey. Charities. 21:961-4, Does South Carolina Need a Compulsory School System? Education. 4:25-34, Compulsory Education. Education. 14:352-6, A Substitute for Compulsory Education. Educational Review. 33:217-44, Why Is Public Education in the United States not as Successful as in Germany? Journal of American Sociology. 10:299-314, Has Illinois the Best Laws in the Country for the Protection of Children? INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM Resolved, That the Constitution of North Carolina should be so amended as to allow the initiative and referendum in state-wide legislation. INTRODUCTION Certain evils existing in the various state governments have aroused wide-spread discussion as to the possible means of their elimination. Many statesmen and reformers are advocating, as a remedy, the adoption of the initiative and referendum. The fundamental idea behind the initiative is that the voters in the state may at their own option suggest and vote upon given measures, irrespective of any action by the state legislature. If a majority of those casting ballots vote in favor of the measure, it becomes a law. If a majority be against a measure, it does not become a law. The referendum operates in much the same way. If the legislature passes a measure which does not meet with popular approval, the voters may by means of the referendum have the question submitted to popular vote. The legislature is forced to abide by the decision of the voters as expressed at the election. The initiative and referendum are in use in foreign countries and in a number of American states and cities. AFFIRMATIVE ARGUMENTS The initiative and referendum are logical and natural outgrowths in the development of American government. They are in harmony with the development that has preceded them. They begin at the points where the previous reform measures leave off. The initiative and referendum will secure better government. They will raise the standard of citizenship. They will put legislation on a business-like basis. They will do away with undesirable legislation, either intentional or unintentional. The initiative and referendum are practical. They require only the ordinary election machinery. They are exceedingly simple in operation. They are comparatively inexpensive. The initiative and referendum have proved uniformly successful; for "Boss" rule has been eliminated in South Dakota. Granting of special privileges has been prevented in Oklahoma. Corporate domination has been done away with in Oregon. Switzerland has been signally successful in using the measures. North Carolina needs the iniative and referendum. Many sorely needed state-wide laws have failed of enactment whose passage would be hastened by the adoption of this amendment. The passage of this amendment would have a salutary effect in that the legislature would then be compelled to listen closely to the people in the making of laws. NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS The initiative and referendum are contrary to the fundamental principles of American government; for they strike at the very root of representative government. They encourage hasty and unwise action. The argument that the initiative and referendum will secure better government is not valid. It is a very simple matter to secure fraudulent signatures on initiative and referendum petitions. The initiative and referendum give a hasty and immature tone to legislation. The initiative and referendum are impractical in actual operation. Voters have failed to show any permanent increased interest in public affairs. Voters have been very superficial in their investigations of pending problems. Voters have used the measures only spasmodically, and have thus kept legislatures in continual doubt as to what course to pursue. Special interests have found it comparatively easy to circularize the state and secure the passage of measures particularly favorable to them. Present conditions do not warrant the adoption of such measures as the initiative and referendum. State governments are comparatively free from abuses. In those instances where unworthy or inefficient legislators are in power, the evil can be remedied by the voters coming to the polls and electing good men to office. The responsibility rests entirely with the people even at the present time. North Carolina does not need the initiative and referendum. If there were a vital need, as the affirmative contends, for the state-wide laws they propose, it would long ago have asserted itself under our system. The working of the initiative and referendum in other states is not of such a nature as to justify their extension to North Carolina. GENERAL REFERENCES Bliss, W. P. D., Editor. New Encyclopedia of Social Reform. Bryce, James. American Commonwealth. Edition 3, Vol. 2, Chapter XXXIX. Debaters' Handbook Series. The Initiative and Referendum. H. W. · Wilson Company. White Plains, N. Y. $1.00. High School Debating Union. The Initiative and Referendum. Chapel Hill, N. C., 1913. Free. Ringwalt, R. C. Briefs on Public Questions. Longmans, Green and Company. New York, N. Y. $1.25. Robbins, E. C. High School Debate Book. A. C. McClurg, Chicago. $1.00. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 43, September 1912, 352 pp. American Academy of Political and Social Science, 36th Woodland Ave., Philadelphia, Penn. $1.00. AFFIRMATIVE REFERENCES Hon. Jonathan Bourne, Jr.-Article on “Initiative, Referendum, and Recall," Senate Document No. 302, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Hon. Jonathan Bourne, Jr.-Speech on "Popular Versus Delegated Government," Senate Document, No. 524, 2nd Session, 61st Congress. Hon. H. S. Bigelow-"Initiative and Referendum," Senate Document No. 556, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Hon. Judson King—“New Danger to Majority Rule." Senate Document No. 897, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Hon. Theodore Roosevelt-"The Right of the People to Rule." Senate Document No. 473, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Hon. Theodore Roosevelt-"A Charter of Democracy." Senate Document No. 348, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. NEGATIVE REFERENCES Senator H. C. Lodge-"The Constitution and Its Makers." Senate Document No. 271, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. President Nicholas Murray Butler-"Why Should We Change Our Form of Government?" Senate Document No. 238, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Hon. Samuel W. McCall-"Representative as Against Direct Government." Senate Document No. 273, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. President W. H. Taft-Address. Senate Document No. 451, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Judge N. C. Young-“Shall We Change Our Plan of Gevernment?” Senate Document No. 865, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Hon. J. B. Foraker-Address. Senate Document No. 445, 2nd Session, 62nd Congress. Hon. G. W. Wickersham-Address. Senate Document No. 62, Ist Session, 63rd Congress. Hon. G. W. Wickersham-Address. Senate Document No. 20, Ist Session, 63rd Congress. Senator J. W. Bailey-Address against Initiative, Referendum, and Recall. Congressional Record, January 2nd, 1913. CHILD LABOR Resolved, That North Carolina should enact a law prohibiting all children under fourteen years of age from working in any mill, factory, or manufacturing plant. Resolved, That there should be an inspector with full state authority for the enforcement of all laws relating to the employment of children in North Carolina. The present child labor law passed in 1913 prohibits the employment of children under twelve years of age; allows children between twelve and thirteen to serve as apprentices; and allows any child thirteen years of age to work in the day. No child under sixteen is permitted to work between the hours of 9 P. M. and 6 A. M. The superintendent of public instruction in each county is given the right to inspect factories but is not given full authority. According to Owen R. Lovejoy, Secretary of the National Child Labor Committee, the unsolved problems connected with child labor resolve themselves into: I. What classes of children should be entirely eliminated as a factor in the industrial problem? 2. From what industries should all children be eliminated? 3. What regulation should govern the condition of the children who may wisely be employed? 4. What is to be done with those excluded from industry? These propositions fairly cover the field of discussion. Among the questions that they bring up are these: I. Should vacation permits be issued? 2. Should home labor for gain be permitted? 3. Is the age limit of fourteen years sufficient protection for children? Should industrial and vocational education be made a dominant feature of public school instruction? 4. |