Digitalisate EconBiz Logo Full screen
  • First image
  • Previous image
  • Next image
  • Last image
  • Show double pages
Use the mouse to select the image area you want to share.
Please select which information should be copied to the clipboard by clicking on the link:
  • Link to the viewer page with highlighted frame
  • Link to IIIF image fragment

Unemployment in the United States

Access restriction


Copyright

The copyright and related rights status of this record has not been evaluated or is not clear. Please refer to the organization that has made the Item available for more information.

Bibliographic data

fullscreen: Unemployment in the United States

Monograph

Identifikator:
1828236179
URN:
urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-226169
Document type:
Monograph
Title:
Unemployment in the United States
Place of publication:
Washington
Publisher:
United States, Government Printing Office
Year of publication:
1930
Scope:
II, 193 Seiten
Digitisation:
2022
Collection:
Economics Books
Usage license:
Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:
Monograph
Structure type:
Chapter
Title:
Statement of Mr. William Green, president of American Federation of Labor
Collection:
Economics Books

Contents

Table of contents

  • Unemployment in the United States
  • Title page
  • Contents
  • Statement of hon. Robert F. Wagner, a senator from the State of New York
  • Statement of Dr. Henry A. Atikinson, general secretary Church Union and World Alliance, New York City
  • Statement of Mr. William Green, president of American Federation of Labor
  • Statement of Dr. Samuel Joseph, College of the City of New York
  • Statement by Miss Frances Perkins, industrial commissioner of the State of New York
  • Statement of Dr. William T. Foster
  • Statement of Prof. Paul Douglas, of Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa.
  • Statement of John B. Andrews, Director of the American Association for Labor Legislation
  • Statement of James A. Emery, Washtington, D.C., representing the National Association of Manufacturers, and others
  • Statement of Mrs. E. E. Danley, representing the National Board of the Young Women´s Christian Association
  • Statement of James A. Emery, representing National Association of Manufacturers of the United States of America
  • Statement of Thomas F. Cadwalader, representing the Sentinels of the Republic, Baltimore, MD.
  • Statement of Miss Grace E. Cooke, representing the National Employment Board, Boston, Mass
  • Statement of Fred J. Winslow, Chicago, Ill., representing the Illinois Employment Board
  • Statement of Frank L. Peckham
  • Statement of James M. Mead, of New York
  • Closing statement of hon. Robert F. Wagner, United States Senator from the States of Yew York
  • Statement of hon. John L. Cable, a representative in congress from the State of Ohio

Full text

UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 27 
who paid fees therefor. An act by the State of Washington was 
passed prohibiting charging employes fees for such service. Appel- 
lants filed a bill in equity in the United States District Court to 
restrain the enforcement of the act alleging it to be unconstitutional. 
The Supreme Court, on appeal, held the act violated the fourteenth 
amendment. The sole ground upon which the court based its con- 
clusion was that the State did not have the power to prohibit private 
employment agencies from charging an employee a fee. 
This question is not involved in the proposed legislation, and the 
case does not in any way suggest that such legislation as is now under 
consideration would be unconstitutional. 
In the last mentioned case Mr. Justice Brandeis delivered a very 
strong and illuminating dissenting opinion in which Mr. Justice 
Holmes and Mr. Justice Clarke concurred. Mr. Justice McKenna 
also dissented. 
Mr. Justice Brandeis reviewed the evils of private employment 
bureaus, the necessity of aid in solving the employment question by 
the Federal Government and reviewed the Federal legislation having 
for its purpose the solution of the larger problems of unemployment. 
He referred to the immigration act of February 20, 1907 (34 Stat. 
898), which created within the Bureau of Immigration and Naturali- 
zation a division of information charged with the duty of promoting 
“a beneficial distribution of aliens.” The services rendered by this 
division included, among others, some commonly performed by em- 
ployment agencies; it undertook to place aliens in positions of em- 
ployment but its operations were national in scope. He also referred 
to the Act of March 4, 1913, creating the Department of Labor. 
which Act resulted in the transfer of the Bureau of Immigration, 
including the division of information, to that Department (37 Stat. 
728) 
Mr. Justice Brandeis stated, page 607: 
By this transfer the scope of the division’s work was enlarged to correspond 
with the broad powers of the Labor Department. These were declared by 
Congress to be “to foster, promote and develop the welfare of the wage earners 
of the United States, to improve their working conditions and to advance their 
opportunities for profitable employment.’ 
The underlying principle of the sections of the above-mentioned 
Acts is the same as the underlying principle of the proposed legislation, 
the only difference being that the proposed legislation affords a 
greater opportunity for service by the Federal Government in co- 
operation with the States. 
The question of the constitutionality of legislation along the lines 
of the pending bill was not involved in the case; but the dissenting 
opinion of Mr. Justice Brandeis apparently anticipated further 
progress In legislation of this type and clearly and emphatically 
shows that such legislation is constitutional. 
In the case of Chicago & A. R. R. Co. ». Tranbarger (238 U.S. 77), 
cited in the brief of the association, the Supreme Court had under 
consideration a statute of Missouri requiring railroads to open drains 
across and through its right of way and road bed so as to form proper 
drainage. The property owner sued the railroad company for 
damages growing out of its failure to comply with this statute. The 
railroad defended upon the ground that the law was ex post facto and 
also a violation of the provisions of the 14th amendment. The
	        

Download

Download

Here you will find download options and citation links to the record and current image.

Monograph

METS MARC XML Dublin Core RIS Mirador ALTO TEI Full text PDF EPUB DFG-Viewer Back to EconBiz
TOC

Chapter

PDF RIS

This page

PDF ALTO TEI Full text
Download

Image fragment

Link to the viewer page with highlighted frame Link to IIIF image fragment

Citation links

Citation links

Monograph

To quote this record the following variants are available:
URN:
Here you can copy a Goobi viewer own URL:

Chapter

To quote this structural element, the following variants are available:
Here you can copy a Goobi viewer own URL:

This page

To quote this image the following variants are available:
URN:
Here you can copy a Goobi viewer own URL:

Citation recommendation

Unemployment in the United States. United States, Government Printing Office, 1930.
Please check the citation before using it.

Image manipulation tools

Tools not available

Share image region

Use the mouse to select the image area you want to share.
Please select which information should be copied to the clipboard by clicking on the link:
  • Link to the viewer page with highlighted frame
  • Link to IIIF image fragment

Contact

Have you found an error? Do you have any suggestions for making our service even better or any other questions about this page? Please write to us and we'll make sure we get back to you.

How much is one plus two?:

I hereby confirm the use of my personal data within the context of the enquiry made.