State to include workmen's compensation, and, in Ohio, that permitting a general minimum wage law. Also the courts have made substantial progress in upholding the constitutionality of protective laws for men, so that there seems little reason to doubt that acts based upon scientifically determined physiological needs will be passed and supported as equitable.1 It may develop that such needs will necessitate special laws for women in some cases, and, in some cases special laws for men.

Until this time comes, when more education and further scientific knowledge is attained, should not the choice of occupation among adult women, so far as there is a choice, be left to those supremely concerned the women themselves? Would not this in itself throw the emphasis upon the need of a plan for progressive legislation beginning with the most helpless of our workers whether they be male or female; upon the imperative need for women to organize, thus strengthening the bargaining power of both men and women and making more probable the enforcement of laws which are passed; upon the advancement of intelligent women into skilled trades; and upon a comprehensive plan for health insurance? Does not other action than this seem fraught with the danger of restriction instead of protection? It cannot be overlooked that many so-called protective laws based upon sex appear to serve only as a handicap for those very important minorities of women who have entered the ranks of skilled workers.

1 The words of Felix Frankfurter to the Consumers' League can give as much hope at this point as when they were first spoken (cf., p. 97, supra): "My interest derives from an unshakeable faith that if we care as much about what we believe in as do those who believe the other thing, our ideas will prevail.... The information gathered must be made living, vivid and active."

TABLE OF CASES CITED

Adkins v. Children's Hospital; Adkins v. Lyons, 261 U. S. 525 (1923) ...

Assaria State Bank v. Dalley, 219 U. S. 121 (1910)

Atkin v. Kansas, 191 U. S. 207 (1903)

......

B. & O. R. R. v. I. C. C., 221 U. S. 612 (1911)

Bosley v. McLaughlin, 236 U. S. 385 (1915)

Re Boyce, 27 Nev. 299 (1904)

Bunting v. St. of Ore., 243 U. S. 426 (1917) ..

88, 404

Children's Hospital of Dist. of Col. v. Jesse C. Adkins, 284 Fed.

Rep. 613 (1922)

Children's Hospital of Dist. of Col. v. Adkins

Commonwealth v. Beatty, 15 Super. Ct. (Pa.) 5 (1900)

Cleveland v. Construction Co., 67 Ohio 197 (1902)

Commonwealth v. Boston & Me. Rr. 110 N. E. 264 (1915)
Commonwealth v. Hamilton Mfg. Co., 120 Mass. 383 (1876)

In re Considine, 83 Fed. Rep. 157 (1895)

Re Dalton, 61 Kan. 275 (1899) .....

Eden v. People (Ill.) 43 N. E. 1108 (1896)

53

52

39

71

39

41, 48, 49, 100, 102

20, 86-88

85-87

52

61

49f.

59, 64

58

52

30

39

26, 28

69

83

20, 22, 35-36, 38, 46, 55, 61

35

54

22, 25, 26-27, 106

54

30

29

29

83

Erie R. R. Co. v. New York, 233 U. S. 671 (1914)
Godcharles v. Wigemen, 113 Pa. St. 431 (1886)
Hawley v. Walker, 232 U. S. 718 (1914)

Holcombe v. Creamer, 231 Mass. 99 (1918)
Holden v. Hardy, 169 U. S. 366 (1898)
Holden v. Hardy, 14 Utah 71 (1896)

.....

Ives v. So. Buffalo Ry. Co., 201 N. Y. 271 (1911)

In re Jacobs, 98 N. Y. 98 (1885)

Jensen v. So. Pac. Co., 215 N. Y. 514 (1915)

Ex parte Jentzsch (Cal.), 44 Pac. 803 (1896)

Jordan v. State, 51 Tex. Cr. Rep. 531

....

Knoxville Iron Co. v. Harbison, 183 U. S. 13 (1901)
Larsen v. Rice, 100 Wash. 642 (1918)
Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 45 (1905)
Low v. Reese Printing Co., 41 Neb. 127 (1894)
Lyons, Willie A. v. Jesse C. Adkins

Miller Tel. Co. v. Min. Wage Com., 145 Minn. 262 (1920)
Millet v. People, 117 Ill. 294 (1886)

Re Morgan, 26 Colo. 415 (1899)
Mountain Timber Co. v. Wash., 37 Sp. Ct. Rep. 260 (1917)
Muller v. Oregon, 208 U. S. 412 (1908)

....

66, 69, 75, 77, 100, 159, 161-162, 206, 214

Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113 (1876)
N. Y. Central R. R. v. White, 243 U. S. 188 (1917)
Noble State Bank v. Haskell, 219 U. S. 104 (1911) ..
People v. Balofsky, 167 N. Y. App. Div. 913 (1915)
People ex rel. Cossey v. Grout, 179 N. Y. 417 (1904)
People v. Erie R. R. Co., 198 N. Y. 369 (1910)
People v. Havnor, 43 N. E. 541 (1896), New York
People ex rel. Hoelderlin v. Kane, 79 Misc. 140 (1913)
People v. Klinck Packing Co., 214 N. Y. 121 (1915)
People v. Liggett, 227 N. Y. 617 (1919)
People v. Lochner, 177 N. Y. 145 (1904)
People v. Metz, 193 N. Y. 148 (1908)
People v. N. Y. Central & H. R. R. Co., 163 App. Div. 79 (1914)
People v. Orange Road Construction Co., 175 N. Y. 84 (1903)
People ex rel. Rogers v. Coler, 166 N. Y. 1 (1901)
People v. Schweinler Press, 214 N. Y. 395 (1915)

....

.....

21, 25

55

21, 53, 54

28

51, 110

39

30-31 69, 206

33

223f., 332

41-42

52

40

......

51

51

72-74, 241

People v. Warden of City Prison, Brooklyn, 215 N. Y. 701 (1915) .. 75

People v. Williams, 189 N. Y. 131 (1907) ...

Poye v. State of Texas, 230 S. W. Rep. 161 (1921)

Re Preston, 63 Ohio St. 428

Radice v. People, 264 U. S. 292 (1923)

Riley v. Mass., 232 U. S. 671 (1914)

Ritchie v. People, 155 Ill. 98 (1895)

Ritchie v. Wayman, 244 Ill. 509 (1910)

Simpson v. O'Hara, 70 Ore. 261 (1914)

Spokane Hotel v. Younger, 113 Wash. 359 (1920)

State v. Atkin, 64 Kan. 174 (1902)

State v. Barba, 132 La. 768 (1913)

State v. Buchanan, 29 Wash. 602, 605 (1902)

State v. Bunting, 71 Ore. 259 (1914)

State v. Cantwell, 179 Mo. 245 (1903)

State v. Crowe, 130 Ark. 272 (1917)

State v. Haun, 61 Kan. 146

State v. Loomis, 115 Mo. 307

State v. Miksicek, 225 Mo. 561 (1909)

State v. Miss. Tie & Timber Co., 181 Mo. 536
State v. Muller, 48 Oregon 252 (1906)

72-73, 238 84

29

72, 75, 88, 100, 336

69 20, 60, 67

20, 60, 68, 67, 162

81

84

52

46f

21, 62, 64

46

38-39

82

29

29

34

29

65, 77

State v. J. J. Newman Lumber Co. 102 Miss. 802 (1912); 103 Miss.

263 (1912)

State v. Petit, 77 N. W. Rep. 225 (Minn.), (1898)

Stettler v. O'Hara, 69 Ore. 519 (1914)

Stettler v. O'Hara, 243 U. S. 629 (1917)

Treat v. Coler, 166 N. Y. 144 (1901)

U. S. v. Northern Commercial Co., 6 Alaska Reports 94 (1918)

....

Wenham v. State, 65 Neb. 394 (1902)

Williams v. Evans, 139 Minn. 32 (1917)

Wilson v. New, 243 U. S. 332 (1917)

Wolff Co. v. Industrial Court, 662 U. S. 522 (1923)

45

30

20, 80-81

81

51

50

62, 64

83, 84

40

93