# data[].attributes.body
The way that women were treated was unfair and judgmental for the fact that they weren't allowed to speak or do certain things because they were women.  They had no voting power and weren't able to hold office. When they did work and earn money it belonged to their husbands, any property they had before marriage was owned by their husband after they got married, and there was no law saying that husbands couldn't abuse their wives.
To do something about this, sisters Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton decided to have a national women's rights convention in New York. Which is known as the Seneca Falls Convention. This convention demanded that women have equal rights, such as going to  work, school, church, and in the voting booth. They also wrote the declaration of sentiments based on the declaration of independence. Susan B. Anthony and Lucy Stone also protested that women should have equal rights. Women's Rights made some progress and New York passed law allowing women to keep their property and hard earned money. Womens voting took sometime to get into action and become a right.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Information and Articles About Women's Rights in America, an important movement in women's history

The women's rights movement summary: Women's rights is the fight for the idea that women should have equal rights with men. Over history, this has taken the form of gaining property rights, the women's suffrage, or the right of women to vote, reproductive rights, and the right to work for for equal pay.

Women's Rights Timeline: Here is a timeline of important events in the struggle for women's liberation in the United States

Pre-settlement: Iroquois women have the power to nominate-and depose-council elders and chiefs.

Margaret Brent demands two votes from the Maryland Assembly: one as a landowner and one as the legal representative of the colony's proprietor, Lord Baltimore. She is refused.

1790: New Jersey gives the vote to "all free inhabitants" of the state. It is revoked from women in 1807.

1838: Kentucky allows widows to vote in local school elections, but only if they have no children enrolled.

1840: Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton meet in London, where they are among the women delegates refused credentials to the World Anti-Slavery Convention. Women are very active abolitionists but are rarely in leadership positions.

1848: Mott and Stanton organize the Woman's Rights Convention in Seneca Falls, N.Y., and take a cue from the Founding Fathers in issuing the Declaration of Sentiments: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal."

1868: The 14th Amendment guarantees civil rights to all citizens but gives the vote to men only.

1869: Wyoming Territory gives women the right to vote. The national suffrage movement splits into two factions: one that supports the 14th Amendment and the franchise for black men and one that calls for woman suffrage above all else.

1887: Federal legislation to end polygamy in Utah contains a measure to disenfranchise women, who had won the vote there in 1870. They wouldn't get it back until 1895.

1890: Congress threatens to withhold statehood from Wyoming because of woman suffrage. Wyoming threatens to remain a territory rather than give up women's votes. Congress backs down, and Western states take the lead in giving women full voting rights.

1912: With 4 million women eligible to vote in the West, presidential candidates vie for their attention for the first time. Democrat Woodrow Wilson wins.

1913: Some 8,000 marchers turn out for the first national suffrage parade in Washington, D.C., the day before Wilson's inauguration.

1915: Suffrage referendums are defeated in Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

1916: Jeannette Rankin of Montana is the first woman elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

1917: Suffragists picket the newly reelected Wilson in front of the White House, the first time a public demonstration has targeted the presidential home. Throughout the summer, activists are arrested and imprisoned in the Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia where they were kept in isolation, beaten and force-fed.

1918: Wilson endorses the 19th Amendment to the Constitution mandating woman suffrage. It narrowly passes in the House, but fails by two votes in the Senate.

1919: On May 21, the Senate defeats the suffrage amendment for a second time by one vote. On June 4, the Senate passes the 19th Amendment by a two-vote margin and sends it to the states for ratification.

1920: On August 18, Tennessee is the 36th state to ratify the 19th Amendment, and "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex" becomes the law of the land.

Articles Featuring Women's Rights From History Net Magazines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The women's rights movement summary: Women's rights is the fight for the idea that women should have equal rights with men. Over history, this has taken the form of gaining property rights, the women's suffrage, or the right of women to vote, reproductive rights, and the right to work for for equal pay.

# data[].attributes.body
Factories were very popular and were important for civilians. They offered jobs and it was easy for everyone to get a job. Since, many people are needed to make daily products the pay wasn't very high. The people who worked in the factory were in horrible living conditions. They were constantly put in danger, because the machines were loud, noisy, and not safe. Many people lost their fingers to the machines while working.

If you think this bad, imagine children working in the factories. They were exposed to the same amount of danger and work. They barely earned any money and they practically lived in filth. Children were also supposed to work on the machines to support their families. Factory owners took advantage of them because they didn't have to be paid as much.Labor reforms were eventually formed to help protect workers and improve child labor laws. The campaign began to decrease the number of work hours to 8 a day, so progress was slowly building.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Labor Movement - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find out more about the history of Labor Movement, including videos, interesting articles, pictures, historical features and more. Get all the facts on HISTORY.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As progressive child labor reformers gained traction during the last quarter of the 19th century, efforts expanded at the state level to outlaw the employment of small children. The move toward state-level reforms proved challenging. Many states, particularly in the South, resisted the effort. Frequently, child labor law opponents denied the problem existed and aggressively extolled the virtues of children in the workplace. This foiled the goal of achieving uniform laws across the country through state action. The failures at the state level caused many reformers by the early 1900s to believe that a federal law might be the best option. The limited role of the federal government under the Constitution, however, made such a prospect difficult. Many constitutional experts, Congressmen, and Presidents believed such a law was unconstitutional. In the face of widespread public support for curtailing child labor, a law based on the Commerce Clause of the Constitution-giving Congress the authority to regulate commerce between states or with foreign nations-was passed in 1916. This article concentrates on the reform movement up through the passage of that law.

I am glad to see there is going to be a meeting here for child labor. I am really tired of seeing so many big children ten years old playing in the streets. -Prominent lady citizen

Don't take these boys away from us! We have just bought these uniforms, and they were made to order. -Shopkeeper in Cleveland, Ohio

There is a street in Lawrence, MA, named Camella Teoli Way. To know the story of how that street came to be named is to know the story of a struggle. The struggle of Camella Teoli is one of a young Italian immigrant who started work in a mill and ultimately spoke before Congress. Teoli's struggle is a battle against child labor.

The story of Camella Teoli drew widespread attention throughout the country. The presence of the First Lady Helen Taft at the hearing helped heighten awareness of the issue. The hearing, though, was not a turning point in the movement against child labor. No seminal event changed public perceptions nor turned the tide against the use of children as laborers. Rather, the struggle was long, with many victories and failures along the way. Teoli's story of injury, false documents, and parental and mill-owner apathy is emblematic of the larger fight against child labor.

The public was starting to become aware of the conditions under which children labored, and politicians slowly began to take notice. In 1872, the Prohibition Party became the first political party to include in its national platform a provision that condemned the use of children in industry. This point of view, though, was not a widespread one. Two years later, in 1874, at least 20 people, most young girls, some as young as 5, were killed in a fire at the Granite Mill in Fall River, MA. Young girls were burned alive, suffocated, or killed in a futile attempt to jump to safety. The story of the fire made headlines across the country. Surprisingly, the story of why there were so many children in the mill did not. Rather, editorials generally focused on a call for greater fire-safety measures in order to prevent future disasters. While the Chicago Tribune lamented the fact that so many children had to toil in such conditions, the paper proposed making the workplace more secure for children as the solution. One Massachusetts resident, however, wondered why the mill was filled with children. His solution: "Take the children out of the mills."

Between 1885 and 1889, stories like this led 10 states to pass minimum age laws, while 6 set maximum working hours for children.Despite these new laws in some states, the number of child workers in the United States continued to increase. In 1890, more than 18 percent of children ages 10 to 15 were employed. Although by 1900 laws in the North curtailed child labor to an extent, the practice of child labor was widespread in the South.Primarily as a result of efforts in the North, enrollment of children across the country in secondary schools increased 150 percent from 1890 to 1900. During this same period, the population increased only 21 percent. Compulsory education laws were widely enacted outside of the South during the post-Civil War period.

Early 20th century reform efforts

Despite Roosevelt's refusal to meet with the children, the procession of 200 youngsters from Pennsylvania to New York drew attention from onlookers and brought publicity to their issue. President Roosevelt even raised the issue of child labor in his 1901 and 1904-08 State of the Union addresses to Congress. He ordered the Department of Commerce and Labor to pay particular attention "to the conditions of child labor and child-labor legislation in several states." He did this with an eye toward setting up nationwide rules to be passed at the state level.A federal law, however, was still out of the question for Roosevelt.

The NCLC continued its work at the state level. To highlight the focus on child welfare, reformers spread stories of the horrors of child labor. This meant not only portraying scenes of little children working in dangerous situations, as NCLC photographer Lewis Hines did, but also portraying greedy mill owners and parents in a negative light. Most stories concentrated on the greedy parents. The reformers spread tales of fathers who were too drunk and too lazy to work that they pushed their own children into labor. Mothers, too, were portrayed negatively. The New York Observer noted that children's wages helped "to deck out with a little more finery the gaunt figure of a neglectful mother." A riot nearly broke out at a New York cannery when the owner attempted to exclude young children from employment. "[He was] besieged by angry Italian women, one of whom bit his finger 'right through.'"

Parents who were ignorant of the damage that child labor did to their children often insisted that their children go to work. The Wisconsin Child Labor Committee reached a similar conclusion that "the violation of the child labor laws, both in letter and spirit, seems to us to increasingly come rather from the side of the parent and child than from the side of the employer." In Mississippi, NCLC investigators found an "unnatural class of parents who had become accustomed to subsist[ing] by their children's labor."One Italian father in Chicago remarked in grief upon the tragic death of his 12-year-old girl that "in two years she could have supported me, and now I shall have to work five or six years" until his next eldest was old enough to provide him support. Parents also competed with their children for jobs, thereby lowering the wages they each received. In the textile industry, for example, while grown men earned $6 to $7 a week, children could be hired for only $2 a week.

1906: a historic year

Few organizations openly and directly defended the toil of children in the factory. While Florence Kelley remarked that no delegation of manufacturers goes to the legislature to say, "Yes, there is child labor, and it is a good thing for the children and the republic," the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) in fact did so. The chairman of the association lashed out against labor unions, which he saw as behind the move for federal legislation. He remarked, "This labor union plot against the advancement and the happiness of the American boy . . . is also a ploy against industrial expansion and prosperity of the country." Believing that most children were destined for factory work, he thought the ban on child labor would deprive children of the chance to develop "good industrial habits."Echoing these sentiments, another opponent of reform remarked, "I say it is a tragic thing to contemplate if the Federal Government closes the doors of the factories and you send that little child back, empty handed; that brave little boy that was looking forward to get money for his mother for something to eat."

1912: stasis

In states with more developed education systems, some success was achieved at least up until the children reached the age they could legally be employed. Illinois, for instance, had its factory inspectors and truant officers work together after child labor and compulsory educational laws were passed in tandem in 1903.Although the law kept children in school reliably until age 14, within a month of turning that age, 20 percent of children were sent to work, with 20 percent more being sent within 4 months. Working at a young age seemed to be supported by many parents. A West Virginia study of 150 families who kept their children home found that approximately one-half found work to be more important than school. One mill recruitment flyer highlighted the realities. It noted a "poor man" could send his child to a school where he or she could become a teacher and earn $35 per month during the school term. However, it noted, "if he or she learned to be a good weaver," the mill offered "$40 per month for the year." Working-class families in the early 20th century simply didn't have the luxury of disregarding these facts.

Breakthrough

The most sustained attack against the bill came from David Clark of North Carolina, the editor of the Southern Textile Bulletin. He argued that no child's health had ever been harmed by working in a mill and that the bill was a plot by Northerners to control the South. The NCLC, he alleged, had used dishonest "sensationalist publicity" to gain public support for the legislation.The prochild labor movement added its own spin. The Manufacturers' Record attempted to create an idyllic picture of mill life. It reported that mill employers witnessed "the emancipation of pale-faced children gaining the appearance of robust health" once the child entered the mill. One reformer gave unwitting support to the idea that the mill life was an improvement, remarking "that to most of these unfortunate people, factory life is a distinct improvement over the log cabin, salt pork, and peach brandy, white-trash and Georgia-cracker type of life from which many of them were sifted out when the mills came."

The fleeting triumph of reform

Although the Keating-Owen Child Labor Act of 1916 was not perfect, it was a milestone in the fight against child labor. Reformers had overcome many challenges to eventually pass a law that, while limited in scope, was the first nationwide victory in the battle against child labor. Child labor had officially become an issue of concern to the federal government. Hence, the law was a resounding victory for child-labor reformers.

Moving toward the Fair Labor Standards Act and beyond

The Keating-Owen Act was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1918. Congress, in 1919, attempted to use its taxing power to achieve the same goal by passing a 10-percent tax on the businesses that hired children. That law, too, was struck down by the Supreme Court. As a result, some children, particularly those in the states with the weakest legal protections, continued to work. Frustrated reformers and legislators sought to outlaw child labor through a constitutional amendment. This, too, failed. An attempt by President Franklin Roosevelt to eliminate child labor via executive action through the National Industrial Recovery Act also was defeated when that law was found unconstitutional. It was not until 1938 that Congress finally passed a child labor law (Fair Labor Standards Act, or FLSA) that would later be upheld by the Court.

The impact of the FLSA on child labor was not widespread. Children working in jobs such as those on farms or at bowling alleys or working as delivery and messenger service providers were outside the reach of the law. As a result, the law covered only around 6 percent of the 850,000 children working in 1938. By the time the FLSA was passed, child labor had already been declining. The causes of this decline go beyond the passage of state child labor and compulsory education laws. As author Viviana Zelizer points out in her book Pricing the Priceless Child, the improving standard of living in the country caused parents to change how they viewed their children. Parents could now afford to send their children to school rather than finding it necessary to send them into the workplace. She finds that, by the first two decades of the 20th century, people expected that a man would be able to provide for his family without the need to have his wife and children work. Professor Paul Osterman claims that children were also pushed out of the labor market by a new wave of immigrants. This increasing supply of workers, combined with the declining demand for unskilled labor because of technological advances, decreased the need to employ children. Complex machines in the workplace frequently required greater skills than children could master in order to operate them.

Afterword

Despite the relatively limited scope of the first federal child labor law (FLSA), historian Paul R. Benson, Jr. in 1970 noted that the Supreme Court's Darby decision (the decision that upheld the FLSA) was "one of the half-dozen most important cases in the whole 180-year history of American constitutional law." The decision answered the long-contested question of the role of the federal government regarding child labor and the role of the federal government in interstate commerce in general. For the child labor movement, the Darby decision was a monumental victory. Although the scope of the law was limited, it gave the Department of Labor a role in the regulation of child labor that has expanded and that the Department of Labor continues to exercise to this day.

I would like to thank everyone who helped make this work possible. Specifically, I would like to thank Rory Quirk for his advice and editing of my master's thesis from which this manuscript was derived. Additional thanks are due to Betty and Richard Duke for their assistance in narrowing the focus of my thesis and to Anne Ridder for her guidance throughout the process. I am also grateful to Catherine Stevens for her comments on the early drafts of the work. Lastly, I would like to thank Erin O'Donohue for her support.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of child labor in the United States-part 2: the reform movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article, which is the second of a two-part series on child labor, describes legislative efforts to curtail the employment of children in the late 1800s and the first half of the 1900s.