Rhetorical Analysis Of Child Labor By Florence Kelley

Essayist, Florence Kelley, once wrote, “For the sake of the children, for the Republic in which these children will vote after we are dead, and for the sake of our cause, we should enlist the workingmen voters, with us, in this task of freeing the children from toil!” (Kelley 92-96). This quote can be traced back to her account, in which she presents before the National American Suffrage Association in Philadelphia in 1905. In it, she vividly depicts the horrors of child labor, providing countless reports, varying child labor laws throughout the states and ultimately, a solution to the dilemma. In author Florence Kelley’s essay … , she employs logos and rhetorical questions, in order to fortify her stance on child labor.

Author Florence Kelley

This statement formulated by Kelley is an example of logos, due to the fact that it compels the audience to ponder about the calamitous effect that child labor is bearing by using statistical evidence. The purpose of using logos is to initiate her argument that child labor is permeating the country, especially in young girls, solidifying it by providing reasoning. This conveys to the audience that the author is well-aware of the situation regarding child labor, thus giving her credibility. In paragraph four, Kelley states, “North and South Carolina and Georgia place no restriction upon the work of children at night; and while we sleep little white girls will be working tonight

Rhetorical questions is the execution of asking question, not necessarily for an explicit answer in return, but to emphasize a point. In paragraph eight, the author asserts, “If the mothers and the teachers in Georgia could vote, would the Georgia Legislature have refused at every session for the last three years to stop the work in the mills of children under twelve years of age? (Kelley 55-58). Essentially, she asks the audience that if mothers and teachers in the state of Georgia had the opportunity to vote, could children have been stopped from working in the mills under the age of twelve. This is an example of a rhetorical question, in view of the fact that she compels the audience to keenly reflect on the current child labor laws. Kelley not only pleads to the audience to consider sympathy for the children, but the government should respond with a justifiable answer because at the moment, mothers and teachers do not have a say about the laws, preventing mothers and teachers from being heard. Kelley furthers her argument in paragraph nine, expressing, “Would the New Jersey Legislature have passed that shameful repeal bill enabling girls of fourteen years to work all night, if the mothers in New Jersey were enfranchised? (Kelley 59-62). In this case, the rhetorical question is if mothers had the right to vote, could the repealing of the bill, allowing girls of age