ABSTRACT

It was a rule of almost universal appJication that when man and woman engaged in tbe same occupation, the remuneration of woman was fixed lower than that of man, and this arose from the fact tbat the physical capabilities of man were considered greater, and it was held tbat be did more work. J nother cases, the soperiority in the remuneration of man's labollr over that of w"man arose from tbe circumstance that it was educated and sk.illed labour, while that of woman was uneducated and mecbanical. As an illustration she referred to the manufacture of pottery, a work in which both men and women engaged. But tbe painting and mo<Jelling, and the work which required taste, delicacy of touch, and artistic skill, was done by men, while the labour of carrying tbe cJay was left to women. The only conceivable reason for assigning the wJrk requiring delicacy of touch, artistic &kill, and taste to men, and the rough mechanical work to women, was tbe ingrained notion that wherever man and woman engage together in tr-dde, tbe man should have tbe pleasantest and best paid work. AB an ordinary rule, the remuneration of WQmen W88 "rbitrarily fiIed at something like two-thirds less than that given to men. By the new educational code, the standards of examination were alike; but nevertbelesa tbe schoolmistres! only received two-thirds of the remuneration paid to the schoolmllster. There seemed to be " preconceh·ed idea on the part of those who directed the education of the people, tbat even when the same provision was made for teaching boys and girls, less money should be spent on the latter. Tbe defence of this was, that as a matter of fact, a schoolmistress was to be hail for less than a achoolmaster, and the ruleB of political economy and the law of supply anddemalld required tbat ahe ahould ~ive lesa. Now, in o~er to make it just tbat the WomaD ahould I'ecelve only the market pnce for her services,

h h

YBi Bi h h eB Boperi

n'B h e Bt e I

eh B B e e

h e tiB Bki

h Bh h santeB B was BOmethi

Bt rdB h s h

'

oYB a a iB

l iB les Bu

B receive a rder re i ri

242 The British Ässociation. there ougbt to be an open market for her labour. Jf a woman teacher, equally efficient as a man, could be obtained for threefourths of the salary of a man, how was it she did not displace tbe schoolma.ster? It was arbitrarily assumed that women could IIOt tcach boys, lind therefore they were shut out from the attempt. Yet women wauld make excellf'nt teachers for boys., aud had reason to complain that they were arbitrarily excluded from these pasts wit.hout trial. Adverting to the objections agaiust admitting women into the medical profession, 8he regretted to find that even in Edinburgh, a spirit of trades-unionism had been manifested with the 80le object of preventing the cntranee of women into one of the learned professiolls. She found thc rule that less must be given to a woman than to a man, prevaiHng nnder circumstances where it could not be excuscd by the plea of supply and demand. She objected to the introduction of needlework as a complllsory subject for girls in the endowed schools. She main!ained th&t ncedlework was a branch of industry and not of learning, and that while it might form part of the course of an industrial or technical school, it was ont of place in an ordinary or elementary school. In point of fact, tbe girls were required to do more than the boys in order to eam the Government grant, and they had to satisfy the examiner-always a unikrsity man-in the mysteries of hemming and stitching. An endeavour was now being made to obtain arevision of the code 80 as to make needlework optional instead of compulsory. There was no necessity that every woman should do her own sewing. That so many women devote so large a portion of their lives to this industry is perhaps the reason that sempstresses find it hard to live. The compulsory Bewing is a great hiudrance to the proper work of the school. She was in conversation a while ago with tbe teacher of one of the best elementary schools in Manchester, and was told that the sewing did interfere very much with the teaching of other subjects in the school, and placcd the girls at a disadvantage compared with the boys. Seeing that sewing is an art whieh requires much practice and little teaching, that any girl 01' woman who feIt the ueed for it could easily acquire it for herself, there seemed no excuse for continuing its compulsory praetice in Government Bchoo18. If sewing were removed from the list of subjects taught in elcmentary schools, its place might be sUl'plied by a subject which, while coming properly within the range of general education, would perhaps be of more immediate importance to the weIl-being of familieB than even needleworkphysiology alld the laws of health. The bady is more than raiment, and it is of more importance that a mother should know how to keep her child alive and weIl, than be able to make it a frock. A lady found the wife of a farmer in East Cheshire feeding her baby of four months old on beer, bacon, and potato pastry. So long as Buch deuse ignorance prevails among the mothers of the race, we must expect a stunted and ill-developed generation to grow up. Tbis iguorance is like1y to prevail so long a8 the idea is suifered to remain in force timt the intellectual development of girls must be considerl'd as subordinate to their training in mechanical or industrial pursuits.