[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—Thanks will be due
to your " stimulating " contributor, Miss Kingston, if, incidentally, her writing brings some popular reflection to bear on that formula of Labour Exchanges and societies dealing with women and girls : " They are not suited to domestic service." Lay efforts to solve the servant question are always brought up against this phrase, and usually break on it. But do these Exchanges and societies think that these women and girls are equally unsuited for marriage ? For, after all, what are the services that multitudes of homes in this country demand, and are willing to pay ;for, bat just those which every right-minded woman " on the bureau." would expect to render in her own home ? To scrub a table, dust a room, " mind " a baby and do a minimum of cooking— that is broadly what is wanted in both cases. The only, qualifications necessary are good will, reasonable health and normal intelligence. If the Exchanges tell us that they think these women equally unfitted for marriage, and the statement is true to fact, then there is nothing more to he said. We may just weep for our country.
But we shall require some convincing thatjt is true to fact before we weep. For myself; I have a profound respect for the domestic servant, the result not only of many years' (not unchequered) experience of a small staff of two—some- times only one—but also of my observation of the homes of my friends ; and one of the pleasant things observed is the transformation wrought on not very hopeful-looking maids by a year or two--even a few months--of sensible, kindly treatment in a place." Of course, this means some " taking pains " on the part of the mistress (not too readily conceded_ in these days), and on the part of both, good will—and, yet, good will.—I am, Sir, Ste.,
Previous page
