[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
Sra,—As your correspondent, Mary Reid, points out, there is a difference between being a wage-earner and having a career. To my mind the difference is great. Leaving apart the economic side of the question, it appears to me to be possible for the mother of even quite young children to make money which is paid to her in the form of wages, provided there is elasticity in the matter of hours and that she is in a position to keep a nurse or at least to send her children to a day school. In this case her family have the first call upon her time and the wage-earning is subservient—at least to some extent. But the woman with a career can afford to yield to it no second place. One can hear her say, "I have my career to think of ! "
Only great talent warrants for a mother the overwhelming -claims that this implies, and the young married woman should consider long and earnestly before she gives herself to a pro- fession, for that is what she must do, no half-and-half measures
• are permissible; otherwise she will make a failure of her career no less than of her home-making. And does not "This Home- making" contend with "This Freedom " ; even as Mr. Hutchinson implies, as "This Housekeeping" would never do ? Even the Nannie mentioned by your correspondent, and hallowed for us all by the memory of Stevenson's Alison Cunningham, is but a hireling whose own the sheep are not. The efficient lady-cook employed no doubt keeps the house, but can either of them really keep the home ? Given good health and sound nerves, I believe a woman who is a good manager can so order her menage as to leave many hours free, even for such efficient work as can command a wage worth earning in these efficient days ; that is a question of organiza- tion. Personally, I devote one morning a week to thinking out the meals, upstairs as well as down, be it noted, for I have a stern disapproval of leaving servants' meals to the cook ; they are almost certain in this ease to be lacking in variety if not in vitamines. Breakfast, luncheon, dinner and their supper are written in a book. On the opposite half of the page I enter the necessary shopping orders, according to the ingredients required, and indite postcards ready to be des- patched the day before the things are wanted : these I put out upon my dressing-table and bring them down to be posted when I descend to breakfast. Should unforeseen happenings expand or reduce my needs, it is easy to add to or delete any part of the order.
It is the same with the children. The more orderly lives they lead the better for them, and, given the means, I can so arrange their time that they are never at a loose end. But should they really need me at any hour of the day or night I must be able to go to them, or I reckon I forfeit that sacred place which no career on earth would compensate me for. "Is mother in ? " How many a happy mother knows the sound of the words as the children rush in from school or walk Does it not warm her heart to hear them and a thousand times repay the so-called "tie." She who has the divine right (for has she not suffered that they might live ?), she alone may have them look to her as their sure ally in every-. thing, so certain of her understanding and sympathy that it is like second nature to them to bring her all their joys and sorrows, little and big.
Some fathers are wonderful—mine was a perfect one—but men must work. If women have gifts it is a joy to use them, and I can imagine no finer companionship for a truly-mated couple than the community of interest born of the fact that they both are giving to the world of their highest service. Yet surely no work a woman undertakes should be at the expense of her home, her husband, or her children. Some women but minister to the selfishness of their children, if not of their husband, by too great a devotion to their needs. This is all wrong, for however perfect the ties and full the pot, each person has his or her own peculiar line of self-development essential to happiness, and needs also a certain amount of pure recreation which in no circumstances should be denied ; but no woman possessed of a sane mind in a sane body should be unable so to plan her existence that she can, if she choose, be a wage-earner, where few only may follow a career.—I am,
WE have received a large number of letters on the subject of "Married Women and Work." Of a batch of twelve who are against married women taking up work outside their homes one lady," G. M. V. I.," says : "Let woman remember what she was created for—' to be a helpmeet for man.' A help is not a rival. Let a woman fully realize that when she marries she is no longer free to choose her own work."
Lady Catherine Milnes-Gaskell says : "Let woman return to the house, unless she be a real artist in painting, singing, acting, or playing some instrument."
Mrs. Yorke Bevan is against married teachers being employed as "the essence of civilization is division of labour, and as nations emerge from barbarism the difference between man and woman accentuates."
Amy Lady Pelly expresses "a strong opinion against the employment of married women as wage-earners," unless the husband is an invalid or his earnings do not suffice for feeding, clothing, and educating the children.
Lady Clarke says a woman would require more than the average physical strength and would be made old before her time by doing outside work. "The exigencies of business are such that it will be the outside work to which the best of her energies will be devoted, and the tired husband in the evening can hardly expect the equally tired wife to be a bright companion. . . . There is no need for a woman to become absorbed in her own home interests, or, if she is blessed with an efficient domestic staff, to feel restless from inaction.' There is plenty of scope for her activities in useful occupation outside her own household, and her life may be as full as she can desire without taking up paid work to satisfy her ambition —that fine-sounding term so often another name for vanity."
Lady Pigott, in her letter, doubts if a woman can take up a wage-earning profession without in some degree at least neglecting her children, and considers that they should not be "left to chance governesses and nurses." She quotes the Russian proverb : "Cod said / can't be everywhere,' and He created the mother." The mother should realize that she is God's deputy in the home and live up to it. If she lived
more up to that we should soon hear less of "Bolshevism, red ruin and the breaking up of laws."
Lady Griselda Cheape reminds married women that in the marriage vow they promised to honour and obey their hus- bands in return for his promise of support, and she quotes the sad case of the poorer women in Dundee who eke out an income in the mills, leaving their homes deserted. She pleads. however, against the woman becoming a "house cat." Let her enliven the lives of the sad. She suggests the Mothers' Union as an outlet. —
We had hoped that some of our correspondents would have given us their views on- the working of the French system, where the wife is also a business partner. Nor, so far, have any of our carrespondents dealt with the side of the question discussed in Mrs. Lynd's article in this number—the part played in the family by the mediaeval woman.—En. Spectator.
Previous page
