The Manawatu Herald. Saturday, April 2, 1910. NO ROOM FOR THE CHILDREN.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 821, 2 April 1910, Page 2

The Manawatu Herald. Saturday, April 2, 1910. NO ROOM FOR THE CHILDREN.

Thk Sydney correspondent ol The Times (London) has created a .little flutter in English philantropic dove-cots by declaring that children were unwelcome to Australia. It appears that some recent immigrants were denied certain employment because they were accompanied by their offspring, and the multitude of old ladies ot both sexes, who spend their time and other people’s money in relieving the congested cities and towns of the old laud by sending abroad some part ot Britain’s starving millions, are simply horrified to think that Australian employers should have a word to say against their schemes, and not be prepared with open arms to receive, house, and feed the wives and babies ol the men they employ. There is an old proverb that says ‘ 1 what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,” and in this instance is peculiarly applicable. The very people who are loud in their condemnation ot the “ colonial ” who refuses to find accommodation are just the class who would not only refuse, but scorn, the idea of employing a gardener, or coachman, or groom, or footman, or butler, or cook, or any servant, who required that their children should also be accommodated with free quarters as well. Then, colonial houses are not built in such a manner as to offer facilities for the accommodation of more than one family, and in every sense the thing is impossible, if not outrageous and indecent. If those who are adversely criticising the action of employers in this connection mean to suggest that the Australian is not fond of children and the family life, they are guilty of a gross libel. There is no country in the world where children are given a higher place, or receive more consideration, and there is nowhere to be found a greater desire to furnish children with all the advantages of a liberal education under the most favourable conditions. There is no class of immigrant more welcomed by the several states that constitute Australasia than the man with a large family, and there is not to be foundjin Great Britain at least, any sentiment for the family man as is the case in the “ colonies,” where generally he is employed in preference to a single fellow. We are safe in saying there is not an employer in the Dominion to-day, that all things being equal, would not sooner give employmeut to the family man than to the single man, who can more easily make shift. To insinuate that the mere possession of a family is a hindrance to a man securing employmeut in the usual way is a gross libel, and in such cases where it undoubtedly, and must necessarily, exist, surely the conditions in the home are such that an employer’s and an employee’s family could not possibly live to their mutual advantage, comfort, and self-respect. It is surprising how much twaddle is permitted to filter through the cables that should not be given a moment’s thought by common-

sense people, and is made a medium of an invidious attack upon an institution —the home — that is as sacred to the colonial householder as it is to those at “’Ome.” The reference of the Sydney correspondent is without a doubt, to domestic employees, and where often a situation is available for a married couple, because of the difficulty of getting domestic servants to go out into the backblocks, a married couple with a troop of children in the present or future tense, would be simply intolerable. The conditions of labour in Australasia are very different to those in the Old Country, but we would like to know where, since the old feudal daj 7 s, employers would not prefer their homes to be inhabited with their own, rather than other people’s children, no matter how well behaved they might be. It is to be hoped also that the class of family man coming into the country as immigrants is such as to be sufficiently independent to require such employment as will enable him to have his own home and his own family circle, and not seek to shelter his flock under the roof of the man whose servant, for the time being he is.