THE LETTERS OF BILL.

Otago Witness, Issue 2896, 15 September 1909, Page 88

THE LETTERS OF BILL.

BEING THE OUTLOOK OF A WORKING MAN. IV.— WOMAN: INDUSTRIAL" AND OTHERWISE. My Dear Pal, — A man needs special qualification to write common sense about woman. If boir% a husband for many more years than my wife cares to remember, and the father of children who know more than I>^be that special qualification, then I'm good for the job. We of tihe alleged sterner sex are even to-day nnk£% in the dark ooHteroing a true undei^j-aindinig of woman. We meet' her at bi-eatfast, in factory, shop, office, or polling booth. From mistress of her home she is becoming dictator of nations. She is our keen competitor in many, things. The au«4ent myth had it $iat she was destined to be only man's comforter.'"" She was once his slave. "Woman was the first human, being that tasted bondage : woman ..was a slave ibefore the slave existed. " English politicians of the 'antisuffrage school are no doubt mighty sorry, that their forefathers and the younger countries gave woman an inch of political freedom. I might write you on a dozen different sidelights of woman's character. " Industrial" is clear enough; " otherwise " may be allowed to develop itself. Woman i was primarily man's slave — to some extent she still is. But it's a deal more like perfect freedom than she's ever been used to, and ©he makes the best of it. One of those prime bits of unconscious humour the compositor has been responsible for wias the alteration in the title of a lecture given by a once-celebrated women — "What Shall We Do With Our Girls" — to "Wlha-t Shall We Do With Our Trials." In real life it often means the same thing, and possibly the old compositor had learnt it by experience. The "trial" first afflicts man in the shape 'of a precocious sister, then it assumes another guise, and promises comfort and happiness plus someone elee's sister. This "trial" develops rapidly, and eventually assumes a dual form — wife and mother-in-law. Later on the " trials " may multi- [ ply in the shape of daughters. Also, in these days of frequent divorce 6uits, "trials " and woman often literally mean the same thing. You see, "otherwise" fits woman in jnany ways. When two expect 'bliss in bucketsful things often turn oust otherwise. Marriage has been denned long since as an institution where one person undertake* to provide happiness 1 for two-. In real life tilings turn out otherwise, so much so that marriage has sometimes proved an institution where there wasn't enough happiness to satisfy the youngest member of the family. What is ahead of a woman if she doesn't marry? Did you never think it out? I " Oh, she'll just be a sour old maid 1" Did you ever meet a sweet old maid? I have. She was sweet when young, and the faot that she went through life without the additional cares a man brings made her delightful in old age. She put her personal philosophy in the Devonshire dialect, and spoke from her whole heart in justification of single bliss: — Blessee cheel, I dsdden want to, I wuz better as I be, Marriages be made in Hearen, but ther's none wuz made vurme; Zo twuz right I shuden marry, lukeezee I'm sure 'twas best — Vur the proper man weren't ready, ana I widden take the rest. And why not? An increasing array of women are taking up an independent attitude on the marriage business. They'll take a husband on their own terms or not at all. It's a change from the old order. It's a mistake to Tun away with the silly idea that every single woman of uncertain age is single because shei missed the matrimonial 'bus. The odds -may nowadays easily be that she's single _ from choice. Of course, there aren't enough men to go round. We can't take any self-glori-fication out of that. By a sort of poetic , justice we are being put in -our place — ; on an equal footing with our equal, hv£ hitherto despised, human partner. Put girls in the university, and they hold their own with the boys. That shows mental capacity. In argument — hush, it's too personal a "matter to nut in cold type. There are things in this world a man would fain forget. He would often succeed if left alone. I've sometimes thought the marriage ceremony is the primary reason why there is so much interrupted bliss in matrirnonia.l ventures. The sweetest girl in the world promises as part of the bargain that she will Obey. In the rose-coloured days she disobeys. Man is indulgent when newly-married, and he overlooks rebellion, arguing that his influence will ultimately reform hie treasure. When he attempts to huve the contract fully observed he is reminded by tears and argument that it's already been broken and that he's been party to the breach. After which the contract deed is mostly waste paper. Women are very much like men — good, bad, a.nd indifferent. I believe most' women are better than most men. When a woman is bad she's worse than a bad man. It's generally man's handiwork,' though, so we can't get much consolation on that score. I made at least one vow when starting thie letter— that I wouldn't wnte anything alx>u,t handsome young widows. I'd divide the opposite sex into two classes — widows and other women. I claim to understand women a little ;| widows are beyond me in all respects.i It's usually wifeest to stick to something you've a chance of understanding. The unexpected has happened: with such' regularity now in matters where woman i-» contained that rules of thought are ekanired. The unexpected is coming to

be understood in American high-claas Society as a happy marriage. A Tuscan proverb has it that "In buying horses and in taking a wife" the only way is to " shut your eyes tight and commend c: yourself to God." The Persian ray of v hope is still more gloomy: "When thou iJ goest on a journey aay a prayer; when t< thou goest to sea say two prayers ; when m thou goest to war gay three prayers ; 1 when thou takest a wife — all, then prayer n will avail t&ee nought." c Most of the proverbs warning Man of y coming danger are ancient. All the blame 3 for tmhappy marriages is laid ait the door of woman. What man . thinks about woman would stock a library ; what woman lias written about man is contained in a few volumes. Man forbade ,-womagt to criticise ham in aacieni times. . She didn't obey his command, but afce "didn't publish her opinions of her lord and master. Her criticism is piling up pretty quick now. ".The Book of Life j begkaa with -a. man and a woman in a ■ garden : it ends with Revelations," wrote \ a modern epigrammatist. And. roan has hitherto only given bis version of the r, revelaiaoim. A modern schoolgirl has f written some impressione in a^ eomposi- . tion on the Lords of Creation.: "Men, are ± what women marry. - They drink and . srooke and have many pockets, but they wont go to church. Perhaps if they wore -, bonnets they would. They are "more logical than women and also more zoo- ] logical! Bolh men and women sprang from: monkeys, but the women certainly sprang farther than the men." We ( secretly enjoy the hint about the bon^" nets. Some of u-s don't fallow fashion* j perchance' because we can't afford to. I , can't ccc much difference between the ab- " surdi&es of Chawley'e twowsers or tinted socks and the Merry Widow hat. It's , Chawley and his tribe who make the • Merry Widow hat possible. A woman in , ironical humour makes verse in defence \ of the vanities of her sex: — Feminine vanity! Oye gods! Hear thie ! muni A» if silk and velvet an-3 feathers and fur, t And jewels »nd gold, had been first for her, Since the world began t Where is his memory-? Ltet nim look back — ' all of the- way} Lei him study the history of his race From the first he-savage that painted his face, To the dude of to-day I "We pad and stuff? — ova man looks bolder. Don't speak of th« time when a bran-filled bunch Made an English gentleman look like Punch — But feel of his shoulder! Feminine vanity! Oy« gods! Hear to these Vanity's wide as the world is wide? Look at th« peacock in his pridela it a hen? One writer— l forget who just now—declared that woman of the past was man s woman: she had developed and progressed just as he desired. The woman of tomorrow will be woman's woman : she will progress and develop as she desires. The diflicßltiea surrounding woman's wholesale entry into industry are pretty Teal to us. There's no good blinking facts. A large proportion of women factory a»d shop worker® are destined to be the futuire nicrtiiers of the nation. The phase of first importance is whether the factory life is the best prelude to motherhood/ That's what you and I ought to place first. Success in trade arid commerce is failure if it comes by weakening the mothers of tihe nation. Women in bygone times have kept nations virile because of their superior virtues and in spite of tie vices of the contemporary men. The men of a nation can be vicious with less danger of national decay than if tihe women axe dissolute. So woman in industry must be considered m the light of this fact. If woman can only I engage in industry at the expense of j national physique and decay, then she , ought to be kept out of industry. It's pretty clear, though, that rfve will remain. The only safeguard is that her conditions should be as near perfect as can be. They' re not. aad I suppose you know ii. Take an illustration. A big firm has fired out the fools-— I mean the men ._arsd installed a bevy of girls in the boookkeeping department. The change spells liundreds a year saved. Would you believe me, that firm has never recognised trie necessity of making the slightest change in the direction of samtary conveniences? It's a positive fact that the arrangements are just as they were ten years ago. Is that good for national development? "Woman," said' a big American trade union official last year, "is the white Chinaman of the industrial world, bhe wears a coiled-up queue, and Trherever j she goes she cheapens the worth of human labour-" I'm not prepared to fully vote aye to that. It contains considerable tru*h. But I don't like the term Chinamdn applied to working women. The stern fact is, though, that women undercut men in industrial occupations. You know it. There's part of your own job taken away by a woman worker. You re lucky. Some other fellows I know have lost almost all their job to women, and only because less wages are paid. I came across this case a little while since: — Miss Mary M'Dowell, of the University of Chicago Settlement, was tobser«ng a girl who was operating an uti•usually heavy and intricate machine in s large hardware factory in an Ohio city. • "Strong, clever girl," remarked Miss M'Dowell. " She's doubled the output of that machine,'* said the superintendent. " " How did ebe get such a good job.'" asked' Miss M'Dowell. "Her feifcer," said the superintendent, "had the machine before she^ got it. We just thought we'd try -her." "How ranch," said Miss M'Dowell, toeing Sootoh artd suspicious, and not completeJy satisfied with this proof of the advance of woman, "how much do

you pay her compared" with, what you paid her father?" "Half," said the superintendent. j I'll close here. Thai speaks plainly enough for itself. I could have piled page uipon page in the same strain or given illustrations of the sweater's inhumanity to woman in older countries. Man amd woman have to go through life together. They are now comrades in industry. The man prides himself on hie chivalry and ' strength. He ha& need of both if be yearns for a healthy motherhood and a. great nation. : Till another day, yours in paldom, i Bill