The Portland daily press., 1870-03-19
THE PR ESSo
Saturday Morning, March 10. 1870.
How We Pay Our Teachers.


Any one who will take pains to study the
City Directory for 1869, will discover that we
then had in the public schools seven male and
eighty-seven woman teachers, the former hav-
ing an aggregate salary of $4,000, the latter
$3.50, 400. In other words, eighty-seuen women
received trifle more than three times as much
as secen men. The average salary of the
iiaie teachers was about $1,47O, that of the
female about 1886 or less than one-tbird the
pay Oh males. five compare individual cases
Tue result is about the same. At the time the
directory was issued land little relative
change mas taken place since) forty-two wo-
men teachers received each salary of only
$3.50; twenty more only 1915 each, and nine
Teen Others, including nine principals of prima-
~ schools, had only $500. Only six had over
Sfoo, and OF these the one who had the largest
salary 500, received 800 less than the loacest
salary paid to any male teacher. Is therejust
ground for this disparity in the wages of male
and female teachersl If, as we venture to
affirm, the men earn all they get, do not the
women earn more than they get? The services
OF our teachers as well as of other workers
ought to be valued according to the qualities
intellectual, moral, and active, natural or ac-
quired, necessary for the successful discharge
OF their duties. They should be paid what ii
costs to develop these qualities and keep them
IN state OF efficiency. The only just ground
1'r paying men more than women would be
that they occupied more responsible positions
AID that their education and subsistence cos
more. The difference between the cases ir
TINS respect does not by any means correspond
70 the difference of their wages in this city.
IL not too much to affirm that the wo
men who resort to teaching, whether tempo
rarily or perraa----+as,----...~s WIFI tney
get from teaching alone, even keep up the eff
nclency OF their powers, supposing them to
have obtained their preliminary training gra-
tnitously. We defy any intelligent human
being to subsist in this city and to supply the
wants which culture creates with $3.50 year
And yet nearly half Of our female teachers
have until recently been compelled to depend
upon this slender income. Even $500, the
sllary which this class of teachers now re-
celves, must be used with great prudence to
enable woman who has no one lit ought
not to be necessary to provide her with
board gratuitously. A woman has to paw
nearly as much for board and clothing as a
man unless she assists in making her own
clothes. This no man is required to do for
the public benefit, and to require it of women
is at once absurd and oppressive. If we pre-
tend to pay women fairly, tt e lowest salar,
ought not to be less than $500 year. Thi.
would be trifle more than half the loves
salary of any male teacher.
The School Committee have during III,
past year voted to raise large portion
OF the salaries. But this obviously inst meas.
ure has been condemned by the Democratic
administration of the past year, and it has
has been urged that the appropriation need
ed to carry out the reform should be refused.
Now that the Democrats have been defeated
in the municipal election we hope no such
narrow and illiberal policy will be thought of.
1t is pitiful for city with valuation of
S3o,0OO,OOO, and rich enough to subscribe
hundreds of thousands of dollars to railroad
enterprises, to grudge the few thousands
needed to compensate tolerably 1--WE do not
urge liberally) those who are labcrious]y
training up the rising generation to the duties
of citizenship. The best instruction is in the
end the cheapest, and to secure it we should
not be parsimonious in our present OUTLAY.