Goldsboro weekly argus. [volume] (Goldsboro, N.C.) 1885-1909, 1893-12-14
Women and the Labor QUESTION.

Women and the Labor QUESTION.
The fem malesuffragists and various
other persons who epell woman
with capi'al initial have recently
attacked Mr.. Walter Besant, who
says in answer;-
81 have maintained, and shall
continue to maintain, that for wus
men to take mems work from them
is the most disastrous thin, thai
can possibly happen, especially in
a small country. For it halves the
wages, and lowers the position OF
the work era, and it drives the men
out OF the country, or forces them
to compete with women at lower
pay; ii deprive5 men OF their wives,
and women OF their usbapds. That
is my contention. | say that when
a cry of rejoing is raised becanse
another field Of mans labor is in
vaded by women, we ought to sit
down and weep for the lowering
OF labor's Independence and the
loss of men.
"As for the theory that the vote
would enable women to combine
ulen, remember, com bined lon5 be-
fore they had vote: that they
ought to have vote because they
out number the men-it is no rea-
sen at all. The separation of in,
terests-as that women must re
present women; that every trade
should have its representatives, and
SO forth destructive OF the very
foundation on which stands the
theory of representatives. But how
could women legislate for women.
By acts to regulate the hours OF
labot? They exist already, and they
are generally a dead letter because
when dozen dres smakers have
been made to work for foursand-
twenty hours on end, the magis>
trate fines the employer twopence
instead of sending him to prison
for month. Such law is mock
cry. One cannot do q sillier thing
than to make law which cannot
be enforced. But it is the constant
cry of the weaker brethren to make
laws-to make more laws-as if the
existence OF law was any protec-
ton at all; as if by tie making OF
laws one could change the seltishs
ness aad greed of mankind; as if
the passing OF law without com-
manding the support Of public
opinion could do the least good
Suppose, however, that, leaving
the statute.book alone, we were all
TO endeavor-men and women to-
getber, without worrying about
votes-to educate the world and to
create public opinion in favor of
humane employment, just wages,
and consideration for all who work, !,
whether men or women.
"The physical force argument
unGerlies everything. Science can
never put woman on the same level
with man for phyical strength and
for fighting. There is a du5tyard
that | know of where the women
with their shovels and their sieves
90 pretty far in that direction; but
We do not think of dustyards. in
connection with this question. En-
tin, my position is unchanged. The
evils that women have to face in
the labor market are very great.
I have always acknowledged that.
Underpay and long hours; want Of
consideration; sometimes personal
insults-these are things that ems
rage men to hear Of, as well as wo-
men to known or to endure. But
are they met when women take
their work from men at half the
pay? Can they be met by giving
women the vote? Is there no sweato
ing OF men who have the vote? Does
the sweating OF men-yoters-
diminish as the years go on2 Do
employers become less exactiny and
more liberal? Not that | can sees
And Ye', to repeat, the men have
their vote. That there is a great
labor question before us-that it is
growing greater every day-that,
as an immediate result, employers
will become rich more slowly and
with greater difficulty-that the
labor question will be kept con-
stantly before US by the growing
intelligence and persistence of the
working classes; all this is perfectly
true. But the labor question ine
cludes the work of women as well
as the work OF men. 1t seems to me
impossible to separate the sexes in
general legislation"