Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-05-30
nored But I don't mean to fight the

bar1anS, and 1t Is, by the altogether worldly
Hight Of political economy.
One of these enormously self-styled econ
omists declares that the rule 1 suggest for
the organization of household affairs.
Don't do anything for yourself that you
can pay others to do for you," Is depen-
dent for it's application on the possession of
wealth, and adds with cheerful inability to
receive an idea or reflect on one, Even If
one do it, think 1t very bad plan to
depend on others entirely for everything
/ am one of hundreds Of people who have
become suddenly poor through misfortune,
and 1 am very thankful for everything
that learned to do when could have had
1t done for me-"
The dominant error of this is In the wo-
man seeking to make the necessity. of her
emergency a rule of the housewives con-
duct-in confusing frugality with economy,
and not one woman in hundred-no, not
one in thousand-haS any clearer notion of
economy. The theory Of woman's labor at
home is that it is not only her duty, but
her chief glory, to compass herSelf-Slngle-
handed, If possible, and if not always with
the assistance of unskilled labor-eeery one
of those utterly dissimilar and conflicting
industries which sustain the life Of the
family. Cooking, securing, washing, IRON
ing, sweeping busting, marketing, nursing
these absolutely must be done, and so
warped is the conscience of woman that in
addition to all these lines of labor, truly
good woman doesn't feel that she has quite
done all she should until she has also done
the ldIllly sewing, HellulnS, uTeSSIlldklHS
and millinery, besides making embroid
cred dressing gowns for her husband and
keeping the creases pressed in his trous
erS.
HOttentOt Domestic Policy.
This is the industrial idea of Hottentot
or Zuluander who is his own cook, carpen-
ter, butcher. tailor and king, because he
has not sufficiently advanced in the order
of civilization 10 profit by the system of
exchange, division OF labor and specialiZa-
ton of talent, which in the industrial
scheme of enlightened Christendom permits
each man to do one thing well in the inter-
ests of all, and, III return, to command for
his own needs the separate services of all.
L want to beat it into the brains of wo
men, such rs have brains, just the place
they occupy in the industrial order of the
world, by reason of their Hottentot do
mestic policy, and make them see, as many
as can see, how their interests suffer in
consequence.
1t requires only a moments attention and
thought to perceive that in following the
rule Of material success in life, Don't do
anything for yourself that you can pay
somebody to do for YOU" this entails first
of all the necessity of acquiring in
yourself an equivalent of the needs you
seek the services of others TO supply
Thus when l advise women to go to
tailor instead of making their own
dresses, l assume that these women are
in some way capable of earning the cost
of their dressmaking. 1 know this is not
the case with large majority OF women
womeI who get married for living who
expect to earn all they have by the sweat of
their husbands brows, and who feel no
moral obligation to make the most of any
natural ability with which they have been
endowed, but are content to do and be sole
ly as the accidents of matrimony ordain
making the virtue of wifely submission a
mask to cover the unintelligent and in
efficient character of their. work. These
yI-.,r hnr- a1t
economy of their households but to work
Ike slaves or force their husbands to do
so. They must make their own clothes or
contract hopeless bills, and in a choice be-
tween sacrificing themselves their hus-
bands, certainly those to be com
mended for heroism who sacrifice them
selves. But my little grl-w ho-made- her
shirtwaist, don't let these women mislead
you. and do let me show you wherein the
particular virtue of these Hottentot econo-
mistS is still a general vice.
An Economic Cipher.
They render inexact, and to that extent
useless. all the calculations concerning the
cost of labor OF the world, and by adherinS
TO their misfortune to a standard of
excellence in home industry, they foster
the inefticiency of women, especially in
every branch of work pertaining to home
industry, and, to lesser degree in every
branch of work in which women anywhere
engage
l have before me two bulky Volumes is
sued by Commissioner of Labor Wright. on
the cost of living. considered an element
Of the cost of production. The income and
expense OF the family are calculated elab-
OrateIy IN detail, but the value OF that VaSt
Expense of energy of woman which enters
INTO The cost of living in the production Of
food and the general care OF the home is
without any sort of mention. The work of
woman IS the economic cipher. Increasing
the value of the laboring unit many fold
IN itself 1t is mere nothing.
Edward Atkinson is the only economist
have known 10 even suggest that do
nestle labor has economic value
In estimating that half the struggle of
HE Is mere struggle for food" Mr. At
klnson says: Il suspect that If We were to
measure the struggle fer life in terms of
hours rather than in terms of money we
should find that a very much greater part
OF life was devoted to the production and
preparation of food than is represented by
the measure even of one-half You will OBJ
serve that in these computations of the cost
OF living which are made in money all
that we obtain is the cost of food delivered
at the house. but no computation is or can
be made in terms Of money of the labor of
the housewife or children in preparing that
food for use. Every one knows how con-
tlnuous and how arduous this is and herein
lies great waste of force
what further waste of force there may
be in doing the family washing ironing
millinering and sewing Mr.. Atkinson does
not touch upon, and he nor any one can
measure what the waste of force in anv
OF these Industries is, only as an exchange
or services establishes its value l have
perceived IN my own experience that a
computation of the force women expend in
domestic labor will eventually result from
the engagement of women in work outside
the home. woman who has established
the fact that her services are worth $40
a week in profession cannot be logically
content TO expend her force in doing the
work of her household until she has proved
that her energy thus expended Is earning
what 1t is worth. In order to make a COM
parlson and arrive at the fact of the mat
Ter, this Will necessitate determining the
actual value of domestic labor This will
seem simple enough at first attempt-a
mere calculation, thus:
Value of Domestic Labor
L earn $40 week at my profession I can
hire cook for s4 and housenaid for S.
Therefore I waste s13 worth of myself in
attempting to do my own housework"
She may even consider the matter more
broadly and reason further:
Il not only waste $l3 worth of myself
in such transaction, but society at large
loses the benefit not only Of that waste
measure of my ability. but also what meas
IRE of loss the cooks and chambermaids
suffer In consequence of MY having placed