Detroit evening times. (Detroit, Mich) 1921-1958, 1943-01-31
0neGir|
Wh0f0uQht For
He anRau


- commonplace Our great navy yards where women
- formerly only made appearance to break bottle
of champagne a ships prov at launching employ
for skilled technical tasks.
In steel companies leaving their stenog-
rapher's books to operate giant cranes.
In aircraft plants operating 4500ton
hydraulic presses They also rveters, drlers and
welders In shpyards they machnists shpftters
Is the woman worker today worthy of her hire? The
War Labor Board has given the answer ruling declar
ing that wasn't necessary to obtain the Boards permits
to increase the wages to that men for
comparable work And the for the ruling is that
in the Boards opinion equal work deserves equal pay
Yet you visualize time when the doctrine
held that a who did a job entitled
wages at all simply because she a It
fantastic to state the proposition But that very
question argued and discussed English only
little hundred years and the subject of
memorable tenpage decision written by Lord Stowel
of Englands great judges
suit brought by Elizabeth Stephens against the
of the sailing vessel Jane and Matilda to
two and onehaH years wages due her for services
board the ship cook steward and mariner at the
Of about $11 per month
Elizabeth apparently in unjudcial phrase quite
gal Even His Honor noted in his opinion that she
robust and vigorous female The other sailors board
ship who sympathetic with her desire to collect
testified that there wasn't a thing on the Jane and
Matilda that she couldn't do
She cooked and served the meals helped navigate the
vessel took her turn at the helm performed her watch
and hand in pulling the ropes deck In many of
these services the sailors testified exhibited great
skill and strength and performed her work much better
than the other members of the crew.
two and one-haf years Elizabeth sailed with the
ship from Plymouth Wales TO Ireland then
Spain, from there to London and back Plymouth
Moreover the testimony showed that whenever the ship
into port the sailors would leave carousng good
time in town while Elizabeth left board to guard
the cargo,
When it to the payoff the owners expressed
surprise that she had been the boat all Informed
her that being woman she had right to take mans
Job and that she any wages They told
her that it contrary 10 public morals for a
work on board ship and that the captain had authority
performed
Needless to say the lofty and hghminded motive of
the nothing than attempt to rob the
of her rightful earnings.
The case came before Lord stowe who had risen
humble origins the of a to one of the
eminent jurists of his day, in July, 1923.
He noted at the outset in his opinion might
be some objection to the work done by Elizabeth from
moral standpoint which have very encourage
ing 10 the But His Lordship wasn't through
1T is a claim the opinion reads, 'for work
done by female circumstances which II gener
ally brought into practice might a good deal of
moral disorder with all the consequences likely
from it."
The judge then to the ycoman services
rendered by Miss stephens TO the which they
challenged
Upon this evidence" the court commented Il find
difficulty in deciding that this woman is entitled TO
nothing She performed had to be performed
by somebody board the ship She is proved to have
performed them and TO have performed them It is
argued that being female she is entitled nothing for
that service which would be- remunerated In a man.
1T does appear alone creates legal
and total disqualification There be
that render the engagement women in a particular
maritime employment uuseemly and unsuitable but the
persons have the benefit their in such EMPLOY
the effect saving expense they must have
incurred by employing other persons in them doubt the
popenety Of their turning around and taking under
the objection that those who rendered the services
were not of the right why the objection
OF sex should be urged bar Of ordinary remuneration
The Judge ordered payment 70 Elizabeth the sum OF
81 pounds and soaked the with the as
well Disappointed in the outcome, the propnetors re-
sorted TO various other legal defeat Eliza
beths claim but to no avail They finally had To pay up