Part 75 (1/2)

”We have with us on this occasion one, as we my say, our equal in birth and breeding,”--Madam Weatherstone here looked painfully shocked as also did the Boston Marrow; possibly Mrs. Danks.h.i.+re, whose parents were Iowa farmers, was not unmindful of this, but she went on smoothly, ”and whose first employment was the honored task of the teacher; who has deliberately cast her lot with the domestic worker, and brought her trained intelligence to bear upon the solution of this great question--The True Nature of Domestic Service. In the interests of this problem she has consented to address us--I take pleasure in introducing Miss Diantha Bell.”

Diantha rose calmly, stepped forward, bowed to the President and officers, and to the audience. She stood quietly for a moment, regarding the faces before her, and produced a typewritten paper. It was clear, short, and to some minds convincing.

She set forth that the term ”domestic industry” did not define certain kinds of labor, but a stage of labor; that all labor was originally domestic; but that most kinds had now become social, as with weaving and spinning, for instance, for centuries confined to the home and done by women only; now done in mills by men and women; that this process of socialization has now been taken from the home almost all the manufactures--as of wine, beer, soap, candles, pickles and other specialties, and part of the laundry work; that the other processes of cleaning are also being socialized, as by the vacuum cleaners, the professional window-washers, rug cleaners, and similar professional workers; and that even in the preparation of food many kinds are now specialized, as by the baker and confectioner. That in service itself we were now able to hire by the hour or day skilled workers necessarily above the level of the ”general.”

A growing rustle of disapproval began to make itself felt, which increased as she went on to explain how the position of the housemaid is a survival of the ancient status of woman slavery, the family with the male head and the group of servile women.

”The keynote of all our difficulty in this relation is that we demand celibacy of our domestic servants,” said Diantha.

A murmur arose at this statement, but she continued calmly:

”Since it is natural for women to marry, the result is that our domestic servants consist of a constantly changing series of young girls, apprentices, as it were; and the complicated and important duties of the household cannot be fully mastered by such hands.”

The audience disapproved somewhat of this, but more of what followed.

She showed (Mrs. p.o.r.ne nodding her head amusedly), that so far from being highly paid and easy labor, house service was exacting and responsible, involving a high degree of skill as well as moral character, and that it was paid less than ordinary unskilled labor, part of this payment being primitive barter.

Then, as whispers and sporadic little spurts of angry talk increased, the clear quiet voice went on to state that this last matter, the position of a strange young girl in our homes, was of itself a source of much of the difficulty of the situation.

”We speak of giving them the safety and shelter of the home,”--here Diantha grew solemn;--”So far from sharing our homes, she gives up her own, and has none of ours, but the poorest of our food and a cramped lodging; she has neither the freedom nor the privileges of a home; and as to shelter and safety--the domestic worker, owing to her peculiarly defenceless position, furnishes a terrible percentage of the unfortunate.”

A shocked silence met this statement.

”In England shop-workers complain of the old custom of 'sleeping in'--their employers furnis.h.i.+ng them with lodging as part payment; this also is a survival of the old apprentice method. With us, only the domestic servant is held to this antiquated position.”

Regardless of the chill displeasure about her she cheerfully pursued:

”Let us now consider the economic side of the question. 'Domestic economy' is a favorite phrase. As a matter of fact our method of domestic service is inordinately wasteful. Even where the wife does all the housework, without pay, we still waste labor to an enormous extent, requiring one whole woman to wait upon each man. If the man hires one or more servants, the wastes increase. If one hundred men undertake some common business, they do not divide in two halves, each man having another man to serve him--fifty productive laborers, and fifty cooks.

Two or three cooks could provide for the whole group; to use fifty is to waste 47 per cent. of the labor.

”But our waste of labor is as nothing to our waste of money. For, say twenty families, we have twenty kitchens with all their furnis.h.i.+ngs, twenty stoves with all their fuel; twenty cooks with all their wages; in cash and barter combined we pay about ten dollars a week for our cooks--$200 a week to pay for the cooking for twenty families, for about a hundred persons!

”Three expert cooks, one at $20 a week and two at $15 would save to those twenty families $150 a week and give them better food. The cost of kitchen furnis.h.i.+ngs and fuel, could be reduced by nine-tenths; and beyond all that comes our incredible waste in individual purchasing.

What twenty families spend on individual patronage of small retailers, could be reduced by more than half if bought by competent persons in wholesale quant.i.ties. Moreover, our whole food supply would rise in quality as well as lower in price if it was bought by experts.

”To what does all this lead?” asked Diantha pleasantly.

n.o.body said anything, but the visible att.i.tude of the house seemed to say that it led straight to perdition.

”The solution for which so many are looking is no new scheme of any sort; and in particular it is not that oft repeated fore-doomed failure called ”co-operative housekeeping.”

At this a wave of relief spread perceptibly. The irritation roused by those preposterous figures and accusations was somewhat allayed. Hope was relit in darkened countenances.

”The inefficiency of a dozen tottering households is not removed by combining them,” said Diantha. This was of dubious import. ”Why should we expect a group of families to ”keep house” expertly and economically together, when they are driven into companions.h.i.+p by the fact that none of them can do it alone.”

Again an uncertain reception.

”Every family is a distinct unit,” the girl continued. ”Its needs are separate and should be met separately. The separate house and garden should belong to each family, the freedom and group privacy of the home.

But the separate home may be served by a common water company, by a common milkman, by a common baker, by a common cooking and a common cleaning establishment. We are rapidly approaching an improved system of living in which the private home will no more want a cookshop on the premises than a blacksmith's shop or soap-factory. The necessary work of the kitchenless house will be done by the hour, with skilled labor; and we shall order our food cooked instead of raw. This will give to the employees a respectable well-paid profession, with their own homes and families; and to the employers a saving of about two-thirds of the expense of living, as well as an end of all our difficulties with the servant question. That is the way to elevate--to en.o.ble domestic service. It must cease to be domestic service--and become world service.”

Suddenly and quietly she sat down.