Starvation Wages and Fallen Girls
Of course, it may be said that a girl ought not to sell her virtue at any price, and thank God, there are many who would live to that standard, and who would give a hundred lives, if demanded, before they would yield the purity of their womanhood. But that is not the case with many others. And in the way in which vice has spread at the present time many girls find an excuse for yielding to temptation by saying that thousands of others do it. There is a committee of investigation in Chicago that has been doing work along these lines, especially inquiring into the wages which women receive. They have examined some of the great employers of women in Chicago. They found, for instance, that Sears, Roebuck & Company earned $7,000,000 last year, and increased their reserve to $12,000,000. They pay their 4,732 women an average wage of $9.40 a week. Many of their women receive $5.00 and $5.50 a week. Many of these may be new beginners, may possibly live in their own homes, and may be able thus to support themselves on that wage. Let us look upon it as charitably as we can. Edward F. Mandel employs 1,866 females, but the wages range from $3.00 to $3.50 a week, an average of $3.25. Think of it! When questioned closely, he thought that a woman might live on $7.25 a week, but justified the wages by saying that the girls who received $3.00 a week lived at home, according to the application blanks. He placed the living expense of a woman at—clothing, $1.00; laundry, 25 cents; room rent and board, $4.00; car fare, 60 cents; luncheons, 70 cents; doctors and dentists, 60 cents; and church expenses, 10 cents. All of which looks pretty low. Marshall Field & Company employ 4,233 females, and the average wage paid by that firm is $10.76, of which 440 are receiving less than $5.00 a week for part of their time, and 213 are receiving $5.00. These doubtless are apprentices. These three firms employ nearly 11,000 women. Rosenwald, of Sears, Roebuck & Company, held that low wages had nothing to do with immorality. Mr. Mandel took the same ground. But when he came to estimate a woman's expenses at $7.25 as compared with the $3.25—the average wage that he gave—it seemed to change his opinion somewhat. Mr. Simpson, of Marshall Field & Company, declared that $8.00 a week is necessary for a woman to take proper care of herself, and both he and Mandel agreed that if a woman is not paid an adequate wage, the chances of her remaining a good woman will be exceedingly slim. Eleanor Benson, a former employee of Sears, Roebuck & Company, said that three eighths of the women working for the great mail order concern are above reproach, but she would not answer for the rest. Five eighths of 4,732 amount to 2,700. Of these, sympathy for common humanity would hope that not all were immoral, but if one half of them were, think of it, that in one establishment so many girls would be seemingly forced from their standard of morality to yield their virtue in order to dress properly! There are all sorts of complaints about the forewomen and abusive foremen. Some of the working girls there shared their clothes because all had not sufficient for their needs. The underpaid women of the country and the child-labor conditions, as brought out in many investigations, are a crying shame. Surely such things ought to be remedied. But all these are a part of a great system of finance and combination which leaves God out of the question, and is ruled by the almighty dollar.