THE TEACHERS SALARIES COMMISSION.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 4440, 21 August 1901, Page 2

THE TEACHERS SALARIES COMMISSION.

"Let them havo scope: though what they no impart Help nothing else, yet they do ease the ileart." Tho übovo quotation, uttered by auo sunenug gncvous wrong, expresses tno feelings or anomer, writes air -v. tvi. bai'iicn, from ouigo. siiie uecause her oiispnng nad been Uivitally uiurdc.eu; f, because by the sophistry of the political and unjust cry oi ‘‘equal pay for equal work,' see tout my wire and cbijurcu siiiUL suffer. •‘Liberty, Equality and Fraternity” has been a cry ior over a century, and what has it brought foi-llif Jusuco to all! See those words, "Un the amount oi dowry depends the facility of marriage. A girl without a dowry finds no appreciation for her intelligence, culture, force of character, or even her beauty, if she cannot bring her husband sufficient money to meet her own expenses. Urns enabling a map, after marriage. to consider on‘y his own selhsh necessities.” Thus it is in France. What is it in England? ‘‘The man expects from his wife only intelligence, appreciation and ac. tivity for lightening the burden of housekeeping ami of bringing up a family,” and ‘‘marriages tend to be a union of real sympathies.' 1 How will it bo with us if the principle ha agreed upon by a majority L say a majority, because I cannot believe that some of the members of the Commission would he so foolhardy as to endorse the action of the others. What if in ail phases of life women .wore to be competitors with men? Nay, rather tiie single woman in this case is to be the robber of the married woman. A man’s .salary shall be reduced that his wife may bo a drudge, his children to cuter .service so soon as they are able, that tho single woman may the better enjoy herself! I say emphatically that it is not man that is being punished, but wo. mail by woman.

Then, this Snldrios Commission applies this so-called wise idea of equal pay for equal work to the hardest worked and poorest paid men—only where there ia likely to bo competition. How just! Nay, rather, how cruel. Why not apply the principle throughout, and pay a man according to the work done, if a man's average he 40, ho shall bo paid Hi.ls per annum, but if it bo .10, the man shall got HIC.I, and have an assistant, who shall have JBBO. In the first case, the man must teach 40 pupils with from eight to ien classes, while iu the second Ids fellow may teach only 20 pupils in four or five classes. Which is the easier work? Is this the principle of equal pay for equal work? The answer comes, ‘‘Wo cannot give the smaller schools equality of payment with the larger.” Wo do not demand it, but I .say, give equal payment for equal work done. Surely the leaching of 40 pupils single-handed demands r, greater reward than the teaching of 20 with less work to bo done. The children of a small school in a farming district are nil producers. They belt) to bring forth the staple products of the country. They assist before and after school in helping to fill the ships that take our exports to other countries, and the teachers whose arduous task it is to give them training when they have time to come to him should he ns well paid the man with lighter work.