MARGARET DREIER ROBINS
The work of Margaret Dreier Robins
has been done in the National Women’s Trade
Union League. It might be supposed that the aim
of such an organization is sufficiently explicit in
its title: to get higher wages and shorter hours.
But I fancy that it would be a truer thing to say
that its aim is to bring into being that ideal of American
womanhood which Walt Whitman described:
They are not one jot less
than I am,
They are tann’d in the
face by shining suns and blowing winds,
Their flesh has the old divine
suppleness and strength,
They know how to swim, row,
ride, wrestle, shoot, run, strike,
retreat, advance,
resist, defend themselves,
They are ultimate in their
own right they are
calm, clear, well-possessed
of themselves.
When Whitman made this magnificent
prophecy for American womanhood the Civil War had
not been fought and its economic consequences were
unguessed at. The factory system, which had come
into England in the last century, bringing with it
the most unspeakable exploitation of women and children,
had hardly gained a foothold in this country.
In 1840, of the seven employments open to women (teaching,
needlework, keeping boarders, working in cotton mills,
in bookbinderies, typesetting and household service)
only one was representative of the new industrial
condition which today affects so profoundly the feminine
physique. And to the daughters of a nation that
was still imbued with the pioneer spirit, work in
cotton mills appealed so little that they undertook
it only for unusually high pay. Anyone of that
period seeing the red-cheeked, robust, intelligent,
happy girl operatives of Lowell might have dismissed
his fears of the factory as a sinister influence in
the development of American womanhood and gone on
to dream, with Walt Whitman, of a race of “fierce,
athletic girls.”
But two things happened. With
the growing flood of immigration, the factories were
abandoned more and more to the “foreigners,”
the native-born citizens losing their pride in the
excellence of working conditions and the character
of the operatives. And all the while the factory
was becoming more and more an integral part of our
civilization, demanding larger and larger multitudes
of girls and women to attend its machinery. So
that, with the enormous development of industry since
the Civil War, the factory has become the chief field
of feminine endeavor in America. In spite of
the great opening up of all sorts of work to women,
in spite of the store, the office, the studio, the
professions, still the factory remains most important
in any consideration of the health and strength of
women.
If the greatest part of our womankind
spends its life in factories, and if it further appears
that this is no temporary situation, but (practically
speaking) a permanent one, then it becomes necessary
to inquire how far the factory is hindering the creation
of that ideal womanhood which Walt Whitman predicted
for us.
As opposed to the old-fashioned method
of manufacture in the home (or the sweatshop, which
is the modern equivalent), the factory often shows
a gain in light and air, a decrease of effort, an added
leisure; while, on the other hand, there is a considerable
loss of individual freedom and an increase in monotony.
But child labor, a too long working day, bad working
conditions, lack of protection from fire, personal
exploitation by foremen, inhumanly low wages, and all
sorts of petty injustice, though not essential to
the system, are prominent features of factory work
as it generally exists.
People who consider every factory
an Inferno, however, and have only pity for its workers,
are far from understanding the situation. Here
is a field of work which is capable of competing successfully
with domestic service, and even of attracting girls
from homes where there exists no absolute necessity
for women’s wages. Yet at its contemporary
best, with a ten-hour law in operation, efficient
factory inspection, decent working conditions and
a just and humane management, the factory remains
an institution extremely perilous to the Whitmanic
ideal of womanhood.
But there are women who, undaunted
by the new conditions brought about by a changing
economic system, seize upon those very conditions to
use them as the means to their end: such a woman
is Mrs. Robins. Has a new world, bounded by factory
walls and noisy with the roar of machinery, grown
up about us, to keep women from their heritage?
She will help them to use those very walls and that
very machinery to achieve their destiny, a destiny
of which a physical well-being is, as Walt Whitman
knew it to be, the most certain symbol.
The factory already gives women a
certain independence. It may yet give them pleasure,
the joy of creation. Indeed, it must, when the
workers require it; and those who are most likely
to require it are the women workers.
It is well known that with the ultra-development
of the machine, the subdivision of labor, the regime
of piecework, it has become practically impossible
for the worker to take any artistic pleasure in his
product. It is not so well known how necessary
such pleasure in the product is to the physical well-being
of women how utterly disastrous to their
nervous organization is the monotony and irresponsibility
of piecework. This method which men
workers have grumbled at, but to which they seem to
have adjusted themselves bears its fruits
among women in neurasthenia, headaches, and the derangement
of the organs which are the basis of their different
nervous constitution. It is sufficiently clear
to those who have seen the personal reactions of working
girls to the piecework system, that when women attain,
as men in various industries have attained, the practical
management of the factory, piecework will get a setback.
But not merely good conditions, not
merely a living wage, not merely a ten or an eight
hour day all that self-government in the
shop can bring is the object of the Women’s
Trade Union League.
“The chief social gain of the
union shop,” says Mrs. Robins, “is not
its generally better wages and shorter hours, but rather
the incentive it offers for initiative and social
leadership, the call it makes, through the common
industrial relationship and the common hope, upon the
moral and reasoning faculties, and the sense of fellowship,
independence and group strength it develops.
In every workshop of say thirty girls there is undreamed
of initiative and capacity for social leadership and
control unknown wealth of intellectual and
moral resources.”
It is, in fact, this form of activity
which to many thousands of factory girls makes the
difference between living and existing, between a
painful, necessary drudgery and a happy exertion of
all their faculties. It can give them a more
useful education than any school, a more vital faith
than any church, a more invigorating sense of power
than any other career open to them.
To do all these things it must be
indigenous to working-class soil. No benefaction
originating in the philanthropic motives of middle-class
people, no enterprise of patronage, will ever have
any such meaning. A movement, to have such meaning,
must be of the working class, and by the working class,
as well as for the working class. It must be imbued
with working-class feeling, and it must subserve working-class
ideals.
It is the distinction of Mrs. Robins
that she has seen this. She has gone to the workers
to learn rather than to teach she has sought
to unfold the ideals and capacities latent in working
girls rather than impress upon them the alien ideals
and capacities of another class.
“Just” it is
Mrs. Robins that speaks “as under
a despotic church and a feudal state the possible
power and beauty of the common people was denied expression,
so under industrial feudalism the intellectual and
moral powers of the workers are slowly choked to death,
with incalculable loss to the individual and the race.
It is easy to kill; it requires a great spirit as
well as a great mind to arouse the dormant energies,
to vitalize them and to make them creative forces for
good.”
One is reminded of the words of John
Galsworthy, addressed to workingwomen: “There
is beginning to be a little light in the sky; whether
the sun is ever to break through depends on your constancy,
and courage, and wisdom. The future is in your
hands more than in the hands of men; it rests on your
virtues and well-being, rather than on the virtues
and the welfare of men, for it is you who produce and
mold the Future.”
There are 6,000,000 working women
in the United States, and half of them are girls under
21. One may go out any day in the city streets,
at morning or noon or evening, and look at a representative
hundred of them. The factories have not been
able to rob them of beauty and strength and the charm
of femininity, and in that beauty and strength and
charm there is a world of promise. And that promise
already begins to be unfolded when to them comes Mrs.
Robins with a gospel germane to their natures, saying,
“Long enough have you dreamed contemptible dreams.”