women altogether; for at present we must sorrowfully admit that in the less skilled divisions of industrial life women's main advantage is often—though by no means always—her greater cheapness.
In short, whether one welcomes or deplores the fact, it is hard to doubt that the immediate future is to see attempts to regulate by legislation many things in the industrial world that have hitherto been left to chance or custom. And unless women receive enfranchisement before further advances are made on this path, it is only to be expected that their special needs may be overlooked and fresh chains not merely of usage, but of law, may bind them more firmly in that economic inferiority which is the greatest of their grievances.
But the new legislation not simply affects women as individuals, it also affects what our opponents so energetically insist is our true sphere—the home and the nursery. I do not for a moment wish to protest against society's keener interest in the well-being of children, and the healthiness of the houses of the people. It is in my view eminently desirable that education should be compulsory, that attempts should be made to ensure that the children, who must by law be educated, should not be underfed, and should all have opportunities for a healthy physical development, that over-crowding should be prohibited, that experiments in housing should be made by local authorities, that baths, wash-houses, and sometimes crèches should be provided, that health visitors should superintend the nurture of infants, &c. All this is good; it means a wider and keener
