Some years ago a woman teacher of New York married, and refused to give up her position. There was no reason for discharging her—she fulfilled every duty as competently as before. But these historic school officials withheld her pay!
They had no right to; she had earned the money—it was hers. But they had the power, and used it. After many months of this high-handed withholding of her legitimate salary, this woman, and another similarly placed, sued for their back pay, making a test case of it.
They won. It was a perfectly plain case in law and equity.
Then the Board, naturally displeased, passed a by-law prohibiting the appointment, or reappointment, of married women. One woman, already in, and married, a very efficient teacher, and candidate for promotion to principalship, was not promoted, for this plain reason: they do not wish married women to teach in our schools.
Now, why?
What injurious influence exudes from previously competent teachers merely because they now know this personal, as well as their former professional, happiness!
Then with bated breath the official male mind suggests that they might become mothers.
Well? So they should. Is there anything about mothers which renders them unfit persons to teach children?
"You do not understand!" says the official male mind, a little nervously. "They would be—about to become mothers—and the children might notice it!"
Here we have Justice Shallow, Mrs. Grundy and King Canute rolled into one. What gross ignorance, what narrow conservatism, what petty and futile resistance to progress, as well as a low coarseness, prompts this objection! If our system of education allows children to grow up in such neglect that they neither know nor reverence motherhood, it is high time that the system was changed.