THE £4 MINIMUM 
51 
it is only what justice and commonsense demand that, when 
dealing with funds contributed by the whole body of the rate- 
payers, they should take each and every one of these enumerated 
things into consideration in order to help them to determine 
what was a fair, just and reasonable wage to pay their employees 
for the services the latter rendered. The Council would, in my 
view, fail in their duty if, in administering funds which did not 
belong to their members alone, they put aside all these aids to 
the ascertainment of what was just and reasonable remuneration 
to give for the services rendered to them, and allowed themselves 
to be guided in preference by some eccentric principles of 
socialistic philanthropy, or by a feminist ambition to secure the 
nquatify of the sexes in the matter of wages in the world of 
a ny. 
“It does not appear to me that there is any rational propor- 
tion between the rates of wages at which the labour of these 
women 1s paid and the rates at which they would be reasonably 
remunerated for their services to the Council. I concur with 
the Auditor in thinking that what has been given to the women 
as wages are really to a great extent gifts and gratuities 
disguised as wages, and are therefore illegal.” 
Lord Sumner said:—‘‘ The one definite thing is that the 
Respondents contend that no adult employee should in any 
circumstances have less than £4 a week, whether young or old, 
male or female, married or single, skilled or unskilled. It is 
not shown that the women’s work is the same as, or is com- 
parable with, the men’s, or that the women inter se or the men 
inter se are engaged in similar tasks. I express no opinion 
as to the merits of this view, that the dignity of adult labour 
requires at least a £4 wage; nor has the honesty of those who 
entertain it been questioned, but I think it is plain that such a 
course, whether it be ideal or social or political or all three, 
forms no part of the conduct, as ordinarily understood, of such 
practical enterprises as Borough Councils are by statute 
authorised to engage in.” . . . . “I am, therefore, of 
opinion, that on their own showing the Respondents have 
exercised such discretions as the Metropolis Management Act 
gives to the Council in the matter of wages upon principles 
which are not open to the Council. and for obiects which are 
beyond their powers.” 
There, then, for the present, so far as the law is concerned, 
the matter rests. It must not be imagined that the principles 
enunciated by the Learned Lords apply only to wages payments 
made by the Council. Whatever expenditure the Auditor thinks 
“‘ unnecessary and unreasonable’ he can disallow, and if he 
thinks he will be supported by the High Court, surcharge the 
councillors who authorised it. From Noble Lords who are so 
class-bigoted as to hold that the payment of £4 for a week of