that the difference between morality and immorality is only one of dollars
and cents. On the other hand, to deny that low wages paid to working-girls
has any bearing on the question of vice is evidence of failure to grasp
the moral problem involved. Morality, to be sure, is always expressed in
the overcoming of difficulties. Yet we can hold a person blameworthy only
if in the full possession of his or her faculties. A poorly nourished,
fatigued girl has no such self-possession. If she does not earn enough on
which to live, and "goes wrong," her inadequate wage is a factor in her
wrong-doing, and the one who pays it to her cannot be rid of his share of
the responsibility. "Sin is misery, misery is poverty. The antidote for
poverty is income,"[7] says Professor Simon N. Patten, who is doing a vast
deal toward bringing economics and morals on speaking terms with each
other.

Vice investigations in Chicago, Minneapolis, Portland, Oregon,
Philadelphia, and elsewhere snow that there are many economic factors
besides wages involved as causes of vice. Some of these other factors are
housing, hours of work morally dangerous employments, associations at
work, and fatigue. The wage, however, is more important than all of these,
for the wage largely governs living conditions, associations and
recreation. The wage often makes the difference between life as mere
existence and life with the opportunities for self-improvement that should
belong to a human being.

It will be of value, then, to note some of the facts about wages that have
appeared in recent surveys made by the Consumers' League of Oregon, by the
State of Massachusetts, and by the Federal Government. After showing that
the minimum cost of living for a self-supporting woman in Portland is $10
a week, the Oregon Survey shows that in the nine principal occupations
employing women in Portland, from 22 to 92 per cent are receiving less