Columbia (BnfoeraJitp 
 
 intl)eytttpt)fiReto|)arfe 
 
< 5^4 — r'* ? t) 
 
 -- /-: ■■ ....... 
 
 Pt 
 
 THE CON 
 
 >—-^4 w,-. / 8 
 
 ?Lidf 
 
 v'CU 
 
 < / 
 
 LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 ALBERT S. BOLLES, 
 
 THE “ NORWICH. MORNING BULLETIN.” 
 
 PHILADELPHI A: 
 
 J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 
 1877. 
 
THE CONFLICT 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 LABOR AND CAPITAL 
 

 
THE CONFLICT 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 BY 
 
 ALBERT S. BOLLES, 
 
 AUTHOR OF “ CHAPTERS IN POLITICAL ECONOMY,” AND EDITOR OF 
 THE “ NORWICH MORNING BULLETIN.” 
 
 PHILADELPHIA*. 
 
 J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 
 
 1877. 
 
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1876. by 
 
 J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO.. 
 
 In the Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. 
 
HON. 
 
 TO THE 
 
 NATHANIEL WHEELER, 
 
 
 OF BRIDGEPORT, 
 
 WHOSE LONG AND SUCCESSFUL CAREER ILLUSTRATES THE KINDLY 
 FEELING AND RECOGNIZED MUTUAL INTEREST WHICH MAY 
 EXIST BETWEEN EMPLOYED AND EMPLOYER, 
 
 THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED 
 
 BY THE AUTHOR. 
 
I 
 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The greater portion of this work was written dur¬ 
 ing the first half of last year, when the author was 
 visiting several countries of Europe. Many of the 
 facts were gathered from personal inquiry, while 
 others were obtained from official reports and equally 
 reliable sources. The author trusts that the work will 
 prove useful, both to the working-man and to his 
 employer, in the way of toning down the antagonism 
 existing between the two classes, and in leading them 
 to see more perfectly their true relations to each other. 
 No theories have been invented or fanciful specula¬ 
 tions indulged in, as it could hardly be expected that 
 those for whom the work is primarily designed would 
 have the inclination to read anything of such a char¬ 
 acter. Practical information is wanted; and this he 
 has attempted to furnish, not from any experience of 
 his own, but from the direct and indirect experience 
 of trustworthy witnesses. 
 
 No work has yet appeared in this country treating 
 
 vii 
 
Vlll 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 so extensively of trade-unions, their evils, their work¬ 
 ing, and what may be expected of them in the future. 
 As these societies have developed more fully in Great 
 Britain than in the United States, for the reason that 
 they have flourished there during a longer period, 
 consequently they can be studied there with greater 
 profit by American employers of labor. By learning 
 their history, both the capitalist and the trade-union¬ 
 ist himself are put in possession of facts which will 
 lead them away from the errors into which both 
 classes have fallen in the old world. The investiga¬ 
 tion into the organization and rules of trade-unions 
 and other associations, undertaken by the British 
 Government in 1867, was exceedingly valuable; for 
 the most experienced employers of labor in all parts 
 of the kingdom, and also the leading trade-unionists, 
 were examined, and their testimony was published in 
 full, thus putting all who could obtain the report in 
 possession of the very best information concerning 
 these societies, and other matters of vital interest to 
 employed and employer. From this source facts have 
 been liberally drawn; and the report furnishes by far 
 the most valuable body of information on this subject 
 which can be found anywhere. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 IX 
 
 At the fourth chapter, relating to the payment of 
 labor, those economists who hold that political econ¬ 
 omy has nothing to do with moral science will sneer, 
 as useless and out of place in a work like this. But 
 all have an equal right to retain their opinions, and 
 if our argument be sound, it is all the stronger for 
 squaring both with moral and economic science. If it 
 be affirmed that, admitting the truth of the principle 
 sought to be established, it cannot be enforced, the 
 same thing may be said of almost any other truth, 
 whether of an economic or any other character. It 
 is none the less one’s duty, however, to find out what 
 is right and expedient, though knowing that neither 
 the one thing nor the other will be heeded. 
 
 Norwich, Conn., March i, 1876. 
 
PAGE 
 
 CHAPTER 
 
 I. Present Relations of Labor and Capital . .17 
 
 II. The Superabundance of Labor . . 29 
 
 III. How the Working Classes are affected by a Rise 
 
 in Prices.41 
 
 IV. The Payment of Labor. 74 
 
 V. The Good and Evil of Trade-Unions . . .92 
 
 VI. Co-operation. 166 
 
 VII. Industrial Partnerships. 177 
 
 VIII. Education of the Working Classes . . .190 
 
 IX. Arbitration and Conciliation .... 205 
 
 Appendix.207 
 
I. 
 
 PRESENT RELATIONS OF LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 To make a peace between the working-man and his 
 employer grounded in justice and stamped with per¬ 
 petuity, is the great social problem of the age. Who¬ 
 ever succeeds in doing this will more worthily earn 
 a title to perpetual remembrance than any victor of 
 battles. 
 
 The conflict between the two classes is not confined 
 to the United States or Great Britain, but darkens all 
 countries. It is to be noted that wherever workmen 
 possess the highest intelligence, is the greatest dis¬ 
 content, strikes are oftenest, and wages most rapidly 
 increasing.* Not that this state of things is always to 
 continue, but only while the relations between the two 
 classes are undergoing readjustment. If the effect of 
 educating working-men is to dissolve, permanently, 
 the peaceful relations which formerly existed between 
 them and their employers, then, indeed, might we 
 think ignorance is bliss, as it certainly would prolong 
 a happier condition of society than exists to-day. But 
 the present stands to the past and to the future as a 
 transitional period, in which the toiling millions, awak¬ 
 ing from the dense ignorance which for ages has en- 
 
 * Evidence of A. S. Hewitt before Trade-Unions Commission of 
 Great Britain, 1867, Question 6892. 
 
 7 
 
8 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 veloped them, are groping after new political rights 
 and social enjoyments, and a higher reward for their 
 labor. Blindly do they pursue their ends, suffering 
 much from ignorance and prejudice, and not unfre- 
 qucntly actuated by selfish motives, yet who cannot 
 see in their movements that they are trying to rise 
 to a higher plane of living? 
 
 The conflict between the two classes is of recent 
 date, and the employer often sighs for the old times 
 when his word was law, and his workmen took what¬ 
 ever he deigned to give, and were silent. That time 
 is no more. In the stately language of the Royal 
 Commissioners of Great Britain who were appointed 
 to inquire into the organization and rules of trade- 
 unions and other associations, “ the habitual code of 
 sentiment which prevailed between employers and 
 workmen in the times when the former were regarded 
 by both law and usage as the governing class is now 
 greatly relaxed, and cannot be revived.” In this elder 
 day the contentment of the working-man resulted from 
 his helplessness, which arose from his ignorance. In 
 many callings he never went from the town where he 
 labored, never knew the amount of his employers 
 profits, never dreamed of any way by which he could 
 improve his lot, and, as necessary to this, obtain higher 
 wages. The spell of ignorance which dazed him has 
 been broken. His eyes are open, and he beholds 
 strange and wondrous things; new desires are kindled 
 which he seeks to gratify. Moreover, that dread feel¬ 
 ing of inferiority formerly entertained toward his 
 employer is gone. The age of servility is past. The 
 workman looks upon those around him as his equals, 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 19 
 
 and knows no reason, provided he honestly acquires 
 the means, why he should not live in as much splendor 
 and have as many enjoyments as any one. This new 
 importance felt by the laboring man springs principally 
 from three causes deserving brief mention. 
 
 First, education. So long as the laboring classes 
 were steeped in ignorance their wants were fewer, and 
 the feeling of discontent toward their employers, if 
 existing at all, was concealed. The laborer knew 
 not how to rise, even when the desire was felt. He 
 was like a horse, possessing a vast deal of inborn 
 energy, yet ignorant of its existence. Education has 
 changed all this. He longs now for more rational 
 living, a better house, food, and clothing. He desires 
 education for his children and time for self-improve¬ 
 ment. Moreover, he has found out how indispensable 
 are his services in production. 
 
 Secondly, his importance has increased in conse¬ 
 quence of combining with his fellow-workers. The 
 trade-unionist believes, whether his opposers do or 
 not, that he can wage a more successful battle by com¬ 
 bining than he could single-handed. And the fact that 
 employers have often yielded to the demands of these 
 organizations, while they have rarely noticed similar 
 demands coming from individuals, encourages this 
 belief. Again and again have trade-unions failed in 
 securing their ends, but the unquestioned fact that 
 they have achieved victories directly attributable to 
 organization has revealed their power and importance. 
 
 Thirdly, the importance of the laboring class has 
 grown with the extension of their political rights. 
 Nothing has led men to feel their consequence more 
 
20 
 
 7 HE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 than the bestowal of the electoral franchise upon them. 
 Mr. Ward, in writing of the moral, intellectual, and 
 material condition of the working classes of Hamburg, 
 Germany, ascribes their progress during the last forty 
 years to the “ increased importance of their position in 
 the Republic, by the extension of the electoral fran¬ 
 chise, which gives every laboring man a vote for polit¬ 
 ical representatives.” The remark may be applied to 
 the same classes in other countries where new polit¬ 
 ical rights have been conferred. The truth has dawned 
 that many of the distinctions between men in society 
 arc assumed, not real, nor won by superior ability or 
 virtues. Working-men begin to feel and assert that 
 they arc quite as good as their neighbors, and, as an 
 expected outgrowth of this idea, demand that in every 
 agreement they shall receive their full share of the 
 benefit. Receiving fresh additions of political power, 
 waxing strong through organized effort, growing in 
 knowledge, with new desires unfolding, who can ex¬ 
 pect of the industrial classes satisfaction with the old 
 order of things? 
 
 Beside, as an eminent manufacturer, whose opinion is 
 worthy of high consideration, has said: ‘‘The general 
 introduction of machinery, by which production has 
 been enormously increased without, as the people be¬ 
 lieve, a corresponding rearrangement of the laws of 
 the distribution of the proceeds,” has increased “ the 
 restlessness and uneasiness which exists among the 
 laboring men all over the.world, and specially among 
 those who are more enlightened.”* 
 
 * A. S. Hewitt, testimony before Trade-Unions Com., Q. 6891. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 2 
 
 The earnestness with which the working classes 
 are enforcing their demands no one will gainsay. 
 Certainly not in the present day, and perhaps in no 
 previous ones, has greater persistence been shown 
 by any body in trying to secure its ends. It is this 
 stubborn spirit, which refuses to yield or be subdued, 
 that is shaking the souls of so many employers. 
 The strikes occurring in Great Britain and in other 
 countries within a few years are piteous and terrible 
 exhibitions of the devotion and desperation of the 
 laboring classes to principles accepted as true and 
 luminous with good to themselves. In a recent strike 
 at South Wales, thousands lived upon the smallest 
 allowance, while not a few died, that the interests of 
 the larger number might not be sacrificed. The Paris 
 Commune is a still more awful illustration of the des¬ 
 peration Which this class has exhibited in its lawless 
 march toward the attainment of its objects. 
 
 That some of the measures leveled by workmen at 
 employers, and those resorted to by the latter in self- 
 defense, should widen the breach between the two 
 classes is to be expected. Neither class would act 
 according to human nature if such conduct did not 
 effect an estrangement. Hence, the growing enmity 
 of the two classes is everywhere observable. Doubt¬ 
 less, trade-unions have fostered this spirit of antagon¬ 
 ism between employers and workmen. 
 
 In the investigation before the Royal Commissioners 
 appointed to inquire into the rules and organization of 
 trade-unions, it was admitted that the cordial and 
 friendly feeling which used to be common between the 
 two classes was gone. The workmen, looking rather 
 2 * 
 
22 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 to the approval of their unions than to the approval 
 of their employers, were less anxious than of yore to 
 stand well with the latter; and the employers, on their 
 part, no longer felt under the same obligation to look 
 after the interests of their workmen and assist them in 
 periods of difficulty. Misunderstandings, also, which 
 would be readily settled if free and friendly intercourse 
 existed between them, are exasperated and prolonged. 
 The alienation is even more complete in France. This 
 is the natural outgrowth of the communistic principles 
 so generally believed in by the working people. With 
 them “ no private indulgence, no public legislation 
 can eradicate the idea that the capitalist is a vampire 
 feeding upon their blood.” However perfect may be 
 the dis< ipline in the workshop, outside of it the em¬ 
 ployer is without influence and respect. Anything 
 done which he may think useful or agreeable to them, 
 they regard, not as a boon, but a device to bribe them 
 to additional labor. Mr. Mallett relates the instance 
 of a large manufacturer who, in order to do a kindness 
 to the hands in his employment, turned on a tap of 
 hot and cold water outside the manufactory, at which 
 any of the families living in that vicinity could come 
 and help themselves. A workman being asked whether 
 the innovation was well received by his fellows, replied 
 simply, without the slightest intention of giving offense, 
 that it appeared to be only a small part of what was 
 due them. Entertaining such feelings and dreaming 
 of a time when communism will prevail, employers 
 look upon their workmen as their natural enemies, and 
 are filled with dread, if not with hatred. Turning to 
 Germany, we find that the relations between employer 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 23 
 
 and employed, if not so bitter as in France, are cold, 
 and never warmed by kindly offices and mutual con¬ 
 fidence. Says Mr. Petrie: “An admission that their 
 mutual interests require a close reciprocity of good 
 offices between them and their employers is the utmost 
 to be expected from the working classes in this country. 
 At the present day a majority of the factory operatives 
 refuse even to admit this. All that they consent to 
 recognize is the necessity of earning the means of 
 subsistence.” A greater alienation exists between the 
 two classes in Belgium. So wide is the gulf that a 
 writer who has studied the subject with great care re¬ 
 marks, that “one of the greatest drawbacks to the 
 prosperity and well-being of the industrial classes 
 consists undoubtedly in the absence of good will and 
 confidence between them and those by whom they are 
 employed, particularly in the great industrial centres. 
 This especially applies to the case of large joint-stock 
 companies, where the ties existing between the oper¬ 
 atives and the managers are of the slenderest descrip¬ 
 tion.” The relations subsisting between employed and 
 employer in the Netherlands and Switzerland are like 
 oases in the wide desert we have been surveying. Even 
 these countries have felt, on some occasions, the breath 
 of foul influences disturbing the peace of men and 
 masters; yet there, as in no other lands, can the eye 
 rest with pleasure, for the two classes live together in 
 a kindly manner, and the condition of each is improved 
 by the magical power of a confidence freely and help¬ 
 fully given, and rarely betrayed. The United States 
 has more slowly experienced the snapping of the ties 
 once binding employed and employers, yet the wave 
 
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 24 
 
 of discontent has reached this shore, and is breaking 
 with more or less fury over every part of the land. 
 According to one eminently qualified to judge, the 
 feelings of mutual respect, confidence, and good will 
 arc rapidly diminishing here. Said Mr. Hewitt, a 
 member of the firm of Cooper, Hewitt & Co., before a 
 committee of investigation in 1867: “Within the last 
 five years there has been a very great diminution of 
 it, and there is a feeling of antagonism at the present 
 time, and a very marked one.” 
 
 Not so deep and wide-spread is this antagonism in 
 the United States as in Great Britain and other Euro¬ 
 pean countries, but that it exists and is constantly 
 increasing is too painfully true. Workmen display a 
 unity of interest in respect to themselves which finds 
 no counterpart in the action of their masters. Had 
 the latter tried half as hard to combine their forces in 
 order to break down the power of the working classes, 
 they might have succeeded long ago. But they seek 
 to make headway by competition rather than by com¬ 
 bination ; for, while one employer is engaged in a des¬ 
 perate struggle with his men, the rest enhance their 
 profits by getting the unlucky one’s trade. Each em¬ 
 ployer is so hopeful of weathering the storm in his 
 own case that combination among masters until a very 
 recent period was quite impossible. Workmen, on 
 the other hand, though suffering from dissension, have 
 made steady progress in organizing and developing 
 their strength. It is true the International failed, and 
 it was well for all classes of society, but trade-unions 
 are growing stronger every day and dealing blows with 
 constantly augmenting force. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 25 
 
 That workmen have often wrongly ascribed their 
 victories to organization we shall hereafter give abun¬ 
 dant proof. That they have reaped some benefit from 
 organization, wrought immense havoc to business, 
 sometimes without themselves profiting thereby, can¬ 
 not be denied. Crude enough are the best of these 
 organizations, not wisely directed, squandering their 
 resources, and very slowly improving their methods. 
 That they have risen to momentous consequence, the 
 appointment of such a commission as that which in¬ 
 quired into the organization and rules of trade-unions 
 and other associations of Great Britain in 1867 is con¬ 
 clusive, while the report of this commission redoubles 
 the proof. That their power is feared, the steps finally 
 taken among masters to combine for mutual safety 
 leave no ground for dispute. 
 
 It cannot be maintained that the claims of labor are 
 always just, nor that the methods workmen pursue to 
 gain their ends are always in harmony with their own 
 interests. Mr. Brassey has observed in his “ Work and 
 Wages” that workmen oftener strike to prevent a fall 
 than to obtain a rise of wages; yet reductions are 
 sometimes necessary, and employers have waited long 
 after business ceased to be profitable before making 
 them. It is because workmen so frequently war 
 against their own interests that they perplex capital, and 
 are driving it to despair. In 1869, a noted mechanic 
 and locomotive-manufacturer of Saxony, Germany, 
 stated in a letter to an English official that the trade- 
 unions in Great Britain had produced the most per¬ 
 nicious results to English trade. To continue in his 
 own language: “ Not only have the engine-makers 
 
26, 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 been driven to German markets, but the same fate 
 awaits them in the non-German markets; for exam¬ 
 ple, in Russia, from whence large orders for railway 
 works have come, and where they had to succumb to 
 German and French firms.” He also affirmed from 
 his own experience that for a time no one ever ven¬ 
 tured to give an order in England, as it was prob¬ 
 lematical whether the manufacturer would be in a 
 condition to execute it, or whether the strikes would 
 not occasion months of delay. We do not propose 
 to treat in any lengthy way how the working classes 
 injure their own interests through ignorance or pre¬ 
 judice; a single additional illustration will suffice. In 
 Antwerp there were at one time nearly fifty establish¬ 
 ments devoted to the manufacture of cigars, and em¬ 
 ploying about ten thousand workmen and apprentices. 
 During the summer of 1871, all the operatives insti¬ 
 tuted a strike for the purpose of getting a reduction 
 of working hours, though not of wages; and also of 
 procuring a discharge of the apprentices. Concerning 
 the justice of the first demand nothing need be said, 
 but the latter demand was cruel, and the employers 
 determined to resist it to the .utmost. Means were 
 furnished to the operatives so that the strike was pro¬ 
 longed for four months and a half, when work was 
 resumed. In the mean time what had happened to 
 the Antwerp cigar trade ? It had received a serious 
 blow from which it has never recovered. Those who 
 had been accustomed to obtain a supply of cigars 
 from this quarter went elsewhere when their demands 
 could not be fulfilled, and have never returned. Trade 
 is often slowly acquired, and quickly lost; and numer- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 2 7 
 
 ous instances might be given of the blows inflicted 
 upon it by workmen themselves who are the first to 
 suffer from their short-sighted conduct. 
 
 Were workmen, whether single or united, studying 
 only their own interests, but from an enlightened 
 point of view, capital would not have much cause to 
 fear. Unhappily, however well meant may be the 
 efforts put forth by the laboring millions, they are 
 deficient in wisdom and deeply immersed in prejudice, 
 and are continually resorting to plans to improve their 
 lot which are fraught not only with injury to them¬ 
 selves, but ruin to their masters. Too sanguine would 
 be the hope of witnessing much improvement so long 
 as their interests are regarded as opposed. Over and 
 over again have workmen been told how identical 
 were their interests with those of their employers. 
 Instead, though, of growing in this belief, their enmity, 
 as we have seen, is deepening every year. It would 
 seem as though such disasters as the Antwerp cigar 
 strike ought to teach a lesson worth remembering; 
 but perhaps many repetitions must occur on a still 
 grander scale before the working classes can behold 
 the ruin they are bringing on their own heads. 
 
 Thus the antagonism between the two classes is 
 great, and their relations are growing worse. Nor 
 will it diminish until it is seen that the interests of 
 capital and labor, instead of being opposed, are the 
 same. Firmly established as is this principle in polit¬ 
 ical economy, it must receive a practical acceptance 
 before peace between the contending parties can be 
 declared. To achieve this end, to make employer and 
 employed recognize the truth of the identity of their 
 
28 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 interests, and act accordingly, is a difficult and long¬ 
 time task. But experiments have been tried in which 
 the combination of interests was seen and acted upon, 
 and these give considerable promise of success. Let us 
 not believe that the antagonism is always to continue, 
 but that, through much suffering and unsuccessful 
 experiment, a solution of this great question will be 
 reached,—a solution as perfect as it is likely to be 
 costly, and more eagerly welcomed than a precious 
 laden ship after a voyage long overdue. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 29 
 
 II. 
 
 THE SUPERABUNDANCE OF LABOR. 
 
 The chief misfortune of the toiling multitude is 
 self-caused, for, as the rate of wages is based upon 
 the supply of labor, this is wholly within their control. 
 Instead of regulating the supply by wisely restraining 
 passion, it is often indulged most by those who can 
 afford to do so least, and, consequently, a superabun¬ 
 dance of labor is to be found in every long-civilized 
 state. Having no accumulated resources, they are at 
 the mercy of the employer; he can pay his own price, 
 and, however low or unjust it maybe, the laborers are 
 plenty who are willing to take the places of the dis¬ 
 contented. Not until a very recent period have work¬ 
 men been able to enforce any concession from their 
 employers; and even now the latter could crush the 
 growing pride of the other class by adopting its 
 tactics. 
 
 Labor may be out of employ for two reasons— 
 either from the disturbance of trade, or from a super¬ 
 abundant supply. For example, in 1865 an extraor¬ 
 dinary stimulus was given to the glass industry of 
 Venice, and a great extension in this business arose. 
 The demand for labor exceeded the supply, and wages 
 increased so much that all who could abandoned their 
 3 
 
30 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 occupations for bead-making. Three years later,clouds 
 gathered over Venice; the demand for Venetian beads 
 ceased, and a large number of persons no longer 
 found employment. Shoemakers, tailors, carpenters, 
 and like persons who had been attracted to the bead- 
 manufacture by high wages, would gladly have returned 
 to their former pursuits, but these were filled with 
 new comers. The distress arising from depression in 
 the business has not even yet passed away. 
 
 Fifty years ago the linen industry of Middle Silesia 
 was in a very flourishing condition. In an evil hour 
 for the workers of this thrfving region, Frederick 
 William III., refusing to acknowledge Queen Isabella 
 of Spain, unwittingly struck a death-blow to this in¬ 
 dustry, for the Spanish market was closed against the 
 importation of linen, and the Spaniards were the chief 
 customers of Germany. From this blow the linen- 
 manufacture of Silesia has never recovered, and thou¬ 
 sands of weavers have suffered severely ever since. 
 Many of them engaged in cotton-weaving, but not 
 having money enough to purchase new looms, they 
 were obliged to work on credit, and so were kept at 
 the feet of large manufacturing and commercial estab¬ 
 lishments which paid them the “ lowest possible wages.” 
 
 The industrial classes of no country are exempt 
 from such calamities as overtook the Venetian and 
 Silesian workmen. In the United States, their lot, as 
 a general rule, is happier than in other lands, yet even 
 here they witness periods of suffering. The panic of 
 1870 effected great changes in the prospects of the 
 working people. The mania for railroad building 
 suddenly ceased, and a large number of men were 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 3 ! 
 
 dismissed from work; then the iron establishments 
 suffered in turn, many were closed, or the quantity of 
 work reduced, as well as wages. The wave swept 
 over nearly all branches of business, with like results 
 to employer and employed. Such things happen 
 everywhere; no country is exempt. 
 
 Almost every country is subject to some local cause 
 rendering the supply of work more or less precarious. 
 Let us note some of these causes, and where they 
 occur. To begin with Belgium, there is, above all 
 things, a superabundance of workmen. The most 
 densely populated country in Europe, and emigration 
 beyond the seas rare in ordinary times, and still more 
 so when commercial crises happen, great misery pre¬ 
 vails among the poorer classes, because they can get 
 no work, and, consequently, earn nothing to buy 
 bread. How vast is the mass of unemployed per¬ 
 sons, even when manufactures are in their normal 
 state, may be learned from the fact that more than 
 nine hundred thousand, or one-fifth of the population, 
 have their names inscribed upon the lists of poor relief. 
 No wonder, then, Belgium is such a formidable com¬ 
 petitor in the international markets with her products, 
 since she is so rich in industrial wealth. 
 
 Going farther north to Denmark, the land is sur¬ 
 feited with workmen. The excessive supply is due to 
 the constant influx from Sweden and Germany. The 
 former country being heavily overburdened, a portion 
 of the excess is drained off into Denmark, whose own 
 population is more than sufficient for her needs. 
 Swedish mechanics or field laborers can travel for 
 fifty cents to Denmark, and there earn higher wages 
 
32 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 than at home, experiencing no difficulty in adapting 
 themselves to the country and using its language. 
 As for the German artisan who comes hither, his 
 nationality sits lightly upon him, and he is easily 
 metamorphosed into an inhabitant of the soil. With 
 such an cvcr-crowding supply, who can paint the 
 Dan h operative condition save in gloomy colors? 
 It has been recently affirmed that of ten old and de- 
 n, nine ar< obliged to go to the parish 
 for relief. It is said that fifteen hundred and seventy- 
 four persons were in the Copenhagen workhouse 
 eight years ago, and one-half of them were artisans. 
 1 taring the trly every fourth inhabitant 
 
 n i ived some kind of public relief. 
 In the poor-quarter of Christianshaven, one-third, or 
 five thousand people, were relieved by the parish; and 
 probably twenty-five hundred more were assisted by 
 private charity. 
 
 In i f the laboring classes fare better, their 
 
 , are great \\ ithin a recent 
 period, small artisans and tradesmen have suffered an 
 eclipse < aused by increased facilities of communica¬ 
 tion and transportation introduced by railroads. Cus¬ 
 tomers, instead of going to the small shops, which 
 abound in the country, resort to the larger ones in 
 the more populous towns, where greater variety can 
 be found. These cut down the trade of the smaller 
 shops still more by sending abroad commission agents 
 who scour the country thoroughly in search of orders, 
 h or the same reason, the annual markets and fairs are 
 sinking to decay. Hence, a universal cry is heard 
 horn the smaller tradesmen and artisans, of their 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 33 
 
 trade being overstocked and the labor market glutted. 
 In order to live, they turn their hands to almost any 
 kind of work they can find, although the larger 
 portion still cling to their regular pursuits. Under 
 such precarious conditions of labor, “ it is not sur¬ 
 prising,” as an authoritative writer has remarked, 
 “that perhaps half-of the families of the artisan class 
 live in comparative indigence.” Fresh meat is an 
 exceptional luxury with many of them, their house¬ 
 hold economy is of the humblest kind, and indul¬ 
 gence in spirituous drinks, even in moderation, beyond 
 their means. 
 
 Although the supply of labor greatly exceeds the 
 demand, another cause of the stagnation in trade is 
 diminished consumption. Hence, while the laboring 
 classes are most severely affected, manufacturers and 
 tradesmen do not escape. 
 
 Incorporated with the German empire is the city, 
 or rather republic, of Hamburg, containing a popula¬ 
 tion of three hundred and fifteen thousand souls. 
 What fact could mark more plainly the superabun¬ 
 dance of labor in Hamburg than this: the laboring 
 classes receive the highest wages paid in Germany, 
 and their living is correspondingly better, yet during 
 the last fifteen years nearly one million have emi¬ 
 grated from the ports of Hamburg and Bremen to the 
 United States and other countries. 
 
 Were the pauper lists a correct indication of the 
 number who cannot get work, most of the countries 
 of Europe would furnish a heavy roll. But they do 
 not always tell the truth, for, doubtless, some prefer to 
 beg and be supported even when there is opportunity 
 3 * 
 
34 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 to work and earn a livelihood. Still, these lists are 
 very significant, and, in many cases, do not tell the 
 whole story of the suffering endured by persons who 
 are unable to find employment. Thousands, especi¬ 
 ally in Belgium, are supported by private charity, and 
 their names never appear upon any public roll for 
 relief. Keeping this fact in sight, the pauper lists 
 more perfectly indicate the number who cannot labor 
 for want of something to do, than some perhaps are 
 inclined at first to believe. 
 
 Labor is severely suffering in France from another 
 cause. The war with Germany wrought havoc to 
 French industries, and many a workman found his 
 supply of work suddenly, and perhaps forever, cut off. 
 While the war was raging, factories both in France 
 and Germany were very generally closed, and the 
 energies of the two nations were bent upon the destruc¬ 
 tion of life, rather than upon its preservation. In the 
 mean time, Belgium profited by the misfortunes of her 
 neighbors. Owing to the inactivity of the French 
 and German factories, the prices of cotton, wool, and 
 flax declined, and the Belgian manufacturers purchased 
 heavy stocks at low figures, while they obtained new 
 markets for their products. When the war was con¬ 
 cluded, large quantities of manufactured goods were 
 supplied to France as well as to Germany. But de¬ 
 pression to French industries did not end with the 
 war. Belgium has continued to hold on to a con¬ 
 siderable portion of her trade, for the French govern¬ 
 ment, compelled to increase taxation, has freighted 
 some of her industries so heavily that they cannot 
 rise. Years will elapse before her production becomes 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 35 
 
 as great and profitable as before the war; and of all 
 who suffer from this fearful calamity, the working 
 classes suffer most. 
 
 The unsettled condition of the government is 
 another weight upon the industries of the country, 
 and affects unfavorably the supply of work ; this, how¬ 
 ever, is a result of the war. Were all the losses, past 
 and prospective, accruing to capital and labor from 
 this terrible struggle computed in dollars, the sum 
 would be enormous. 
 
 War is undoubtedly one of the greatest curses from 
 which the laboring classes suffer; in European coun¬ 
 tries it may be questioned whether the supply of work 
 has not been more seriously affected by this cause 
 than by any other. Says M. Dauby, an eminent 
 Belgian writer: “All the industrial crises in Belgium, 
 if traced back to their origin, will find their source 
 either directly or indirectly in war or its results.” He 
 recites this remarkable illustration, drawn from the 
 history of the cotton crisis of Ghent in 1826: 
 
 During the month of February most of the fac¬ 
 tories stopped work, and one employing 500 hands was 
 closed. The number of operatives still employed who 
 averaged ten hours a day was 9107, and 1150 were 
 without work. A fortnight later, in March, the latter 
 number was increased to 1386, the average working 
 hours of the 8865 still employed being nine and a half. 
 Near the latter end of April 2367 operatives were out 
 of employment, and by the middle of May the number 
 swelled to 3000. At that time, therefore, only seven- 
 tenths of the operatives were employed, and they, in 
 consequence of a reduction of the working hours, 
 
36 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 earned about three-fifths of their former wages, 
 employed from eight to nine hours a day instea o 
 thirteen or fourteen, as they were during t e go en 
 period of the industry. 
 
 It is unnecessary to say any more upon this sad 
 topic. The International, with all its startling princi¬ 
 ples and measures, felt the full significance of war and 
 armed peace to the workmen, for its enormous force 
 was directed against standing armies and human blood¬ 
 shed. This was one of the two foundation-stones upon 
 which the society was built, and this was one reason 
 why the governments of Europe marked it for destruc¬ 
 tion. 
 
 The working class of the United States is less 
 exposed to suffering from this cause than is that of 
 Europe. It is free from national jealousy, for no other 
 nation of importance is near. Over the sea the con¬ 
 tiguity of states and the existence of large standing 
 armies thirsting for glory and conquest render peace 
 a precarious thing at all times. Still, the people of the 
 United States have suffered from internal dissensions, 
 the evil consequences of which will long remain. One 
 of the bitterest fruits was the creation of a paper cur¬ 
 rency, the circulation of which has been a heavier tax 
 to the laborer than any other arising from the war. In 
 consequence of this currency the prices of all commod 
 ities rapidly rose, but the price of labor did not ad 
 vance in parallel lines, as all know. This was the first 
 loss, but a second has continued longer; for, in conse¬ 
 quence of the fluctuations caused by the currency, 
 every one charged more for what he sold to cover any 
 loss that might accrue. In other words, a sort of in- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 3 7 
 
 surance premium was added to cover possible losses. 
 And then, after the currency had grown superabundant, 
 it flowed off into new channels of enterprise; the con¬ 
 struction of railroads before they were required, and 
 the like, stimulating the demand for labor during a 
 short period ; for quickly the bubble burst, hundreds 
 of enterprises were stopped, thousands were dismissed 
 from work, and all trade was shaken or destroyed. 
 Even yet recovery is far from complete. 
 
 Notwithstanding the hard knocks labor has received 
 in the United States, it is the most promising of all 
 lands for the son of toil. The remark of Mr. Ford is 
 unquestionably true that “ to no quarter of the globe 
 can a man turn with so reasonable a chance of finding 
 work as to the United States of America.” In the 
 older, more thickly-settled portions of the land, the 
 supply is quite equal to the demand, but the great 
 prairies of the West invite the laborer to come hither, 
 assuring to him a livelihood, if nothing more. No 
 starving multitudes are found in the United States; 
 and there is no excuse for beggary or destitution, 
 provided the laborer has health. Of course, every 
 country has its drones, and so has this. Nevertheless, 
 Nature has richer gifts to bestow upon the man of in¬ 
 dustry in this quarter of her vast domain than in any 
 other. True, she does not give everything, and those 
 who come hither expecting to pick up gold in the 
 streets will be disappointed. Gold does not grow on 
 bushes nor wheat in barns; to get either requires 
 effort. But there is an immense difference between 
 the opportunity to earn one’s bread if he desires, and 
 not being able because there is no chance. 
 
38 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 For the sufferings of its people every country has 
 some compensation which no other can grant. Thus, 
 in fleeing to the United States the emigrant leaves 
 friends, amusements, and associations of various kinds, 
 —a deprivation not easily borne. Many there are who 
 prefer the garrets or cellars of cities, subsisting upon 
 the coarsest and poorest food, to sweet, smiling valleys 
 or broad, rich prairies, where a healthy living can be 
 easily obtained, for the sole reason that they cannot 
 part with their friends, their amusements, and the ex¬ 
 citement of city life. Social wants, family ties and 
 patriotic associations often rise superior to the cravings 
 of the body, else emigration from over-crowded coun¬ 
 tries would be far more rapid. 
 
 The following illustration vividly illustrates the fore¬ 
 going idea. The hand-loom weavers of Urach, a vil¬ 
 lage in Wurtemberg, Germany, have outlived their 
 day as fully as the battlements and towers which but¬ 
 tress their habitations. These are of two stories, 
 greatly reduced in number, for the frames upon which 
 the weavers work have been reduced from one hun¬ 
 dred to twenty-one within the memory of men living, 
 rhe busy factories, by giving greater and surer earn¬ 
 ings, have drawn away the younger generations 
 from the employment of their fathers. Entering the 
 houses, a narrow stair leads to the room above, where 
 a great amount of preparatory work is done by the 
 female members of the household. On the ground- 
 floor, or more frequently in the region beneath, are 
 placed four or five looms; two or more friends or 
 relations occupying the cave for mutual warmth and 
 solace. It is said that not unfrequently work is fur- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 39 
 
 nished them by old-fashioned persons, women who are 
 still without faith in machinery, and refuse to depart 
 from the ways of the past. Such an one will purchase 
 her raw material, or cultivate it in her field, and after¬ 
 wards, hunting out among the villages of the Alb an 
 antiquated crone with a spinning-wheel, will employ 
 her during the winter to spin the flax into yarn by 
 hand. This done, she goes in the summer-time to 
 Urach and makes a bargain with her weaver that her 
 hand-spun may be hand-woven, declaring that, if she 
 can help it, no machine-made fabric shall ever be worn 
 by herself. These poor weavers, working fourteen 
 hours a day, earn but a scanty pittance, and while 
 the wages of the common laborer have increased fifty 
 per cent, within twenty years, theirs have risen only 
 twenty-six. At present, a weaver with the aid of his 
 wife, reckoned at three hours more per day, making 
 seventeen for both, will receive for that time thirty- 
 two cents; though in. a factory hard by they “ could 
 scarcely earn less, do what they might, than fifty-eight 
 cents between them in exchange for twelve hours’ 
 labor.” Why, then, do these haggard weavers remain 
 during the livelong days in unfloored cellars, many of 
 which are never heated, not even in keen mid-winter, 
 when the doors of the factory are open to them ? This 
 is the answer: To maintain independence of all but self- 
 imposed rules and routine, emancipation from all other 
 masters but self; the breathing of a purer, less crowded 
 air, free from dust and steam and ceaseless din; the 
 power, whether used or not, to go and come at will; to 
 shorten to-day’s task and lengthen to-morrow’s, or to 
 exchange, at times, the weary sittings altogether for a 
 
40 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 week’s apple-gathering or field-labor; last, but not 
 least, strong inherited habit, prejudice, association, 
 and tradition,—these are the influences which keep 
 the gaunt weavers in the flagging ranks, and nerve 
 them to the pitiless contest, leaving the young and 
 lusty to do homage, if they will, to the new power of 
 the crank and wheel.* 
 
 This illustration reveals to some extent the grave 
 difficulties checking industrial progress. Inherited 
 associations, ideas, habits, prejudices, cannot be buried 
 in a day, and new experiments as quickly begun. 
 These are never tried by the poorer classes when they 
 can be avoided. Rash as they sometimes are, it is not 
 so with the most ignorant and dependent. Hence, 
 while the superabundance of labor in Europe might 
 be drained off into other lands, to the obvious good 
 of those going as well as those remaining, emigration 
 is comparatively slow. Not until education steals in 
 more brightly upon the toiling masses, quickening 
 them with .1 new courage for improving their lot in 
 other lands and by other occupations than those in¬ 
 herited, making them willing to sacrifice some things 
 in order to gain more, can we hope that labor will find 
 its proper home and reward. 
 
 # “ Factories for the Spinning and Weaving of Textile Fabrics 
 abroad,” p. 218. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 41 
 
 III. 
 
 HOW THE WORKING CLASSES ARE AFFECTED BY 
 A RISE IN PRICES. 
 
 All over the world an increase of prices has taken 
 place; the farthest nation has felt the rising wave. 
 The price of labor in China, it is asserted, has doubled 
 in several things within a recent period; while her 
 products exported are far more costly than formerly. 
 It is a very interesting, though difficult, inquiry to 
 ascertain how the industrial classes have been affected 
 by these changes, for not only must the advance in the 
 price of labor be known, but of everything for which 
 workmen spend their earnings. To find out how much 
 wages have advanced is a useless inquiry ; their pur¬ 
 chase-power must be ascertained before a deduction 
 of any value can be made, like answering the ques¬ 
 tion whether the working classes are better off in 
 these changeful times. 
 
 As mankind universally are trying to get advantages 
 of one another, a common way of securing them is to 
 enhance the price of all things offered for sale. Of 
 course, we do not mean to assert that a person can 
 arbitrarily put any price he pleases upon his commodi¬ 
 ties with the expectation of selling them, but only, as 
 he can control to some extent their price, he uses that 
 4 
 
42 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 power to dispose of his property to the best advan¬ 
 tage. Protection against a rise of prices is sought in 
 the same manner; hence, if a workman asks a higher 
 price for his labor, his employer puts the excess upon 
 the purchaser. This protection runs over a commu¬ 
 nity, not suddenly, like a current of electricity, but as 
 surely, until it embraces almost everything offered for 
 sale 1 he w < >1 kman, therefi>re, who is expecting to be 
 .1 gi at gainer by an advance of wages, often sees his 
 expectations turned into a delusion, for the additional 
 reward must be paid to landlords and shopkeepers, 
 be< uise they have raised their prices. In the re¬ 
 adjustment of prices it often happens that the condi¬ 
 tion of the industrial classes is rendered worse, instead 
 of better, by the change, as we shall abundantly prove 
 before concluding this chapter. The reason is, because 
 the unfortunate son of toil is placed at a disadvantage 
 with almost every other class in controlling the price 
 for his labor. The employer, the merchant, the car¬ 
 rier,—all have a greater command over what they sell 
 than the man working for his daily bread has over the 
 product of his toil. 
 
 Mow, then, are the working classes affected by the 
 advance in the price of labor and the necessaries of 
 life ? Arc they gainers or losers by the change? 
 
 Let us look at their condition, first, in the Nether¬ 
 lands. For several years prior to 1872 there had been 
 a continual rise of prices in the necessaries of life, but 
 not in labor. This rise had become so serious, that a 
 committee composed of twelve members,—four ordi¬ 
 nary workmen, four masters, and four indirect employ¬ 
 ers of labor,—who were appointed in January, 1870, 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 43 
 
 reported, at the end of three months’ examination, 
 that, notwithstanding the narrow limits within which 
 household expenses were kept, in every case they 
 considerably exceeded the nominal wages of the head 
 of the family. That our readers may know what kind 
 of food was thought of in estimating these expenses, 
 we will note that no meat, save a very small quantity 
 of bacon, was allowed, and no liquor, not even beer. 
 The average necessaries of an ordinary skilled work¬ 
 man with a family were reckoned at nine florins, or 
 three dollars and seventy-five cents, per week, while 
 his average wages did not exceed six florins and sixty 
 cents, or two dollars and seventy-five cents, during 
 the same period. If he belonged to a lower class, his 
 average wages never exceeded four florins and eighty 
 cents per week. Thus, in the former case, there was 
 a deficit of one dollar, and in the latter, of one dollar 
 and seventy-five cents, which must be provided for by 
 working out of the regular hours, or by the aid of the 
 wife or children. With this dark coloring the report 
 of the committee may be anticipated. Within the 
 district of Arnheim, where the inquiry was made, they 
 declare the average rate of wages “ was not in propor¬ 
 tion to the cost of the necessaries of life; in other 
 words, that wages were too low.” 
 
 In the consular report of Mr. Newham, for Amster¬ 
 dam, to the British government, the following year, 
 he says there had been a general rise of wages during 
 the last few months previous to the making of his re¬ 
 port, in April, 1872,—another illustration of a well- 
 known truth, that, in a general rise of prices, wages 
 are the last to advance. 
 
44 " 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 To their credit be it said, employers had anticipated 
 the wishes of their workmen and increased their wages 
 before hearing any complaint from them. 
 
 The wages of a skilled artisan, like a carpenter, 
 joiner, plumber, or smith, in 1869, were only about 
 four dollars a week; while his wife, if having one, 
 earned, perhaps, seventy-five cents or one dollar more 
 by washing, and her husband twenty-five or fifty cents 
 in addition to his regular wages, the united earnings 
 of a family amounting perhaps to five dollars and fifty 
 cents per week. Men whose trade or occupation re¬ 
 quired less skill were not so well paid unless the labor 
 was more severe, like that of the stokers in the gas 
 works at the Hague, who were paid four dollars and 
 thirty-seven cents a week. To earn this much they 
 were obliged to work twelve hours daily seven days in 
 the week, with an additional six hours every Saturday. 
 
 Notwithstanding the rise in wages, the question re¬ 
 mains unanswered, How do the Dutch laborer and his 
 family succeed in fighting off starvation? This is ac¬ 
 complished, but in a manner which would seem heroic 
 to the ordinary laboring man in the United States. To 
 the industrial classes of Holland, animal food, cheese, 
 eggs, beer, currants, raisins, sugar, etc., are luxuries of 
 which they partake only on Sundays, and then spar¬ 
 ingly, ofttimes not at all. Their food is chiefly vege¬ 
 table,—carrots, turnips, onions, cabbage, etc., stewed 
 with lard and bread, both wheat and rye. When vege¬ 
 tables cannot be obtained, they vary their meal by sub¬ 
 stituting dried peas and beans of various kinds, or rice, 
 barley, and flour prepared with butter, milk, and treacle. 
 
 Such is a brief outline of the working-man’s condition 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 45 
 
 in Holland. Does his fate seem a hard one? One 
 who studied carefully their condition declares that the 
 “ native working classes are doubtless in a comfort¬ 
 able and contented state, poverty is rare, destitution 
 almost unknown ; and this is to be attributed chiefly 
 to the national character, to steady life, and thrifty 
 ways.” Out of such meagre earnings the Hollander 
 can get comfort and contentment: happier far would 
 it be for other countries were their people endowed 
 with similar characteristics. 
 
 From the Netherlands we pass to Belgium. Within 
 the boundaries of this little country numerous strikes 
 have occurred recently, and dissatisfaction and unrest 
 mark the conduct of the working population. Not¬ 
 withstanding a recent rise of wages in Antwerp, of 
 thirty per cent., the condition of the laboring classes 
 is pitiful enough. According to the best authority, 
 the standard of wages in Belgium for all kinds of 
 labor is insufficient to satisfy the legitimate wants of 
 the laboring population. The average daily wages of 
 a mill operative do not exceed two francs ; or about 
 forty cents, and, excluding Sundays, holidays, and 
 other days when he remains idle for want of work or 
 from inclination, his working days will rarely number 
 two hundred and fifty in the year, so that the amount 
 earned will not exceed five hundred francs, or one 
 hundred dollars, yearly, which is eight dollars and forty 
 cents a month, and two dollars and twenty-five cents 
 per week. Suppose the case of a married operative 
 earning this sum, and having a wife and three children, 
 one child earning one franc, or twenty cents, a day, in 
 addition, the income of such a family would be three 
 
46 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 dollars and twenty cents a week. The expenses of 
 these five persons, calculated at the lowest rate, will 
 be the following: 
 
 FRANCS. 
 
 Bread. 5.25 
 
 Potatoes. 2.10 
 
 Coffee and chiccory . 2.00 
 
 Vegetables. 2.00 
 
 Butter.... 1.00 
 
 Clothing. 2.00 
 
 Washing, soap, etc. 1.00 
 
 Rent. 2.00 
 
 « 7.35 = # 3.47 
 
 No mention is made of beer, meat, or sugar; nothing 
 but the absolute necessaries of life. Remove one of 
 the number, or add one-third to the wages of the 
 operative, and yet it is almost impossible for him to 
 maintain his family. This is by no means an over¬ 
 drawn statement. “ Probably ten thousand or twenty 
 thousand working-men’s households in Belgium are 
 in this sad position."* 
 
 Some workmen, it is true, break through the thick, 
 hard crust covering them. In Brussels, for example, 
 a good carpenter, working for himself, and having a 
 few dollars of capital or credit to buy wood, can earn 
 from one dollar to one dollar and fifty cents a day, and 
 get all the work he can perform. As soon as his in¬ 
 come will admit, he rents a small house, in which his 
 wife begins a little shop. Ultimately her husband be¬ 
 comes a master carpenter, making contracts for the 
 construction of buildings. To obtain this position is 
 
 * Mr. Grattan, “Ind. Classes,” 1S72, p. 18. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 47 
 
 the dream of the lesser bourgeois. In the domestic 
 trades the journeyman, as a rule, is either young or 
 improvident and cannot set up for himself. Such being 
 his financial position, it is hardly necessary to allude 
 to the poverty of his living,—little or no meat, inferior 
 bread, with grease, potatoes, vegetable soup, and floods 
 of weak coffee and chiccory form the cheap diet in 
 towns. Their lodgings are simply deplorable: they 
 herd together in the most dismal streets of the great 
 cities, or crowd the damp hovels which surround the 
 country towns and the pitmouth. Their dwellings are 
 as fine a field for epidemics of every description as it 
 is possible to conceive, for they are rarely able to afford 
 more than one room, to which lodgers are frequently 
 admitted. Mr. Pakenham says, in reviewing the con¬ 
 dition of the Belgian laborer: “The inferior hand in 
 all trades is, as a rule, unable to live on his wages; 
 that he is badly fed and clothed, ill housed, and that 
 he cares for little beyond his periodical orgies; faring, 
 however, slightly better in the country than in the 
 towns.” The superior workman, he adds, “ gets fair 
 wages, is decently fed, and well lodged but this class, 
 unhappily, is small compared with the other. 
 
 Even when manufacturers are the most prosperous, 
 there is a superabundance of labor, so that wages re¬ 
 main low in comparison with other things. Hence, in 
 times of usual prosperity, great misery prevails among 
 the laboring population, widening and deepening dur¬ 
 ing periods of commercial distress. The names of 
 more than nine hundred thousand persons, or one- 
 fifth of the population, are inscribed upon the list of 
 poor relief; a fact sadly illustrative of the privations 
 
48 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 and sufferings experienced in a land whose manufac¬ 
 turing and industrial wealth is so great. Of course, 
 this excessive supply of labor, especially among the 
 lower classes of society, will maintain pretty nearly 
 level the rate of wages. The rate has risen within a 
 few years, but not in proportion to the things neces¬ 
 sary to sustain life. This being so, the observation of 
 Mr. Pakenham ought not to go unheeded, “that too 
 much haste can hardly be made in finding a remedy 
 for evils which, in the future, may become very serious 
 as regards the tenure of property and the maintenance 
 of public order/’ 
 
 Consider for a moment the condition of the brick- 
 makers, who, in the district of Charleroi, number 
 nearly seven thousand. About six thousand leave in 
 the fine season to work in France, where the business 
 of brickmaking begins in April and lasts until Sep¬ 
 tember,—extending over a period of five months. The 
 work is mostly performed by hand, machinery being 
 cither unknown or disliked. The food of these labor¬ 
 ers consists of second quality bread, one pound of 
 butter and the same quantity of meat per week, with¬ 
 out soup save on Sundays. For drink, each man is 
 furnished with two litres of beer a day; and they are 
 lodged in sheds, both drink and lodging being given 
 by the employers. The men earn about one dollar 
 and ten cents a day, but deducting forty cents for food 
 and the expense of going and coming, the sum re¬ 
 maining for the support of the family is exceedingly 
 small. Yet even this much pay is given with the 
 expectation that the workman will not stop for any 
 cause; and if, in case of sickness or other accident, he 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 49 
 
 cannot be immediately replaced, the loss falls equally 
 upon those working with him, because the ordinary 
 task cannot be finished. In respect to the boys em¬ 
 ployed, they earn only one-quarter of these wages, and 
 barely keep off starvation. During absence from 
 home their wives care for the children, do some farm- 
 work, while the larger number are engaged in making 
 nails by hand. The men, also, upon returning home, 
 chiefly engage in the same occupation, at which they 
 make, with great difficulty, working from five in the 
 morning until eight in the evening, thirty cents a day. 
 At the end of each working-season, after paying the 
 debts incurred during their absence by their wives and 
 children, and for their clothing, they have exhausted 
 all their resources, and, having no reserve fund to use 
 in the event of illness or want of work, are thrown upon 
 the charities of the public. This example shows how 
 a single class of workmen in a particular district live. 
 Did time and space permit, many more might be 
 given. 
 
 In 1855 a work was prepared by the Minister of the 
 Interior of Belgium, relating to the financial position 
 of the working classes of the country, based upon 
 returns furnished officially to the government by the 
 local authorities in each province. Detailed estimates 
 of the means of living and the necessary expenditure 
 of the working population were given, the people 
 being divided into three classes as follows: 
 
 First, families partly supported by public charity; 
 secondly, those hardly able to meet their expenses, 
 but not dependent upon public relief; and thirdly, 
 those whose means enabled them to live comfortably, 
 
50 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 and who might be considered entirely independent. 
 A family of each class, consisting of father, mother, 
 and four children, two, six, twelve, and sixteen years 
 of age respectively, were taken as examples for each 
 important section of country or locality. The returns 
 in the tabic herewith given for Antwerp are most 
 striking: 
 
 2 Naturh op 
 j Employment. 
 U i 
 
 < £ 
 
 Ikrlaer. I i Navvy.|$8i.8o $80. 
 
 '* -. 2 jWcavcr.j 128.00j122.65 $1.00 
 
 " .. ! 3 jCarpcntcr. 252.00j201.60; 3.80 
 
 Eckcrcn. j 1 Ag. Laborer... 141.00 134.76 3.38 
 
 Ghccl.' 1 " ...1152.60' 159.05 . 
 
 ** 2 " ...I203.96 175.66 1.50 4.16 181.32 
 
 " 3 “ ... 338.26 317.39 7.40 4.72 329.51 
 
 II . 1 “ ... 82.001 II 8 .I 7 . 3.53 121.70 39.70 
 
 “ ... 3 “ ...191.73-179.59 4-9 2 7-32 191.83I 
 
 81.67 881.67 
 4.09 127.74 ... 
 24.95 230.35 ... 
 4.94 143.08 82 
 3.12 162.17 9.57 
 
 80.13 
 
 26 
 
 From this table it will be seen that only one belong¬ 
 ing to the first class showed any surplus; the two 
 returns from the second class were favorable; as were 
 two out of the three instances given of the expendi¬ 
 tures and earnings of the third class. But in all the 
 cases, excepting two, the surplus is small, and quickly 
 covered by any additional expense like sickness or 
 want of work. 
 
 This brief presentation of the condition of the labor¬ 
 ing classes in Belgium must necessarily be incomplete, 
 but we think enough facts have been given to enable 
 the reader to form some conception of industrial life 
 in that country. 
 
LABOR ANJD CAPITAL . 
 
 5 
 
 From the ill-starred population of Belgium we will 
 go to Germany. Here the field of inquiry is so vast 
 that nothing can be done, save to glance here and 
 there at the condition of the industrial classes. Still, 
 we are desirous of lingering long enough to form a 
 tolerably complete idea of the rise in the price of food 
 and in wages in this newly-created empire. 
 
 Wages in Prussia did not vary much for fifteen years 
 from 1840,* although the price of living had doubled 
 
 * By way of illustrating the wages paid in cotton- and woolen-fac¬ 
 tories we have collected the following figures : 
 
 Spinners. 
 
 Spoolers. 
 
 Drawing-Frame tenders, 
 
 Pickers (girls). 
 
 Winders. 
 
 Strippers (girls). 
 
 Spinning overseer.. 
 
 Picker overseer. 
 
 Carding overseer. 
 
 1839. 
 
 1855- 
 
 1871. 
 
 #1.87 
 
 $i- 5 ° 
 
 $ I -37 
 
 .64 
 
 .66 
 
 
 .64 
 
 
 
 •57 
 
 .56 
 
 .81 
 
 •63 
 
 •75 
 
 
 
 .85 
 
 1.12 
 
 
 3-75 
 
 3-75 
 
 
 2.87 
 
 3-75 
 
 These were the weekly wages paid in a Saxon spinning-factory 
 during the several periods indicated. The following prices were paid 
 for labor in a factory near Berlin, in which plush and w’oolen goods 
 were made : 
 
 
 1862. 
 
 1867. 
 
 1872. 
 
 Overseers. 
 
 Best hands. 
 
 Ordinary. 
 
 $4.50 to 6.00 
 4.50 to 5.25 
 2.25 
 
 $5.25 to 7.50 
 5.25 to 6.00 
 3.00 
 
 $6.00 to 9.00 
 6.00 to 6.75 
 3-75 
 
52 
 
 THE CONFLICT BE 7 WEEN 
 
 within that time. Since 1855 wages have risen about 
 twenty-five per cent, in nearly all employments, though 
 this is by no means a proportionate advance to the 
 increased cost of living, as statistics prove. The con¬ 
 dition of the laboring classes, therefore, has grown 
 worse, rather than better, during this period. 
 
 The wages of factory operatives are high enough, 
 in most cases, to support single persons comfortably; 
 and, provided they are of a saving disposition, they 
 can lay up something ; but wages are insufficient to 
 support a family. To do this one member or more, 
 besides the husband, must work. The operatives in 
 the eastern provinces of Prussia get higher wages 
 than those in the western, while the expense of living 
 in all is quite the same. The weavers of Berlin are 
 among those who reap the smallest reward for their 
 labor. Of the three thousand weavers, working twelve 
 hours a day, one-fifth earn three dollars per week ; one- 
 quartcr, two dollars and sixty-two cents; another 
 quarter, who do inferior work, two dollars and twenty- 
 five cents; while the remaining thirty per cent, earn 
 one dollar and eighty-seven cents only. In one of the 
 larger manufacturing districts of Prussia, Lower Sile¬ 
 sia, slight relief is given to this deplorable picture. 
 Some German authorities, quoted by Mr. Petrie in his 
 report to the British government upon the industrial 
 classes in Prussia, affirm that their condition for sev¬ 
 eral years has been improving, and that wages are 
 sufficient to satisfy the requirements of their mode of 
 living. Herr Jacobi says that throughout the indus¬ 
 trial districts there was a deficiency in the supply of 
 labor, which he attributes to the strides made by agri- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 53 
 
 culture and manufactures within the last ten years in 
 Lower Silesia, and to a change in the law respecting 
 the freedom of labor, as well as to increased facilities 
 for the distribution of labor. As a consequence of 
 this improved demand, wages have risen, and in some 
 districts within the circle of Hirschberg fifty per cent, 
 in five years. The erection of a manufactory at Luben, 
 where none had existed before, caused a rise from 
 twelve to eighteen cents a day for men, and the wages 
 of women, who had received previously from agricul¬ 
 tural labor only six cents a day, were doubled. Yet 
 how small are these wages compared with those paid 
 in England, and especially in the United States! 
 
 In Saxony, with the exception of fixed salaries, the 
 average rate of wages paid weekly has increased very 
 considerably during the last decade. The rise corre¬ 
 sponds to the higher price for food, clothing, house- 
 rent, and other wants of life. l^Ior is the rise owing 
 to the greater productiveness, skill, or capacity of the 
 workmen. At present there is strong competition be¬ 
 tween the country and city tailors of Leipzig. The 
 wages of the latter in 1859 were, for making a vest, 
 thirty-five cents ; pants, fifty-six cents ; coat, one dollar 
 and eighty-seven cents; and frock-coat, two dollars. 
 In 1864 these rates had been changed to the following : 
 vest, fifty cents ; pants, sixty-two cents; coat, two dol¬ 
 lars and twenty-five cents ; and frock-coat, two dollars 
 afid sixty-two cents. And in 1870 wages had been 
 still further enhanced: thus, vest, sixty-two cents; 
 pants, sixty-eight cents ; coat, two dollars and seventy- 
 five cents; and frock-coat, three dollars. A very con¬ 
 siderable increase within eleven years. 
 
 5 
 
54 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 How fares the operative in the kingdom of Saxony ? 
 At the Pfaffendorf woolen and worsted factory in 
 Leipzig four hundred hands are employed. Piece¬ 
 work is the rule, and the rates earned are as follows: 
 
 Per week. 
 
 Master spinner .$3.00 
 
 Females . i.oo 
 
 Combing-machine hands . 1.25 
 
 Sorters (male). 2.25 
 
 Sorters (female). 1.25 
 
 Washers (male) . 3.00 
 
 Washers (female). 1.25 
 
 Women of all work.. ... 1.43 
 
 That this scale of wages is very low and presupposes 
 excessive frugality in living is so apparent that nothing 
 need be said. The women chiefly live upon weak 
 coffee, often made from roasted barley or from grounds 
 bought in hotels and taverns. Many of the working¬ 
 men of Saxony cannot earn five dollars a week. Sup¬ 
 pose one capable of acquiring so much, how can he 
 maintain a family consisting of a wife and four chil¬ 
 
 dren ? Here are the figures: 
 
 House-rent . $0.62 
 
 Washing. 12 
 
 Firing. 2 5 
 
 Lighting. 12 
 
 Clothing. 43 
 
 Schooling. *5 
 
 Early coffee, bread per head. 26 
 
 Breakfast, bread per head. Si 
 
 Dinner, per head. 1.03 
 
 Vespers, four o’clock bread . 43 
 
 Supper, per head. 53 
 
 Coffee, roasted barley or acorns .18 
 
 $ 4-9 3 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 55 
 
 The reply to the above inquiry, How can such a 
 family live? is, what the husband does not earn must 
 be made up by his wife; and if she be unable to do 
 this the household gets into debt. Something is some¬ 
 times gained by letting one or two beds at the rate of 
 twenty-five cents per week, but this is a precarious 
 source of income. The unmarried man, however, is 
 well enough off, for his weekly reckoning would be 
 something like this: 
 
 House-rent.$0-25 
 
 Washing.12 
 
 Firing.25 
 
 Lighting.05 
 
 Clothing.50 
 
 Food. 1.12 
 
 $2.29 
 
 Hence, he can live better, spend more for his clothes, 
 and save money for evil days. 
 
 Passing into Wurtemberg, from 1830 to 1869 there 
 has been a steady increase both in wages and in num¬ 
 ber of manufactories, which began to flourish at the 
 opening of this period. Prior to this time but few 
 existed. According to the table found in the appendix, 
 the average increase in the rate of wages in eight 
 branches of industry during forty years was nearly 
 seventy per cent.; in two cases the increase drops to 
 sixty per cent.; while the wages of printers have gone 
 up to fifty-two per cent. The percentage of increase 
 in the cotton-spinning establishments was fifty-seven, 
 and for paper-making one hundred per cent. more. 
 The rise to seventy-seven per cent, in the pianoforte 
 
56 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 manufactories is accounted for by the extraordinary 
 development of this branch of manufacture, which de¬ 
 mands skilled workmen, and also by the increased cost 
 of living, especially in the larger towns where this in¬ 
 dustry is the principal one. With respect to the wages 
 of dyers and tanners, an increase of fifty per cent, has 
 been observed, while the wages of masons, bricklayers, 
 carpenters, and painters have risen eighty to ninety 
 per cent., owing to the unusual activity in the building 
 trade during the last dozen years, especially at the 
 capital Sixty-nine per cent, may be taken as the gen¬ 
 eral average increase in the daily wages for open-air 
 labor on the roads and the like. The rates differ much 
 in various parts of the country, having increased fifty 
 per cent, in some, in other places doubled. 
 
 On the other hand, the cost of living has increased, 
 but not, upon the whole, in proportion to wages, so 
 that the material condition of the operative has greatly 
 improved during the last thirty-five years. The follow¬ 
 ing table concerning the price of food will enable the 
 reader to judge for himself: 
 
 
 WHKAT. 
 
 KYB. 
 
 BAKLBY. 
 
 SPELT. 
 
 BEEF. 
 
 PORK. 
 
 VEAL. 
 
 *833. 
 
 $ 4 - 4 * 
 
 53.18 
 
 52.83 
 
 51.95 1 
 
 50 . 05 ^ 
 
 $0.05 
 
 50.04 
 
 1836. 
 
 3*93 I 
 
 2.64 
 
 2.81 
 
 1.68 
 
 •05 X 
 
 •05 
 
 ■°s l A 
 
 1842. 
 
 6.04 1 
 
 3-25 
 
 : 3 °° 
 
 2.60 
 
 .06 
 
 •05 
 
 ■04/2 
 
 1856. 
 
 7-75 1 
 
 5.25 
 
 ! 4.33 1 
 
 3 -i 0 1 
 
 - .08 
 
 .08 
 
 .07 
 
 <859. 
 
 5-75 I 
 
 3-75 
 
 4 25 , 
 
 2*37 
 
 . 09 ^ 
 
 .09 
 
 .08 
 
 1 ‘865. 
 
 5-37 
 
 3-75 
 
 370 
 
 2.25 
 
 .IO 
 
 .IO 
 
 •07# 
 
 1869. 
 
 5-37 
 
 375 
 
 3 70 
 
 2.25 ; 
 
 .12 
 
 .12 
 
 .08^ 
 
 From this survey of the condition of the laborer in 
 Wurtembcrg, compared with the condition of those 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 57 
 
 in the neighboring provinces, he has some reason for 
 feeling contented with his lot. Recently house-rents 
 have rapidly advanced in Stuttgart, but houses are 
 multiplying which, though of the flimsiest description, 
 will effect a reduction of rents. 
 
 The contiguity of Wurtemberg to other provinces 
 where labor may be found in great abundance must 
 lead to immigration, so that the advantages now en¬ 
 joyed by the toilers there will soon pass away. The 
 condition of the Wurtemberg laborer is too superior 
 to be lasting. 
 
 Near to Wurtemberg is the Grand Duchy of Baden, 
 in which country a considerable rise of wages has 
 taken place within a recent period. Since 1863 the 
 advance in some occupations has been forty per cent. 
 For example: 
 
 
 MALES. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 FEMALES. 
 Per cent. 
 
 Cotton-spinning mills. 
 
 12 
 
 20 
 
 Cotton-weaving mills. 
 
 25 
 
 33 
 
 Cigar-factories. 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 Iron-foundries. 
 
 
 15 
 
 Hemp-factories.. 
 
 36 
 
 
 Cotton-printing. 
 
 13 
 
 
 Button. 
 
 7 
 
 11 
 
 T .pathpr. 
 
 40 
 
 
 Mechanical. 
 
 32 
 
 
 TTmhrplla.,. 
 
 12 
 
 Silk. 
 
 
 G 
 
 
 
 As wages have risen more rapidly than the prices 
 of the necessaries of life, “ their condition is good or 
 better than it has been at any previous period.” 
 
 Saxe Coburg, one of the smaller German states, 
 5 * 
 
58 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 has passed through one of the most extraordinary 
 changes of any state in Europe. Within a few years 
 wages have risen from fifty to one hundred per cent., 
 while the price of food has remained nearly the same. 
 Nevertheless, the working classes fare poorly in re¬ 
 spect to food. Bread and potatoes are the chief arti¬ 
 cles. They never eat meat unless they can afford to 
 keep a pig,— a marked contrast to the living of laborers 
 in the United States and Great Britain. 
 
 Quitting the German empire, we will glance at the 
 condition of the working classes in Denmark. Like 
 all other countries, wages, especially for skilled work¬ 
 men, have risen, though not in proportion to the ad¬ 
 vance in food and rent. These latter things have gone 
 up nearly forty per cent, since 1850. The price of 
 labor is somewhat higher at Copenhagen than in the 
 country; and notwithstanding the fact that rents are 
 lower outside than within the capital, the workman is 
 better off in the city. A provincial artisan who lives 
 with his master gets two dollars and twenty-five cents 
 a week, with board and lodging. The average daily 
 wages received in Jutland by navvies who used their 
 own tools in 1865, for the summer months, were fifty- 
 four cents a day, and for all the year thirty-seven 
 cents. The next year wages were higher on account 
 of the greater demand for labor, being nearly seventy- 
 five cents a day during the summer, and the yearly 
 average sixty cents. In 1868 wages were still advanc¬ 
 ing, for the summer being eighty-one cents, and for 
 the year sixty cents, as much as they received at any 
 time during 1865. But note the change which took 
 place the next year. In March, 1869, hardly thirty- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 59 
 
 seven cents per day was paid, and only the best hands 
 could obtain work even at that reduced price. The 
 condition, therefore, of Danish workmen is not an 
 enviable one. Elsewhere* we have given a picture of 
 their state. 
 
 Next we shall deal with the industrial classes of 
 Austria. In 1869 the average yearly wages of an 
 agricultural laborer were fifteen to twenty dollars; 
 and the wages of women two-thirds to three-fourths 
 of these figures. This remuneration, however, is in 
 addition to board and lodging. Generally, the laborer 
 is well fed, and this circumstance has given rise to the 
 proverb: “What the plough makes, the ploughman 
 takes.” Owing to the general rise of prices and the 
 construction of railways, the rate of wages for agri¬ 
 cultural labor during several years has risen consider¬ 
 ably throughout the empire, and is likely to continue, 
 as the demand for this kind of labor is greater than 
 the supply. Having no data for showing what the 
 rise has been in the wages of other laborers, we must 
 be content with tabulating the present rates without 
 any reference to what they formerly were. 
 
 Italy has followed in the wake of other countries 
 in advancing the price of labor and other things. 
 Thus, in 1861, according to the statistical returns for 
 the province of Parma, workmen in the various trades 
 were paid the following average rates: 
 
 Woolen-, silk-, and cotton-weavers.$0.20 
 
 Ropemakers.20 
 
 Hatters .29 
 
 * Chapter II. 
 
6o 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 Tailors .$0.32 
 
 Shoemakers .40 
 
 Iron- and copper-founders .42 
 
 Coopers . * .25 
 
 Paper-makers .28 
 
 Printers. 27 
 
 Since then, wages have risen in some trades fifty 
 per cent., though it is difficult to obtain the advance 
 with exactness. The following table shows the rise 
 in the price of labor at Venders, in the Province of 
 Vicenza, where are extensive woolen-mills. The table 
 includes the price of labor in other parts of Italy 
 for 1868: 
 
 Sorters. 
 
 Rinsers.. 
 
 Carders. 
 
 Spinners.... 
 
 Scourers.... 
 
 Warpers. 
 
 Weavers...., 
 
 Fullers. 
 
 Finishers.... 
 Carpenters.. 
 
 Smiths. 
 
 Laborers.... 
 
 Women. 
 
 Women, 
 
 Women 
 
 1836. 
 
 $0.20 
 
 .28 
 
 .18 
 
 •36 
 
 .29 
 
 .16 
 
 .40 
 
 .28 
 
 .16 
 
 .40 
 
 .40 
 
 .20 
 
 1846. 
 
 50.24 
 29 
 
 1856. 
 
 $0.34 
 32 
 26 
 58 
 46 
 3i 
 57 
 35 
 24 
 45 
 50 
 35 
 
 1863. 
 
 $o 
 
 50.17 
 
 •34 
 
 35 
 
 62 
 
 50 
 
 20 
 
 5 2 
 
 40 
 
 17 
 
 40 
 
 50 
 
 24 
 
 It will be observed that even the present rates are 
 very low ; on the other hand, house-rent, especially in 
 the manufacturing districts, is cheap, being fifty per 
 cent, less than in Belgium, while food is not so dear. 
 As the habits of the Italian operative are frugal, and 
 the climate mild, tending to diminish his wants, he is 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 6 1 
 
 better off than the Belgian operative,—better off even 
 than workmen in some of the German states. 
 
 A few words concerning the laboring classes of 
 Russia, and we will go to Switzerland. The reader 
 may anticipate the remark that in this country, as in 
 every other noticed, a general rise in prices has taken 
 place. The tables given in the appendix exhibit very 
 fully the advance in wages and provisions in Moscow 
 during nine years from i860 to 1869. 
 
 The increase in the chief articles of consumption 
 during the last decade was nearly fifty per cent.; 
 nevertheless, wages have risen in an equal, and, in 
 many cases, greater proportion; so that the condition 
 of the Russian artisan has improved very materially 
 during recent years. 
 
 In regard to Switzerland, we regret not having the 
 space to give a full history of its industrial classes, 
 so fraught with instruction and moral beauty is the 
 theme. Of all the nations of Europe, the people of 
 Switzerland are the most content, the most intelligent, 
 and the least immoral. The true relations subsist¬ 
 ing between employed and employer are better under¬ 
 stood there than in any other country in the world, 
 —due chiefly to two facts: first, the universal educa¬ 
 tion of the people; and secondly, the interest taken in 
 the working classes by their masters. So that there, 
 as in no other country, does a mutual good feeling 
 prevail. 
 
 But we cannot speak of these things here without 
 wandering from the central point of inquiry; namely, 
 the advance in wages and the increased cost of living. 
 The tables in the latter part of this volume answer the 
 
62 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 question and show what the increase has been, and 
 how the laborer is affected thereby. 
 
 Leaving Switzerland, we stop to note the condition 
 of the industrial classes in France. In this, as in all 
 great countries, there has been an agitation and un¬ 
 settling of prices,—a state of things which will surely 
 continue so long as the government, like a helpless 
 infant, rests in the arms of one political party to-day 
 and is snatched away by another to-morrow. With a 
 population of nearly forty millions, for a long period 
 France has been the birthplace of numerous social 
 experiments, and of dazzling, but disastrous, ideas 
 concerning the rights of man and the rewards of labor. 
 Every one knows how deeply the doctrine of Com¬ 
 munism has taken root in French soil, for the poison¬ 
 ous tree cast a fearful shade over Paris in 1871, causing 
 the death of thousands, and the destruction of many 
 of her noblest palaces and works of art. In 1863 the 
 French government published an elaborate statistical 
 work* upon wages in France, which presented the con¬ 
 dition of French workmen in the most favorable light 
 possible. This document, however, fails to give the 
 price of wages later than 1857 f° r the provinces, and 
 1853 for Paris. Since then, wages in the capital have 
 risen about twenty-five per cent., while the price of 
 food is forty per cent, higher than it was in 1855 ; the 
 work in question, therefore, cannot be appealed to for 
 the latest information on the subject. Some observa¬ 
 tions contained in the report afford a glimpse of the 
 condition of the industrial classes, and these will not 
 
 Slatistique de la Fiance, Deuxidme S6rie, tom. xii. p. 24. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 63 
 
 be out of place here. “ The examination of the in¬ 
 crease of wages, proved by documents of charitable 
 institutions running over thirty-two years, may be 
 summed up in the remark that, while the price of 
 living has increased forty-five per cent., wages (at least 
 for workmen engaged in the building trade, the most 
 regularly paid and the most actively employed) have 
 only increased seventeen per cent., and this increase 
 has only taken place of late years under the double 
 influence of great and prolonged dearness, and an 
 active demand for work.” This disproportionate in¬ 
 crease in the expense of living to the price of labor 
 applies equally to all the workmen engaged in the 
 minor industries. The observation quoted, which can¬ 
 not be regarded as a very favorable one for the work¬ 
 ing classes, is slightly relieved by the consideration 
 that notwithstanding an increased consumption of 
 clothing and furniture, these things have declined in 
 price. The workman is, therefore, better and more 
 warmly clad, and his furniture is more comfortable 
 than formerly. This was declared to be especially 
 true of workmen in the larger towns, where compe¬ 
 tition stimulates industrial activity and fosters cheap¬ 
 ness. On the other hand, the advantage they possess 
 over country workmen is neutralized by the heavier 
 rents demanded in the larger centres of population. 
 
 The condition of agricultural laborers is no better. 
 They are divided into two classes,—the farm-laborer, 
 who is employed by the year and lives upon the farm, 
 and the day-laborer, whose employment is by the day. 
 The former class receive, in addition to food and 
 clothing, wages partly in money and the rest in kind. 
 
64 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 The average yearly wages of the farm-laborer are one 
 hundred and forty-five francs, or twenty-nine dollars, 
 while the value of the kind is estimated throughout 
 France at twenty-six francs, or five dollars and twenty 
 cents ; so the entire yearly wages of the farm-laborer, 
 exclusive of food and lodging, are thirty-four dollars 
 and twenty-five cents. This seems an exceedingly 
 small sum for a laboring man to receive. 
 
 The day-laborer earns, upon an average, thirty-five 
 cents per day,— the highest being fifty .cents, in the 
 Department of the Seine ; and the lowest twenty-three 
 cents, in the Cotes du Nord. His average amount of 
 work is two hundred days in the year. The daily pay 
 of a woman in the agricultural districts is seventeen 
 cents, that of children twelve and a half cents; the 
 former works one hundred and twenty days in the 
 year, the children eighty. Their food and lodging are 
 valued at thirty-six dollars and sixty cents a year. 
 Supposing the above figures to be correct, the day- 
 laborer earns three hundred and fifty francs, or seventy 
 dollars; a woman one hundred and two francs, or 
 twenty dollars and forty cents; and a child eighty 
 francs, or sixteen dollars, during the year. These 
 figures are taken from the Stcitistujue Agncole Officielle, 
 and in the same document are calculations made re¬ 
 specting the expenses of a day-laborer, single and 
 married. Let us consider the single man s case first: 
 His food is reckoned at two hundred and thirty, 
 lodgings twenty-seven, and clothing forty-five, francs; 
 making a total of three hundred and two francs, or 
 sixty dollars and forty cents; leaving forty-eight francs, 
 or nine dollars and sixty cents, for other expenses or 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 65 
 
 investment. Regarding him as able to take care of 
 himself, look at a family consisting of a day-laborer, 
 his wife, and three children. The items of expendi¬ 
 ture may be put down as follows: 
 
 Lodgings. $8.40 
 
 Bread. 47.00 
 
 Vegetables. 7.20 
 
 Meat. 8.40 
 
 Milk. 4.80 
 
 Wine and beer. 6.80 
 
 Clothing. 18.20 
 
 Taxes. 1.09 
 
 Other expenses. 6.40 
 
 $116.19 
 
 To live in this manner all the members of the family 
 must work, as the following table will prove: 
 
 FRANCS. DOLLARS. 
 
 Man’s wages. 
 
 Woman’s wages. 
 
 . 350 •••• 
 
 .. 102 .... 
 
 . 20 40 
 
 Three children, at fifty francs each. 
 
 . 150 .... 
 
 
 
 602 
 
 120.40 
 
 For, if all receive these wages, only a balance of 
 four dollars and twenty-one cents will be left at the 
 end of the year. When sickness happens, or the sup¬ 
 ply of work is diminished, it is easy to see how poor 
 is the condition of such a family. It must be said, 
 however, that a portion of the agricultural laborers of 
 France, estimated at eight per cent., supplement their 
 resources by the prosecution of some accessory in¬ 
 dustry,—such as weaving, wood-cutting, sawing,—by 
 6 
 
66 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 which their wages are considerably increased, although 
 they may not be able to work so many days at their 
 regular employment in consequence. 
 
 In respect to the manufacturing population, a marked 
 increase in the price of their labor may be noted, al¬ 
 though the rates have varied much at different times 
 and places. The Statistique Officielle de VIndustrie, in 
 1852, gave the following prices for labor in the manu¬ 
 facture of cotton goods: 
 
 Spinning-mill . $0 ™ 
 
 Thread mill ... 
 
 Braid mill . 
 
 Texture*, calicoes, blankets, shawls, and prints... 
 
 l^iwn, cambric . 
 
 Stamped goods ... 
 
 Between i860 and 1870 the wages of cotton opera¬ 
 tives rose thirty per cent. : 
 
 46 
 
 46 
 
 33 
 
 59 
 
 
 i 860 . 
 
 1870 . 
 
 Spinner* . 
 
 3'M 
 
 59)4 
 
 34)4 
 
 39X 
 
 73 
 
 ■39# 
 
 
 Carder*... 
 
 Winder* ,,,, ,,,,. ..... 
 
 Men or women.. ... 
 
 25 
 
 ' 4)4 
 
 39# 
 
 25 
 
 Children ... ... 
 
 
 In 1804, fifteen thousand five hundred pieces of cloth 
 were manufactured at Elbeuf, and eighty-two thousand 
 pieces in 1852. The cloth at the former period was 
 made by hand, and sold for the average price of twenty 
 francs the metre; the cloth produced in 1852 was 
 manufactured by machinery, and, though selling for 
 twelve francs a metre, was of better quality. The 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 67 
 
 wages of workmen in 1804 were twenty-four cents a 
 day for men, women fifteen cents, and children four to 
 six cents. In 1853 the average was fifty-five cents for 
 men, women thirty-five cents, while children received 
 eighteen cents per day. A writer, after noting these 
 facts concerning the rise in the price of wages, ob¬ 
 serves : “ The price of food rose at the same time; but 
 even taking this into consideration, the rate of wages 
 paid in the latter year was one-fourth higher than in 
 the former.” 
 
 In the way of further illustrating the rise in wages, - 
 let us note the changes which have occurred in the 
 mines and forges under the direction of Messrs. Schnei¬ 
 der & Co., at Le Creusot, who have nine thousand 
 nine hundred and fifty persons in their employ. The 
 mean rate of wages had risen, between the years of 
 1850 and 1866, from fifty to seventy-five cents a day, 
 representing an increase of fifty per cent. In this 
 establishment, however, great facilities are given to 
 their employees, at the partial expense of the proprie¬ 
 tors, for feeding, lodging, clothing, and educating 
 themselves and their families, which are valuable addi¬ 
 tions to the income of the workmen. Seven hundred 
 families, it is stated, are lodged by the company at 
 fifty per cent, below the usual price of house-rent; 
 and seven hundred gardens are let to them at the 
 nominal rate of forty cents per annum. 
 
 Generally, it may be affirmed, there has been a rise 
 of wages throughout France of forty per cent, during 
 the last fifteen years; but the workman does not get 
 much benefit from this rise, as his cost of living has 
 greatly increased. Notwithstanding the higher prices 
 
68 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 he must pay for house-rent, clothing, and all the 
 necessaries of life, a margin is left in his favor; and 
 “ to this extent,” says a writer well qualified to speak, 
 “ there has been a rise in wages, which enables the 
 laborer to feed, lodge, and clothe himself somewhat 
 better than he could fifteen years ago.* 
 
 Such, in brief, is the manner in which the French 
 working classes are affected by the rise in wages and 
 necessaries of life. In some respects France has been 
 1 ss fortunate than her neighbors in maintaining peace, 
 which is essential to the prosperity of any state. It 
 i s true that during the reign of Napoleon her material 
 prosperity was greatly augmented, for her commerce, 
 which in 1825 was valued at nine hundred million 
 francs, one billion seven hundred million francs twenty 
 years later, four billion francs in i860, had risen in 1866 
 to six billion four hundred million francs ; in short, her 
 trade with foreign countries had increased sevenfold 
 during the forty years previous to the date last men¬ 
 tioned. But war, with all its horrors, has smitten 
 France; her government has been overthrown, and 
 confusion, uncertainty, and distress are everywhere 
 experienced. The laborer suffers most during the 
 depressed period of a country’s industry. As truly 
 remarked in one of the documents of the French 
 government relating to this subject: “That which is 
 requisite for the welfare of the industrial classes is 
 regular, constant, and certain wages rather than high 
 wages accompanied by irregularity in the duration 
 of the engagement.” True, not much collision has 
 
 * Julian Fane, “Correspondence with Her Majesty’s Missions.’ 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 69 
 
 arisen between workmen and their employers, but 
 this is due rather to ignorance than to satisfaction with 
 their condition. In the readjustment of prices the 
 workman of France, though benefited in some in¬ 
 stances by the change, is in general reduced to a 
 sorrier plight, and his future is without much hope. 
 
 As for the British laborer, although there has been 
 an enormous increase of wealth in Great Britain within 
 a quarter of a century, his remuneration in many cases 
 has advanced but little, if at all. Mr. Brassey, in his 
 “Work and Wages,” handles this question with great 
 care, and his conclusions are undoubtedly trustworthy, 
 as he possessed unusual facilities for obtaining informa¬ 
 tion. Some of his illustrations are worth repeating. 
 For example, in the Canada Engineering Works at 
 Birkenhead, thirteen classes of workmen are employed. 
 In six of them, workmen received less wages in 1869 
 than in 1854; in three, the same ; and four classes have 
 had their wages increased. The government employs 
 in the dockyard at Sheerness thirteen classes of work¬ 
 men like shipwrights, calkers, etc. In three classes 
 only were wages advanced between 1849 an< ^ 1859, 
 and the greatest increase did not exceed sixpence a 
 day; during the next decade wages were absolutely 
 stationary in every class. At the private shipyards on 
 the Thames wages rose from 1851 to 1865, yet four 
 years later the advance had been wholly lost. The 
 rise in 1865 was not lasting, for it was caused by spec¬ 
 ulation ending two years later in a panic. Trade then 
 collapsed, thousands were shut out of employment, 
 and the wages of the remainder were considerably re¬ 
 duced. Mr. Brassey has shown the greatest and most 
 6 * 
 
70 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 permanent advance to have accrued to the workmen 
 of the building trades in London and Manchester. 
 Between 1853 and 1872 their wages were increased 
 one-third, a very large addition. 
 
 On the other hand, the cost of living has rapidly risen. 
 It is stated that the rent of houses in London and Man¬ 
 chester has advanced quite as much in proportion as 
 the wages of those employed in the building trades. 
 Says Mr. Fawcett: “As there has also been a not 
 less marked rise in the price of coal, meat, milk, butter, 
 cheese, and many other commodities which compose 
 the items of a laborer’s ordinary expenditure, it would 
 seem that even in the trades where the advance of 
 wages has been greatest, a large portion of the ad¬ 
 ditional wages has been absorbed by the increased 
 dearness of commodities, and consequently the real 
 remuneration of the laborer may have but very slightly 
 increased.” 
 
 In respect to that large class whose wages have re¬ 
 mained nearly stationary, like clerks, porters, police¬ 
 men, railway-servants, omnibus-drivers, and others re¬ 
 ceiving fixed salaries, they are worse off than formerly. 
 Concerning the truth of this there can be no dispute. 
 
 The wretched condition of the agricultural laborer 
 is not relieved by a single consideration, save that of 
 emigration. In some counties he fares much better 
 than in others; but in all his case is gloomy enough. 
 Nor do we see much hope for him so long as the 
 present system of land-tenure prevails. 
 
 The working-men of Great Britain may derive some 
 comfort in comparing their condition with that of the 
 toiling millions on the continent, but it is a feeling 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 71 
 
 empty of aspiration. The tendency of the hour is to 
 reduce wages and increase the cost of living. With 
 this closing in of his prospect on both sides, his future 
 is likely to be but little more than a repetition of the 
 past. 
 
 How the working classes have been affected by the 
 rise of prices in the United States, has excited con¬ 
 siderable discussion. In 1867, Mr. David A. Wells, 
 Special Commissioner of Internal Revenue, stated in 
 his “ First Annual Report” that the general rise in the 
 price of labor since i860 had been about sixty per 
 cent., and the rise in all other commodities ninety 
 per cent. According to this statement, therefore, the 
 working classes were not so well off in 1867 as they 
 were seven years before. The correctness of this 
 conclusion was quite warmly disputed when the “ Re¬ 
 port” appeared, but, whatever the truth might have 
 been, it is clear enough that wages are much higher 
 now in proportion to other commodities than they 
 were fifteen years ago. And this is so, notwithstand¬ 
 ing the fact that, at the present time, business is dull, 
 many are out of employment, and reduction of wages 
 quite general. The prices of commodities are de¬ 
 clining more rapidly in proportion, so the laborer is 
 better off in respect to compensation than ever before. 
 
 The table contained in the appendix, extracted from 
 the “ Fifth Report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Sta¬ 
 tistics of Labor,” shows conclusively that while the 
 average per cent, of increase in groceries and provisions 
 between the years 1861 and 1873 was 43 per cent., on 
 men’s board 66.7 per cent., and on women’s board 50 
 per cent., the average per cent, of increase in wages 
 
7 2 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 by the hour and week in the Pacific Mills, Lawrence, 
 manufacturing cotton goods, was as follows: 
 
 Average per cent, of increase in wages by the hour was 76.9 
 “ “ “ males “ 63.3 
 
 “ “ females “ 84 
 
 “ “ by the week “ 67.6 
 
 “ “ “ “ males “ 54.6 
 
 “ “ females “ 74.3 
 
 And also, in the Washington Mills of the same 
 place, manufacturing woolen goods, the 
 
 Average per cent, of increase in wages by the hour was 76.9 
 “ “ males “ 71.7 
 
 “ “ “ females “ 88.7 
 
 “ “ by the week “ 67.7 
 
 ** “ “ “ males “ 62.7 
 
 “ “ “ “ females “ 78.9 
 
 Besides, in both mills the hours of labor during the 
 interval were reduced from sixty-six hours to sixty-two 
 and a half per week. 
 
 Another example may be selected from Mr. Lorin 
 Blodget’s paper, read before the Philadelphia Social 
 Science Association in 1872. During that year one 
 hundred and forty thousand persons had been em¬ 
 ployed in the city, whose wages exceeded sixty-two 
 million dollars. This sum, excluding the holiday 
 season, was about one and a quarter millions per 
 week. Compare these figures with those of i860. 
 Then, twenty-seven million dollars were paid for 
 wages, but two-thirds as many workmen being em¬ 
 ployed as in 1872,— thus showing that wages had 
 more than doubled since the former period. It is 
 true a portion of this advance is lost in the enhanced 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 73 
 
 cost of living, but not all. Wages, therefore, have very 
 materially risen in Philadelphia. 
 
 An advance in other places and industries might be 
 shown, though not in all cases so large. We are not 
 sure, however, that the laboring classes will be able to 
 retain the entire increase. Everywhere is the tendency 
 manifest to reduce wages, and, though not falling back 
 to the point they were in i860, it is probable consider¬ 
 able reductions will be made. 
 
 Notwithstanding the prospective reduction, three 
 facts clearly appear from the inquiry. First, labor is 
 surer of getting employment, and, secondly, of re¬ 
 ceiving a higher reward in the United States, than 
 elsewhere. The third fact is that while the laboring 
 classes have rarely been the gainers by the rise of 
 wages in most countries, they surely have here. 
 
74 
 
 THE C0NFLIC1 BETWEEN 
 
 IV. 
 
 THE PAYMENT OF LABOR. 
 
 It will be the chief purpose of this chapter to 
 remove a fallacy which often deceives the capitalist in 
 contracting for labor. Before doing so, however, we 
 will briefly consider the theoretical and practical rela¬ 
 tions subsisting between the two classes. 
 
 The contest between capitalist and laborer is a con¬ 
 test between present and accumulated labor. Capital 
 is labor saved, nothing more.* The contest is between 
 those who have saved their labor or inherited it, and 
 those having less. It is a contest of the laborer with 
 the laborer, after all. 
 
 There is a very gradual shading between the capi¬ 
 talist having many millions, and the laborer having 
 nothing except his brains and limbs. One man has a 
 vast fortune, another a hundred thousand dollars, 
 another a quarter of that sum, another his farm, 
 another his brains, one a store of goods, one a set of 
 tools, another a shovel. Thus the gradations from 
 the capitalist to the laborer shade off almost imper¬ 
 ceptibly, and it is not easy to classify all persons. 
 
 Respecting the true relation between capitalist and 
 
 * Technically, labor is exertion demanding something for itself in 
 exchange.—Perry, p. 122. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 75 
 
 laborer, there is no division of opinion. They are 
 partners in the same enterprise, they are united by a 
 common purpose; hence, there is no reason whatever 
 for jealousy on the part of workmen toward their em¬ 
 ployers. Such is the belief of all who have investi¬ 
 gated the subject. 
 
 It may be very easily shown that the true interests 
 of labor and capital are identical. Without the em¬ 
 ployment of capital, laborers in many cases could not 
 live. An accumulation of capital is necessary to un¬ 
 dertake most of the enterprises of the world. While 
 a machine is being made, a railroad built, a crop 
 raised, capital is required upon which to subsist. 
 Without capital, people would live from hand to 
 mouth, according to the common saying; that is, 
 would return to their original state, and live by fish¬ 
 ing, hunting, the fruits of the earth, and the like. It 
 is by saving, accumulating capital, that the world has 
 been able to make such progress—to build factories 
 and railroads, and undertake thousands of enterprises. 
 
 The capitalist has the means to accomplish these 
 things, if united with labor. He can do nothing with¬ 
 out it. To build a railroad, labor is just as essential 
 as capital. Both are indispensable elements. Were 
 the rich man totally unable to unite his capital with 
 labor, he would become a beggar; were the workman 
 unable to get employment from the capitalist, he 
 would starve. The interests of the two are, therefore, 
 inseparably united; their need of each other is equally 
 great. 
 
 Notwithstanding this very palpable truth, anything 
 but harmony exists between the two classes. Not 
 
;6 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 
 that antagonism prevails everywhere, for beautiful 
 exceptions are seen in Switzerland, and doubtless may 
 be found in other countries. In a work like this we 
 cannot take account of the exceptional instances; we 
 must consider the relations subsisting between the 
 two classes generally. What are these ? 
 
 The laborer is determined to get the highest wages 
 for the least work; the employer the most work for 
 the least wages.* The motives of the two classes are 
 the same. The question of paying or receiving a 
 >le compensation is not the one determining 
 the questu HL 1 low much can I get? how little can I 
 pay? these arc the questions asked. 
 
 The trade-unions of Great Britain have declared 
 this again and again. In the Edinburgh Review,\ their 
 object is clearly set forth: “‘The final end’ of the 
 trade-unions is * to raise to the highest practical point 
 the rate of wages/ and it is their maxim that no work 
 should be done heartily; to ‘evade’ work and to 
 ' loiter’ at work are rules; ‘ he who is most skillful in 
 these arts is the greatest benefactor to his order;’ ‘the 
 sluggard, according to the standard of the unions, 
 must be the model workman/ the unionists have 
 plans for making work that is useless to their em¬ 
 ployers; they, in some cases, oppose the use of 
 
 • Burke has saitl: “ There is an implied contract, much stronger 
 than any instrument or article of agreement, between the laboiei in 
 any occupation—that the labor, so far as that labor is concerned, shal 
 he sufficient to pay to the employer a profit on his capital and a com 
 pensation for his risk; in a word, that the labor shall produce an ad¬ 
 vantage equal to the payment. ”—7 houghts and Details on Scat city, 
 vol. v. p. 137. 
 t July, 1S68. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 77 
 
 machinery, and compel the public to make use of 
 inferior articles—for example, hand-made bricks; the 
 Leeds bricklayers have a rule against one man carry¬ 
 ing more at a time than ‘ the ridiculously small num¬ 
 ber of eight bricks;’ walking slowly to work, so as to 
 consume as much as possible of the master’s time, 
 has been acted on as a rule; the trade-unions aim at 
 ‘ making as much work as possible,’ by rendering the 
 labor of each less efficient;’ the union is, in some 
 cases, so ‘omnipotent over masters,’that ‘the indus¬ 
 trial machine is turned topsy-turvy;’ in cases of out¬ 
 rage, employers are afraid to prosecute, and a witness 
 who appears in court against a trade-union ‘must be 
 helped to emigrate.’ ” 
 
 Turning to the capitalist, what shall be said of him? 
 Is he less selfish? The capitalist, having an advantage 
 of his workman, rarely fails to use it. It is a hard 
 truth that people are forever trying to get advan¬ 
 tage of one another. If all laborers were willing to 
 work for a reasonable or just price, and all capitalists 
 were willing to pay it; if every exchanger were will¬ 
 ing to buy and sell according to the same beautiful 
 rule—the world would move on in perfect harmony. 
 Unhappily, this is not the case. Every man seeks to 
 get the most he can for what he sells, and pay as little 
 as possible for what he buys. This is the law of the 
 world. In order to carry out the law, all are forever 
 inventing methods by which they can overreach one 
 another, while the overreached are continually apply¬ 
 ing counter-protectives. 
 
 If a restrictive tariff law is enacted by which a rail¬ 
 road company pays twenty-five per cent, more for its 
 7 
 
78 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 rails, it makes up the advantage thus accruing to the 
 home manufacturer by raising the price of freights.* 
 If a man intends to buy anything, he hides his real 
 intentions from the seller if he can. Why? Because 
 he fears the seller will take advantage of the buyer’s 
 situation to raise the price. So men hide their real 
 purposes, pretending not to want very badly, although 
 their wants may be great; pretending to be not very 
 desirous of selling, although wishing to sell even at a 
 loss. And thus deceptions are employed; each afraid 
 to tell the honest story of his condition, and trust his 
 fellow, because he knows that, generally, men will take 
 advantage of one another when opportunity occurs. 
 The capitalist is like the rest, and, unfortunately for 
 the laboring class, he has an advantage over them 
 which they find difficult to overcome. He can live if 
 all his capital is not employed in reproduction; their 
 labor will not keep, and, if they are not employed, 
 they perish. 
 
 For example, A owns a factory run by a hundred 
 hands. They demand higher wages and refuse to 
 work until they are given. But the owner says, “No; 
 I will stop my mill first.” He has property beside, 
 and can live upon that until it is exhausted; perhaps 
 he has enough for his support always. But if the 
 laborer does not work, he will starve. It is clear 
 enough, then, that A holds his help in the hollow of 
 his hand, and can squeeze them as hard as he pleases. 
 This is the fact, and every true observer will say so. 
 
 # See, as nn illustration, Colonel Grosvenor’s admirable aiticleon 
 “The Railroads and the Farms,” in the Atlantic Monthly , vol. xxxii. 
 P- 59 1 - 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 79 
 
 Admitting the truth of all the beautiful theorizing about 
 the necessary marriage of labor and capital in order 
 to bring forth fruits for both, capital often has a de¬ 
 cided advantage. 
 
 The laborer sees this. He says: “The capitalist 
 has a great advantage over me; he can compel me to 
 make a contract by which I am not fairly paid for my 
 services.” It is like telling a man to deliver up his 
 money or forfeit his life. The capitalist says : “ Work 
 for me for so much, or I will starve you to death.” 
 
 Such are the actual relations subsisting between the 
 two classes. It is a feeling of antagonism instead of 
 harmony, because each class regards its interest as 
 opposed to that of the other. As the capitalist is 
 most favorably situated, he has more advantages and 
 can generally get the better half of the bargain with 
 the laborer. The latter receives the most sympathy— 
 a very unsatisfactory substitute for additional pay. 
 
 In making the contract for labor, we maintain that 
 the laborer ought to be willing to work for a reason¬ 
 able price, and the employer ought to be willing to 
 pay it; and each ought not to take advantage of the 
 situation of the other. If labor be plenty, the em¬ 
 ployer ought to pay as much, other things with him 
 remaining the same; if scarce, the employed ought to 
 ask no advance of wages, provided his condition in 
 other respects remains , unchanged. In short, people 
 ought not to take advantage of one another as they do. 
 
 This law men are violating continually. The capi¬ 
 talist declares that, as he is not bound to employ 
 laborers at all, he has the right of paying them any 
 price that may be agreed upon. In other words, as 
 
8o 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 he is independent of the workman, he may pay him 
 as little or as much as he pleases. The plea on behalf 
 of the capitalist has been put by Mr. Thornton,* in 
 the following form : “ Capital, being under no previous 
 obligation to enter into arrangement with labor at all, 
 is at liberty to reject any arrangement to which she 
 objects, and is entitled to whatever profit may accrue 
 to her from any arrangement to which labor and her¬ 
 self mutually agree.” This plea we believe to be 
 wholly wrong, and if we can succeed in proving this, 
 as well as the truth of our position, labor will stand 
 upon a prouder basis in making contracts than ever 
 before. 
 
 What are the relative positions of the two? Let 
 the capitalist cease to employ the laborer, and how 
 much capital has he left? Absolutely nothing. The 
 laborer keeps him from sinking. Dispense with his 
 services, and capital vanishes into thin air. Dispense 
 with labor, and every vessel will rot at the wharves, 
 every farm will run to weeds, the spindle will not give 
 out its music. No man will have anything except 
 what he can get by direct exertion. As for selling his 
 property and living upon the income, who will buy if 
 no labor can be employed ? A great factory would 
 not sell for a dollar, because it would be of no more 
 use to the purchaser than the moon. That all desire 
 to preserve their property and enhance its value, is a 
 general truth which no one will deny. Of course, 
 there are spendthrifts who have no ability or desire to 
 acquire property, or to keep what they may have 
 
 On Labor,” p. 138. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 8l 
 
 inherited. But this is not true of mankind in general. 
 Their desire is for more wealth, to save what they 
 have, and add to its value. These two facts being 
 true,—that all are intent upon saving their property, 
 and that labor is absolutely necessary for this purpose, 
 —the property-owner ought to be willing to pay a fair 
 compensation for the labor whereby his riches are 
 saved and increased. 
 
 The usual way of looking at the question is this: 
 no man need build a ship or a factory in order to 
 employ labor, because he can loan his money and live 
 upon the income received. But what do others want 
 of his money if they cannot employ labor with it ? 
 If the manufacturer gets tired of his business and 
 resolves to quit, upon the ground that he is under no 
 obligation to employ any one, he sells his establish¬ 
 ment ; and what then ? Why, he invests his property 
 in other concerns which employ labor. He employs 
 and pays for labor less directly; that is the only differ¬ 
 ence. His money is put to the same use as before. 
 He buys railroad stocks; but the railroad employs 
 labor in great quantities. He puts it in a bank; but 
 the bank employs labor, and loans its capital to others 
 who use it to pay for labor. Everywhere capital and 
 labor touch, and if they do not, one is as worthless as 
 the other. Whether employed directly, or loaned to 
 others for them to use, capital must be employed in 
 union with labor, else it is absolutely valueless. The 
 man who is worth a million is as poor as the man not 
 having a dollar, and both must get a living by simple 
 and similar tasks. As men will not do that,—as they 
 will use their capital themselves, or loan it to others 
 7 * 
 
82 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 to be used by them,—they are bound to pay a reason¬ 
 able reward to the laborer for his services. 
 
 Again, the capitalist asks: “ Have I not a right to 
 do what I will with mine own ? If I throw my capital 
 away, surely I am under no obligation to employ 
 workmen; for if I am, then all are bound to employ 
 labor, whether having capital or not.” If a man has 
 nothing, he cannot be required to employ labor; if 
 he has property he is bound to use it, either directly 
 or indirectly, for his own and others’ support. Dis¬ 
 cussion has long been rife respecting the right of pri¬ 
 vate property, and not a few hold that no sound reason 
 can be given for claiming absolute personal ownership 
 of things. We do not share in this view; but that 
 private property is both justifiable and necessary rests 
 upon the economic principle: it is the most effective 
 form for administering the external resources in the 
 production of national wealth, and the most effective 
 form of providing for the necessary wants of individ¬ 
 uals.* Hence, the owner of property must use it in 
 reproducing wealth, or must spend it in other ways, 
 for this is a duty he owes to society. Government, in 
 protecting property, thus enabling its owner to accu¬ 
 mulate more, puts him under obligation to employ a 
 portion of it in reproduction, as well as to expend 
 another portion in the maintenance of himself. He has 
 no right to throw it away. He must use his property 
 himself in some way or other; for, if he will not, nor 
 loan it, his property becomes worthless, and the state 
 must aid him. The state has power to prevent men 
 
 * See “ Kaufmann’s Socialism/’ p. 45* 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 83 
 
 from wasting their substance and becoming a burden 
 to the public. 
 
 The argument may be easily pressed further. The 
 preservation of property is necessary for the perpetuity 
 of the state and the discharge of its obligations. To 
 permit a person to destroy his property—for this is 
 the effect of not using it in reproduction or exchange 
 —is to bankrupt the state, stop every public improve¬ 
 ment, and do away altogether with the governing 
 power. What would become of the heavy debts of 
 all the principal nations of the earth if private property 
 were destroyed? And how could even those who are 
 called to govern be paid ? Thus it is perfectly clear 
 that the preservation of private property is necessary 
 for the perpetuity of the state itself. But property is 
 preserved only through use, either in reproduction or 
 exchange. The owner of capital who refuses to em¬ 
 ploy it in connection with labor, or to exchange it for 
 other commodities, is no better off than the man with¬ 
 out capital. He is a pauper, but for what he can earn 
 by his own exertions. What, then, can be clearer than 
 this: if persons possessing property did not employ 
 it in any way whatever, the state would have the 
 right to make some use of it ? Perhaps the right of 
 the state to take so much as may be needed for its 
 own maintenance, in the way of taxes, will be ad¬ 
 mitted. Here, however, the objector stops and says: 
 “Surely the state has no right to take any more, or 
 exercise any further control.” Agreeing to this, should 
 individuals not make use of their property, then the 
 state, though taking all they had, would not get 
 enough, for unemployed capital has no value. So 
 
8 4 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 the practical conclusion is, if people maintained the 
 right to do what they pleased with their property and 
 chose to do nothing with it, the state, for the purpose of 
 self-protection, would be compelled to take it all and 
 employ it whenever feasible. It cannot be true, then, 
 that the owner of property has an absolute right to 
 do with it according to his own pleasure. His tenure 
 of anything is conditioned upon his employment of it 
 in reproduction or exchange. We admit he has the 
 choice of letting the state have his property; but who 
 will allow only the smallest portion to be taken in this 
 way ? Every man desires to retain his own, and we 
 have seen the condition upon which this can be done. 
 Destruction is not permissible ; use must be made of 
 property, or the state is compelled to take it to main¬ 
 tain itself. 
 
 Now, in order to use it, as we have seen, capital 
 must be harnessed into the car with the working-man. 
 Capital is utterly worthless unless joined with labor. 
 Men are in fact bound to employ labor, or else their 
 possessions, whether great or small, are of no value 
 to them or to any one else. Labor is just as neces¬ 
 sary a factor in the saving and reproduction of capital, 
 as in producing capital in the first place. Let no one 
 forget that in this discussion we are not talking of any¬ 
 thing but labor, present and accumulated. Accumu¬ 
 lated labor, to be worth anything, must be united with 
 present labor; the two operate together. Conse¬ 
 quently, the assertion is without foundation that the 
 capitalist is under no obligation to employ labor. Such 
 an obligation does exist. He has no right to throw 
 his property away. We assume that every man is 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 85 
 
 desirous of saving his property; if so, he must em¬ 
 ploy labor, else his property becomes valueless. And 
 if he must employ labor to save it, he ought to pay a 
 fair compensation therefor. Suppose a man’s house 
 was in danger of being carried away by a flood, and 
 some men coming along were asked to help in saving 
 it. They have no time to make a definite bargain as 
 to the remuneration, but engage with a hearty will, 
 and by their efforts save the house. Would not every 
 one say the owner of that house was mean if he were 
 not willing to pay those men a reasonable compensa¬ 
 tion for their services? The position of the capitalist 
 is the same in respect to his property. His capital will 
 vanish like a stroke of lightning unless united with 
 labor. Analyze the uses made of capital, and all can¬ 
 not help admitting the fact. 
 
 From this line of reasoning, it appears clear to us 
 that capital is not only under obligation to employ 
 labor, but to pay a reasonable price for it. To some 
 the argument may seem prolix or even unnecessary, 
 but there are many who will not accede to our view. 
 If it be sound, the laborer is placed upon a juster and 
 more commanding plane in contracting with the capi¬ 
 talist. It is most important to intrench himself in 
 this position, if possible; for, should he succeed, the 
 way is easy for obtaining exact justice from his em¬ 
 ployer. 
 
 As between workmen, there is a natural difference; 
 one man is worth more than another, because he has 
 greater strength or skill. It is right that the strongest 
 and most skillful should receive higher wages. Con¬ 
 cerning these natural advantages, there is nothing to 
 
86 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 be said. What we object to is the use of artificial 
 and wrongful advantage. If the corn crop is less this 
 year, the price should not be increased, except to 
 require people to practice economy, or for some other 
 good reason. If laborers are plentiful, let them be 
 paid as much ; if they are scarce, let them work for 
 the old prices. Let no advantage be taken of un¬ 
 natural, artificial, or forced conditions, and all will be 
 well. 
 
 It will be said that this mode of reasoning is con¬ 
 trary to the operation of supply and demand. Shall that 
 law cease to be applied ? No, not in the true sense. 
 All that we have written about asking and expecting 
 reasonable prices does not conflict with the work¬ 
 ing of this law. There is, however, a wide difference 
 between the natural and unnatural operation of supply 
 and demand. Rightly interpreted, the law is this— 
 demand is what people really need and would pur¬ 
 chase if they could buy at a reasonable price; and 
 supply is the quantity that can be had at such a price. 
 But the world is forever interfering with this law, by 
 creating artificial scarcity on the one hand, and, on the 
 other, by trying to make the demand less than it 
 really is, so as to beat down the price. The law, to a 
 great extent, does not express the truth about ex¬ 
 changes. The real demand is often much greater 
 than purchases indicate, and the supply also. But 
 people deceive one another; they exercise force, they 
 refuse to sell when they really want to, hoping for an 
 advance of prices. The buyer refuses to buy, although 
 he really wants the thing, hoping to get a reduction 
 of price. So numerous are the deceptions practiced, 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 87 
 
 the real state of things is covered up so deeply, that 
 the natural law of demand and supply has, in fact, 
 only a limited operation. 
 
 How often does a transaction like the following 
 occur. It was found last April that there were twenty 
 thousand bales of cotton in New York, and thirty 
 thousand in Liverpool, less than were supposed to be 
 in those markets. Besides, the quantity received at 
 Bombay, India, was not so large by forty thousand 
 bales as during the corresponding week of the previ¬ 
 ous year. If the law of demand and supply had had 
 anything to do with the commodity, its price would 
 have risen in consequence of this great diminution; 
 but what did happen? As soon as the fact was 
 known that the supply was not so great as supposed 
 by nearly one hundred thousand bales, cotton specu¬ 
 lators in New York sold forty-eight thousand bales to 
 be delivered on a future day. The effect of these 
 heavy sales was to depress the market. The Liverpool 
 Daily Post , in commenting upon the transaction, re¬ 
 marked that it certainly did appear absurd with a 
 diminution in the supply of nearly one hundred thou¬ 
 sand bales of cotton in one week, there should be 
 found men of sufficient temerity to sell forty-eight 
 thousand bales on a single day for future delivery. 
 But these sales had the effect intended, namely, to 
 prevent a rise in the price of cotton, which is precisely 
 the event that would have happened had the law of 
 demand and supply operated. From the 1st of Sep¬ 
 tember, 1874, to the 9th of April following, four mil¬ 
 lion seven hundred and ten thousand bales were sold 
 in New York to be delivered at a future time, while 
 
88 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 the entire amount of cotton received during that 
 period was only three hundred thousand bales. These 
 facts being true, who can doubt that the price of cotton 
 is regulated by artificial means, and not by the law of 
 supply and demand ? Such certainly is the belief of 
 those who buy the article for purposes of manufacture. 
 
 What is a reasonable price depends upon many 
 things. Obviously, it is impossible to draw any hard 
 and fast line defining it. The most we can do is to 
 find out what principle should govern in making con¬ 
 tracts between capitalist and workman. This is a 
 reasonable price without regard to any advantage 
 which either capitalist or laborer might take of the 
 condition of the other. 
 
 Some considerations, however, may be mentioned 
 in making contracts for labor. First, laborers should 
 receive the highest wages when profits are largest. 
 To some of our readers this may seem a very trite 
 observation, but for centuries no such principle was 
 acknowledged by employers. They paid fixed prices, 
 the lowest possible, and never raised them because 
 profits increased. The acknowledgment of this prin¬ 
 ciple marks a step forward in adjusting the relations 
 between capital and labor. In basing remuneration 
 upon profits, solid ground is occupied, and naught 
 remains save to ascertain what proportions capital and 
 labor shall receive. 
 
 It is true, though, that a question was long ago 
 raised concerning the extent of the fund out of which 
 labor is paid, but, for our own part, we fail to see 
 anything so mysterious or deep about the matter. 
 However simple a subject may be, one can generally 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 89 
 
 succeed in getting puzzled over it if he tries hard; but 
 if one is seeking to know what the fund is from which 
 the working-man gets his dues, the answer is easy 
 enough. The wages fund is the sum accruing from 
 the sale of goods after all the expenses of production 
 except labor are paid. Says Judge. Kettle: “After 
 making certain payments, such as replacement of 
 material, maintenance of plant, ordinary interest upon 
 capital, premium to cover risk, and that disputable 
 item, cost of management, the balance of price then 
 in the hands of the master is what should be divided 
 between the wages fund and the profit fund.” The 
 dispute between masters and men is, what portion of 
 the price received for the joint product of labor and 
 capital shall go to the laborer. There is a complete 
 unity of interest between the two classes throughout 
 the whole course of production and exchange that as 
 much as possible shall be produced and exchanged 
 for the highest price. Immediately upon the sale of 
 the product their interests diverge, each class being 
 desirous of retaining the largest portion of the price 
 possible. To determine this question, the foregoing 
 rule of. paying the laborer a reasonable reward for his 
 labor might be successfully applied. 
 
 Secondly, the laborer should receive more where 
 the work is hazardous to life and health than in those 
 occupations which are healthy and free from accident. 
 An operative in a powder-mill, or who makes certain 
 parts of a brimstone match, ought to receive higher 
 wages than a person working in a woolen-factory, 
 which is comparatively healthy and safe. 
 
 Thirdly, a person ought not to expect so much who 
 8 
 
9 o 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 receives regular employment as a person who cannot 
 get work regularly. The ordinary hackman is justified 
 in charging more for conveying passengers, if he can 
 get them only now and then, than if he were employed 
 all the time. The same person will charge less by 
 the hour if employed for several hours, than to go 
 a short distance, in proportion to the time required. 
 This is just. A great many who work in factories, 
 especially in New England, ought not to expect so 
 much, because their employers, in most instances, feel 
 bound to give them constant employment if possible. 
 Ofttimes they run, and at a loss, when they would not, 
 except to keep their help employed. Other consider¬ 
 ations of less importance probably enter into the con¬ 
 tract fixing the price of wages. 
 
 There are some subsidiary questions surrounding the 
 main one which require notice. It is said that labor 
 is paid enough generally, whatever the price may be, 
 because, as a class, workmen do not make a wise use 
 of their wages. 
 
 That workmen are often prodigal in the use of their 
 wages will not be denied. In the previous chapter we 
 have seen how wages have advanced in some countries, 
 especially in the United States. Here, laborers have 
 reaped the richest harvest. Only few of them have 
 saved the increase. Some of them have, but the larger 
 number spend all they earn. The goods in factory 
 stores have greatly changed, which is the best proof 
 of the extravagance of the class. The quantity of 
 jewelry they wear, their finer clothing, the amusements 
 patronized, and food consumed, —these things are 
 proof, not only of higher wages, but of what is done 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 91 
 
 with them. In England the industrial classes work 
 fewer days in the week and spend a larger portion of 
 their earnings in the ale-houses, so that neither they 
 nor their families are better off by their increased 
 gains. They live upon a lower plane than the work¬ 
 man in the United States, who spends his additional 
 income in dress, amusements, jewelry, and the like. 
 
 Now, it is said, why pay them so much ? they do 
 not make an economic use of their money; teach them 
 to use it properly before giving it to them. This, by 
 way of advice, is good. Operatives spend a great deal 
 of money foolishly, and they should be taught to save 
 it against a day of want, and for nobler uses. Yet, is 
 this a good defense against paying them higher wages ? 
 
 The same mode of arguing will cut the manufacturer 
 off from making money, for does he put it to any 
 better use than his operatives ? Is he not as extrava¬ 
 gant? does he not spend as much money foolishly? 
 He cannot, in truth, say anything on that score. 
 
 Thus, we have gone over the ground between the 
 capitalist and laborer, and sought to find out how the 
 latter should be paid. No rule fixing the price of labor 
 has preference over a division of the profits upon some 
 agreed plan whenever a division is practicable. But 
 it is not practicable to base remuneration directly 
 upon profits in every case; and when it is not, the 
 rule sought to be established in this chapter is just 
 and easy of application. 
 
92 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 V. 
 
 THE GOOD AND EVIL OF TRADE-UNIONS. 
 
 No one will deny the vast importance to which 
 trade-unions have attained, for the influence they wield 
 over their members is enormous; and a marvel, too, 
 because obedience is so general while being purely 
 voluntary. It is true the members in submitting freely 
 to organized rule believe they are really promoting 
 their own personal advantage, yet this does not always 
 appear, and when the interest is unseen, or thought 
 to be opposed to the interest of the individual, his 
 temptation to disobey is great. Such discipline, there¬ 
 fore, as trade-unions often exhibit must excite admira¬ 
 tion, however bitterly they may be condemned. 
 
 Trade-unions have their origin in the rise of fac¬ 
 tories. So long as workmen were isolated in their 
 tasks and could not meet together in large numbers, 
 no organization existed among them, and the do¬ 
 minion of the employer over his men was complete. 
 But times have changed. Great factories have arisen 
 employing thousands. When they daily assemble 
 under the same roof, tend the same machine, and 
 work at the same table, is it not natural, nay reason¬ 
 able, to confer and act together upon questions in 
 which all are mutually interested ? Besides, manufac- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 93 
 
 turing cities have sprung up, busily engaged in pro¬ 
 ducing the same commodities, thus augmenting the 
 mutual personal interest. Sheffield, Manchester, 
 Lyons, Verviers, Lowell, Pittsburg, are names of 
 great cities, in each of which nearly all the capital 
 and skill are united in a single industry. 
 
 Railways and other facilities of easy communication 
 also lend their aid in forming these unions, by bringing 
 workmen together and enabling them to render fra¬ 
 ternal assistance. A recent writer upon the condition 
 of the operatives in the factories of Wurtemberg re¬ 
 marks that if its scattered industry has been a source 
 of much inconvenience and some pecuniary detriment 
 to the manufacturers, combinations among workmen 
 have been rendered difficult, if not impossible. “ The 
 operatives of isolated spinning-factories scattered along 
 the banks of woodland streams or connected together 
 in smaller numbers in the neighborhood of rural towns, 
 or weavers who worked dispersed in their own dom¬ 
 iciles, and only came into casual contact with one 
 another on their way to and from their common em¬ 
 ployer,—these men had little occasion for or incentive 
 to hostile combination.” But this state of things has 
 passed away in that country as in almost every other, 
 by creating the railway and the manufacturing city. 
 
 While stating this as the immediate or superficial 
 origin of trade-unions, the deeper one, as we have 
 shown in a previous chapter, is the discontent existing 
 between workmen and their employers respecting the 
 division of profits. In the language of Mr. Hewitt, 
 an iron-manufacturer, whose testimony before the 
 Trade-Unions Commission of Great Britain evinced 
 8 * 
 
94 the conflict between 
 
 wide observation coupled with the deepest insight 
 into the subject: “Trade-unions are a symptom of the 
 readjustment of the relation of capital and labor.” 
 
 Trade-unions are increasing in number and influ¬ 
 ence. In Great Britain, the United States, Belgium, 
 and most of the European countries where their forma¬ 
 tion is not prohibited by law, the ranks of unionists are 
 constantly swelling with fresh accessions. In every 
 trade of much importance a portion of the workmen 
 have organized these societies. What the total num¬ 
 bers are, we have no means of ascertaining. One 
 estimate has put the number of unionists in Great 
 Britain at eight hundred and sixty thousand; but this, 
 probably, is too small. The membership in the United 
 States has never been determined by any official or 
 other authority. 
 
 Nor can it be said these unions contain only work¬ 
 men of inferior skill and intelligence. The proportion 
 between the skilled and unskilled varies, doubtless, in 
 different trades and at different times. “ It is probable 
 that in many trades some of the best and most edu¬ 
 cated men stand aloof. It has not, however, been 
 suggested by any one that the union is ever com¬ 
 posed of the inferior order of workmen, though it 
 may not invariably be composed of the superior. In 
 some trades — and those requiring the greatest skill— 
 it seems to be admitted that the union contains the 
 great bulk of the most skilled men, as the engineers, 
 the iron-founders, the painters, glass-makers, printers, 
 ship-builders, and others.”* 
 
 Messrs. Hughes and Harrison, Dissenting Report, p. 33. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 95 
 
 Respecting the right to form these associations, it 
 is just as evident that laborers have the right to com¬ 
 bine in order to get their dues as masters have to 
 resist an advance of wages. As long ago as when 
 Adam Smith wrote, he said that “ masters are always 
 and everywhere in a sort of tacit, but constant and 
 uniform, combination not to raise the wages of labor 
 above their actual rate. To violate this combination 
 is everywhere a most unpopular action, and a sort 
 of reproach to a master among his neighbors and 
 equals.” 
 
 Employers, in many cases, are combined by stronger 
 ties than a tacit understanding. In Great Britain and 
 elsewhere associations have been formed by masters, 
 the principal object of which is to control the rate of 
 wages. Say Messrs. Hughes and Harrison: “ It is 
 plain to us that the rules of these associations are en¬ 
 tirely similar to the rules of the unions, and quite as 
 coercive as any of them.” 
 
 The object of workmen in combining is to form a 
 reserve fund, by means of which they seek to put 
 themselves upon an equal plane with the capitalist in 
 bargaining for wages. The latter, having such a fund, 
 occupies a vantage-ground in respect to the workman, 
 for the capitalist is a combination himself. Work¬ 
 men, in combining, only seek to get what capitalists 
 already possess,—namely, a reserve force, so that they 
 can bargain for their labor upon favorable terms. It 
 seems impossible to frame an argument for prevent¬ 
 ing the sons of toil from doing this, unless the old- 
 fashioned and exploded idea be maintained that 
 workmen are bondmen to the capitalists, who, conse- 
 
9 6 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 quently, have the sole right to determine the rewards 
 of labor. In France, where the notion still lingers, we 
 hear now and then of efforts to regulate the price of 
 labor by law, but in no other country. Freedom to 
 labor is as universally recognized as any other right. 
 All have their choice to work separately, or unite 
 and form a partnership or other organization, if they 
 like. 
 
 It was a long period before workmen in England 
 were permitted to form these societies, so strongly 
 intrenched were capitalists in the legislation of the 
 realm. In 1799, the following act of Parliament 
 showed the willingness of that body to legislate against 
 the combination of workmen : “ Contracts entered into 
 for obtaining an advance of wages, for altering the 
 usual time for working, or for decreasing the quantity 
 of work (excepting such contract be made between a 
 master and his journeyman), or preventing any per¬ 
 son employing whomsoever they may think proper 
 in their trade, or for controlling the conduct, or any 
 way affecting any person or persons carrying on any 
 manufacture or business, in the conduct or manage¬ 
 ment thereof, shall be declared illegal, null, and void.” 
 
 This statute illustrates how workmen were regarded 
 in that day. Not until 1827 did Parliament repeal all 
 statutes prohibiting workmen from combining. Until 
 then employers and Parliament had taken it for granted 
 that they alone could regulate wages. 
 
 In France the law permitting workmen to combine 
 was not decreed until 1864. Prior to that period the 
 “ Penal Code” contained the most rigorous stipulations 
 against combinations of workmen. They were char- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 97 
 
 acterized as misdemeanors, and the promoters of them 
 were punished with from two to five years’ imprison¬ 
 ment. It is fair to state that the combination of em¬ 
 ployers for the purpose of unjustly depressing wages 
 was also declared to be illegal, though the punishment 
 inflicted was less severe. 
 
 In the several states constituting the German em¬ 
 pire various laws were in force relating to the rights of 
 workmen until 1867, when a new enactment went into 
 operation throughout the empire, declaring that “ all 
 prohibitions and penal provisions directed against per¬ 
 sons engaged in industry, trade, assistants, journey¬ 
 men, or factory operatives, on the ground of their 
 co-operating and uniting for the purpose of obtaining 
 more favorable wages and conditions of labor, more 
 especially by means of strikes or discharge of work¬ 
 men, are repealed,” thus guaranteeing to the industrial 
 classes the right to form trade-union associations. 
 
 In the United States workmen have no just reason 
 to complain, for they have always stood upon the same 
 footing with capitalists, and have enjoyed the unques¬ 
 tioned right to form trade-union societies. Not until 
 very recently has the old doctrine been revived that 
 the state has a right to control the price of labor. 
 Governor Brown, of Georgia, in an annual message to 
 the Legislature of that State, did remark that “ labor 
 must be controlled by law.” There is no occasion 
 for fearing the re-establishment of this doctrine on 
 republican soil. Liberty to contract for labor is a 
 right too deeply grounded to be crushed out by the 
 fiat of Governor Brown, or by any one else holding 
 a similar opinion. 
 
9 8 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 All this by way of clearing the field for inquiring 
 into the purpose of trade-unions and the soundness of 
 their methods. 
 
 Their purpose is twofold: first, that of an ordinary 
 friendly or benefit society, —namely, to afford relief to 
 the members of the union when incapacitated from 
 work by accident or sickness; to provide a sum for 
 the funeral expenses of members and their wives ; and 
 sometimes to grant superannuation allowances to 
 members disabled by old age. Second, that of a trade 
 society, — namely, to watch over and promote the in¬ 
 terests of the working classes in the several trades, 
 and especially to protect them against the undue 
 advantage which the command of a large capital is 
 supposed to give the employers of labor. 
 
 Many societies exist having only one object in view. 
 Some are purely friendly societies; others are organi¬ 
 zations for promoting the interests of members in their 
 various trades without any reference to their social 
 welfare. For years in all the countries of Europe 
 societies of the former description have flourished, 
 while trade-unions are of recent creation. Thus we 
 have seen that workmen in France were not permitted 
 to combine in order to raise the rate of wages until 
 1867; but they have helped each other in an organ¬ 
 ized way during sickness and old age, and provided for 
 burial, and done other humane acts for a long period. 
 And this applies as truly to many other countries as 
 to France. 
 
 It has been found desirable generally to unite the 
 two purposes, and in this form most trade-unions 
 exist. Considerable opposition to them as thus con- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 99 
 
 stituted has been manifested, because persons who are 
 friendly to purely benefit organizations and hostile to 
 those organized for purposes of trade oppose societies 
 combining this double purpose. No enemies to friendly 
 societies have appeared, for their purpose is a most 
 noble one, and the good they have done is incalcu¬ 
 lable. The amount yearly distributed to sick mem¬ 
 bers and expended for burial, and other like purposes, 
 is an eloquent testimony to the character of these 
 institutions. But in uniting the two objects trade- 
 unions taint the sensibilities of some people, who are 
 moved on this account to compass their destruction. 
 
 Much can be advanced in favor of, and against, this 
 coupling of ends. Did they remain separate, friendly 
 societies would have the aid of all, for their useful¬ 
 ness none will dispute. Besides, they would grow in 
 numbers and in income. Thousands who would not 
 join trade-unions aiming to affect the price of wages 
 only, would gladly join societies of a friendly nature. 
 A great many workmen beyond the pale of unionism 
 are likely to remain outside, who are desirous of 
 joining their fellow-workers in alleviating distress, 
 and, consequently, lay the foundation for being aided 
 in return. Moreover, benevolent men live everywhere 
 who would willingly join friendly organizations, and 
 contribute moral and financial support. 
 
 On the other hand, trade-unions are dignified and 
 ennobled by superadding a friendly and humane pur¬ 
 pose to that of a trade society. Though they inflict 
 much evil, the enmity against them is somewhat soft¬ 
 ened when the good they do is remembered. But we 
 cannot agree with Mr. Morrier that the strength of 
 
IOO 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 the English system depends upon the two-edged pur¬ 
 pose to which the funds of trade-unions may be 
 applied. Doubtless they are stronger when created 
 in this manner, but their vitality depends upon some¬ 
 thing more substantial than this. 
 
 So far as the members are concerned, this question 
 is of little importance. Provided they know what 
 they are giving their money for, whether sickness, 
 burial, strikes, or anything else, it is their business, 
 and theirs alone. And they probably do know, both 
 by personal inquiry and by experience, how unions 
 can employ their funds. Mr. Morrier is hardly fair in 
 saying they are raised for purposes of peace, but are 
 applicable to the purposes of war. It is known before 
 they are given for what purposes they may be used. 
 No deception is necessary, nor is it practiced, in rais¬ 
 ing funds for these societies. 
 
 Whenever a society unites both purposes, it is evi¬ 
 dent that a separation of funds for any particular 
 object is quite impracticable. The cry is heard every 
 now and then that a division of the resources for 
 friendly and trade objects ought to be made. It comes 
 from some one who either does not understand the 
 nature of the organization, or is so keen as to see that, 
 by providing several funds, collision would probably 
 arise among the members, ending perhaps in disunion. 
 This will appear clearly when the nature of the 
 organization is more fully explained. 
 
 Its income is derived from members who pay a 
 certain sum weekly, monthly, or annually, according 
 to its rules. This sum, as remarked, is devoted to 
 several purposes. One purpose is to provide some- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 IOI 
 
 thing for sick members during their illness. Another 
 is termed an accident benefit, which consists of a sum 
 given to those who lose their tools; while a third is 
 a burial fund. Besides these, some of the richer 
 unions have additional funds for reading-rooms, 
 libraries, donations, and charitable subscriptions. 
 
 The benefits conferred often extend much further. 
 One of the most frequent and costly objects of dona¬ 
 tion is to members out of work. This is occasionally 
 so large as to maintain all the workmen of a trade 
 during a period of disaster. During the year 1867 
 the engineers of Great Britain spent two hundred and 
 ninety-one thousand two hundred and fifteen dollars 
 in this manner; and the iron-founders nearly two- 
 thirds of that sum. The great service thus rendered 
 in keeping a large number of working-men and their 
 families from the cold field of pauperism no one will 
 question. 
 
 We proceed now to consider the main purpose of 
 trade-union societies. Whenever the two purposes 
 are found united in the same organization, the chief 
 purpose always is to raise directly and indirectly the 
 price of labor. This, no unionist will deny. 
 
 To begin with the indirect methods first. One 
 method of raising wages is to prevent competition 
 among workmen. The quantity of work being limited, 
 and a superabundance of labor in most countries ex¬ 
 isting, competition among laborers is the natural 
 consequence of this state of things. Wherever com¬ 
 petition exists, employers pay much lower wages; 
 in truth, workmen themselves cut under one another 
 until they receive barely enough to keep them from 
 9 
 
102 
 
 # THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 starving. This is the only limit to cheapness of wages. 
 Men will not starve so long as they can get work, and, 
 the supply being short, for centuries they have toiled 
 at ruinous rates. Thus workmen, by reason of their 
 excessive numbers, are the authors of their own mis¬ 
 fortunes. While they can justly complain of their 
 employers, in many cases, for not paying more, on 
 the other hand the latter can say with truth they 
 have paid the price demanded. In short, the supply 
 being excessive, the capitalist has paid only the 
 smallest rates, and knew perfectly well there was no 
 need of paying more. It was evident enough that, 
 could competition be prevented, wages would rise. If 
 there be work for only two men, and four offer to do 
 it, the price will be very small; but let the four agree 
 that only two shall apply, and the others keep away, 
 perhaps the rate of wages will be doubled. What 
 more rational plan, then, could workmen devise for 
 raising wages than to prevent, so far as possible, com¬ 
 petition ? in other words, to reduce the supply of 
 labor. 
 
 So long as proper rules for preventing competition 
 are observed, we see no ground for condemning this 
 object of trade-unions. For it is a thing of common 
 occurrence to create scarcity in the market and so 
 enhance price. Mr. Mill relates an instance in point 
 in his “ Principles of Political Economy.” He says 
 the owners of the Spice Islands for a long period 
 enjoyed a monopoly of the trade, and, in order to 
 keep the price of the article up, in good seasons de¬ 
 stroyed a portion of the crop. Constantly do we hear 
 of practices being resorted to for the purpose of 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 103 
 
 increasing scarcity and enhancing price. We do not 
 contend that any person, whether laborer, merchant, 
 or manufacturer, has a right to ask more than a rea¬ 
 sonable price for whatever he desires to part with, but, 
 to obtain that price, we can see no injustice in pre¬ 
 venting competition among laborers, provided the 
 methods of securing this end do not infringe upon 
 the liberties of any one. 
 
 What, then, are trade-unions doing to prevent com¬ 
 petition? By one rule they limit absolutely the num¬ 
 ber of hours each person shall work. The object of 
 this- rule is clearly enough seen,—to divide work 
 among a larger number. Additional reasons, worthy 
 of consideration, are given for fixing a limit to working 
 hours. 
 
 One reason is that it prevents the laborer from over¬ 
 tasking his energies, as he is often tempted to do, in 
 order to increase his earnings. Not infrequently have 
 workmen impaired their health by prolonged exertion. 
 Thousands of persons by unduly taxing their powers 
 have died, leaving helpless families to face the icy 
 charities of the world. So far, therefore, as shorten¬ 
 ing the hours of labor is required by the laws of 
 health, who will not commend the action of these so¬ 
 cieties? Sentiments of humanity demand that the 
 laborer be not overtaxed; and if trade-unions did 
 nothing worse than prevent this, no indictment could 
 be found against them. 
 
 Another object in preventing overwork is to make 
 employment for more persons. Be it said to the 
 credit of these associations, their efforts to provide 
 work for all, or rather to divide so far as practicable 
 
104 * THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 what work there is among all, is a pure and praise¬ 
 worthy motive. Such conduct testifies to their regard 
 for one another. The most skilled of the working 
 classes are able to obtain work always; how generous 
 is their conduct, therefore, in consenting to work 
 fewer hours, so that those possessing less skill can 
 have an opportunity to earn a livelihood ! All efforts 
 of this sort peaceably put forth are laden with the 
 best results; who can condemn them ? 
 
 A third reason for working shorter hours is that 
 time is saved for self-improvement. When honestly 
 expressed, this reason merits consideration. But it 
 has a suspicious look, and by many it is regarded as a 
 cover for getting higher wages. Those who are at¬ 
 tempting to deceive the public in this way will not 
 only fail, but lose its sympathy and support. The 
 claims of workmen, no matter what they are, ought 
 to be honestly expressed, so as to create a universal 
 belief in the purity of their motives. 
 
 It is quite true employers may suffer inconvenience 
 and loss in some cases from the refusal of their help 
 to work only a certain number of hours, but we ap¬ 
 prehend that many violations of these rules must 
 arise in those places where it is most desirable for 
 workmen to do more than their accustomed tasks. 
 For, evidently, the foregoing rule is meant to apply 
 chiefly to those cases where the supply of work is 
 limited ; in places where this does not happen, the 
 cause of the workman suffers nothing in getting all 
 the employment he can. This rule is designed for 
 those localities in which an excess of laborers live 
 wanting employment, and if, in such cases, persons 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 105 
 
 having regular work choose to cut down the number 
 of working hours voluntarily, in order to give the less 
 fortunate son of toil an opportunity to earn some¬ 
 thing, very rarely can any detriment accrue to the 
 employer. 
 
 We now come to a rule enforced by many trade- 
 unions of a very different character: prohibiting the 
 employment of apprentices, or limiting their number. 
 It is true this rule is not maintained by all trade- 
 unions; many exceptions might be noted. Thus, in 
 the evidence adduced before the Trade-Unions Com¬ 
 mission, it was found to be an open question with the 
 carpenters, masons, bricklayers, joiners, iron-makers, 
 shipwrights, and printers as to whether, and if so, 
 how many, apprentices should be employed in any 
 shop or trade. Nevertheless, the right to limit the 
 supply of labor in a given trade so as to raise the rate 
 of wages, is a claim distinctly made by some union¬ 
 ists. Mr. Wilkinson, the Secretary of the National 
 Flint-Glass Makers’ Friendly Society, says: “ The 
 limitation of apprentices is simply because we con¬ 
 sider that as working-men who have been brought up 
 in the trade, and have devoted years to learn it, . . . 
 we have a right in a certain measure to limit the 
 supply in accordance with what the demand may be.” 
 Mr. Alexander Campbell, a champion of trade-unions, 
 puts the claim in a little more plausible way. Putting 
 his words into the mouth of a workman, he says: 
 “ We further object to employers taking more appren¬ 
 tices than we have determined to be consistent to the 
 keeping of a regular supply of hands in the trade, 
 because an unlimited number of apprentices throws 
 
io6 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 more men into our trade or profession than can find 
 regular employment, and thus causes our union to be 
 heavily taxed for their support, or otherwise compels 
 them to tramp from place to place, begging leave to 
 toil, to the evident injury of the trade and their own 
 degradation; and another reason we have against an 
 undue number of apprentices is that you have no 
 right to ask us to communicate our skill to your 
 apprentices, as the result will be to permanently 
 supersede us in our employment, as in most trades 
 young men are preferred to those above fifty years of 
 age.” Mr. Shreeve, Secretary of the Printing-Machine 
 Managers Trade Society, says, in alluding to his asso¬ 
 ciation: “The way in which we look at this appren¬ 
 tice question is simply this: that we have served our 
 time to a business, and work to get a respectable 
 living by it. We know that if there are four men to 
 do two men’s work the wages must come down.” 
 Such are the reasons advanced for limiting the num¬ 
 ber of apprentices in each particular trade. 
 
 In reply to the foregoing, we hold the limitation to 
 be unjust to the class either practically or wholly shut 
 out; and further, a logical deduction from this prin¬ 
 ciple of exclusion is, that persons pursuing any par¬ 
 ticular business have a right to prevent others from 
 engaging therein. Consider the case of the glass- 
 makers already mentioned. Were the claim true that 
 they had a right to say how many workmen should 
 en g a g e in their employment, the owners of that con¬ 
 cern or any other glass-manufactory might declare 
 with equal propriety to any new enterprise: “You 
 have no right to go on with your undertaking. We 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 107 
 
 have been engaged in this business for a long period, 
 we have put our money and skill into it, our profits 
 are not excessively large, and there is really no open¬ 
 ing for you; and if you persist in undertaking this 
 business our profits will be reduced, and perhaps 
 some of us will be ruined. In that case, all the men 
 in our employ will be thrown out of work.” To this 
 it will be replied: “You are stretching the argument.” 
 Not in the least. The fact is, in some cases, workmen 
 have made an effort to limit production so as to keep 
 up the price of labor. Of colliers especially is this 
 true. It is the natural outcome of such a principle. 
 To shut out a part of the race needing employment 
 because of their age or inexperience, upon the ground 
 that the supply of work belongs to those engaged in 
 it, is monstrous, and naturally leads to opposing the 
 extension of trade, whereby profits are likely to be 
 reduced, and consequently wages. Those workmen, 
 therefore, are logical who, regarding the supply of 
 labor in any given trade as belonging to them, oppose 
 the extension of their business, whereby products are 
 cheapened and wages diminished. 
 
 Now, if there be any ground upon which trade- 
 unions can stand, and we do not deny this, it must be 
 in taking the condition of the entire working class 
 into account. To declare these associations to be for 
 the benefit of the working population, when they are 
 only for the benefit of a class, is a cheat. They are 
 not unions at all. They are merely class societies 
 instituted for the benefit of a particular class of work¬ 
 men. We have stated the only argument ever ad¬ 
 vanced in support of the rule limiting the number of 
 
io8 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 apprentices who may be employed in a particular 
 trade. Those engaged in it have no more right to 
 control the supply of labor than producers have to 
 limit production, except in special cases provided by 
 law. Were this not so, a person might build a great 
 factory, and fill it with costly machinery, and produce 
 nothing, unless, forsooth, permission be given by work¬ 
 men to the owner to employ help for running the 
 concern. Thus we see that the argument respecting 
 the employment of apprentices is bound up with the 
 question concerning the limit to production. If work¬ 
 men have no right to limit the number of factories, 
 they have no right to limit the quality and quantity 
 of the help who may be employed in them. 
 
 Were it maintained that older workmen receive less 
 pay in consequence, and so are directly affected by 
 the introduction of apprentices, this claim would be 
 quite another thing and furnish some ground for in¬ 
 terposing. To state the claim in a different manner — 
 if, on account of the poorer skill displayed by these 
 less experienced hands, the pay of the rest is reduced, 
 they might complain of unfair treatment. But is this 
 ever the case? If an apprentice is hired to do a cer¬ 
 tain piece of work which is completed in quite as 
 satisfactory manner as it could be done by a skilled 
 workman, how can the latter suffer? And, in fact, the 
 employment of so many of them is directly contrary 
 to the theory that they are incapable of doing the 
 work they undertake. The only way workmen can 
 be injured by apprentices is by increasing the supply 
 of labor. And this is the real effect which workmen 
 seek to obviate. But then, all workmen are equally 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 IO9 
 
 entitled to a living, and no one has a right to say that 
 another shall remain idle. This is directly contrary 
 to the object of creating trade-union societies. The 
 state, indeed, may claim a paramount right over ap¬ 
 prentices for purposes of education or public defense, 
 but so far as the working classes are concerned, no 
 one has a right to control the work of another; in 
 other words, no one has a better right to monopolize 
 work than a manufacturer has to monopolize the pro¬ 
 duction of a particular thing. 
 
 Mr. Campbell introduced a more plausible argu¬ 
 ment, which was the chief reason for quoting from his 
 paper. It was that employers had no right to ask 
 workmen to communicate their skill to apprentices by 
 stealth. If they are employed with the idea they can 
 go into the workshop, mingle with experienced work¬ 
 men, and by watching and inquiry learn a particular 
 trade, compensation should be made for the informa¬ 
 tion thus given. It has cost the older workmen time 
 and money to learn their trade, it is capital to them, 
 and mean indeed would be the employer to put inferior 
 workers with the most skilled, believing that the latter 
 would aid the former either directly or indirectly with¬ 
 out compensation. We imagine, however, this is not 
 often the case; but when it does occur, surely those 
 skilled ought to receive a recompense for all the in¬ 
 struction they impart. 
 
 Messrs. Hughes and Harrison, in their “Dissenting 
 Report,” find a sort of justification for limiting the 
 number of apprentices in the fact that the leading 
 professions prescribe terms of admission. We cannot 
 discover the slightest analogy between the conduct of 
 
I 10 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 trade-unions and that of other associations or profes¬ 
 sions. The question with the workman is not whether 
 the apprentice is qualified for his work, but whether 
 he shall become qualified. 
 
 If the members of the legal fraternity, for example, 
 should conclude there were lawyers enough, —and who 
 can doubt it?—and forbade any increase, then an anal¬ 
 ogy would exist. But this is not the case. Every one, of 
 his own choice, can study for admission, and, provided 
 he fulfills the prescribed conditions, can enter, no mat¬ 
 ter how many may have passed before him. But the 
 flint-glass makers say: “ No; you shall not learn the 
 trade any way, whether there be work enough for you 
 or not.” This is purely arbitrary, unjust, and utterly 
 at war with the principle upon which trade-unions 
 are founded,—that of providing work for the largest 
 number possible. 
 
 What we have said concerning the treatment of 
 apprentices applies with quite as much force to non- 
 unionists. Why shut them out from employment? 
 Were unionists more competent and feared the ming¬ 
 ling of non-unionists might reduce wages, their admis¬ 
 sion might be opposed with reason. But this reason 
 is never given, and cannot be, because non-unionists 
 are not less competent workmen. The only object in 
 shutting them out is to force them into the union 
 societies. To cut off a man’s daily bread in order to 
 necessitate his seeking admission into a society is a 
 serious, as well as a severe, proceeding, for which there 
 is no justification. Unions, to win the respect of the 
 public, must exercise greater freedom, and not resort 
 to such harsh measures for attaining their ends. What 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 111 
 
 justice in claiming for unionists a monopoly of all 
 work? Who gave them this paramount claim to it? 
 If such a claim be unfounded, and all laborers stand 
 upon the same plane, those not belonging to unions 
 are just as much entitled to work as unionists. All 
 working-men are equally free to join or remain as they 
 are; because some are unionists and more are not is 
 no reason for drawing a line between them and claim¬ 
 ing all the work for one particular portion. 
 
 The same rule has been widened so as to exclude 
 women from employment. In many cases women 
 ought not to go into the workshop. Especially is this 
 true of married women. The husband alone should 
 work; and if this practice were general in countries 
 having a superabundance of labor the supply would 
 be considerably lessened, and the wages accruing to 
 a family quite as large as though both were employed. 
 Generally, therefore, it would be for the interest of 
 labor in the case of married persons, did not the wife 
 engage in the same occupation as her husband and 
 busied herself in looking more carefully after the 
 family. This is so generally admitted that no more 
 need be said for the dullest to understand it. Trade- 
 unions, to this extent, are acting wisely in attempting 
 to diminish the supply of labor. 
 
 To this rule one exception must be noted. Women 
 unmarried, or having husbands who are unable to 
 work, should have the privilege of earning a living 
 when they are able. Consider the condition of a large 
 family. The husband has become unable to work. 
 The family are dependent upon him for bread. They 
 have no lesource unless the mother can take the hus- 
 
I 12 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 band’s place. The loudest cry of humanity is heard 
 to give her employment. Shall the family starve 
 when the mother is able and anxious to work? The 
 same reasons apply to unmarried women. They must 
 live, for life is as dear to them as to any other class. 
 To live, they must work; why cut them off? They 
 do not, like the marriechportion of their sex, have any 
 one to aid them. They must earn a living themselves, 
 or starve. These are the only alternatives. There 
 is no reason for denying work to this class, and, in 
 attempting to do so, trade-unions adopt a cruel and 
 unjustifiable policy. 
 
 In regard to the extent of this practice, Messrs. 
 Hughes and Harrison admit: “There can be little 
 doubt that it is constantly enforced whenever the 
 union is strong enough to insist on it.” They also 
 affirm that the practice is unsocial, and often carried 
 out in a vexatious and arbitrary spirit ; but they add, 
 in the way of smoothing down its harshness, that it is 
 too common among other classes of the community 
 to receive any special treatment. It is common to 
 corporations, confraternities, and parties of all kinds. 
 This we admit is partially true, though rarely is it 
 carried so far. Occasionally we hear of persons under¬ 
 selling in trade for the purpose of ruining some one, 
 but these instances are infrequent. Whether they are 
 common or not, neither merchants, workmen, nor any 
 other class have a right to ruin persons by the use of 
 such means. 
 
 To be as strongly condemned is the effort to mo¬ 
 nopolize the work within a given district. This has 
 been attempted in some cases. For example, a so- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 113 
 
 ciety of brickmakers in England “claim an extent of 
 four miles round Manchester in every direction—an 
 area of one hundred and twenty square miles—as 
 their peculiar district, within the limits of which they 
 permit no bricks to be made except by Manchester 
 union men, nor any bricks to be used except those 
 made within the district.” They accomplish the latter 
 object through an alliance with the Manchester Brick¬ 
 layers’ Union, the members of which will not set any 
 bricks not made within the above-named district. 
 How they have acquired this exclusive right to the 
 work within that locality the public have never been 
 informed. The deed conferring the right has never 
 been shown. 
 
 Another expedient of trade-unions for repressing 
 competition is fixing a minimum rate of wages, and 
 prohibiting their members from working by the piece. 
 Unions have a perfect right to prescribe such a rule if 
 they like. Both classes suffer from its application— 
 the better workmen at all times in not receiving ade¬ 
 quate remuneration for their labor; inferior workmen 
 in getting no work whatever in dull seasons. For, 
 when all are paid alike, the most skillful will be long¬ 
 est retained. It may be thought there is sufficient 
 compensation in the varying conditions of work to 
 satisfy both classes. Anyhow, if unionists voluntarily 
 subscribe to such a rule, greater injustice is done to 
 themselves than to any one else. 
 
 Employers say this equality of wages tends to de¬ 
 teriorate the quality of labor performed. The desire 
 of the workman to excel and do his best is deadened 
 by the system to which he has submitted. This is 
 
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 I 14 
 
 quite evident without much inquiry. If better work¬ 
 men get no higher pay for the exercise of greater skill, 
 their latent capacities will not be called forth. Man 
 will not exert himself much without the hope of a 
 reward, and certainly there is none in the case of a 
 society whose members all consent to labor for equal 
 pay. To this unionists reply that inferior workmen 
 are stimulated to improve so as to get an advance of 
 wages. While this ought to be expected of them, the 
 fact is otherwise. The more skillful workmen fall 
 down to the level of the less skillful; no half-way 
 improvement even occurs. There is no denying this. 
 It cannot be questioned that a system of remunera¬ 
 tion which prevents workmen from putting forth their 
 best energies is wrong, and not to be encouraged. 
 Higher wages would be paid, superior articles would 
 be produced, did workmen exercise greater skill. 
 With all the vast improvements making, workmen 
 ought to be stimulated to do their best, and keep 
 pace with the wants of the age. But, if they are not 
 encouraged by higher wages, and submit to a system 
 preventing payment of them, where is the incentive 
 for exercising superior genius? Thus trade-unions 
 fail to call forth the skill of the better portion of their 
 membership, and, as a corollary to this, deprive them 
 of getting the highest wages they might receive. 
 
 Were the most skillful the best paid, their ambi¬ 
 tion to improve would be aroused. Naturally, every 
 one is desirous of acquiring the highest remuneration 
 possible, and the strongest inducement to earn it is 
 to pay the highest wages to those who perform the 
 greatest service. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 115 
 
 Though we see no moral wrong in trade-unions 
 establishing a minimum rate of wages, so long as it is 
 purely voluntary, it is easy to see how injuriously the 
 rule operates with the members. First, the more 
 skillful workmen receive less pay and perform poorer 
 work; secondly, inferior workmen do not improve so 
 rapidly and have not so strong an incentive to acquire 
 greater skill, and are the first to be thrown out of em¬ 
 ployment in dull periods, because when all are paid 
 the same price the most skillful are longest retained; 
 in the third place, employers suffer from the inferior 
 quality of work; and lastly, the public suffer from 
 the inferior product. 
 
 Nearly all trade-unions prescribe a minimum rate of 
 wages, though none fix a maximum , and it is an error 
 to suppose that unionists always seek to equalize 
 wages. In the “ Fifteenth Annual Report of the 
 Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners,” 
 the secretary of the society, in speaking for its mem¬ 
 bers, begins the subject by saying: “ We are contin¬ 
 ually charged with repressing individual merit, and 
 dragging all men down to one common level. That 
 this is altogether untrue our members well know ; 
 they are aware that whilst we endeavor to fix a mini¬ 
 mum rate of wages, and to admit only those into our 
 ranks who are capable of fairly earning that rate, we 
 fix no maximum rate of wages, and are always glad to 
 see exceptional ability rewarded by an increased re¬ 
 muneration. We are desirous of offering every pos¬ 
 sible facility to those who desire to develop their 
 ability as workmen.” To this end, an annual scholar¬ 
 ship of five hundred and twenty-five dollars has been 
 \ 
 
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 I 16 
 
 established, to be awarded to the member most profi¬ 
 cient in architectural drawing, building construction, 
 and the practical application of scientific principles to 
 the trade of a carpenter and joiner. 
 
 Another thought of Mr. Oliver’s may be mentioned 
 here: “Without some means of self-protection to 
 workmen, capital always tends to bring the wages of 
 the good workmen to the level of the wages of the 
 bad, and to reduce the wages of the bad still lower.” 
 This is a good defense for prescribing a minimum rate 
 of wages, but not for setting a higher limit, as is often 
 done. Perhaps by fixing a uniform rate for all it can 
 be more regularly maintained, so that, if the most 
 skilled are not always adequately rewarded, the remu¬ 
 neration may average higher during a long period 
 than would be the case were varying rates paid to the 
 workmen. 
 
 In this connection let us consider the question of 
 piece-work. In the United States unions have not 
 objected much to piece-work; but they have in Great 
 Britain. All have perfect freedom to contract in 
 their own way. In Great Britain masters make every 
 effort to induce their workmen to labor by the piece; 
 while the latter very strenuously object to working 
 in this manner. 
 
 Their reason for this is a double one: namely, the 
 task is not so well performed; besides, such a mode 
 of working tends to weaken the power of the unions. 
 They contend it is for the interest of the public, as 
 well as themselves, to object to piece-work. This 
 view, however, employers almost universally deny. 
 Said Mr. Robinson, the engineer of the Atlas Works, 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 ii 7 
 
 Manchester, England, in commenting upon the state¬ 
 ment of a trade-union secretary that piece-work, as a 
 general rule, is inferior: “The plan of doing piece¬ 
 work in an establishment like ours has led to such a 
 reputation for our work that we can get a higher price 
 than other firms.” This objection to piece-work may 
 be dismissed as not based on fact. 
 
 The remaining objection urged by workmen against 
 piece-work—that it tends to break up the cohesion of 
 their organization—contains more force. So long as 
 men remain in a similar condition, working according 
 to the same rule, greater unity of interest naturally 
 exists than when each man is working for himself. It 
 is policy for trade-unions to sustain this rule so far as 
 practicable. Isolation tends to weakness; were each 
 man laboring for himself, regardless of those around 
 him, doubtless we should hear but little of strikes. 
 “Where each man makes a separate contract with his 
 employer,” say Messrs. Hughes and Harrison, very 
 correctly, “ he finds that, being the weaker, he gets 
 often the worst of the bargain. The workmen very 
 naturally prefer to treat in a body.” 
 
 Whether they receive better pay in working by the 
 piece or not is a difficult question to answer. Some 
 affirm that wages could be more easily reduced did 
 piece-work prevail, and workmen in Great Britain 
 claim they would be lower than they are ; we know of 
 no way to decide the point. 
 
 Other rules of a minor character, aiming to repress 
 competition and increase work for unionists, require 
 brief notice. We will mention some of them adopted 
 by trade-unions in Manchester, England. 
 
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 I 18 
 
 Firstly, as to brickmakers: 
 
 No person is allowed to make bricks by machinery. 
 
 Secondly, as to bricklayers: 
 
 1. No bricklayer allowed to set machine-made bricks. 
 
 2. No master-bricklayer to have more than three* 
 apprentices. 
 
 3. No bricks to be used in Manchester that are made 
 beyond an arbitrarily-fixed boundary-line, averaging 
 about three and a half miles from the Exchange. 
 
 4. No bricks to be wheeled in a barrow. 
 
 5. laborers not to go up one ladder and come down 
 another. 
 
 6. Masters must employ men resident in Manches¬ 
 ter at all their works within fifteen miles of the city. 
 
 7. Every bricklayer to have one laborer to attend 
 upon him, whether there is work for the latter to do 
 or not. 
 
 8. All foremen-bricklayers to be members of the 
 union. 
 
 Thirdly, as to masons : 
 
 1. No quarry-worked stone allowed to come into 
 Manchester. 
 
 2. No ashlar (walling-stone) to be worked by ma¬ 
 chinery. 
 
 3. All masons, bricklayers, and plasterers (whatever 
 they are worth) are to have the same rate of wages, 
 according to their respective trades. 
 
 4. Masons not to work overtime on any considera¬ 
 tion. 
 
 To these might be added the rules enforced by some 
 unions, confining each class of workmen strictly to 
 their own division of labor: for example, restricting 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 119 
 
 masons from ever setting or displacing a brick, or 
 bricklayers a stone, or either class from doing any 
 work belonging to a plasterer. Another rule, called 
 “ chasing,” prohibits the leading man, where several of 
 them are working in a line, from proceeding at more 
 than a moderate rate. Other rules of like character 
 might be mentioned. 
 
 Such are the principal rules by means of which 
 these organizations attempt to limit the number of 
 working-men in any branch' of industry, and to create 
 a monopoly of work in order to increase wages. 
 
 No one can fail to see that while the leading aim 
 of unionists is a very noble one,—to divide the profits 
 of labor more equally among all by repressing com¬ 
 petition,—the methods of obtaining this end are often 
 cruel and unjust. Perhaps they are the best and 
 only ones that can be devised; whether this be so or 
 not, they are seriously defective. Trade-unions can 
 never gain much support beyond their own body so 
 long as persons are prevented from obtaining work 
 because of age or sex. Happily, many of these rules 
 are not enforced by all unions, and the sooner they 
 are completely abolished the better. 
 
 In framing them trade-unions are perfectly frank, 
 and declare they seek no interest besides their own. 
 Said Mr. Conolly, a leading unionist, before the Trade- 
 Unions Commission: “The rules are made for men, 
 not for masters; ... we merely look upon them as 
 men who step in with their capital, and who want to 
 get the greatest profit they can out of their capital; 
 while we want to get the greatest profit we can out of 
 our labor.” 
 
120 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 \ 
 
 We shall now leave these less direct methods for 
 increasing wages to consider a much shorter method, 
 namely, strikes. These have become so frequent, are 
 conducted on so large a scale, and often are so disas¬ 
 trous, as to create much anxiety concerning future 
 production and trade. It is an unwelcome fact that 
 English builders very generally decline to build any 
 structure requiring much time to complete, through 
 fear of the workmen making unreasonable demands 
 and striking upon refusal to comply, thus rendering 
 it impossible, perhaps, for contractors to fulfill their 
 engagements. So they contract more by the day, 
 increasing the expense to the owner, who receives no 
 advantage therefrom. 
 
 Strikes, which in the fourteenth century had their 
 counterpart in the Jacquerie riots, are the last thing 
 for the laborer to resort to in order to get an advance 
 of wages. As for the justice of them, if workmen 
 are not getting a reasonable price for their labor, and 
 their employers refuse to pay more, after working the 
 length of time agreed upon they are justified in 
 quitting their places. 
 
 In England, workmen have oftener struck to resist a 
 fall than to secure a rise of wages. Says Mr. Brassey: 
 “ Resistance to a proposed reduction was the cause 
 of the engineers’ strike in 1852; of the strike at Pres¬ 
 ton in 1853; of the strike in the iron trade in 1865; 
 and of the strike of the colliers, at Wigen, in 1868.” 
 The strikes in the United States have generally sprung 
 from a similar cause. The weavers at a cotton-mill in 
 New York having had their wages reduced three 
 cents a yard, struck to regain the old price; the 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 12 I 
 
 sounding-board makers in a piano-factory struck on 
 account of a threatened reduction of ten per cent, in 
 their wages; one thousand operatives employed in 
 a carpet-manufactory in New York struck against a 
 similar proposed reduction ; the potterymen of Tren¬ 
 ton, New Jersey, were on a strike which lasted several 
 months, causing a loss of three hundred and fifty 
 thousand dollars to the employers and of fifty thou¬ 
 sand dollars more to themselves, determined to accept 
 no reduction for their labor; the cordwainers of 
 New York struck for a period of nine months against 
 a proposed reduction of twenty per cent.; and other 
 instances might be noted. What Mr. Brassey has 
 observed concerning English strikes applies to all 
 those mentioned: “ Masters had found it necessary, 
 in consequence of the depressed state of trade, to re¬ 
 duce the rate of wages; but the men, ignoring the 
 circumstances of the trade, and looking only to what 
 they believed to be a degradation of their position as 
 workmen, refused to accept the reduction.” This re¬ 
 mark is emphatically true of the strikes which have 
 occurred in the United States during the last twelve 
 months. Profits have greatly declined, prices in gen¬ 
 eral have been heavily shrinking, and a reduction of 
 wages in most cases was absolutely necessary. Yet 
 never have so many and so severe strikes occurred 
 during the same period ; never were they so causeless. 
 
 Much as these sad affairs may be regretted, they 
 cannot be laid to the door of trade-unions. All the 
 members of the Trade-Unions Commission were in 
 accord on this point concerning English strikes, and 
 the language used in the leading and dissenting 
 
122 
 
 TILE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 reports is almost the same. To quote from the chief 
 one: "It does not appear to be borne out by the 
 evidence that the disposition to strike on the part of 
 the workmen is in itself the creation of unionism, or 
 that the frequency of strikes increases in proportion 
 to the strength of the union. It is, indeed, affirmed 
 by the leaders of unions that the effect of the estab¬ 
 lished societies is to diminish the frequency, and cer¬ 
 tainly the disorder of strikes, and to guarantee a 
 regularity of wages and hours rather than to engage 
 in constant endeavors to improve them.” 
 
 This evidence throws into bold relief a good feature 
 of trade-unions. Admitted upon the best authority 
 that they are not the authors of strikes, the strongest, 
 richest, and most extended of these organizations 
 have had the fewest strikes and disputes, while the 
 wages of their members and their hours of labor 
 show the greatest permanence. The society of engi¬ 
 neers, of which Mr. Allan is secretary, is very numer¬ 
 ous, embracing the principal portion of the workmen 
 engaged in that business in Great Britain. At one 
 time the society had a reserve fund of seven hundred 
 and fifty thousand dollars. So great is their power, 
 that Mr. Beyer, a partner in one of the largest iron- 
 foundries in England, represented himself as wholly 
 in the control of the union. But their wages, not¬ 
 withstanding their power, have been scarcely raised 
 for twenty-five years except by the voluntary act of 
 their masters. 
 
 The feeblest unions, those just struggling into ex¬ 
 istence perhaps, or which have the least control over 
 their members, oftenest indulge in strikes. Not in- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 123 
 
 frequently unions are formed when the spirit for 
 striking is rife; and, consequently, they are charged 
 with instituting strikes which would have happened 
 whether unions existed or not. When men are dis¬ 
 satisfied with their wages, they can easily subscribe a 
 small fund for the purpose of striking and create a 
 union which is not intended to exist beyond the occa¬ 
 sion giving it birth. The proceedings of such bodies 
 ought not in justice to be charged to the regularly 
 constituted union. It was said of the English tailors’ 
 and ironworkers' unions that they “ never possessed the 
 power or the permanent character of such societies as 
 the Amalgamated Engineers and Amalgamated Car¬ 
 penters,” and these are the trades in which the loudest 
 complaints are heard of the frequency of strikes. 
 Numerous strikes and lockouts have occurred in the 
 coal-mining districts of Wales and Derbyshire, but no 
 unions have flourished in those regions. In the United 
 States most of the unions are young, hardly in work¬ 
 ing order, having no accumulated funds, the discipline 
 exercised being exceedingly lax; the machine in every 
 way bearing evidence of hasty and rude construction. 
 
 Several unions were recently created during a strike, 
 or with special reference to it. Thus the hated trade- 
 unions are unjustly accused of originating grave evils 
 which would have happened in any event. As these 
 organizations grow older and more stable, and select 
 more capable leaders, they will be managed with 
 greater wisdom, and capital will have less cause to 
 fear them. 
 
 It is questioned whether the diminished frequency 
 of strikes among powerful unions arises from any want 
 
124 
 
 TIIE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 of disposition to strike on the part of the members, 
 but from the fact that their organization is so powerful 
 as, in most cases, to obtain the concession demanded 
 without recourse to this measure. Perhaps this is so, 
 but surely it will not be denied that the Trade-Unions 
 Commission, who raised this query, did not glean a 
 scintilla of evidence upon the point in their most 
 thorough, and in every way creditable, investigation. 
 We can comprehend what influence these powerful 
 organizations could exert, if they chose, and how 
 masters had better submit to their demands, though 
 declaring them wrong, than go through the painful 
 uncertainty of a strike. In several instances masters 
 have confessed themselves within the power of trade- 
 unions; if this be true, they could obtain new con¬ 
 cessions without a conflict of any kind. Possibly, if 
 several of the societies were less strong, they might 
 not have received some of the benefits which have 
 come to them peaceably; and perhaps none at all. VVe 
 repeat, this may be so; but there is no evidence on 
 the subject. The fact is, the larger organizations have 
 been guided by wiser counsels, and were more con¬ 
 tent with their situation. In many of them, as pre¬ 
 viously seen, wages have not been raised much for a 
 l° n g period, and yet strikes have rarely occurred. 
 
 The reason why the richer and more powerful 
 unions moderate the disposition for strikes is not 
 merely to conserve their funds, nor because they ob¬ 
 tain concessions by reason of their power, but because 
 they are more wisely conducted than the newer and 
 smaller organizations. The government of each branch 
 of the union is vested in a committee and local secre- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 125 
 
 tary elected from time to time by the members, while 
 the government of the whole society is commonly 
 vested in a general or executive council elected by 
 the branches, and a general secretary elected by uni¬ 
 versal suffrage of the entire organization. Both the 
 executive council and the committee of the several 
 branches are required to govern themselves according 
 to established rules, and when these are silent, they 
 must rely upon their judgment, subject to an appeal 
 to the general body. Instituting and conducting 
 strikes is the most important function of every well- 
 organized union’s council. It is these councils which 
 have toned down the disposition of workmen so much 
 in regard to strikes. For, generally, the best men 
 are selected for these places, men of the most intelli¬ 
 gence, and who are the best capable of ascertaining the 
 condition and profits of the business in which work¬ 
 men are employed. These leaders, from their superior 
 knowledge and capability to find out the true con¬ 
 dition of business, can judge better than the members; 
 and hence it is that strikes in the larger and more 
 wisely conducted unions are diminishing. And this 
 we regard as a very hopeful feature of trade-unions. 
 One thing the toiling classes need is correct informa¬ 
 tion concerning the business in which they are en¬ 
 gaged. They imagine their employers are getting 
 very rich oftentimes, when they are running at a loss, 
 though keeping the fact concealed. The strikes which 
 have recently occurred in the cotton-mills of New 
 England are unanswerable proof of this remark. 
 Most of them have earned no profits for several 
 months, yet the operatives have foolishly demanded 
 
126 
 
 THE CONFLICT BE TI VEEN 
 
 an increase of wages. Had they known anything 
 about the condition of trade, they would have com¬ 
 prehended the folly of asking for an advance when 
 employers were keeping them busy at a loss. Per¬ 
 sonal knowledge or wise leadership would have saved 
 them from a contest with their employers which was 
 sure to end in the laborers’ defeat. They were the 
 dupes of ignorant and wild leaders, instead of wise 
 and temperate ones, and behold the result! Every 
 man who knew anything about the condition of the 
 cotton trade was certain the strikes would end in 
 failure, for, in fact, the owners were quite as willing to 
 have the men unemployed as not. Prejudice and ill 
 feeling between employed and employer help kindle 
 the laboring man’s imagination respecting the profits 
 accruing from his labor. Now, the leaders of unions 
 are in a situation to learn more perfectly the exact 
 nature of things, and this is why they advise more 
 peaceful measures. 
 
 Here a streak of light issues from these organiza¬ 
 tions, especially since the establishment of boards of 
 arbitration and conciliation for the settlement of dif¬ 
 ferences between men and masters. Members having 
 confidence in their councils are able to submit ques¬ 
 tions to third parties for settlement. They could do 
 what would be impossible were they unorganized. 
 Should all the men in a shop strike and the attempt 
 be made to leave the differences between them and 
 their masters to some person for arbitration, the diffi¬ 
 culty would be in organizing the workmen for con¬ 
 sultation; even were a temporary organization formed, 
 and representatives selected from their number to con- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 127 
 
 fer with their employers, they would not command 
 such confidence as those who were recognized as 
 watching over their interests and thoroughly know¬ 
 ing the condition of business. 
 
 It is asserted that these very councils foment strikes 
 when they ought not. Being paid officers, they regard 
 it as part of their duty, it is said, to advise striking 
 occasionally. This is thought to be their occupation. 
 They are chosen to wage war, not to maintain peace. 
 These notions are erroneous. Only a very few per¬ 
 sons connected with trade-unions receive any pecu¬ 
 niary reward, nor do they constantly agitate for higher 
 wages and other benefits. This, we suppose, they do 
 in some cases; yet it is quite clear that, in general, 
 the tendency of their advice and counsel is to mod¬ 
 erate the striking disposition of those under their 
 direction and control. Strikes began long before 
 trade-unions were ever thought of; they are the inci¬ 
 dent of collecting men in masses as they have been 
 collected by the erection of factories. The union 
 does give an increased power of striking, it can deal a 
 harder blow, but, instead of giving it, an increased 
 sense of order, subordination, and reflection are ex¬ 
 hibited. Does any one doubt the truth of this ? 
 Listen to what the General Secretary of the Amalga¬ 
 mated Society of Carpenters and Joiners says in his 
 last report: “ Our demands on our employers for 
 wages and reduced working hours, which have been 
 moderate in their character, and which have been a 
 consequence, not a cause, of the enhanced cost of the 
 necessaries of life, have generally been courteously 
 conceded, and thus our disputes have been few and 
 
128 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 unimportant. I sincerely trust that an amicable rela¬ 
 tionship between employers and employed may be 
 permanently maintained. Although we may be told 
 that in accordance with the law of supply and demand 
 we arc justified in pressing for all the advantages we 
 can possibly obtain in busy times, and that we should 
 accept whatever may be offered to us when trade is 
 depressed, I hold that such a policy is advantageous 
 neither to employer or employed, and cannot benefit 
 the general public. Wherever our employers are dis¬ 
 posed to meet us in a fair and conciliatory spirit, our 
 members will do well to meet them with equal cor¬ 
 diality, to carefully consider any arguments that may 
 be advanced, and thoroughly examine both sides of 
 the question at issue. If employers and workmen 
 are determined to act fairly by their opponents, as 
 well as to secure justice to themselves, matters of de¬ 
 tail may be arranged, differences amicably settled, and 
 results secured which would be far more satisfactory 
 to all parties than anything which could be obtained 
 by a strike or lockout.” Who can find fault with 
 this advice, or maintain that men are not better off 
 under such leadership than they would be, each one 
 struggling for himself? Do not these words give 
 promise of restored harmony between capital and 
 labor ? Surely trade-unions thus directed ought to 
 be encouraged, not condemned. 
 
 The method of instituting strikes is often exceed- 
 ingly harsh and unfair towards the employer, especially 
 in the United States. In Great Britain it is usually pre¬ 
 ceded by an intimation that if the concession demanded 
 be not granted the men will quit work in a body. If 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 129 
 
 this intimation fails to produce the desired effect, the 
 case is ordinarily brought before the governing body 
 of the union, and if the proposed proceeding is ap¬ 
 proved, the strike is organized and the men are called 
 off work. But in the United States they do not proceed 
 in such a deliberate and methodical way. 
 
 Mr. Hewitt narrated in his testimony before the 
 Trade-Unions Commission how the thing was done 
 in America. “ When I came away there was a strike 
 in New Jersey at the iron-mines, which supply a large 
 number of furnaces with ore. Without notice at all 
 to the owners the workmen in a single mine suddenly 
 stopped work. They never made any request to have 
 their wages raised, but marched to the next mine and 
 told the workmen there that they had inaugurated a 
 strike, and directed them to desist from work. And 
 out of that mine (I know the facts perfectly well, for 
 it was my own mine), they came out from fear; they 
 all said so. They then marched to the adjacent mines, 
 eighteen or nineteen in number, and stopped 'the whole 
 work in forty-eight hours (the area being comparatively 
 small), and they marched in bodies of fifteen hundred 
 to two thousand without committing violence upon 
 anybody except this: they found some teams of ore 
 being carted down to the canal; they took the horses 
 out of the wagon so as to leave the team standing in 
 the road, and told the drivers that if they undertook 
 to put them in again they would be punished. Con¬ 
 sequently, the whole business of that region was sus¬ 
 pended. But the banks of the canal being filled with 
 ore, the companies proceeded to load their boats and 
 send them along the canal to supply the furnaces. The 
 
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 130 
 
 miners then came down and compelled the boatmen 
 to leave their boats, and finally, fearing that they 
 might get through anyhow, they filled up the canal 
 for a considerable distance with ore so as to make it 
 entirely impassable. We applied to the canal com¬ 
 pany, in the first instance, to help us, and they said 
 their duty would be confined to clearing their canal, 
 which they did promptly. Then we applied to the 
 Governor for a military force to protect the boatmen 
 and the men working in the canal. He promptly as¬ 
 sented, and as soon as they found that the furnaces 
 were likely to be supplied for the next three or four 
 months they returned to work.” 
 
 Who will question the rudeness of this method, 
 or that trade-unions would gain in power did they 
 proceed in a fairer manner? The following instance 
 serves to show how a strike was conducted among the 
 waiters at the principal hotels in New York: They 
 simultaneously struck for an increase of pay from 
 five dollars, per month, with board, to thirty dollars, 
 —an advance of twenty per cent. They maliciously 
 selected the dining hour for quitting their employ¬ 
 ers ; after serving the first course of the repast, they 
 marched out of the various hotels in a body. The 
 employers were enabled to obtain a supply in a few 
 days ; and in the end the strikers were most injured, 
 for neither they nor any belonging to unions can 
 obtain employment at the hotels where the strike 
 took place. 
 
 The method pursued in Great Britain is evidently 
 wiser and will command more respect. So long as 
 these organizations seek to take advantage of the sit- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 131 
 
 uation of their employers in unfair ways, or at critical 
 times, they will not receive any sympathy from the 
 public. It is true they are sometimes duped and led 
 to strike by the action of their employers, and when 
 this is the case, the conduct of the latter cannot be 
 too severely condemned. For example, in 1870 a 
 strike occurred among the miners in the anthracite 
 coal regions of Pennsylvania, which lasted nearly six 
 months. The movement was begun by the specu¬ 
 lators and coal corporations interested in maintaining 
 the price of fuel. The miners alleged no grievance 
 whatever. During the spring of that year, which had 
 succeeded an unusually mild winter, a stock of fuel, 
 estimated at seven hundred thousand tons, remained 
 unsold. The existence of so large a surplus, it was 
 feared, would cause a reduction in the price of coal, 
 so it was determined to stop production. This could 
 not be done without giving the public some sort of 
 excuse. So measures were taken with the miners 
 which, it was expected, would lead them to strike. 
 They, ignorant of the trap set for them, fell into it, 
 though when they did resume work higher wages 
 were demanded and obtained. 
 
 Such proceedings, whether on the part of masters 
 or men, cannot be justified. We do not mean to im¬ 
 ply that when business is very brisk and employers 
 are reaping rich harvests, workmen ought to remain 
 silent and be content with the wages paid in dull 
 seasons. Not at all, for this would be giving them 
 over entirely to the mercy of their employers. But 
 the latter should have fair warning of the intention of 
 their laborers, so as to adjust all differences if possible. 
 
132 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 To do like the waiters of the New York hotels, or 
 some of the coal companies of Pennsylvania, is only 
 to widen the breach between the two classes without 
 accomplishing any good. 
 
 We now proceed to inquire whether trade-unions 
 through strikes have been successful in enhancing 
 wages, or preventing a fall. This inquiry is fraught 
 with deep importance, for, as the principal object in 
 creating unions is to secure more adequate remunera¬ 
 tion for labor, so, if they have failed to do this, their 
 worth to their founders is correspondingly diminished. 
 In truth, if wages are no better maintained with, than 
 without, these societies, it is not worth the cost of 
 continuing them. And we have no dotfbt unionists 
 will agree with us in the conclusion. 
 
 It was the opinion of the Commission to which we 
 have often referred, that trade-unions had had some 
 influence in bringing up wages more speedily than 
 would have happened otherwise. This statement, it 
 must be remembered, merely refers to the cases where 
 an increase has happened. But what has been the 
 influence of the organization regarded in its entirety? 
 Mark the answer : “ We think it doubtful whether 
 the net earnings of the workmen connected with 
 unions have not, on the whole, been diminished rather 
 than increased through the agency of the unions; 
 while it is unquestionable that in many cases large 
 bodies of unskilled laborers, in numbers often exceed¬ 
 ing those of the skilled workmen, are rendered desti¬ 
 tute by strikes which they, being unconnected with 
 the unions, have no means of preventing or control¬ 
 ling.” 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 133 
 
 To the same effect are the words of Mr. Brassey, 
 whose intimate knowledge of the subject well quali¬ 
 fies him to express an opinion: “Their organized 
 and united action may secure an advance of wages at 
 a somewhat earlier date; but eventually, in the great 
 majority of cases, the competition among employers 
 would bring about equally beneficial results to the 
 working people. The advantage to the working 
 classes of obtaining the advance at an earlier date is 
 not, in my honest opinion, sufficient to compensate 
 for the expense of perpetually maintaining by heavy 
 subscriptions a trade-union organization ; still less to 
 compensate for the great loss which is caused by un¬ 
 successful strikes.” 
 
 It is impossible to answer this question with exact¬ 
 ness, for no one can tell what the wages of workmen 
 would have been in the absence of strikes. Nor can 
 it be ascertained how much capital by ill-advised 
 strikes has been driven from the field of production 
 and loaned. In every pursuit, and everywhere, wages 
 have advanced, but this is not due to the influence of 
 trade-unions, for their operations are confined to a 
 limited sphere. Upon the authority of Mr. Graham, 
 one of the largest cabinet-manufacturers in London, 
 the salaries of assistants in wholesale warehouses and 
 retail shops, both male and female, have risen in the 
 average about fifty per cent, within forty years, with a 
 reduction in the hours of attendance. Every one 
 knows there has never been any combination to raise 
 the salaries of clerks in stores in the United States, or 
 the wages of common workmen who are employed 
 around the streets or on farms. Consider the wages 
 
134 
 
 TIIE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 of house servants. They have advanced very consid¬ 
 erably within ten years, in fact, often more than 
 doubled, and without the shadow of a combination. 
 Is not the statement true that non-unionists have had 
 their wages increased quite as much in proportion as 
 those belonging to the unions? We think the facts 
 give this answer. 
 
 Let us look at the countries of continental Europe. 
 In all, wages have risen considerably; yet in some of 
 them laborers were not permitted to combine for the 
 purpose of securing an increase of wages until a very 
 recent period. Thus in Austria, where wages have ad¬ 
 vanced very considerably within fifteen years, prior to 
 1867 the law provided that workmen, apprentices, etc., 
 combining for the purpose of organizing strikes or 
 otherwise forcibly raising the rate of wages, were tres¬ 
 passers, and punishable accordingly. Nor was the 
 statute a dead letter, for in 1866, under the Belcredi 
 ministry, when the tanners struck for higher wages, 
 the affair was summarily settled by wholesale im¬ 
 prisonment, and many of the men emigrated. It is 
 true, in 1870, when the saw-grinders struck for an ad¬ 
 vance of pay, they were released by the court before 
 whom they were brought charged with conspiracy to 
 raise the rate of wages, contrary to the existing law, 
 upon the ground that the bill relating to trade-unions 
 permitting men to combine for the purpose of secur¬ 
 ing a rise of wages, although not a law, would prob¬ 
 ably be enacted, as proved to be the case. 
 
 Switzerland was free from strikes until they were 
 instigated by the International Workingmen’s Society ; 
 yet wages there have not remained stationary. They 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 135 
 
 began to rise long before the International was born. 
 Nowhere are workmen so content and upon such 
 pleasant terms with their masters. In one country at 
 least, Switzerland, have workmen learned how identi¬ 
 cal are their own and their employers’ interests, and 
 how much more can be gained by preserving friendly 
 relations than by open and bitter opposition. The 
 intershock of classes is avoided, rather than sought, 
 in every possible way by all. 
 
 It cannot be affirmed that the general rise of wages 
 is due to the influence of organizations created prin¬ 
 cipally for this purpose. We do not maintain that 
 trade-unions have never succeeded in enhancing wages. 
 But the question is, whether they would not have 
 reached as high figures by the voluntary action of 
 employers. During the civil war in the United States 
 wages rose very high, not by virtue of any combina¬ 
 tion among workmen to force them up, but on account 
 of the scarcity of labor and the great profits flowing 
 from almost every pursuit. The strikes in the United 
 States have been principally to resist a fall, not to get 
 an advance. Strikes have multiplied rapidly within a 
 few years, when employers have been seeking to re¬ 
 duce wages; not during the period when they were 
 rising. It is within the knowledge of all that strikes 
 did not occur during the gilded and delusive period 
 of American industry when everybody received high 
 prices,—the manufacturer for his product, the opera¬ 
 tive for his labor, and every one else according to his 
 effort. This proves that in the United States trade- 
 unions had no influence in raising the rate of wages ; 
 furthermore, when the flood tide of prices was run- 
 
13$ 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 ning, these societies did not exist in any strength. 
 Within seven or eight years only have they been im¬ 
 portant enough to attract any attention. The rise of 
 wages, therefore, in the United States was wholly due 
 to other causes than combination among workmen. 
 
 In England, too, in those parts of the country where 
 trade-unions do not exist, are witnessed the same fluc¬ 
 tuations in the labor market, the same rise and fall of 
 wages, depending upon the demand for labor, as occurs 
 under the influence of trade-unions. At the Dowlais 
 iron-works in South Wales, where ten thousand men 
 are employed, no trade-union was ever heard of until 
 recently; yet wages have fluctuated as freely, accord¬ 
 ing to the varying circumstances of trade, there, as 
 elsewhere. The terrible strike in that part of the 
 country early in 1875 cannot be justly charged to 
 unionism, for no society was organized until a few 
 days before the event occurred. It would have hap¬ 
 pened anyhow, whether a union existed there or not. 
 Nor is it less true of the entire section of country, that 
 notwithstanding the absence of these societies, those 
 employed have been as well paid as in any part of 
 Great Britain. In some of the iron-works non-union¬ 
 ists have received higher wages than members of 
 unions. Mr. Markham, manager of the Staveley Iron 
 and Coal Company’s Works, testified before the Trade- 
 Unions Commission that no trade-union had existed 
 in his district for twenty years, nevertheless he be¬ 
 lieved wages were higher than in any other part of 
 the country where unions flourished. 
 
 Now, if it be true unionists have received no higher 
 wages than would have come to them in any event, 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 137 
 
 surely in making up a general profit and loss account 
 the latter side will be the heaviest. For, in the first 
 place, must be noted the unsuccessful strikes to obtain 
 a rise, or maintain the rate, of wages. Mr. Thornton 
 has summed up the result of some of the numerous 
 strikes in England happening within the last twenty- 
 five years, but a detailed account of them, and many 
 others besides, will be found in Ward’s “Workmen 
 and Wages.” We shall merely mention the great 
 strike of the Manchester spinners in 1829, when one 
 million two hundred and fifty thousand dollars wages 
 were forfeited; the Ashton and Staleybridge strikes 
 of 1829 and 1830, participated in by thirty thousand 
 spinners, who lost one million two hundred and 
 fifty thousand dollars; the strikes of the Tyne and 
 Wear pitmen in 1832, which were very protracted; 
 the Manchester builders’ strike in 1833, when three 
 hundred and sixty thousand dollars of wages were 
 lost; the “terrible” strikes of the Preston spinners: 
 first, in 1836, lasting thirteen weeks and costing the 
 men two hundred and eighty-six thousand dollars; 
 and secondly, in 1854, when seventeen thousand 
 persons went into voluntary idleness, suffering in¬ 
 tensely for thirty-eight weeks, and giving up two 
 million one hundred thousand dollars of wages; the 
 engineers’ strike in 1853, of fifteen weeks’ duration, 
 in which two hundred and fifteen thousand dollars 
 wages were sacrificed; the strike in the metropolitan 
 building trade in i860; and the strikes of the iron¬ 
 workers of Staffordshire and the North in 1865, and 
 of the London tailors in 1868; these are a few of the 
 more prominent instances. 
 
 12 
 
•38 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 In the second place, when advances are secured 
 by striking, very often they are of short duration, so 
 that the gain docs not compensate for the loss in¬ 
 curred during the period of idleness. Thus, at the 
 present time, the price of labor is receding in many 
 employments, and advances won by strikes have sunk 
 out of sight. The strike is a very costly expedient, 
 and, unless the advance be large or long continued, 
 in the end does not pay. For example, the second 
 strike among the Preston spinners, to which we have 
 previously alluded, lasted thirty-eight weeks, and two 
 million one hundred thousand dollars of wages were 
 forfeited. They demanded ten per cent, increase. 
 Had they succeeded, it would have required five 
 years to repay the loss,—a period much too long to 
 count upon with safety. How few of the advances 
 made within fifteen years, especially in the United 
 States, have been fully maintained? After the panic 
 of 1870 there was a very general reduction by rail¬ 
 way companies of ten per cent, on the wages of all, 
 including the chief officers. This tendency may be 
 observed everywhere at the present time. Profits 
 have diminished, and competition is so sharp that 
 wages must be cut down in order for business to 
 thrive at all. One reason for this, doubtless, is over¬ 
 production ; markets are too full to command fair 
 prices, and the only refuge for manufacturers is to 
 reduce wages. 
 
 Again, whenever unions have had the longest, most 
 expensive, and bitterest conflicts in obtaining a rise 
 of wages, they have the most speedily fallen, and for 
 the very obvious reason, that, there being the least 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 139 
 
 justice for granting the advance, so did the necessity 
 earliest arise for taking the advance off. 
 
 In the third place, those strikes which were origi¬ 
 nated to prevent a fall have generally been the most 
 disastrous to the working class. For when wages 
 have been advanced by the voluntary action of em¬ 
 ployers, slowly do they fall; and manufacturers often 
 continue to pay them after profits have sunk into 
 insignificance, or perhaps have entirely ceased. Em¬ 
 ployers seldom or never ask their help to accept 
 a lower rate of wages until the condition of their 
 trade has become so unfavorable as to make the re¬ 
 duction absolutely necessary. Whenever, therefore, 
 a reduction is determined upon, unions rarely have 
 prevented a fall. In the summer of 1874 nearly all 
 the blast furnaces in the Cleveland district, which pro¬ 
 duces one-third of the iron made in Great Britain, 
 were within a few days of being blown out in conse¬ 
 quence of a strike among the iron-stone miners last¬ 
 ing six weeks. Many of the furnaces were damped 
 down at a very serious loss to the owners, and the 
 miners, after enduring great hardships, submitted un¬ 
 conditionally to the reduction of wages proposed by 
 the mine-owners, at a loss of three hundred thousand 
 dollars, which would have been'earned during the 
 period of inactivity had they continued to labor. 
 
 Recent experience in the United States has shown 
 how powerless are trade-unions to maintain the rate 
 of wages when business is drooping. The strike of 
 the miners in Pennsylvania in 1875 cost them three 
 million two hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars, 
 and they gained nothing. The strikes among the 
 
140 
 
 TIIE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 iron-workers at Pittsburg, the operatives at Fall 
 River, Lowell, Taftville, and other places were long 
 protracted and unsuccessful. At Taftville thirty-five 
 thousand dollars wages were thrown away; the Fall 
 River strike which occurred in August and September, 
 1870, cost the workmen three hundred and fifty thou¬ 
 sand dollars; and the “Mule-Spinners’ Strike” at 
 Lowell in 1875 kept twelve thousand and thirty-five 
 dollars and fifty-one cents from the pockets of the 
 operatives working in the mills of the Merrimack 
 Manufacturing Company. 
 
 Millions of dollars of wages have been sacrificed in 
 the United States during the last five years by union¬ 
 ists without any corresponding gain. What is the 
 conclusion to be drawn from these facts? Clearly 
 this,—that strikes do not pay. In the most favorable 
 event they are a very costly remedy. When a strike 
 proves ineffectual the loss is total, without any saving. 
 Even when the end is gained, often the advantage 
 is not equal to the loss incurred. The victory is a 
 barren one. To win another such perhaps would be 
 destruction to the victors. Granted that strikes are 
 proper remedies to procure higher wages, the utility 
 of them for this purpose must be tested by the finan¬ 
 cial standard; and, according to that, they are un¬ 
 profitable. The loss is greater than the gain. This 
 much concerning the pecuniary aspect of strikes. 
 
 Then there is additional loss to laborers who are 
 not members of unions, and who are averse to such 
 methods for raising wages. It seems hardly less than 
 cruel to inflict loss upon those who would prefer to 
 work, who are satisfied with the wages they are re- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 141 
 
 ceiving, and who believe that the contemplated strike 
 will prove a failure. Yet this is repeatedly done. 
 
 Another consideration must not be left out of sight; 
 namely, in forcing up wages, unless the advance be 
 actually paid out of the profits of the employer, 
 workmen gain nothing in the end. In other words, 
 if wages are forced up, and, as a consequence, the 
 employer sells his products for an advance sufficient 
 to cover the additional price paid to the laborer, he is 
 not benefited by the rise. For, when the employer 
 instead of bearing this new burden throws it upon the 
 shoulders of the community, the laboring classes bear 
 their share in common with the rest. It is true the 
 employer first pays the increase of wages, but when 
 it is added to the cost of production the consumers 
 and not the employers are the sufferers. The public, 
 therefore,pay the increased wages; not, indeed, directly 
 to the workmen, but to the manufacturers, and thus the 
 question of a rise in wages is in most cases a ques¬ 
 tion between the artisan and those who purchase the 
 product of his toil. To this he replies, whenever 
 wages rise other things do not, as a consequence, 
 rise in proportion, so that he is a gainer. This has 
 been admirably answered by Mr. Booth : “ Those who 
 use this argument seem to forget that the unionists 
 are bound to allow to every other class of producers 
 the same means of enhancing the price of their pro¬ 
 ductions as they claim for themselves; and, if this 
 system could be pursued through all branches of in¬ 
 dustry, it would simply come to this,—that each class 
 could be taxed in its turn for the benefit of all other 
 classes, and so we should arrive at a general system 
 12* 
 
142 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 of production, the only advantage to the members of 
 the trade-unions being that they would have the power 
 of taxing, for their benefit, that large class of workmen 
 who cannot be admitted to the unions: for example, 
 a very large majority of the working classes, together 
 with the rest of the community not comprised within 
 the trade-unions.” It is probably true that when any 
 one secures an advance on the former price of a thing, 
 whether labor, machinery, coal, or grain, he is a gainer 
 for a season, but every person is seeking either to get 
 upon an equal plane with his fellows, or above them. 
 This they must do in self-protection. When an ad¬ 
 vance takes place in the price of labor the employer 
 asks more for his products, the landlord a higher rent, 
 the merchant more for his groceries and clothing; 
 and so the workman finds the advance obtained to be 
 not a real but a delusive one. The price of one thing 
 having risen, the cycle must be completed before the 
 rise stops. Can the workman get a larger share of the 
 profits accruing to the employer,—in other words, can 
 he get an advance of wages,—and goods be sold at 
 the old rates ? In such cases, and such only, is he 
 truly benefited by an increase of pay. Before striking 
 or demanding additional wages, workmen ought to 
 consider well whether they will be really paid by 
 the employer or by the public ; for if the latter is the 
 case, they merely put money into one pocket to be 
 taken out again without receiving the slightest benefit 
 therefrom. 
 
 Another fact workmen should remember before 
 demanding higher wages: namely, if employers are 
 to throw off the advance upon consumers, production 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 143 
 
 will be checked, as every turn of the screw enhancing 
 price checks demand. Lessen this, and the price of 
 labor must fall again, or workmen be thrown out of 
 employment. We admit that a rise of wages, so far 
 as wealthy consumers who do not produce anything 
 are concerned, would be real, for they could not affect 
 the advance, as they have nothing to sell; but such 
 persons are only a small portion of any community. 
 Besides, they would curtail their demands. Had they 
 nothing to part with the price of which they could 
 raise and so wreak their revenge, they would cut down 
 their purchases all the more quickly. Thus, we are 
 brought once more to the stubborn fact that an ad¬ 
 vance of wages not paid out of profits which the em¬ 
 ployer either does, or expects to make, is thrown off 
 upon the public, becomes an additional tax which 
 workmen in common with the rest of the community 
 are obliged to pay. 
 
 Let not our readers think we are opposed to the 
 working classes because we have taken such a sombre 
 view of their efforts to increase wages. Undoubtedly, 
 they often suffer, and many of their demands for in¬ 
 creased remuneration are probably just, but these 
 things have nothing to do with our inquiry. The 
 question is, Do they obtain what they desire by means 
 of strikes? can they get their dues in this way? In 
 showing how poorly they have succeeded, how im¬ 
 possible it is for them to get an advance, unless it 
 comes out of the profits of employers instead of be¬ 
 ing thrown off as a tax upon the public, we are not 
 in any way touching upon the justice of their claims. 
 We are merely showing how difficult, nay, impossible 
 
144 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 in many cases, it is to get an advance; not that it is 
 unjust and ought not be granted. 
 
 VVc are now in sight of another fact which work¬ 
 men have always forgotten, and are likely to forget 
 many times more before they learn the lesson it ought 
 to teach. The fact is this: by securing too great an 
 advance of wages, or rupturing the trade of an em¬ 
 ployer for too long a period, it is lost forever. The 
 Trade-Unions Commission examined this question in 
 their thorough and most creditable manner, but were 
 compelled to admit their inability to arrive “at any 
 very definite solution of the problem.” It cannot be 
 perfectly solved, for when production declines, it does 
 not follow that unionism has caused the result; as 
 Messrs. Hughes and Harrison have said, it may be 
 due to over-production or imprudent speculation, to a 
 glut of the home market, to the opening of new facil¬ 
 ities elsewhere, and the natural development of a new 
 competing market. It may be the result of increased 
 means of communication and transport, or to changes 
 in the money-market in the new competing district 
 or country. It may be due to great political causes, 
 like civil or foreign war, to the opening of new rail¬ 
 ways, to the formation of commercial treaties and 
 alliances, to “monetary panics” and “commercial 
 manias”; in a word, to a crowd of social, political, 
 and economic events. The decline of trade may 
 happen from several co-operating causes; when such 
 is the case, it is not fair to ascribe the decline to any 
 one thing. 
 
 Leaving, therefore, the results of the British inves¬ 
 tigation, we will note a few facts bearing upon this 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. I45 
 
 question which none can dispute. In a previous 
 chapter we showed how the Antwerp cigar-makers, 
 by their continued persistence in striking, destroyed 
 to a great extent the business upon which they de¬ 
 pended for a living. A large portion of the foreign 
 trade had been with Great Britain. The introduc¬ 
 tion of the trade there was owing to two causes ; 
 first, to the operation of trade-unions in Great Britain 
 whereby the wages of workmen were increased ; and 
 secondly, to the exorbitant profits expected by the 
 English manufacturer. Trade-unions in Great Britain 
 were a co-operating cause in driving the business 
 away from there in the beginning, while its return is 
 wholly due to the influence of the same organization 
 in Belgium, which by frequent and groundless strikes 
 has nearly ruined the cigar manufacture of the whole 
 country. 
 
 Another strike occurring in the State of Nevada, 
 if not so disastrous to so many people as the one 
 last mentioned, was born not less of ignorance and 
 fanaticism. In the silver mines of Grass Valley, 
 three hundred Cornish miners, who were receiving 
 four dollars a day, struck upon the introduction of 
 a new kind of blasting-powder which was found to 
 effect a considerable saving of labor. They insisted 
 upon following the Cornish system of mining; the 
 result was that the mines were closed forever. What 
 became of those Cornish miners, whose stubbornness 
 seemed to be their chief endowment, we are unable 
 to state. 
 
 In France, too, it is asserted “ that the work-people, 
 by striking for wages when they know that their em- 
 
146 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 ployers have a time-contract on hand, can force ruin 
 upon the latter, and that many contracts have been 
 rejected owing to the impossibility of working them 
 at a profit while the price of labor may be artificially 
 raised.” These contracts, it is asserted, pass into the 
 hands of foreign manufacturers, who have not yet 
 fallen under the control of their workmen: and the 
 trade of the country suffers in this way the most 
 serious detriment. 
 
 These instances explicitly prove how workmen put 
 away the bread from their own mouths and those of 
 their children, by permitting their greed for wages to 
 triumph over reason. It should be, and doubtless is, 
 the universal wish that workmen will seek to do the 
 best thing possible for themselves, but they must learn 
 the truth concerning the identity of their own and their 
 masters’ interests. If this is not believed, and the op¬ 
 posite principle practiced, of getting the highest wages 
 regardless of the interest of their employers, the work¬ 
 ing classes will sooner or later find themselves in com¬ 
 pany with those furnishing employment, shipwrecked. 
 This may not be the case with those trades which do 
 not compete, that are local, like house-building; but 
 excepting such occupations, it is possible to press 
 wages so high in some localities as to cause the ruin 
 of its business through competition. This is exceed- 
 ingly sharp wherever it can be introduced, and a slight 
 circumstance is sufficient to turn it away from one 
 place and give it to another. Workmen should con¬ 
 sider well this point, and remember that what they 
 have done in the past they may do again,—destroy 
 the trade of a city or country forever. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 *47 
 
 It is no wonder, especially in the old world, where 
 competition is so keen, and dependence upon foreign 
 markets so vital to the prosperity of the country, that 
 the unreasoning conduct of the laboring classes is 
 often looked upon with great solicitude as endanger¬ 
 ing the prosperity of employer and employed alike, 
 and consequently the nation itself. It is ignorance 
 which inspires the working classes to act contrary to 
 their own interests. If they were trying to inform 
 themselves upon what slender threads their future 
 employment and prosperity were hanging, the anxiety 
 which many now feel would diminish. Unhappily, 
 this is not often the case. Ignorance and prejudice 
 are enthroned in the bosom of the laborer, and argu¬ 
 ment proves of little avail. The American workman 
 does not yet realize that the higher the point to which 
 his wages are raised, the more is he exposed to the 
 certain effects of foreign competition. For, to raise 
 his wages is to cut down the dam shutting out the 
 overflow of foreign production. To be content with 
 a fair division of profits, to do good work and keep 
 production steady, is the surest guarantee for employ¬ 
 ment during the years to come. The prosperity of 
 the working-man is within his own achievement, but 
 there is danger of his making shipwreck of his oppor¬ 
 tunities, and sinking both his employer and himself by 
 his stubborn and inexcusable disregard of the many 
 lights which are set to warn him of the peril to which 
 he is constantly exposed. Nothing can more delight 
 the iron- and steel-workers of Great Britain, or the 
 woolen-manufacturers of Belgium, than to see the 
 laboring classes in the United States engaged in these 
 
148 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 industries forcing up the price of wages. It operates 
 quite as effectively in their favor as a reduction of the 
 tariff upon their products. The dearer American goods 
 arc made, the greater is the chance for foreign compe¬ 
 tition; and nothing is more illogical for workmen than 
 to demand higher wages on the one hand, and an in¬ 
 creased tariff on the other. If they want a higher 
 tariff, consent to a reduction of wages and they have 
 secured their end ; but recently, some classes of British 
 workmen, who have clamored most loudly for higher 
 wages, are demanding a tariff upon importations in 
 order to rescue the home market for themselves. This 
 latter demand is the clearest proof of what the ad¬ 
 vance of wages has brought to them. It has yielded 
 nothing, or rather, loss. True, wages have advanced, 
 but employment has been lost, so where is the gain ? 
 Such a pushing up of wages is contrary to all reason, 
 and the effect must end disastrously to the employed. 
 In America, the price of products must be kept down 
 if trade is to be retained, and workmen should be edu¬ 
 cated to see that their employment depends upon the 
 cheapest production possible. Fairly should they be 
 compensated, and likewise their employers for the use 
 of capital and skill, but it is equally certain that if the 
 greed of either workman or capitalist forces the price 
 of production too high for the consumer, foreign com¬ 
 petitors will apply a remedy, speedy and decisive. 
 
 Another aspect respecting strikes remains for con¬ 
 sideration,—a topic we would gladly omit, for it is 
 an unhealthy feature of unionism. It is the practice 
 of picketing, which consists in posting members of 
 the union at all the approaches to the works struck 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 149 
 
 against, for the purpose of observing and reporting 
 all workmen going or coming thither; and using 
 such influence as may be in their power to prevent 
 persons from accepting employment in place of the 
 strikers. 
 
 Trade-unions declare their policy is merely to repre¬ 
 sent the case of the union, using argument and per¬ 
 suasion only, and never resorting to violence, intimi¬ 
 dation, or coercion. There is no reason for ascribing 
 any other intention to unions; nor can any one deny 
 the legitimacy of this practice. Surely a workman, 
 however earnestly bent he may be in pursuing his 
 accustomed task, will not object to reasoning in regard 
 to the propriety or advantage of withdrawing from 
 work. So long as picketing is confined to reasonable 
 and peaceful methods, no law can, or ought to, be 
 enacted against the practice. For while the employer 
 may be still more crippled by the withdrawal of men 
 whom the pickets persuade to discontinue work, yet 
 if no contract regulates their employment, they have 
 a perfect right to leave at their discretion. Though 
 an employer may be executing a contract which can¬ 
 not be completed if a strike takes place, yet this is 
 not a thing workmen are in duty bound to consider. 
 So long as they fulfill their agreement with their em¬ 
 ployer, it is no concern of theirs what obligations he 
 may be under to other parties. They have the right 
 to leave when they please in the absence of any agree¬ 
 ment ; and if a part strike and persuade the rest to d° 
 likewise, the master has no just reason for complain¬ 
 ing. Very likely his passions may arise, and, unless 
 a very excellent Christian, he may lose his temper; 
 13 
 
TIIE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 150 
 
 but anger is one thing, and accusation another. 
 Though feeling never so provoked, he cannot blame 
 his men unless they violate their engagement with 
 him or incite others to do this. These remarks apply 
 solely to the right of urging all to strike by peaceful 
 methods, without any reference to the question whether 
 workmen arc justified in striking on account of the 
 lowness of wages, or any other cause. 
 
 Although no fault can be found with such means 
 for inducing laborers to strike, the practical difficulty 
 in the way of sticking to these gentle methods, as 
 proved by experience, is very great. These pickets, 
 be it remembered, are interested parties; having struck, 
 they desire every one else to follow their example; for 
 according to the number abstaining from labor is the 
 probability of a successful issue to the strike. The 
 picket very well knows that if any considerable body 
 of workmen continue at their posts, the strike will be 
 prolonged, and is more likely to end in failure. With 
 such sharp incentives to prevent their fellow-laborers 
 from continuing their occupation, it surprises no one 
 to see them step over the line and use force in accom¬ 
 plishing their end when argument fails. This they 
 have often done. No one, we think, will differ from 
 the Trade-Union Commissioners who has read the evi¬ 
 dence given before them, “that during the existence of 
 a strike workmen desirous to accept work are often sub¬ 
 jected through the agency of the pickets to molestation, 
 intimidation, and other modes of undue influence, and 
 in effect are prevented from obtaining employment.” A 
 most notable illustration has occurred recently. The 
 coal-miners of Pennsylvania waged warfare, not only 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 151 
 
 against their employers, but against those of their 
 own number who wished to work. Violence was used, 
 and several miners were killed in these lawless attempts 
 to prevent them from pursuing their avocation. The 
 newspapers for a time contained almost daily accounts 
 of the outrages committed. Several have been tried 
 and condemned, and doubtless more will suffer in like 
 manner from the plainest infractions of law. 
 
 If the members of a union are in harmony concern¬ 
 ing the utility of the strike, pickets are unnecessary. 
 Non-unionists should not be interfered with save by 
 arguments and reasonable methods. But we cannot 
 see the truth of the following remark expressed by the 
 Trade-Unions Commission: “ So far as relates to 
 workmen who are not members of the union, picket¬ 
 ing implies in principle an interference with the right 
 to dispose of their labor as they see fit, and is there¬ 
 fore without justification.” Do they contend that, when 
 one sees another doing a thing believed to be con¬ 
 trary to the interest of both, neither has a right to say 
 anything about the matter ? This is a very extreme 
 view to take. Suppose A should advise B how he could 
 make greater profits in his business, would the latter 
 regard such a suggestion as an interference ? B is 
 not bound to follow the advice. Daily, hourly, men 
 are advising one another not to do thus or so ; we 
 have never heard before that, in so doing, a right is 
 violated. So long as the advised is left to act freely 
 as before, how is he interfered with in the prosecu¬ 
 tion of his business ? Advice is all that pickets are 
 expected to give, and the reason why they give it is, 
 because they deem the interest of those advised to be 
 
152 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 the same as their own. Certainly they have a better 
 ground for advising with their fellow-workmen than 
 most persons have who dole out wisdom daily to 
 others. If this be true, the next conclusion of the 
 Commission referred to is equally unsound, namely, 
 picketing, “ so far as it relates to the employer, is 
 a violation of his right of free resort to the labor mar¬ 
 ket for the supply of such labor as he requires.” For, 
 although the laborer be drawn off from his work, his 
 employer has just as clear a right to go after him as 
 he ever had. The fact of all withdrawing does not 
 affect the freedom of the labor market. If men are 
 taken out and kept out by force, then picketing does 
 interfere with the free disposal of labor, as well as 
 abridge the freedom of the market for employers. It 
 is possible that the Commission meant by the term 
 picketing, not what trade-unions mean by it, but what 
 it actually is, as commonly practiced. If this latter 
 idea is the one intended to be conveyed by the term, 
 we see no flaw in the conclusion they reached. 
 
 Messrs. Hughes and Harrison, in their defense of the 
 system, maintained that it has its counterpart in the 
 practices of the masters. They are accused of having 
 associations with rules similar to those of the unions 
 and quite as coercive. They say: “The practice of 
 sending round lists of workmen who are on strike, or 
 who have been discharged, appears to be quite uni¬ 
 versal. Indeed, in many instances, it seems the sole 
 cause of the association.” We admit the truth of the 
 analogy, provided that force, coercion, threats, and 
 the like rude methods are left out of reckoning. We 
 have contended that the practice was justifiable so 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 153 
 
 long as argument and gentle measures were used; 
 when harsher ones are employed, by whatever class, 
 they are to be condemned. Freedom to work is a 
 right which no one can justly take away, and if work¬ 
 men who have struck endeavor to persuade others to 
 follow, it is just as harsh a thing towards their em¬ 
 ployers as for them to retaliate by persuading other 
 employers not to engage those who, either in the be¬ 
 ginning or afterwards, have been induced to strike. 
 
 This leads directly to the subject of lockouts, which 
 are supposed to be the correlative of strikes. Mr. 
 Thornton has remarked that “ no lockout has ever 
 taken place without being accompanied by a tremen¬ 
 dous outcry from the locked-out and their partisans 
 against the tyrannous atrocity, cruelty, and injustice 
 of withholding from the poor the work by which alone 
 they live, and of withholding it equally from the 
 unoffending and offending. Lockouts are most in¬ 
 variably replies to strikes, and, even if entirely un¬ 
 provoked, they would still be the exact correlatives 
 of strikes, and in so far as the latter are justifiable 
 would be equally justifiable on precisely the same 
 grounds. But a lockout is never initiative, it is always 
 retaliatory; never the first step in an industrial quar¬ 
 rel, always the answer to an actual or a threatened 
 strike.” To us the truth of this reasoning is not 
 so apparent. An iron-master employing a thousand 
 hands suddenly finds one-half of them striking for 
 higher wages. He thinks that, if the other half are 
 permitted to work, they will furnish funds to those 
 not engaged, and so the strike will be prolonged. 
 We admit that so far as the employer has reason to 
 13* 
 
*54 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 believe that those who continue to labor will furnish 
 aid and comfort to the idlers, he is justified in taking 
 work away from them. Unionists who complain of 
 this proceeding certainly do so without cause, for it is 
 little less than absurd to suppose that an employer 
 who regrets the attitude assumed by his workmen in 
 striking, will furnish the means to prolong such a 
 state of things, as he would do by furnishing work to 
 any who gave their income to the strikers. And this 
 remark is just as true of all shops whose members use 
 their funds to support those out on a strike. The fact 
 is, those who have struck, and those who are support¬ 
 ing them, are partners in the same affair, and hence 
 there is no injustice in refusing work to them all. 
 This is clear enough. But what shall be said of those 
 who desire to continue for the sake of supporting 
 themselves and their families? Should they be com¬ 
 pelled to suffer for the sins of the rest? There is no 
 justification for this vicarious punishment. Doubtless, 
 masters have converted many to unionism by such 
 harsh treatment. One thing appears in this worse than 
 Babylonish confusion, namely: masters ought to pro¬ 
 cure, if possible, men who are either all unionists or 
 non-unionists, and not attempt to mix oil with water 
 in the same jug. Masters could then deal with their 
 men more intelligently ; less suffering would be ex¬ 
 perienced by the innocent and unoffending. It is not 
 practicable to observe it in those places where union¬ 
 ists greatly outnumber other workmen ; but whenever 
 it is possible for non-unionists to unite and form the 
 majority in a shop or factory, this is evidently the 
 best thing for them; though the remark does not 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 155 
 
 hold as to unionists. For, where they constitute a 
 majority sufficiently large to control a shop and make 
 a strike effectual in stopping work, they harass non- 
 unionists far more than if they were peacefully en¬ 
 gaged in some position where they did not fear the 
 action of unions. Lockouts are becoming more fre¬ 
 quent as unionism grows in desperation, and non- 
 unionists will find it for their interest to unite and 
 institute some policy of their own, and thus mitigate, 
 if not escape, the terrible effects of lockouts to them¬ 
 selves. 
 
 Much has been said of the practice among masters 
 of ostracizing obnoxious unionists, and Messrs. Hughes 
 and Harrison have declared that “ persons may well 
 doubt whether there has been anything in the prac¬ 
 tices of unions shown to be so preposterously one¬ 
 sided as a combination of masters pledged to refuse 
 employment to workmen who combine. The inherent 
 injustice of the attempt comes out when we suppose 
 the converse case of a unionist, before engaging with 
 an employer, requiring him to sign a document that 
 he would not enter into any association.” We cannot 
 see the injustice of a workman making this demand 
 before stipulating for employment whenever he fears 
 the employer might do so and use the power which 
 such a combination would give him to reduce wages, 
 or in any other way injure the laborer’s prospects or 
 gains. On the other hand, we do not see the injustice 
 of refusing to hire workmen who are unionists when 
 the employer believes they will annoy him, or strike 
 for higher wages, or in any way injure his business. 
 Neither party is to be blamed for observing precau- 
 
156 
 
 TIIE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 tions before making an agreement. Employers are 
 neither fond of strikers, nor sure of their ability to 
 pay higher wages; and workmen are just as sure they 
 will not work for less; so both parties make all the 
 stipulations necessary to guard against these contin¬ 
 gencies. Neither are to be blamed for doing these 
 things, but rather respected and looked upon as exer¬ 
 cising a degree of caution which would prevent many 
 a misfortune, were it applied more generally. No¬ 
 where have we observed such coercive measures on 
 the part of masters towards unionists as the latter 
 have practiced upon their fellow-workmen who have 
 not seen the expediency of joining these associations. 
 The instances are quite numerous in which unionists 
 have resorted to severe force to carry their measures. 
 In the neighborhood of Sheffield and Manchester, 
 England, “crime and outrage have been the habitual 
 methods of enforcing the laws of the union.” Rat¬ 
 tening, which consists in taking away the poor work¬ 
 man’s tools, so as to prevent him from earning a living 
 until he has obeyed the orders of the union, is one of 
 the mildest ways of enforcing its demands. One of 
 the witnesses before the Trade-Unions Commission 
 declared that unionists regarded workmen who stand 
 aloof from the society with a feeling akin to that which 
 defenders of their country have towards a citizen who 
 deserts to the invaders for the sake of better pay. 
 Well may the Commissioners say: “ Here is manifest, 
 in the testimony of their friends, an utter perversion 
 of all sense of law and duty.” 
 
 It is true that the Manchester and Sheffield outrages 
 have not been repeated in Great Britain. Had they 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 157 
 
 been, trade-unions there would have fared far worse 
 than they have. Those terrible occurrences were 
 not sudden outbreaks of thoughtless men, but were 
 instigated and sanctioned by the several unions within 
 the districts in which they were respectively com¬ 
 mitted. But if not occurring in great manufacturing 
 districts, they have happened elsewhere, although not 
 resulting in so great a destruction to life and property. 
 At Pittsburg, in 1874, a strike broke out lasting sev¬ 
 eral months, and costing the lives of two or three non- 
 unionists who persisted, forsooth, in performing their 
 lawful and regular tasks. 
 
 That trade-unions have widened the feeling of en¬ 
 mity between the laboring classes and their employers 
 is clear enough to all. We are not aware that they 
 deny this. It is not regarded as a fault by them, but 
 rather as evidence of a better knowledge of their re¬ 
 lations. The workman cannot be persuaded that his 
 interest is identified with that of his employer, but 
 quite the reverse; and so the spirit of antagonism 
 is rising in proportion to the power of the unions to 
 enforce their demands. Everywhere is this separation 
 manifest, and if the breach be not filled, serious results 
 will follow. 
 
 Workmen, if they like, can maintain the belief that 
 their own and their masters’ interests are different, and 
 still remain friendly. Two merchants are opposed to 
 each other in business, but they are not envious. 
 Granted that workmen, being weaker, are at the mercy, 
 to some extent, of their employers; let them seek to cul¬ 
 tivate a spirit of friendship, and at the same time strive 
 to improve their condition. The verdict of the Trade- 
 
158 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 Union Commissioners, that workmen look rather to 
 the approval of their unions than to that of their em¬ 
 ployers, and are less anxious than of yore to stand well 
 with the latter, is sadly true of the laboring classes in 
 nearly all countries, unless we except Switzerland. 
 This was affirmed by Lord Brabazon of the laboring 
 classes in France. The same may be said of them in 
 Belgium, Germany, Denmark, and Spain. 
 
 It may be asked: What if this enmity does exist, 
 how is either class seriously affected ? 
 
 In the first place, by preferring the union for a 
 standard, instead of the master, poorer work is per¬ 
 formed, because this institution has ordained rules 
 which have that effect, and purposely so. Thus we 
 have seen how all are brought down to a dead level 
 in respect to quality and amount of work done, to the 
 evident detriment of those workmen possessing greater 
 skill. One who exhibits more than ordinary ability 
 or industry is regarded with jealousy, and in some 
 societies would be fined for doing more than an aver¬ 
 age day’s work, even though he were acknowledged 
 to be a better workman. If the fine were not paid he 
 would be put in the black list and excluded from the 
 society. Such a rule is rigorous and unjust in the 
 extreme. Happily, it does not exist in all unions. 
 Yet some kind of defense can be given for it. It is 
 maintained that men, when permitted to labor freely, 
 will often overtask their energies. This rule, which is 
 to prevent what is termed chasing, had its origin, ac¬ 
 cording to Thomas Conolly, a member of the Society 
 of Operative Stone-Masons, in this way: formerly, 
 more than at present, “ there was a practice amongst 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 159 
 
 the employers of this kind: if one of them met a 
 strong and very skillful man (it is very exceptional in 
 the trade to get those two qualities combined, in other 
 words it is not often that you can find men who are 
 both strong and skillful), desiring to knock as much 
 labor out of his man as he could for his money, he 
 would give him sixpence a day more, and that man 
 would always keep at the top of his speed and drive the 
 other men on, while they were endeavoring to do as 
 much work as they could, because nobody likes to be 
 left behind.” 
 
 In the second place, the public suffer from the 
 diminution in skill, for they always need the best 
 efforts of man. It is a sad thing for all that unionism 
 is throwing such a blight upon the genius of the 
 working class. But it must be admitted that, as the 
 better workmen themselves are the greatest sufferers, 
 if they agree to these conditions whereby their genius 
 is fettered no one can complain of the exercise of in¬ 
 justice, although all ought to lament the fact. 
 
 The Trade-Unions Commission touched upon an¬ 
 other point which ought not to be passed over with¬ 
 out comment. We will state it substantially in the 
 form presented by them. 
 
 It is said that the better workmen are losing, 
 under the influence of trade-unions, the self-reliance 
 and independence by which they used to be distin¬ 
 guished. The desire of the workman to excel, to do 
 the best in his power to give satisfaction to his em¬ 
 ployer, to improve himself, and if possible to rise in 
 the world, is damped by the thralldom in which he is 
 held to the rules of the union, and by the systematic 
 
160 THE conflict between 
 
 disapproval on the part of his fellow-unionists of all 
 efforts to go beyond that average level of exertion 
 which it is the aim of the unions to maintain. 
 
 To this it is replied on the part of the unions, their 
 real tendency, considered in a wider and more equi¬ 
 table view, is to raise, not depress, the character of 
 the workman, by making him feel that he is not an 
 insulated agent, subject to oppression, or at all events 
 to accidents over which he can exercise no control, 
 but a member of a strong, united body, capable at 
 once of defending his rights and of insuring him a 
 resource in case of temporary need. Many of the 
 better unions have a code of rules, agreed to between 
 employer and workman, and this practice is held to 
 be a good one as tending to diminish, and usually 
 to extinguish, the occurrence of strikes, and to es¬ 
 tablish a spirit of co-operation between masters and 
 workmen. 
 
 This is the workman’s side of the question, nor is 
 the view incorrect. Sufficient evidence can be adduced 
 in proof of its truth. Besides, there is something noble 
 in the willingness to suffer displayed by the better 
 workmen, in order that the condition of the greater 
 number may be improved. The point towards which 
 unions should steer is to create harmony of interest 
 between laborers possessing greater, and those possess¬ 
 ing lesser, skill, that both may fare equally well with 
 the employer; but it is too much to expect that such 
 an adjustment of relations can be easily made. It is 
 a work of time, and not till the proper period for ac¬ 
 complishing this purpose has elapsed should unions 
 be judged too harshly for having a defective rule. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 161 
 
 Undoubtedly, the antagonism existing between the 
 two classes prevents a settlement of their differences 
 by the peaceful method of arbitration. This is to the 
 injury of both. Enmity and prejudice ought not to 
 blind the eye and prevent the laborer from making 
 the best bargain he can, or from coolly surveying 
 his real position. Again and again has his bitterness 
 led him rashly to strike for higher wages without the 
 slightest reason; when, by putting confidence in em¬ 
 ployers and stopping to consider what was the real 
 condition of trade, strikes might have been averted. 
 The Pittsburg strike, which lasted so long and ended 
 so disastrously for the workmen, would not have hap¬ 
 pened if the slightest attention had been given to the 
 real condition of trade. So long as passion instead 
 of reason governs, the repetition of such disgraceful 
 and lamentable scenes may be expected. 
 
 Two other features of unionism deserve brief men¬ 
 tion. One function of trade-unions is to equalize the 
 supply of labor. This end is easily effected. A secre¬ 
 tary of one of the unions thus explains the method : 
 “ When the monthly returns, on or about the sixth of 
 each month, come into my hands, I run down the 
 reports to find where men are wanted, and where men 
 are out of employment. I then take the earliest op¬ 
 portunity possible of writing to the secretaries in the 
 towns where men are out of employment, to tell them 
 where men are wanted; and we make a practice of 
 paying the railway or steamboat fare of the men that 
 are out of employment, when we send them to places 
 where men are wanted.” This is a most admirable 
 function for the organization to perform, and cannot 
 
62 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 be too highly commended, for it is a benefit to both 
 workman and employer. 
 
 The other feature of unionism is that it seeks to 
 solve the difficulty of getting work for its members by 
 ei tion rh a w und solution of the question, 
 li the pri( e of labor is below living rates, go to other 
 countries where it is better, or at least where land can 
 be easily obtained upon which workmen and their 
 fiunilu ubsist In Great Britain emigration is 
 
 becoming more popular, and we rejoice that at last 
 she has found how much improved will be the condi¬ 
 tion of all by pouring off her surplus population upon 
 the many lands where toilers are few. 
 
 Perhaps our readers will think we have taken a 
 very gloomy view of trade-unions and would rather 
 see them die than live. We are not ready to pro¬ 
 nounce this conclusion yet. There are great evils 
 connected with them ; this we have clearly shown. 
 Some of the practices of these bodies are harsh and 
 painful in the extreme. Many of their rules are 
 founded upQn narrow and short-sighted considerations, 
 and arc clearly at war with the main principles for 
 which the society was founded. Evidently all work¬ 
 men who are not members, and they are numerous, 
 are the enemies of trade-unions and receive but little 
 mercy. There is no fraternity between the two classes. 
 All these things, and more which might be added, 
 cannot be denied. On the other hand, it must be 
 remembered that these organizations are compara¬ 
 tively new, and are in a crude state. It is an experi¬ 
 ment to get upon a level plane with the capitalist 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 163 
 
 Nor do we blink the fact that the necessity exists for 
 some sort of an organization, in some countries at 
 least, to enable workmen to get their just dues. That 
 the rightful claims of labor have been opposed in the 
 years and ages past cannot be denied. The groans 
 of the toiling millions have been long and terrible. 
 Helpless as they have generally been, and powerless 
 to secure better terms from their employers, a remedy 
 has been found in unionism. We do not condemn 
 unionists for the main purpose which has brought 
 them together: they are right in combining; what we 
 find fault with, is the manner in which they proceed. 
 But we remember, also, that the society is young, and 
 it cannot be expected that its rules will be perfect and 
 work smoothly in the beginning. Whenever the 
 rules are found to be defective, they will be amended 
 or repealed. For example, the rule in respect to 
 chasing is falling into disuse, and there is manifest a 
 growing disposition to create such rules as will admit 
 of greater freedom in allowing each man to do his best. 
 
 So in regard to picketing, unions are setting their 
 faces against it; and the same may be said of the 
 rule concerning apprentices. As unions grow stronger 
 there is a greater tendency to avoid strikes. This latter 
 is a point of the utmost importance, for strikes are 
 looked upon as the worst evil growing out of union¬ 
 ism. That such is the fact in England has been 
 proved by most elaborate inquiry.* If not so true of 
 
 * Testimony of W. Allan, Secretary of the Amalgamated Society of 
 Engineers, before the Trade-Unions Commission of Great Britain, in 
 1867: 
 
 Q. Have you found by experience that the advance in wealth and 
 
164 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 unions in the United States, it is because they are in a 
 crude state, and have not obtained perfect control over 
 
 strength of your society has tended to make strikes in the trade more 
 frequent, or the reverse?—Quite the reverse. 
 
 Q. Have you found, for instance, taking the last fifteen years, that 
 there have been more trade disputes and more cases of strike and lock¬ 
 out than there had been in previous periods of fifteen years, or fewer? 
 — Fewer. 
 
 Q. Has the executive or central council, or governing body of the 
 Society, in your opinion, done anything to prevent disputes from break¬ 
 ing into an actual strike ?—The executive council does all it possibly 
 can to prevent any strike, and where they have time or opportunity, 
 generally, as I slated here the other day, they cause a deputation of the 
 workmen to wait on their employers to represent their grievances, and 
 then the council gives advice afterwards. We endeavor at all times to 
 prevent strikes. It is the very last thing we would think of encour- 
 aging. 
 
 Q. Do you find that the possession of very large funds, and the fact 
 that they belong to a very j>owerful organization, such as your society 
 is, tends generally to make the members of your society disposed to 
 enter into such a dispute, or the contrary ? Iam not asking now with 
 regard to the council, but the members.—I should say that the mem¬ 
 bers generally are decidedly opposed to strikes, and that the fact of 
 our having a large accumulated fund tends to encourage that feeling 
 amongst them. They wish to conserve what they have got: as I have 
 heard it put here, the man who has not got a shilling in his pocket has 
 not much to be afraid of, but with a large fund such as we possess, we 
 are led to be exceedingly careful not to expend it wastefully, and we 
 believe that all strikes are a complete waste of money, not only in re¬ 
 lation to the workmen, but also to the employers. 
 
 Q. Have you found by experience that your society has done any¬ 
 thing to promote the same feeling or the same practice in other trade 
 societies?—Many of the societies (the Amalgamated Carpenters’ and 
 others I could mention) have taken in fact our constitution and our 
 mode of management as their guide. 
 
 Q. Has your society in recent limes ever interfered in trade ques¬ 
 tions with a view of bringing about a settlement?—Yes. 
 
 Q. lias it ever interfered to put a stop to, or dissuade, or discoun- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 165 
 
 their members. As they grow in intelligence, and 
 learn how clearly related they are to the capitalist, 
 they will become allies in the great task of produc¬ 
 tion. But time must be given these organizations to 
 fulfill their mission. Painful and costly are many of 
 their acts and methods, nor do we hope for immediate 
 improvement. Yet every impolitic and unjust meas¬ 
 ure will eventually have an end, as surely as the sun 
 dispels the darkness of night. 
 
 tenance, a threatened strike or ail actual strike?—Decidedly; we have 
 recommended that no strike should take place, at least in twenty cases 
 in as many months. 
 
166 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 VI. 
 
 CO-OPERATION. 
 
 Unionism is not the only method for increasing 
 wages. Co-operation is another, and by no means an 
 insignificant one. Though less noisy than unionists, 
 co-operators have much to show from their experi¬ 
 ments. Until now, however successful unionism has 
 been, co-opcration has accomplished far more. 
 
 Fewer of these organizations exist in the United 
 States than in European countries ; not because they 
 are less suited to our soil, but for the reason that, labor 
 being more highly paid, there is less necessity for cre¬ 
 ating them. England, France, and Germany, have 
 each been successful in propagating three forms of 
 co-operation : the first, societies of distribution; the 
 second, those of production ; while the success of Ger¬ 
 many has consisted in instituting societies of credit 
 whose functions are to open accounts of credit with 
 their members and furnish them loans. A short de¬ 
 scription of each kind is all that need be given in this 
 place. 
 
 Distributive co operation may be said to have origi¬ 
 nated in England a generation before the birth of the 
 Rochdale Pioneers, which was organized about thirty 
 years ago. This is the oldest co-operative society ex- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 167 
 
 isting in Great Britain, and was the first well consid¬ 
 ered and successful effort. Its history has been told 
 in a most attractive way by Mr. Thornton in his work 
 “On Labor.” The rise of this society was like the 
 growth of a mustard-seed. In the beginning, twenty- 
 eight flannel-weavers, disgusted with the poor quality 
 and outrageous price of the provisions they were in 
 the habit of buying, subscribed two and three pence 
 a week towards making up a sum of twenty-eight 
 pounds, which they spent in purchasing, at wholesale 
 prices, in Manchester, flour, sugar, butter and oatmeal. 
 From this common stock, each took what he wanted at 
 the current prices, paying in cash ; and when the whole 
 amount had beeh sold, they were surprised to find that 
 so much had been made by the operation. They re¬ 
 peated the experiment. They purchased in larger 
 quantities and added to their subscribers. The em¬ 
 bryo association was laughed at in the beginning, but 
 it continued to grow, and after a short time it was 
 found that a room was necessary to hold the goods 
 purchased. A small one was hired, and it was ar¬ 
 ranged that one of their number should act as sales¬ 
 man for a few hours during two evenings in the week. 
 In 1845, the second year of the society, the number 
 of subscribers had increased from twenty-eight to 
 seventy-four, and the capital was one hundred and 
 eighty-one pounds, upon which a net benefit of thirty- 
 two pounds had accrued. The two following years 
 they divided eighty pounds and seventy-seven pounds; 
 and they have gone on increasing at a wonderful rate 
 ever since. In 1847, linen and woolen drapery was 
 added to the original grocery and chandlery business; 
 
168 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 in 1850, a butcher’s shop was grafted on; shortly after, 
 a slaughter-house; in 1852, shoemaking.and tailoring 
 were begun. A single glance at the profits tells the 
 story of progress. We have not space for all the 
 figures ; we will simply show what they were at the 
 end of each period of five years. The society was 
 started in 1844, arxl the net profits run as follows: 
 
 1845. 
 
 . £22 
 
 1850. 
 
 . ^880 
 
 1846. 
 
 . 80 
 
 ■855. 
 
 
 1847. 
 
 . 77 
 
 i860. 
 
 .* 5 » 9<>6 
 
 1848...*. 
 
 . **7 
 
 1865. 
 
 .25,156 
 
 1849. 
 
 . 561 
 
 1867.. 
 
 
 The causes of their success are very clearly seen. 
 They bought at wholesale, and always paid in cash, 
 thus getting the largest discounts. They never sold 
 on credit, and consequently had no bad debts. Having 
 a large number of shareholders, they were assured of 
 plenty of customers, and were under no necessity of 
 spending a penny to make themselves known in order 
 to obtain trade. The expenses of management were 
 small, not exceeding two per cent, of the business 
 done. For attracting outsiders, their equitable dis¬ 
 tribution of profits was a device far more efficacious 
 than a showy front or advertising. 
 
 When any one makes a purchase, be receives a tin 
 ticket, whether a member of the association or- not, 
 denoting the sum he has paid. At the end of every 
 quarter, when profits are declared, there is a deduction 
 of five per cent, per annum for interest on the capital, 
 another deduction of two and one-half per cent as an 
 education fund is taken out, and the balance is divided 
 among the holders of the tickets. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 169 
 
 There are some very decided benefits arising from 
 this form of co-operation. First, one’s money goes 
 farther than anywhere else ; secondly, the stores give 
 the best possible security to the purchaser that what 
 he buys will be of the best quality, since it is the same 
 as the owners of the concern purchase for themselves. 
 Upon these points Mr. Holyoake* has justly said: 
 “The whole atmosphere of a store is honest. In that 
 market there is no distrust and no deception—no 
 adulteration and no second prices. Buyer and seller 
 meet as friends. There is no overreaching on the 
 one side, and no suspicion on the other.” 
 
 Besides supplanting dearer and poorer shops, co¬ 
 operative stores stimulate to self-amendment and pro¬ 
 mote prudence. The poorer class, considering the 
 means they have, are not infrequently quite as waste¬ 
 ful and extravagant as others; but these societies 
 have a most beneficial effect in the way of elevating 
 all concerned, and making them prudent and more 
 self-reliant men.f 
 
 * “Self-Help,” pp. 38-9. He also says: “They have no interest 
 in chicanery. Their sole duty is to give fair measure, full weight, 
 and pure quality, to men who never knew before what it was to 
 have a wholesome meal, whose shoes let in water a month too soon, 
 whose waistcoat shone with devil’s dust, and whose wives wore calico 
 that would not wash. These men now buy in the market like million¬ 
 aires, and, as far as pureness of food goes, live like lords. They make 
 their own shoes, sew their^own garments, and grind their own corn. 
 They buy the purest sugar and the best tea, and grind their own coffee. 
 They slaughter their own cattle, and the finest beasts of the land 
 waddle down the streets of Rochdale, for the consumption of flannel- 
 weavers and cobblers.” 
 
 t An article by Professor Fawcett upon “ The Position and Prospects 
 
170 
 
 THE COXFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 The progress made by these societies, according to 
 the “Sixth Report of the Annual Co-operative Con¬ 
 gress,” held in 1874, is most satisfactory. Returns to 
 the Register showed that seven hundred and forty- 
 eight retail stores were in operation in England and 
 Wales, numbering three hundred thousand nine hun¬ 
 dred and twenty-eight members, and having a share 
 capital of $13,928,885. This does not include all, for 
 sixty-seven societies made no returns, while no statis¬ 
 tics are given for Scotland. Besides, there are a large 
 number of wholesale stores having a million dollars 
 capital, and doing a yearly business of $8,184,765, 
 while the business of similar associations in Scotland 
 amounted to $1,904,365 more. To these societies 
 should be added an industrial bank and a co-oper¬ 
 ative insurance company. 
 
 Passing from distributive to productive co-operation, 
 we shall consider what has been done on French soil, 
 although great progress has attended English enter¬ 
 prises of this character. During the revolutionary ex¬ 
 citement of 1848 the constituent assembly of France 
 voted three million francs to these societies, which 
 was divided among fifty-six of them. This proved 
 anything but a blessing, for not long after receiving this 
 subvention, forty-two associations collapsed. Among 
 those founded at that time was the Association Rem- 
 quet, so called after the name of its founder. Pre- 
 
 of Co-operation,” in the February number of the Fortnightly Review , 
 1874, is worth reading in this connection. Also one by Thomas 
 Hughes upon “The Working Classes of Europe,* in the International 
 Review , March, 1874. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 \yi 
 
 vious to this he had been employed in a printing 
 establishment, which was obliged to suspend. Rem- 
 quet thereupon proposed to his fellow-workmen to 
 unite their labors and continue business on their own 
 account. Fifteen consented, and, obtaining a loan of 
 eighty thousand francs from the state to serve as cap¬ 
 ital, they formed a society with Remquet at its head, 
 the regulations fixing the rate of wages for all kinds 
 of work, and providing for the gradual formation of 
 a working capital by reserving one-fourth part of every 
 man’s wages. This capital was to pay no dividends nor 
 interest during the ten years for which the society was 
 intended to last, but at the end of that term was to be 
 divided among all the associates in the ratio of their 
 contributions, that is to say, in the exact proportion 
 of the work each had done. When ten years had 
 expired, the net capital remaining after repayment of 
 the government loan amounted to one hundred and 
 fifty-five thousand francs, more than ten thousand 
 francs for each member. The lowest sum received 
 by any one was seven thousand francs; the highest 
 eighteen thousand. 
 
 Another society formed at this period was made 
 up of masons, whose success is worth mentioning. 
 Seventeen united in the beginning, having a capital of 
 three hundred and sixty-two francs, or seventy-two 
 dollars and forty cents. In 1867 the membership had 
 increased to eighty-four,—two being managers, one an 
 assistant-manager; of the remaining eighty-one, two- 
 thirds labor with the hod and trowel, and the rest are 
 superintendents and distributors of work, or simply 
 holders of capital. The society employs from two hun- 
 
172 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 died to three hundred workmen, called auxiliaries, but 
 they have no share in the profits. They were permitted 
 to do so for a time, provided they would share any loss 
 accruing, but it was found necessary to discontinue the 
 system, owing to the impossibility of reconciling them 
 to a participation in losses. The number of workmen 
 employed in 1867 was increased, for the association 
 undertook the construction of a railway station in 
 Paris costing two million francs. The power to ex¬ 
 ecute such a contract stamps the character of the 
 society. According to Villiaume, previously to be¬ 
 coming associated these masons were poorly clad in 
 vest and blouse, because they never had sixty francs 
 with which to purchase a frock-coat, but now most of 
 them are as well dressed as the bourgeois, and often 
 in better taste. 
 
 Mr. J hornton says the most ancient co-operative 
 society in existence is that of the jewelers, formed in 
 Pans, in 1831, by eight workmen, with a capital of 
 no more than two hundred francs. A government 
 loan of twenty-four thousand francs enabled them, 
 in 1849, to extend their business, which, in 1858, 
 amounted to one hundred and forty thousand francs. 
 
 In 1867 there were thirty-nine co-operative asso¬ 
 ciations engaged in production in Paris, and a very 
 large number in the provinces. Three great societies 
 flourish in Lyons, —one the weavers, numbering 
 eighteen hundred members; while another, the ribbon- 
 manufacturers, counts a membership of twelve hun¬ 
 dred, and possesses a capital of one million two hun¬ 
 dred thousand francs. The society having the most 
 Pathetic history is that of the piano-manufacturers, 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 *73 
 
 founded at Paris, in 1849, by fourteen workmen, hav¬ 
 ing a capital of two hundred and twenty-nine francs 
 fifty centimes (forty-five dollars and ninety cents). It 
 never received any aid from the state, but struggled 
 on through many difficulties, and now possesses a cap¬ 
 ital of two hundred thousand francs, and is doing an 
 annual business of equal amount. 
 
 More instances might be added respecting the suc¬ 
 cessful working of these institutions, but enough have 
 been given to prove the practicability of co-operation 
 in production as well as in distribution. 
 
 In 1872 fifty productive associations were in oper¬ 
 ation in the United Kingdom of Great Britain. So 
 profitable have these become, and so many trials have 
 they successfully endured, they are no longer regarded 
 as experiments. 
 
 The most prosperous co-operative productive asso¬ 
 ciation in the United States is an iron-foundry estab¬ 
 lished at Troy, New York. It was begun in May, 
 1866, with a capital of fifteen thousand dollars. A 
 charter was procured fixing two thousand as the 
 number of shares, and their value at one hundred dol¬ 
 lars each. No member could have more than fifty 
 shares, nor less than one. Each member was entitled 
 to a vote irrespective of the number of shares held. 
 Thirty-two men united in forming the association, but 
 this number has been increasing every year. A divi¬ 
 dend of ten per cent, on the stock was declared the 
 first year, and about thirty per cent, more was paid 
 on labor. The second year the dividends on stock 
 and labor reached eighty-nine per cent., and they have 
 been very large ever since. 
 
 *5 
 
1 74 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 Great importance is attached to the employment 
 only of a limited number of men. The fewer the 
 number, the greater are the chances of success. Be¬ 
 sides, by limiting the number of stockholders, constant 
 work at regular wages is assured. In busy seasons 
 additional help can be employed. 
 
 The profits of the establishment have not been paid 
 out to the members; additional stock has been issued 
 instead, and the money retained to enlarge the busi¬ 
 ness. When a member’s stock has accumulated until 
 owning more than fifty shares as allowed by law, the 
 surplus has been bought in and issued to new mem¬ 
 bers. In this way the increased capital has given em- 
 plbyment to more men, and the business has been 
 safely and naturally enlarged. 
 
 Excellent discipline, also, is enforced. Rules are 
 made to prevent refusal to perform any work demanded 
 by the foreman, or an evasion of it, as well as to guard 
 against drunkenness, waste, and insubordination. A 
 stockholder can be dismissed at any moment, what¬ 
 ever may be the number of shares owned by him, and 
 there are no means of redress. The consequence of 
 such strict rules is that every man is put on his good 
 behavior. 
 
 For the last two years the business in which the 
 association is engaged has been very dull; neverthe¬ 
 less, it has paid expenses and furnished work during 
 eleven months of the year to its members. This, 
 surely, is a good showing, considering the condition 
 of business, since many iron-foundries are not running 
 more than eight or nine months in the year. At pres¬ 
 ent, about one hundred men are employed, their wages 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 175 
 
 averaging four dollars per day. Sixty are stockhold¬ 
 ers, every one of this number hawing acquired consid¬ 
 erable property since the creation of the organization. 
 
 The capital stock has been increased from time to 
 time until the actual amount has rolled up to one 
 hundred thousand dollars. There are two foundries, 
 each having a capacity to employ thirty men, besides 
 store-houses, mounting shops, and other buildings and 
 property. No one can question the success of this 
 experiment/or have any fears concerning its future. 
 
 The third form of co-operation relates to the estab¬ 
 lishment of co-operative banks, the purpose of which 
 is to furnish means to those who are desirous of pro¬ 
 ducing on their own account. As this number con¬ 
 stitute a very large class in Germany, the furnishing 
 of capital to them is a thing of far greater importance 
 than in any other country. Not that concentration 
 of the leading branches of industry in a few hands is 
 desirable. Great industrial establishments have bene¬ 
 fited mankind by multiplying and cheapening produc¬ 
 tion, but they have crushed individual producers and 
 compelled them to go into shops and factories like 
 other workmen. In Germany, the noblest energies 
 have been employed to keep this class alive, the prin¬ 
 cipal difficulty being to furnish them with capital. 
 Co-operative banks were founded to effect this pur¬ 
 pose; their success no one will question. 
 
 These institutions have been so often described as 
 to render it quite unnecessary to lay the plan before 
 our readers. Mr. Villard read a paper before the 
 American Social Science Association in 1869 describ¬ 
 ing their origin and working, while an article by 
 
176 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 Thomas Hughes, entitled, “The Working Classes of 
 Europe,” published in the International Review , March, 
 1874, carries authentic information concerning them 
 down to a recent date. The report furnished by Mr. 
 Morricr to the British government in 1867 enters into 
 an elaborate investigation of the origin and progress 
 of these institutions, and is accompanied with a trans¬ 
 lation of the law authorizing their creation. From 
 these sources complete information can be obtained 
 concerning co-operative banks whenever the time 
 shall come for creating them in the United States. 
 
 The chief objection to co-operation as usually car¬ 
 ried on is, that capital is too completely divorced from 
 labor. Any scheme of production seeking to get on 
 without a fair amount of capital to pay for the raw 
 product and other things is defective. Could this be 
 obtained according to the requirements of business, 
 co-operation would be able to make far more headway 
 than hitherto. This difficulty to a great extent has 
 been surmounted in Germany, thus saving a great 
 body of producers from being swallowed by over¬ 
 grown industrial concerns. The state and the indi¬ 
 vidual arc both better off by retaining a large number 
 of independent producers. 
 
 Co-operation does not solve perfectly the future of 
 the laboring classes; but it certainly has accomplished 
 much and promises more. To co-operation, therefore, 
 we can confidently look as a fitting, though not the 
 only, answer to the great question of the age. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 1 77 
 
 VII. 
 
 INDUSTRIAL PARTNERSHIPS. 
 
 As we have seen, the chief objection to co-operative 
 organizations is the isolation of capital from labor. 
 In the form of effort now to be considered, these two 
 potent agencies of production are brought into alli¬ 
 ance. Consequently, it is the more natural method, 
 though it has proved thus far not very successful. 
 
 An industrial partnership is created by uniting the 
 employer with his men who are paid wages, some¬ 
 times at the market rate, in some cases less, and then, 
 after deducting a sum for the use of capital, the re¬ 
 mainder of the profits, if any there be, is divided 
 among all in various proportions determined by agree¬ 
 ment. The longest-fried experiment in Great Britain 
 was that of the Methley collieries, owned by Henry 
 Briggs, Son & Co. The business of the proprietors 
 was undertaken in 1852. For the next twelve years 
 their relations with their men were most unsatisfactory, 
 and strikes were constantly occurring. In 1865, they 
 launched their experiment of an industrial partnership. 
 The business of the firm was transferred to a joint- 
 stock company, the owners retaining two-thirds of the 
 shares, and offering the other third to the public, and 
 especially inviting their employees to become share- 
 
 15* 
 
178 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 holders. At the same time they arranged “ that when¬ 
 ever the divisible profits accruing from the business, 
 after a fair and usual reservation for redemption of 
 capital and other legitimate allowances, exceeded ten 
 jxrr cent, on the capital embarked, all those employed 
 by the company as managers, agents, or work-people, 
 should receive one-half of such excess profit as a 
 bonus, to be distributed among them as a percentage 
 on their respective earnings during the year in which 
 such profit should have accrued.” 
 
 They made no claim to disinterestedness; they 
 adopted the system as one of convenience and specu¬ 
 lation. Their profits had never exceeded ten per cent., 
 and these they were sure of receiving before there was 
 any division to the employees. 
 
 Until the close of 1874, a period of nearly ten years, 
 the experiment was eminently successful. The trial 
 began July 1, 1865. “At the end of the first twelve- 
 month the total of profits was found to be fourteen 
 per cent., of which the shareholders took twelve and 
 the work-people two per cent. In the,second year the 
 total was sixteen per cent., the shareholders getting 
 thirteen per cent, and the work-people three. In the 
 third year the corresponding figures were seventeen 
 and three and a half.” So the concern went on 
 gathering strength and realizing fully the expecta¬ 
 tions of all parties interested, besides some unlooked- 
 for advantages. During the year 1875 a cloud over¬ 
 shadowed the fair prospect. Profits having greatly 
 declined, it was found necessary to reduce wages. 
 The justice, or rather necessity of doing this, the 
 workmen could not see. For several weeks efforts 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 179 
 
 were made to adjust the difficulty, but no proposition 
 looking towards a reduction of wages would the work¬ 
 men consider. Finally the partnership was dissolved, 
 to the mortification of the Messrs. Briggs, who, deem¬ 
 ing their experiment thoroughly tested, had gone so 
 far as to recommend an adoption of the system to all 
 employers of labor. 
 
 So long as the price of wages kept up, all went well 
 with the Methley collieries; when a reduction became 
 necessary, the system broke down. Many had long 
 felt the crucial test was to order a reduction, and never 
 until such a time came, and the concern passed 
 smoothly over it, could the system be thought fairly 
 tried. The Messrs. Briggs had reason for supposing 
 the evil days with their workmen were passed, and 
 their failure, after so long a trial, is the more to be 
 regretted, because it will deter others from undertaking 
 kindred experiments. 
 
 Another plan of industrial partnership worthy of 
 mention was sketched by Mr. Abram E. Hewitt in his 
 testimony before the Trade-Unions Commission. He 
 proposed the enactment of a law whereby the owner 
 of any manufactory or other concern might issue par¬ 
 ticipation certificates, or, to use his own words: “I 
 may make a certificate of a hundred dollars, and say 
 to my workmen, ‘I will sell you that for one hundred 
 dollars; you shall pay for it in money, or I will take 
 it out of your wages, and that certificate shall entitle 
 you to your pro rata share of the profits, which shall 
 be made out by an accountant under inspection.’” 
 Such a plan would be objectionable in some kinds of 
 business, but, of course, any law authorizing this 
 
j8o 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 would not be mandatory, but permissive. The work¬ 
 man would have his share of the profits, the propor¬ 
 tion being fixed by agreement. The supposed ad¬ 
 vantages of this plan were, workmen would know 
 they were sharing in the profits, and also the exact 
 condition of business,—when they might fairly de¬ 
 mand an increase of wages, and when not. On the 
 other hand, the owner would retain the right to re¬ 
 deem these certificates if workmen became drunkards, 
 unruly, or disagreeable, upon payment of the sum for 
 which they were sold. According to this scheme, 
 workmen acquire no ownership in the property and 
 no right to control it. That is still vested in the 
 owner, whose duty it is to manage and conserve the 
 capital. Yet workmen acquire an interest in the con¬ 
 cern which not only pays them some profit, but in¬ 
 duces them to save, and to determine more perfectly 
 what wages they ought to receive. This scheme, Mr. 
 Hewitt affirmed, was receiving great attention in the 
 United States, and is being successfully tried by Mr. 
 Lawson, at Carlisle, Scotland. 
 
 The principle of admitting workmen to participate 
 in the profits of their employers has been adopted by 
 M. Cini, the owner of an extensive paper-mill in Tus¬ 
 cany, Italy. In 1869 ordinary hands were paid fixed 
 rates, from seven to ten francs (one dollar and twenty 
 cents to two dollars) per week, and whenever the pro¬ 
 duction of paper exceeded a certain quantity, they 
 received an increase of wages in proportion to the 
 excess. The fixed wages of foremen, superintendents, 
 etc., were low, being only nine dollars a month, but 
 they also received a share of the profits, so they be- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 181 
 
 came directly interested in the prosperity of the factory. 
 In this way they gained from twenty to thirty dollars 
 monthly, while the weekly wages of ordinary hands 
 were increased from one dollar and eighty cents to 
 two dollars and forty cents per week. 
 
 Nowhere as on French soil has the plan of indus¬ 
 trial partnership been so long and so favorably tried. 
 One of the oldest experiments is Leclaire’s, cited by 
 Mill in the second volume of his “ Principles of Politi¬ 
 cal Economy.” M. Leclaire was a house-painter, em¬ 
 ploying about two hundred workmen, whom he paid 
 by giving fixed wages and salaries. In 1840 he de¬ 
 termined to give his workmen a share in the profits 
 of his establishment. He assigned to himself, besides 
 interest for his capital, a fixed allowance for his labor 
 and responsibility as manager; and, at the end of the 
 year, the surplus profits were divided among them all, 
 himself included, in proportion to their salaries. Le¬ 
 claire, however, did not admit all, but less than half 
 the workmen, to participate in the profits. All, though, 
 received full market wages, so that none had any cause 
 to complain. In 1864 the business was reorganized; 
 Messrs. Leclaire and Defournaux uniting with fifty- 
 nine associate, and between one hundred and two 
 hundred non-associate, workmen. A benefit society 
 of the workmen, which had accumulated one hundred 
 thousand francs, entered as a partner of the new con¬ 
 cern, in which each of the proprietors had invested an 
 equal amount. The annual profits are divided in the 
 following manner: fifty per cent, to Leclaire and De¬ 
 fournaux, who severally receive in addition a salary of 
 six thousand francs for managing the business of the 
 
I 82 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 establishment. The remaining fifty per cent, is assigned 
 to clerks and workmen, two-fifths going to the benefit 
 society and three-fifths among the clerks and work¬ 
 men who have rendered themselves worthy of recom¬ 
 pense. 
 
 By good authority it is said the conduct of the 
 workmen is exemplary, that the best relations subsist 
 between them and the proprietors, and that the par¬ 
 ticipation of the workmen in the profits of the estab¬ 
 lishment has exercised considerable influence both 
 upon the rapidity and quality of the work executed. 
 
 Since France is prereminently the home of social 
 experiments, one would expect to find that the vexed 
 relations between labor and capital had been the sub¬ 
 ject of more inquiry there than anywhere else. And 
 so they have. As the outcome of speculation and 
 trial, the union of capital and labor in some form of 
 industrial partnership is regarded as the best solution 
 of the grave problem yet suggested. Not that the 
 difficulties inherent in the plan are in the least over¬ 
 looked. How profits shall be divided between capital 
 and labor, how the latter, having nothing to lose, can 
 in any real sense become a sharer in losses, what pro¬ 
 portion of wages shall be paid pro rata to the working 
 classes to enable them to live before dividing the 
 profits, if there be any to divide,—these questions are 
 just as profoundly grasped in France as in any other 
 country. Yet they have been answered, and in a way 
 so practical that we will record the answers. 
 
 Replying to the third question first, it is proposed 
 that a minimum rate of wages, fixed by a vote of the 
 society, be paid weekly, and the dividend on profits 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 183 
 
 be declared quarterly, half-yearly, or annually, as may 
 be found convenient. It is contended that this mini¬ 
 mum rate of wages need not be regulated by the mar¬ 
 ket price of labor; the arrangement being provisional, 
 wages may often be lower than the market price with¬ 
 out working injustice. The rate should be voted twice 
 a year, the value of labor being more variable than 
 that of capital. 
 
 Secondly. If, at the end of the quarter or term 
 fixed, the undertaking has yielded no profits, or has 
 lost, the workmen receiving only a minimum rate of 
 wages will lose the difference between the sum re¬ 
 ceived and what they might have earned elsewhere, 
 and the capitalist will also lose in like manner upon 
 his capital. 
 
 Thirdly. In order to arrive at a division of profits, 
 the amount of capital employed should be compared 
 with the sum of wages paid. If the capital, for ex¬ 
 ample, is sixty thousand francs, and the amount of 
 wages expended forty thousand francs, three-fifths 
 of the net profits realized should go to the capi¬ 
 talist, and two-fifths to supplement the wages of the 
 workmen. 
 
 It is easy to expose flaws in this scheme, as Mr. 
 Fane has done; nevertheless, it is suggestive to capi¬ 
 talists as to what they may do in solving the problem 
 confronting them. Many instances with modifications 
 to make the plan fit the case could be given, showing 
 how the idea is blooming and ripening into the fairest 
 fruit. In the iron-foundry of M. Godin-Lemaire, at 
 Guise, employing nine hundred men; in the factory 
 of Messrs. Dollfus, Meig & Co., at Mulhouse and 
 
184 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 Dornach ; in those of Charles Kestner, near Giro- 
 magny, Messrs. Schlumberger & Co., at Guebwiller, 
 and Messrs. Bourcart & Co., in the same town; the 
 shoe-manufactory of M. Savart, at Paris; in Messrs. 
 Steinheil, Dicterlen & Co.’s factory, at Rothau; and 
 in the establishments of the Paris and Orleans Railway 
 Company* and of the Middle Railway,—in all these 
 cases has the industrial partnership proved a splendid 
 success. 
 
 An industrial partnership was founded by the 
 brothers Godin, in Belgium, nearly half a century 
 ago, containing several very unique and remarkable 
 features. The brothers sought to make every work¬ 
 man do his best by introducing the principle of re¬ 
 sponsibility. When the last of the brothers died, in 
 1867, a Belgian journal gave some account of the 
 working of the factory. Not only was the workman 
 rewarded according to the quantity and quality of his 
 work, but inattention and negligence were punished. 
 He was recompensed according to the application 
 and perfection introduced into the manufacture of the 
 paper, which was the business of the establishment, 
 confounding the interest of man and master, and yet 
 making each one independent in his own sphere. 
 
 In this manufactory, which is a small world, who 
 surveys the work of the workman, to see that his part 
 is properly executed ? The workman himself. All 
 imperfect manipulation is discovered by the succeed¬ 
 ing workman, who is obliged to report defects to the 
 
 * This Company divided eight million francs among its employees 
 between 1S44 and 1871. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL . 
 
 185 
 
 proper officer. Were this a duty solely, he might be 
 often tempted to neglect it; but as he is interested 
 pecuniarily in the product, self-interest impels him to 
 insure the execution of the work in the best manner. 
 Nevertheless, this surveillance seemed insufficient to 
 the Godins. They introduced a mute overseer, incor-- 
 ruptible and novel, that followed the product through 
 all the stages of manufacture from the time the raw 
 material was received until the paper was finished, 
 noting the name of the operators and the quality of 
 their work. Yet even this did not suffice. There must 
 be a supreme judge, a court of appeal, so merciless 
 and clear-sighted that nothing can escape his lynx eye. 
 This is the purchaser of -the product manufactured. 
 Suppose the operation lias been imperfectly performed 
 through the negligence or connivance of the work¬ 
 man. The purchaser, discovering the fault, makes 
 complaint to the proprietor, who immediately orders 
 a search to find out where the mistake has been com¬ 
 mitted. This search is so thorough, and the manu¬ 
 facture is carried on in such a way, that the slightest 
 fault may be detected and the negligent or guilty per¬ 
 son discovered. Thus, says the Belgian journal, every¬ 
 thing is connected by means so simple in principle, 
 though complicated in application, that an investiga¬ 
 tion can be made incredibly soon, no fault can escape, 
 and responsibility will be brought home to its author. 
 The goods of the establishment have attained a wide 
 reputation for excellence, and, though both of the 
 founders are dead, it is highly prosperous, and all the 
 workmen are thriving and content. 
 
 In the report of Mr. Gould to the British govern- 
 16 
 
J 36 THE conflict between 
 
 ment on the condition of the industrial classes in 
 Switzerland, three years since, he remarks that “the 
 only really effectual solution of the greatest question 
 of the period would seem to be in the removal of the 
 existing obstacles to the direct participation of the 
 working-men in the profits of their employers.” After 
 suggesting a practical plan* for effecting this end, he 
 relates the example of a watchmaking establishment 
 at La Chaux de Fonds, in the canton of Neufchatel, 
 managed most successfully according to the method 
 described. The men, numbering thirty-five, are ad¬ 
 mitted on probation, and are dismissed for want of 
 ability or the slightest irregularity of conduct. After 
 five years all, including the clerks, are admitted to 
 
 * The following is the plan suggested by Mr. Gould : 
 
 “ The entire management of affairs and control over the men to be 
 rested as heretofore in the masters; their books to remain closed to 
 inspection on the part of the men, except on preconcerted and special 
 occasions, should such a proceeding be unavoidable (notwithstanding 
 the official declaration of profits which has to be annually made in 
 many countries); such inspection to be made only by one or more 
 delegates, chosen by the men and approved of by the masters, and 
 moreover sworn to secresy; the men to bind themselves under penal¬ 
 ties to observe the conditions on which they are engaged; all matters 
 of pecuniary interest in dispute between masters and men to be sub¬ 
 mitted to arbitration, such arbitration to be considered final; the men 
 as heretofore to receive fixed wages according to a reasonable scale, 
 the probable addition thereto arising from their share in the net profits 
 being duly taken into consideration; the men to be likewise entitled to 
 a certain fixed percentage of the net profits, if any, each individual’s 
 share thereof being determined by the amount of wages he receives; 
 lastly, the term net profits to be understood to mean the profits arising 
 from the transactions engaged in after the payment of all expenses as 
 well as losses, and of a fixed interest on the capital employed, propor¬ 
 tionate to the risk incurred.” 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 IS/ 
 
 share, proportionate to the amount of their respective 
 wages, in the net profits of the business. At Basel, 
 and one or two other places, are establishments con¬ 
 ducted in a similar way. 
 
 The last experiment of the kind to be noted was 
 undertaken by Messrs. Brewster & Co., of New York, 
 the famous carriage-manufacturers. It was in October, 
 1869, that the proposal was made to their men, at a 
 time when peace reigned in their shop and business 
 was prosperous. They proposed to all persons in 
 their employ, excepting those who had a direct inter¬ 
 est in their business, a share of the annual profits, in 
 addition to the regular wages, which were to be as 
 high as those paid by similar establishments. The 
 amount of profit to be divided among the employees 
 was one-tenth of the whole, making no deductions 
 for interest on capital or for services of the partners. 
 The division was to be annual; the business for each 
 year being wholly disconnected from any other. This 
 offer was accepted by the men, and on the first of 
 January, 1870, the agreement went into operation. 
 For nearly two years and a half the partnership con¬ 
 tinued to flourish and fulfill the expectations of all 
 concerned. At the end of the first six months a divi¬ 
 dend was declared and paid, in order to make the 
 fiscal year of the partnership begin on the first of 
 July; and a year from that date a second dividend 
 was ordered, the two amounting to eleven thousand 
 five hundred dollars. The men worked more con¬ 
 tentedly, and the most harmonious relations sub¬ 
 sisted between them and their employers. All were 
 gainers, socially and financially. During the year 
 
188 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 1872 the workmen were carried away by the eight- 
 hour movement, and demanded of their employers a 
 reduction of the working hours per day to eight. 
 They had a right to do this themselves under the 
 constitution creating the partnership, but, singularly 
 enough, they demanded this as a concession direct 
 from their employers, who justly refused to comply. 
 Had the leader of the workmen been among them 
 when the agitation was at its height, probably they 
 never would have acted so foolishly. Contrary to 
 their own interests, four-fifths of them struck and re¬ 
 mained idle two weeks, and then began work with¬ 
 out any concession on the part of their employers. 
 Such conduct discouraged the proprietors, and they 
 broke up the partnership, having reserved this right 
 in the original agreement, whereby the men lost a 
 dividend of eleven thousand dollars nearly due, be¬ 
 sides nine thousand dollars wages occasioned by the 
 strike. 
 
 Notwithstanding the unfavorable issue of this ex¬ 
 periment, the proprietors have faith yet in the plan 
 modified in some particulars. It is to be preferred to 
 co-operation, because capital and greater skill in man¬ 
 agement are united with labor. Such a mode of re¬ 
 warding labor is just and encouraging. Men like 
 profits better than salaries. We suspect this is the 
 outcropping of the speculative or gambling spirit 
 which every person displays in some degree. It is 
 only fair, though, since workmen add their full share 
 to the increase of capital, that the division of such 
 increase be equitable. It is the best stimulus to work¬ 
 men, and the fairest mode of conducting business 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 189 
 
 whenever possible. The whale-fisheries have always 
 been conducted on this principle. It is worthy of 
 more attention than it has received, for it reveals the 
 true relationship that should exist between employers 
 and employed. Being partners in production, so 
 ought they to be in its rewards. 
 
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 I90 
 
 VIII. 
 
 EDUCATION OF THE WORKING CLASSES. 
 
 Education is a very old remedy for healing the 
 differences between capital and labor. Were the dis¬ 
 ease less violent, this remedy perhaps would be effect¬ 
 ive; but a very superficial diagnosis of the case reveals 
 the necessity of applying swifter relief. Water will 
 have no effect in restoring a drowning person to life; 
 something stronger must be given. A remedy is 
 wanted, producing speedy effect. Both capital and 
 labor are impatient, and desire an instant settlement. 
 To compel attendance at school is well enough ; in the 
 mean time a generation must pass away before edu¬ 
 cated workmen are seen in the factory or workshop. 
 If possible, their education should begin at once, 
 whether young or old, whether at work or idle. That 
 the laboring classes may learn better than to strike 
 when the act is opposed by honesty and self-interest, 
 is the need of the hour. Educate the children, of 
 course; but can nothing be done in the way of en¬ 
 lightening the older classes concerning their true in¬ 
 terests ? 
 
 To devise a system of education for all the sons of 
 toil is not so difficult as to make them see the ad¬ 
 vantages of procuring it. Compulsory attendance at 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 I 9 I 
 
 school is opposed strongly by those having children 
 who need education most. Evidently, such parents 
 set a higher value upon wages than upon education ; 
 or, if regarding education somewhat favorably, a pres¬ 
 ent gain is preferred to a future one. Besides, the 
 educational benefit accrues to the child, and not to 
 the parent: and so we find thousands not appreciating 
 the benefits of education, either for themselves or for 
 their children ; parents who make no effort to become 
 informed themselves, and prevent light from stream¬ 
 ing into the minds of their own offspring. For this 
 reason nearly all the educational energy of this coun¬ 
 try has been spent in training children and perfecting 
 the common-school system, while the majority of the 
 adult working-men and women are left to their own 
 devices. 
 
 If education will melt down the antagonism between 
 the two classes, why should older workmen be neg¬ 
 lected ? And if it be worthless, why educate any one ? 
 Surely the same arguments apply with equal force to 
 the education of all. Of course, it is not practicable 
 for every one to go to the existing schools, as parents 
 must work in order to gain a livelihood; but this fact 
 does not render their education any the less desirable. 
 
 Doubtless, education sometimes fails to yield the 
 fruit expected. The education received by many in 
 the schools unfits them for the occupation they ought 
 to follow. The true end of education should be to 
 enable its possessor to act perfectly his part in life; 
 but what is the popular conception of this ? It is to 
 follow some profession, or seek political fame; in 
 short, to make a great noise in the world. If this be 
 
192 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 the true end, only a few can ever succeed, for places 
 and opportunities arc not numerous enough for all. 
 This is not the aim of education, however. The true 
 idea is to enable a person to do the very best possible 
 with his abilities and opportunities. His life is the 
 most successful who accomplishes most with the re¬ 
 sources and circumstances at his command. Judged 
 by the true standard, some humble coal-miner who 
 has rarely seen daylight may have lived a life just as 
 splendid as earth’s greatest hero. He may have done 
 the very best possible for himself, and who can do 
 more ? 
 
 That this must be held up as the true standard of suc¬ 
 cess, is clear from the fact that it is the only standard 
 rendering success possible for every being. To make 
 the attainment of some high office in government, or 
 achievement in art, science, or literature, the sole test 
 of success, is to shut out the greater portion of man¬ 
 kind from competition, because they must pursue 
 humbler callings in order to live. In the race for 
 success, the first condition must be that all have the 
 opportunity to enter the lists. To prevent the greater 
 portion of mankind from competing, and then accuse 
 them of failing, is a judgment as incorrect as it is 
 pitiless. 
 
 That education often fails to convey the true idea 
 concerning one’s future in life, none can deny. Not a 
 year rolls around without persons going forth from 
 the higher schools of the land with very erroneous 
 notions as to what they should do. Youthful aspira¬ 
 tions are often wrongly stimulated. Their thoughts 
 and energies too often are turned into a wrong chan- 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 193 
 
 nel. They learn to dream of the impossible, and are 
 disappointed and unhappy when they see their beauti¬ 
 ful castles vanish. Not too soon can this false method 
 of education be corrected. Were it certain that one 
 of a hundred boys could win the presidential chair 
 by persisting in the effort, we do not believe it is 
 worth while for all to try. Ninety-nine lives are too 
 many to throw away that one may succeed. Every 
 person should live.a successful life. But the schools 
 in many cases prevent this. They do not paint the 
 dignity of labor in bright colors, and so, instead of 
 learning a trade and bending down to hard begriming 
 tasks, although sure to rise quickly, because of a 
 superior outfit, students go forth and seek clerkships, 
 prepare for college, and become lawyers, physicians, 
 and the like. Now and then one succeeds in some 
 learned pursuit, but thousands fail. We do not pro¬ 
 pose to say a word against higher education; one 
 thing, however, is certain: many would have succeeded 
 in what are termed the lower pursuits who have mis¬ 
 erably failed in the higher. We do not mean to cool 
 the zeal of those who are striving to gain a liberal 
 education and enter the learned professions, provided 
 they be quite sure of becoming better lawyers, phy¬ 
 sicians, artists, scientists, than anything else. And the 
 fact that some who engage in learned pursuits fail is 
 not conclusive in respect to all, for, perhaps, either 
 from innate laziness or other defect the unsuccessful 
 ones would have been not less so in anything. But 
 it is none the less true that, in consequence of the edu¬ 
 cation received by our youth, stimulated in many cases 
 by bad advice, they are led away from the pursuits in 
 
194 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 which they are most likely to succeed. Thousands 
 acquire a liberal education who might have spent their 
 energies, time, and money to better advantage. Their 
 education was not by any means useless to them, but 
 they might have gained more by pursuing a different 
 course. 
 
 / Education ought to lead its possessor to see what is 
 best for himself considering all his capacities and sur¬ 
 roundings, and to make him contented with doing the 
 most promising task, whatever it be. Instead of having 
 this effect, too often it stimulates ambition without 
 developing the mind and correcting the judgment. 
 It seems to delude its possessor in respect to his 
 powers, and he comes to think success is probable in 
 almost anything he may undertake. Education does 
 not lead him to place a true estimate upon his talents 
 and surroundings. Hence the multitude of failures 
 which are constantly happening. What more conclu¬ 
 sive evidence does one want in respect to the defective¬ 
 ness of education? 
 
 In tracing the causes of the prosperity of Switzer¬ 
 land, Mr. Gould declares that national education takes 
 precedence of every other. “ The benefits conferred 
 on the population by a sound elementary’’ education, 
 such as befits the particular sphere in which they are 
 individually destined to move in after-life, cannot as¬ 
 suredly be overrated. Nevertheless it becomes less 
 clear how far its positive advantages out-balance the 
 possible disadvantages, if it be carried beyond a cer¬ 
 tain point extremely difficult to define.” The desire 
 to carry education in schools too far is manifesting 
 itself among a class of politicians and others in that 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 195 
 
 country. Passing over the question of expense to 
 the families in doing this, their need of their chil¬ 
 dren’s services, we come to the objection previously- 
 raised, and which is thus stated by Mr. Gould : “ As a 
 sound elementary education of the working classes 
 tends not only to develop their mental faculties, but 
 also to raise them above mere sensual enjoyments, 
 and is of undoubted advantage to them in every-day 
 transactions of life, so a higher-classed education is 
 just as likely to unsettle their minds, and to render 
 them discontented with the position in which they 
 find themselves.” 
 
 In the canton of Zurich a proposed law for extend¬ 
 ing the period of compulsory attendance at school 
 was thrown out by an overwhelming majority when 
 referred finally to popular vote. This decision, which 
 was unexpected, proves that the people of Zurich at 
 least view their interest in a different light from their 
 leaders. 
 
 The system of education needed is one which will 
 be of practical benefit to its possessor. What is learned, 
 but disused, will soon be forgotten. Learning which 
 unfits the possessor for any save a literary or scien¬ 
 tific calling, it were better never to have acquired, 
 unless he can follow such a pursuit successfully. 
 Thousands have been unfitted to act well their part 
 in the drama of life on account of their education; 
 who can deny this ? 
 
 What, then, is wanting in the education generally 
 given to children ? It ought to be supplemented with 
 instruction having special reference to the occupation 
 they are going to follow. Of course, this does not 
 
196 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 apply to those who intend pursuing an extended 
 course of instruction. It relates to the great body 
 of students having no such end in view, and who, 
 at an early age, are obliged to earn a living. It does 
 not include even the education of the student as a 
 citizen of the state, nor by any means his own 
 complete development. The conception of him is 
 principally that of an industrial person who is fitting 
 himself to do skillful work and earn a satisfactory 
 livelihood. It would be a shallow and most imperfect 
 view of one’s nature to maintain that an industrial 
 education is all that is needed by any class of per¬ 
 sons, in addition to the general instruction furnished 
 by most of the States in the American Union. But 
 we do insist upon furnishing such an education first, 
 to be extended afterwards if circumstances will admit. 
 No kind of education, however, ought to be regarded 
 as of more importance than a mental outfit whereby 
 persons can earn their daily bread and provide for 
 their families. 
 
 That education will enable its possessor to make a 
 living more easily none can deny. In 1870, the edu¬ 
 cational bureau in Washington issued a circular ask¬ 
 ing employers and others who knew, what effect, if 
 any, education wrought upon the price of labor; and 
 the general reply was, ordinary common-school edu¬ 
 cation added twenty to fifty per cent, in the income of^ 
 laborers. In other language, when a parent sends his 
 boy through a common school he is worth one-fifth to 
 one-half more to himself than he would be without 
 such an education. If, for example, the ignorant 
 tailor can make one thousand dollars per annum, he 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 197 
 
 would earn two hundred to five hundred dollars a 
 year in addition provided he was properly educated. 
 This increase, if carefully saved, would be the foun¬ 
 dation for an early fortune. Not long since we visited 
 the studio of one of the most celebrated sculptors in 
 Florence. In the first room were men shaping rough 
 blocks of marble, leaving them before any well-defined 
 figure appeared. These men received small pay, for 
 the skill they displayed was ordinary. The blocks 
 were taken from this into an adjoining room, where 
 much greater skill was displayed in fashioning them. 
 Here beautiful forms were wrought in the marble 
 under the skillful manipulation of the workmen. They 
 were much better paid than the workers previously 
 mentioned. Finally, the blocks passed under the eye 
 of the master, who, with his chisel, gave the finishing 
 strokes which, though few perhaps, added so much 
 grace and beauty that a much higher price was paid 
 for them than for all the labor of the others. The 
 great value attached to the marble was given by the 
 master, not by the other workmen, though they had 
 toiled much longer than himself. Thus it is that skill 
 always receives a richer reward than mere force-power. 
 
 In the common schools children are taught reading, 
 writing, arithmetic, grammar, geography, etc., which 
 studies are well enough; but when a more extended 
 education is sought, what are the usual additions ? 
 Latin, Greek, French, German, a little smattering of 
 science, and other things which amount to still less. 
 These studies certainly have a place in a complete 
 education ; the day has not passed for the mastery of 
 language, as some affirm. They all have their uses, but 
 17 
 
198 
 
 TIIE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 it is none the less true that in providing an education 
 for the millions who must of necessity begin their 
 life-tasks at an early age, a very different sort of 
 education from this is required. 
 
 Considering the limited time they can give to edu¬ 
 cation, and the occupations in most cases they are to 
 pursue, who can doubt that greater attention ought to 
 be paid than now is to the art of living? Think of 
 the little instruction given in physiology, yet what 
 study is more important ? That it is practicable to 
 master the study at an early age has been proved by 
 its adoption and continuance in some of the schools. 
 To create a strong body, and so fit it for physical and 
 mental toil, is not this a task worthy of attention? 
 Then, the study of climatology, too, and all those sub¬ 
 jects which will enable the future laborer to toil to the 
 best advantage. These physical studies may properly 
 be considered one department of education. Beside 
 this physical culture, comes next that of perfecting 
 one’s self in domestic economy. This is a broad field 
 for inquiry, as it includes the study of foods, houses, 
 ventilation, heating, cookery, clothing, etc. How 
 grievously defective is the education of almost all per¬ 
 sons in these things ! Surely they are of the greatest 
 importance. The laws of hygiene are second to none 
 in their practical consequences. We ought not to 
 trust to instinct in matters so grave, but acquire a 
 thorough and useful education which will be of con¬ 
 stant service. 
 
 I he two principal ends sought after in such an 
 education are, first, to develop the physical powers 
 of man to the utmost, and to conserve his energies; 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 99 
 
 and secondly, to use the income he receives from his 
 daily toil in the most economical manner. It is true 
 that an education of this sort is quite as applicable to- 
 every class as to working-men. 
 
 Two other features remain for notice in the work¬ 
 man’s education. The first relates to his vocation: 
 such an education, in short, as is provided for him in 
 many of the continental countries, and of late years 
 in England. We have not space here to enlarge upon 
 the topic and prescribe the various studies which ought 
 to be mastered by those who propose to follow the 
 varied occupations in which it is possible to exercise 
 skill; suffice it to say, such schools are so thoroughly 
 established in the old world that it would not be 
 difficult to prescribe courses of study and methods of 
 carrying them on in the United States. 
 
 The last point to be considered in the education of 
 the working classes is of more importance than any 
 other so far as it immediately affects capital. This 
 point is to educate the working-men in the cost of 
 production. The immediate object of this education 
 is to wear off the antagonism between employed and 
 employers, and prevent strikes. Now, the industrial 
 classes know very little, if anything, about the profits 
 of the business in which they are engaged, or the con¬ 
 ditions upon which success depends. On account of 
 their ignorance, they are unable to form any intelli¬ 
 gible judgment as to what they ought to receive. They 
 know not how great or small are the profits of their 
 employers, and not infrequently strike supposing they 
 ought to receive more, when perhaps they are over¬ 
 paid in proportion to the returns received from their 
 
200 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 toil. Again and again have workmen struck for 
 higher wages when business was being conducted at 
 a loss. This proves as clearly as anything can be 
 proved how poorly they know whether business is 
 profitable or not, for one would not accuse them of 
 being so foolish as to act thus intentionally. 
 
 Employers are in part to blame for this. If they 
 told their workmen more about their business, discon¬ 
 tent would decline and strikes diminish in number 
 and violence. But they rarely deign to do this, un¬ 
 less when men are about to strike, and then it is too 
 late to reason with them. Their passions aroused, 
 their employer’s influence is gone; they regard his 
 statements with suspicion ; and his words are as chaff 
 which the winds blow away. But if they were in¬ 
 structed in their cooler moments, the effect would be 
 far more benign. Doubtless many a statement made 
 by an employer which fell flat upon the ears of a 
 workman at a time when he either had struck or was 
 on the edge of striking, would have been believed 
 and acted upon if put forth at an earlier period. We 
 believe if men were informed at the proper time re¬ 
 specting the nature of their business, the conditions 
 upon which success depended, many strikes would be 
 avoided. 
 
 Of course, many will say: “It is absurd to suggest 
 the expediency of exposing the details of our busi¬ 
 ness to our workmen ! Who ever heard of such a 
 thing? Besides, it is not worthy of an employer to 
 do anything of the kind.” It is quite easy to reply 
 conclusively to these assertions. In the first place, 
 employers do occasionally make an exhibit of their 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 201 
 
 business, especially when a strike is threatened. 
 Again and again have they done so. This answers 
 the difficulty relative to the worthiness of the act. If 
 he can do it at such times, he can do it at any time 
 without loss of dignity. This, also, is a conclusive 
 answer as to its practicability. He prepares a full 
 statement with the view of convincing his men. He 
 tells them the condition of his affairs, what his busi¬ 
 ness is, the profits and losses, what they are likely to 
 be, all, in short, necessary for them to know in order 
 to form a competent judgment as to what they should 
 do for themselves. 
 
 Two other objections, more difficult to answer, 
 may be raised to making an exposition of one’s busi¬ 
 ness. The first is, workmen and the outside world 
 would be informed concerning the employer’s gains 
 or losses. Suppose a manufacturer is making great 
 gains, he does not want to advertise the fact by 
 making a statement, for, in that case, others will en¬ 
 gage in the same business, if possible, and so reduce 
 profits by increasing the supply. Besides, the public 
 would complain over the price paid, if they knew they 
 were buying dearly; which is the same thing as say¬ 
 ing they would complain if they knew an enormous 
 sum was accruing to any one from the sale of his 
 products. 
 
 This objection to uncovering one’s business many 
 will regard as unanswerable. We are not inclined 
 towards this view, however, for every person ought 
 to be satisfied with reasonable profits ; and if he be 
 making more, it is only just for the men to share 
 them, and the outside world to know the fact. It is 
 
 17* 
 
202 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 clear enough that whenever employers are seeking to 
 make the most they can from their business, and are 
 never moved by humane motives, sound policy dictates 
 silence. But when this is the case, workmen cannot 
 be condemned for not maintaining silence. They are 
 entitled to a fair share of the profits, and if employers 
 will not tell what they are, how can they blame those 
 employed for striking? They strike, in most cases, 
 through ignorance which only employers can remove. 
 This they will not do, and yet bitterly complain when 
 their men attempt to obtain higher wages. Such con¬ 
 duct is very much like tempting a person to commit a 
 crime, and then condemning him for doing it. So long 
 as employers choose to keep the facts concerning their 
 business from their workmen, they must not complain 
 if the latter acquire very erroneous notions respecting 
 it, and every now and then indulge in a strike. Let 
 the capitalist remember that he often tempts his men 
 to do these very things by maintaining the policy of 
 silence regarding his business. Strikes will happen 
 just so long as workmen remain ignorant in respect to 
 the adequacy of their remuneration. When their 
 masters get ready to show their hand in business, and 
 thus lead the employed to see they are receiving a fair 
 share of the profits, will they be satisfied and cease to 
 strike. Let manufacturers inform their men from time 
 to time of the conditions of trade, the state of the mar- 
 k ets, the effect of a change in the tariff or other taxes, 
 the discovery of new mines, in short, of all things 
 affecting the business in question, and we are quite 
 sure nothing will be heard from workmen provided 
 they are receiving fair wages. Now, men are grossly 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 203 
 
 ignorant in many cases of the profits of masters, and 
 almost always think they are making money. To 
 educate them in fitting ways in the elements of busi¬ 
 ness prosperity would open their eyes to the truth, 
 and do much, in our opinion, to soften the asperity 
 existing between the two classes. 
 
 The remaining objection to disclosing the con¬ 
 dition of one’s business is, it may lead to pecuniary 
 embarrassment. Suppose a manufacturer is losing 
 money, he fears that, if his condition be known, he 
 cannot obtain credit or other assistance. If doing 
 business in a public manner, people would be more 
 prudent, and all woyld know better whom to trust. 
 Not so many would become embarrassed, for they 
 would manage their affairs more economically and 
 honestly than now. Nothing would conduce more to 
 the healthy growth of business, to improving its tone, 
 to the cultivation of sound principles, than to keep it 
 open to the scrutiny of the public. When men did 
 become weak, we are not sure that all aid would be 
 withdrawn from them. Provided they were honest 
 and regarded as efficient in the management of their 
 affairs, we see no reason why they should not be aided 
 as heartily and as effectively as under a secret business 
 system. In the case of dishonest and inefficient per¬ 
 sons they would suffer more, but this is only just. 
 What they lost, the public would gain. 
 
 In our judgment, this would prove one of the most 
 effectual methods in averting strikes. Education in 
 general is excellent, and ultimately will correct many 
 mistakes and improve the feeling between men and 
 masters, as it has done in Switzerland; but, if possi- 
 
204 
 
 THE CONFLICT BETWEEN 
 
 blc, measures are needed to produce a better state of 
 things now. Did employers attempt to inform their 
 men in times when good feeling between them pre¬ 
 vailed, and in a systematic way, they would, we be¬ 
 lieve, be inclined to listen and remain content. 
 
LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 205 
 
 IX. 
 
 ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION. 
 
 The last method for settling the differences between 
 employed and employer, is arbitration. This is not a 
 modern remedy, for the Conseils des Prud’hommes 
 have been in operation for a long period. Both in 
 this and in foreign countries they have been tried long 
 enough to test their utility. 
 
 Prior to the introduction of them at Nottingham, 
 by Mr. Mundella, eight or nine years ago, strikes were 
 of almost constant occurrence in the lace and hosiery 
 trades. The bitterest feelings between men and mas¬ 
 ters were prevalent. A board for the adjustment of 
 differences was instituted, composed of seven em¬ 
 ployers and seven workmen, elected by their re¬ 
 spective classes, who met once a quarter or oftener 
 upon the request of their members. At these meet¬ 
 ings questions relating to wages and other difficulties 
 were discussed in a friendly manner, and on many an 
 occasion angry feelings were in this peaceful way 
 assuaged. The essence of the system, in the opinion 
 of the promoters, lay in its voluntary character. So 
 long as this was the case, there was no room for 
 jealousy on either side. It is needless to say that the 
 experiment has proved most successful. Mr. Mundella 
 testified before a committee of investigation as to the 
 
206 
 
 LABOR AND CAPITAL. 
 
 straightforward character and fairness of the repre¬ 
 sentative workmen who appeared at these arbitrations. 
 Generally, it is found, say the Trade-Union Commis¬ 
 sioners, that after free discussion, and, in most cases, 
 some mutual concession, an understanding satisfactory 
 to both parties is reached. Although the arrange¬ 
 ment is not legally binding, it is considered so morally, 
 and is generally acquiesced in and acted upon until a 
 change of circumstances calls for a readjustment. 
 
 So successful, indeed, have been these arbitrations, 
 that the Royal Commissioners of Great Britain ap¬ 
 pointed to inquire into the origin and rules of trade- 
 unions and to recommend plans for establishing better 
 relations between capitalists and workmen, declare in 
 their report that the establishment of boards of arbi¬ 
 tration seems to offer a remedy at once speedy, safe, 
 and simple. They require no complicated machinery, 
 no novel division, no new mode of conducting busi¬ 
 ness, no additional legislation, no legal powers or 
 penalties. All that is needed is for certain represen¬ 
 tative employers and workmen to meet at regular 
 stated times, and amicably discuss around a table the 
 common interests of their common trade or business. 
 There is not a single business in which this system 
 might not at once be adopted, and no reason could be 
 seen for supposing the results to be less satisfactory 
 than the results at Nottingham. Under such a sys¬ 
 tem, the Commissioners hopefully looked for a peace¬ 
 ful and prosperous future for the industry of Great 
 Britain. Is it unreasonable to predict that boards of 
 arbitration could accomplish as much in the United 
 States as in any other country? 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 TABLE OF WAGES FOR WURTEMBERG. 
 
 
 1830-39. 
 
 1840-49. 
 
 1850-59. 
 
 1860-69. 
 
 Percentage 
 of increase. 
 
 Cotton-spinners.... 
 
 $0.28 
 
 50.31 
 
 50.35 
 
 5o.45 
 
 65 
 
 Wool-spinners. 
 
 .29 
 
 •29 
 
 •37 
 
 •45 
 
 57 
 
 Cotton-weavers.... 
 
 .26 
 
 •27 
 
 •33 
 
 .41 
 
 60 
 
 Goldsmiths. 
 
 •33 
 
 •27 
 
 •52 
 
 .66 
 
 60 
 
 Pianoforte-makers 
 
 •3 1 
 
 •43 
 
 •52 
 
 .66 
 
 77 
 
 Paper-makers. 
 
 •25 
 
 •3 1 
 
 •35 
 
 •39 
 
 58 
 
 Printers. 
 
 •45 
 
 •52 
 
 •52 
 
 •70 
 
 52 
 
 Carpet-makers. 
 
 .29 
 
 •33 
 
 •37 
 
 •5° 
 
 7i 
 
 Hardware-makers 
 
 .27 
 
 •29 
 
 .41 
 
 •45 
 
 65 
 
 Silversmiths. 
 
 •45 
 
 •37 
 
 .58 
 
 •75 
 
 61 
 
 Dyers. 
 
 .29 
 
 •33 
 
 •37 
 
 •43 
 
 53 , 
 
 Tanners. 
 
 .29 
 
 .31 
 
 •35 
 
 •43 
 
 5'K 
 
 Masons. 
 
 •35 
 
 •39 
 
 •47 
 
 .60 
 
 80 % 
 
 Bricklayers. 
 
 .27 
 
 •3 1 
 
 •37 
 
 •54 
 
 90 , 
 
 Carpenters. 
 
 .27 
 
 •3i 
 
 •37 
 
 .50 
 
 
 Painters. 
 
 •37 
 
 •43 
 
 •54 
 
 .68 
 
 81 
 
 Blacksmiths. 
 
 •25 
 
 •27 
 
 •33 
 
 •39 
 
 62 
 
 Locksmiths. 
 
 •27 
 
 •29 
 
 •33 
 
 .41 
 
 65 
 
 Coppersmiths. 
 
 .27 
 
 .28 
 
 •43 
 
 •43 
 
 65 
 
 Tailors. 
 
 .20 
 
 •25 
 
 •33 
 
 •35 
 
 65 
 
 Shoemakers. 
 
 .20 
 
 .22 
 
 •29 
 
 •35 
 
 67 
 
 Saddlers. 
 
 •25 
 
 .29 
 
 •33 
 
 •39 
 
 6 i ^4 
 
 Joiners. 
 
 , 2 Z 
 
 .29 
 
 •33 
 
 .41 
 
 6iJ^ 
 
 Tinmen. 
 
 • J 
 
 •25 
 
 • 29 
 
 •33 
 
 •39 
 
 57 
 
 Day laborers. 
 
 .20 
 
 .25 
 
 •29 
 
 •35 
 
 47 
 
 207 
 
208 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 WEEKLY WAGES IN AUSTRIA. 
 
 Blacksmiths.$7.20 
 
 Shoemakers. 6.00 
 
 Tailors. 7.50 
 
 Masons. 6.00 
 
 Plasterers. 6.00 
 
 Carpenters. 7.20 
 
 Painters. 9.00 
 
 Machinists, second grade... 2.77 
 Iron-moulders, third grade. .95 
 
 Cabinet-makers.12.00 
 
 Wheelwrights,second grade 6.00 
 
 Tailors.15.00 
 
 Cotton-spinncries, highest... 5.76 
 “ lowest.... 1.15 
 
 Cotton-factories, highest. 3.60 
 
 “ lowest. 1.15 
 
 Printers.$2.30 
 
 Paper-makers. 4.32 
 
 Ship-carpenters. 5.76 
 
 Tanners and curriers.-. 7.20 
 
 Woolen manufactures: 
 
 Washing. 1.40 
 
 Sorting..-.- 2.40 
 
 Scouring. 1.92 
 
 Carding. 1.80 
 
 Spinning. 4.00 
 
 Spooling and warping. 1.20 
 
 Dressing. 1.52 
 
 Weaving. 3.20 
 
 Fulling.-. 1.60 
 
 Burling..-...-. 1.40 
 
 The above figures are gold prices, and are taken from the Fifth Re¬ 
 port of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor. 
 
 MONTHLY WAGES AT MOSCOW. 
 
 COTTON-MILLS. 
 
 
 i860. 
 
 1869. 
 
 Pickers. 
 
 
 53-66 
 
 Strippers. 
 
 ... 5.50 
 
 6.29 
 
 Spinners. 
 
 
 9.50 
 
 Reelers. 
 
 .... 4.27 
 
 472 
 
 Winders.. 
 
 .... 5-25 
 
 5.25 
 
 Warpers. 
 
 ... 8.S6 
 
 7.72 
 
 Weavers. 
 
 ... 8.33 
 
 S.16 
 
 Enginemen. 
 
 ... 10.33 
 
 12.16 
 
 Stokers. 
 
 
 7.09 
 
 Mechanics. 
 
 ... 10.S3 
 
 12.00 
 
 Blacksmiths. 
 
 
 13-66 
 
 Joiners. 
 
 
 * *-33 
 
 Watchmen. 
 
 ... 3.S6 
 
 403 
 
 Day laborers. 
 
 .... 4.39 
 
 5.19 
 
 WOOLEN MILLS. 
 
 
 i860. 
 
 1869. 
 
 Card-cleaners. 
 
 • 55 33 
 
 $6.00 
 
 Card-teniers. 
 
 ... 2.66 
 
 3*5 
 
 Shearers. 
 
 ... 3.00 
 
 3- 1 5 
 
 Weavers. 
 
 
 6.66 
 
 Cloth-cleaners.... 
 
 .. 500 
 
 4.66 
 
 Wool-washers.... 
 
 ... 5.66 
 
 5.66 
 
 Cloth-dyers. 
 
 •• 5-33 
 
 5-66 
 
 Cloth-pressers .... 
 
 
 6.00 
 
 Spinners. 
 
 ... 2.66 
 
 3.00 
 
 PAPER-MILLS. 
 
 
 
 i860. 
 
 1869. 
 
 Workmen.. 
 
 
 $5.66 
 
 Workwomen. 
 
 • 333 
 
 4.00 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 209 
 
 PRICES OF PROVISIONS AT MOSCOW. 
 
 
 i860. 
 
 1869. 
 
 Flour, white, best, per cwt. 
 
 
 $5-77 
 
 “ “ 2d “ . 
 
 . 3-83 
 
 4.12 
 
 “ “ 3d “ . 
 
 . 3-70 
 
 3-7o 
 
 Malt, per cwt. 
 
 . 1.85 
 
 3-31 
 
 Salt, “ . 
 
 . 1.85 
 
 2.06 
 
 Oil, “ . 
 
 
 13-25 
 
 Salted beef, per cwt.. 
 
 . 5-75 
 
 8.77 
 
 Butter, per pound. 
 
 .16 
 
 .18 
 
 Small fish, per pound.. 
 
 
 .11 
 
 Beef, 1st quality, per pound. 
 
 
 .09 
 
 “ 2d “ “ . 
 
 
 .07 
 
 Buckwheat, per measure. 
 
 . 1.19 
 
 .86 
 
 Wheat, “ .. 
 
 . 1.06 
 
 1.19 
 
 Peas, “ . 
 
 
 3-70 
 
 WAGES IN HURLIMANN’S SPINNING-MILLS, 
 SWITZERLAND. 
 
 
 1835. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1845- 
 
 1850. 
 
 1855- 
 
 i860. 
 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Foremen. 
 
 33h 
 
 33\ 
 
 36 
 
 36 
 
 42 
 
 44 
 
 Carders, men and boys. 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 28 
 
 24 
 
 Bobbin and fly-frame wo¬ 
 
 men. 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 Hi 
 
 Hf 
 
 13 
 
 18 
 
 
 Piecers, girls. 
 
 9 t 
 
 9 f 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 l 6 
 
 
 Spinners on hand mules. 
 
 Spinners on self-acting 
 
 24 
 
 30 
 
 30 
 
 35 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 mules. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Reelers, women. 
 
 14 
 
 20 
 
 17 
 
 20 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 1865. 
 
 1868. 
 
 1869. 
 
 1870. 
 
 1871. 
 
 Inc. 
 Per ct. 
 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 Cents. 
 
 
 Foremen. 
 
 46 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 56 
 
 30 
 
 62 
 
 84 
 
 Carders, men and boys. 
 
 Bobbin and fly-frame wo¬ 
 
 
 
 38 
 
 28 
 
 99 
 
 
 
 men . 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 125 
 
 Piecers, girls. 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 26 
 
 140 
 
 Spinners on hand mules. 
 
 Spinners on self - acting 
 
 42 
 
 
 
 63 
 
 65 
 
 ”3 
 
 mules. 
 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
 44 
 
 44 
 
 49 
 
 Reelers, women. 
 
 25 
 
 3 ° 
 
 33 
 
 60 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 18 
 
210 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The preceding table is extracted from a very complete one prepared 
 by Mr. Gould, and appended to his Report relating to the Condition 
 of the Industrial Classes in Switzerland. To the table he has added 
 the following note: , 
 
 Average increase 122 per cent, since 1835, or nearly 3^ per cent, 
 per annum. Corresponding increase in the cost of food and lodging 
 1 io^ 5 , or 3^ per cent, per annum. The difference between the two 
 sums is only $ per cent, per annum, “ but in reality the cost of living 
 has increased at the same ratio as wages, for the number of those in 
 receipt of the lower rate of wages is greater than that of those in 
 receipt of the higher rate.” 
 
 WAGES AT THE PACIFIC MILLS, LAWRENCE, 
 MASSACHUSETTS, PAID IN 1861 AND 1873. 
 
 In 1861 the employees worked sixty-six hours, in 1873 sixty-two 
 and a half hours per week.* 
 
 
 Ycart86i. Pay 
 by hour. 
 
 Year 1873. Pay 
 by hour. 
 
 Per cent, of in- 
 
 . 1 <-.!■ r. 
 
 Year 1861. Pay 
 by week of 66 
 hours. 
 
 Year 1873. Pay 
 by week of 
 
 6a % hours. 
 
 Per cent, of in¬ 
 crease. 
 
 Sorters. 
 
 50.1375 
 
 50.1754 
 
 27.5 
 
 59.07 
 
 510.96 
 
 20.8 
 
 ; Pickers. 
 
 .0846 
 
 •*343 
 
 58.7 
 
 5-58 
 
 8-39 
 
 50-3 
 
 Grinders. 
 
 .IO44 
 
 .156 
 
 49.4 
 
 6.89 
 
 9-75 
 
 415 
 
 Card-strippers.. 
 
 .0752 
 
 *343 
 
 76.6 
 
 4 96 
 
 8.39 
 
 69.1 
 
 Drawing. 
 
 .0456 
 
 .0826 
 
 8l 
 
 3.00 
 
 5.16 
 
 72 
 
 Slubber. 
 
 .0614 
 
 . 1*94 
 
 I 10.7 
 
 405 
 
 8.08 
 
 99-5 
 
 Intermediate... 
 
 .0636 
 
 .1268 
 
 99-3 
 
 4.20 
 
 7.92 
 
 88.6 
 
 Jack-frame. 
 
 .0708 
 
 *335 
 
 88.6 
 
 4.67 
 
 8.34 
 
 78.6 
 
 Mule-spinners.. 
 
 .11 
 
 .2054 
 
 86.7 
 
 7.26 
 
 12.83 
 
 76.7 
 
 Frame “ 
 
 .0535 
 
 .0962 
 
 798 
 
 3 53 
 
 6.01 
 
 70.2 
 
 Spoolers. 
 
 •0557 
 
 .0967 
 
 73-6 
 
 3-68 
 
 6.04 
 
 64.1 
 
 •Warpers. 
 
 .0742 
 
 *394 
 
 87.8 
 
 4.89 
 
 8.71 
 
 7S.1 
 
 Dressers. 
 
 .1463 
 
 .2622 
 
 79.2 
 
 9.66 
 
 16.38 
 
 69 -5 
 
 Weavers. 
 
 .0704 
 
 .1244 
 
 76.7 
 
 465 
 
 7-77 
 
 67 
 
 Sorters, grinders, card-strippers, mule-spinners, and dressers are 
 males; pickers, males andJemales ; all others are females, girls being 
 employed for drawing. 
 
 * This and the following tabic are extracted from the Fifth Report of the Bureau 
 of Statistics of Massachusetts. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 21 I 
 
 WAGES AT THE WASHINGTON MILLS, LAW¬ 
 RENCE, MASSACHUSETTS, PAID IN 1861 AND 
 1S73. 
 
 In 1861 the employees worked sixty-six hours, in 1873 sixty-two 
 and a half hours per week. 
 
 
 Year 1861. Pay 
 by hour. 
 
 Year 1873. Pay 
 by hour. 
 
 Per cent, of in- 
 
 Year 1861. Pay 
 
 by week of 66 
 
 Year 1873. Pay 
 
 by week of 
 
 62^ hours. 
 
 Per cent, of in- 
 
 Carding, males. 
 
 $0,069 
 
 $0,131 
 
 89.8 
 
 # 4-55 
 
 $8.l8 
 
 79-7 
 
 “ females... 
 
 .052 
 
 .088 
 
 69.2 
 
 3-43 
 
 5-50 
 
 60.3 
 
 Spinning, males.... 
 
 .096 
 
 .164 
 
 70.8 
 
 6-33 
 
 IO.25 
 
 61.9 
 
 “ females.. 
 
 .072 
 
 .129 
 
 79.I 
 
 4-75 
 
 8.06 
 
 69.6 
 
 Weaving, males.... 
 
 .09I 
 
 .141 
 
 55 
 
 6 00 
 
 8.8l 
 
 46.8 
 
 “ females.. 
 
 .070 
 
 .128 
 
 82.8 
 
 4.62 
 
 8.00 
 
 73 -i 
 
 Fulling, males. 
 
 .072 
 
 .136 
 
 88.8 
 
 4-75 
 
 8.50 
 
 78.9 
 
 Picking, “ . 
 
 •0 73 
 
 •133 
 
 82.2 
 
 4.81 
 
 8.31 
 
 72.7 
 
 Shearing, “ . 
 
 .076 
 
 .128 
 
 68.4 
 
 5.01 
 
 8.00 
 
 59-6 
 
 Finishing, “ . 
 
 .089 
 
 •153 
 
 71.9 
 
 5.87 
 
 9-56 
 
 62.8 
 
 “ females.. 
 
 .048 
 
 .102 
 
 112.5 
 
 3 -i 7 
 
 6.38 
 
 101.3 
 
 • Packing, males. 
 
 .072 
 
 .144 
 
 100 
 
 4-75 
 
 9.00 
 
 89.4 
 
 “ females.. 
 
 .062 
 
 .IIO 
 
 77-4 
 
 4.09 
 
 6.94 
 
 69.7 
 
 Sorting, males. 
 
 .099 
 
 .l6l 
 
 62.6 
 
 6-53 
 
 10.06 
 
 54 
 
 Dye-house, males.. 
 
 .085 
 
 •151 
 
 77.6 
 
 5-6 1 
 
 9.44 
 
 68.2 
 
 Dressing, males.... 
 
 .098 
 
 .152 
 
 55 -i 
 
 6.47 
 
 9-50 
 
 46.8 
 
 “ females.. 
 
 .069 
 
 •H 5 
 
 IIO.I 
 
 4-55 
 
 9.06 
 
 99.1 
 
 Skein - spooling, 
 
 
 
 
 
 females. 
 
 .063 
 
 .Il8 
 
 87.3 
 
 4.16 
 
 7-38 
 
 774 
 
 Burling, males. 
 
 .081 
 
 .137 
 
 69.1 
 
 5-35 
 
 8.56 
 
 60 
 
 “ females.... 
 
 •055 
 
 .105 
 
 90.9 
 
 3- 6 3 
 
 6.56 
 
 80.7 
 
 P r y> n g> males. 
 
 .078 
 
 .122 
 
 56.4 
 
 5 -i 5 
 
 7-63 
 
 48.1 
 
 Gigging, “ . 
 
 .076 
 
 .134 
 
 76.3 
 
 5.02 
 
 8.38 
 
 66.9 
 
 Scouring, “ . 
 
 .074 
 
 .134 
 
 81. 
 
 4.88 
 
 8.38 
 
 71.7 
 
 Carpenters, males.. 
 
 .164 
 
 .272 
 
 65.8 
 
 10.82 
 
 17.00 
 
 57-1 
 
 Machinists, “ .. 
 
 .142 
 
 •215 
 
 51-4 
 
 9-37 
 
 1344 
 
 43-4 
 
 Watch, fire, and 
 
 
 
 
 59-8 
 
 yard hands. 
 
 .099 
 
 .167 • 
 
 68.6 
 
 6-53 
 
 10.44 
 
 THE END. 
 
PUBLICATIONS OF J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 
 
 NOW COMPLETE, IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES. 
 
 NEW STANDARD EDITION 
 
 or 
 
 PRESCOTT’S WORKS 
 
 WITH THU 
 
 Author's Latest Corrections and Additions. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 JOHN FOSTEE KIEIKC 
 
 as follows: 
 
 HISTORY OF FERDINAND AND ISABELLA, 
 
 .‘I Volumes. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE CONQUEST OF MEXICO, 
 
 J Volume**. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE CONQUEST OF PERU, 
 
 Vi Volume*. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE REIGN OF PHILIP II., 
 
 3 Volume*'!. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE REIGN OF CHARLES V., 
 
 3 Volumes. 
 
 PRESCOTTS MISCELLANEOUS ESSAYS, 
 
 I Volume. 
 
 This Edition is Illustrated with Maps, Plates, and Engravings. 
 Price per volume, umo, in fine English cloth, with black 
 and gold ornamentation, $2.25; library sheep, 
 
 $2.75; half calf, gilt back, $4.50. 
 
 “ It would be difficult to point out 
 among any works of living historians 
 the equal of those which have pro¬ 
 ceeded from Mr. Prescott’s pen.”— 
 Harper s Magazine. 
 
 “ We would gladly do our share to¬ 
 wards making acknowledgment of the 
 debt of gratitude we all owe to Messrs. 
 Lippincott & Co. for the superb and 
 even monumental edition of the Works 
 of William H. Prescott, which they 
 
 have at last brought to completion.”— 
 York Cknstian Union. 
 
 “ The typography, indeed the entire 
 mechanical execution, of these books 
 is exquisite; and we unhesitatingly 
 pronounce the scries nutjonly the best 
 edition of Prescott’s Works ever* pub¬ 
 lished, but one of the handsomest set 
 of books the American press has given 
 us.”— Boston Jonmal.