The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-09-27 00:00:00

THE DIEPUTE BETWEEN EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYED.

1 hi pe my friend Mr. Ificrris, If he is here, will allow me to
make some allusion to his able paper. I don't entirely
agree with all his views, but I wish to treat them in the WM
spirit in which he treats them—that is, with fairness, and
an appreciai ion of all that can be sal loathe other side. I
menlton him I remise it is by no means a rare meting—lt is
a very common feeling—that disputes between labour-re and
capitalists are Zaire dangerous and more fierce now than
tiny have been at former periods. I must demur to that.
ear, hear.) I think it may be true that disputes are mime-
times carried on on a somewhat larger scale. The number
of labourers is far greater, the power of communication
I, much easter , but what I do maintain Is that these
dispute. am conic ted with less fierceness and acrimony
than they were In former times, and that, generally
speaking, Milt do not last as long. (Applause.) Nor
instance, there are some Bradford men who may remember
the fierce struggle there was against the introduction of
machlnery and looms Into Bradford, and who remember the
violent fights of that time. It would be impossible to do
any thing of that kind now. (Applause.' Again, I recollect,
worn, almost a by, I was learning the manufacturing busi-
ness at Norwich, that there waa a dispute, and the masters
had to walk through the town lookine with suspicion at
almost everybody coming near them, for tear of having
vitriol thrown in their eyes. That Is long past. Then,
again, take the Preston strike of 20 years ago, which I have
studied. I think that st,ike lasted onger than any ditpute
of recent times. there are not now those foolish struggles
against the laws of science which there were formerly, thp-
plane.).

A LEAGUE OF CAPITAL AND CAPITALISTS.
As I demur to my Mend Mr. Morris's statement and his
remedy, he will not be eurerised that I demur to the con-
clusions of hie paper I think he overeat. the evil hut,
whether he does so or not, allow me to state that his remedy
of a league of capital asel canitellsts throughout the
country is one Which I shoufa be meet grieved to see anyone
attempt to apply. (Appbailee.) I think • league of labour
ag sleet capital is imposelele. It may be talked about in meet-
lugs and t newspapers. but I do not believe In its possi
Witty. It anything could make it Denial., however, it
would ba a league of capitalists against the labourers. (Ap-
plause.) I think we shall all ogres that two such opposing
leagues would he considered one of the greatest calamities
that could afflict the country. (Applause) I tremble
to thick that those engaged in our tedietries should be
divided into hostile parties—that Eugland, with Its
Induatrial workers, should be divided Into opposing
camp.. (dear, hear.) Some people say that it Is impossible,
as the capitalists are so unequally matched wilts the
labourers, and that, ea you have given votes tie the labourers,
they would be stronger than the capitalists. I cannot take
that for granted. I believe that She two puttee, if they WCIO
unwise euough to band themselves together—lf they could get
the d demiut indlviduale to do so, which I behave they could
not—would riot be unequally matched. I think money will
always buy men, and capital will always bud its gets sup-
port from among labourers. I believe they would not be
unequally matched In power : and although I know many
of their friends are meatior.ing such a remedy sincerely,
yet I believe, if the cutest were once begun, it would le
cououcted with equal recklessness on both sides. Well,
the very pessieility of it mikes me take some additional
comfort for one of the politleel measures with which I have
had something to do. If there were anything like this op-
p titton in the COM try. there would bean erdleavour on the
part of each pert) to clutch the power of the law, and aim
at legislative merge... rids makes me very glad that the
(I reernmin,t has done sometldeg to lessen the power of the
leaders on both sides by giviug to the rank and file of each
aide the protetion of the Bellot, and that hrtngs me to one
remark, and that Is—putting adde the possihility of these
tpcoong leegues, and I will dismiss them ?rem my mind—l
think there Is on both sides. on the side of both those who
*Avocalo the rights of labourers and those who wish for
the protection of the rialata of capital, • little too lam%
&society to make nee of law, tedoubtedly, there ought to
be perfect freedom to selling labour. That implies that
there should lie perfect freedom In combination. I believe
there is no greater mistake than the attempt to pre-
vent • man from agreeing with his fellow.men as to hew
and upon what erudition they would like to sell
their labour. (Ilea, hear.) But, of course, we ought
alan to say that there ought to be perfect freedom to refuse
I to conshlue, and that the right of the individual In that re-
enact ought to he protected. (Appiauee ) Bat there Is a
das g _r that in our efforts to secure that freedom we shall try
to we& the law to do that which it cannot sigh cannot,
tee fact, effectually, co. We can nitke use Of lOW to protect
the Queen's subjects *gidesl bodily harm, against physical
I violence but it I no use atto toiling to protect men against
persuasion or even against moral Intimidation. They can only
protect ihemselvet, and if the law tries and strives lode the:
It will sorely fall, and probably put upon the aide of those
over whom It eV-mete to exert its power the feeling of the
tnterfer. uce with their reasohable liberty, oral I don't think
In dealing with this question we must look forward to any
exceptional legislation. . . .

TWO KINDS OF CO-OPERATION.

With regard te co-operation, just let me make one remark.
There are two kiwin of co-operation ; and if we attempt to
c ,nslder the sul ject scientificelly we must not mix them up
togett er. There is th.A form of co-operation in which the
capitalist—the employer —pays the labourer . the employer
pays the man he employes not altogether in wages, but by
giving him a suave of the profit I was very hopeful, by the
halp of these mutual rerations, that the condition of the
labourer would be much better I am still hopeful, but not
quite so much so as I was at the commencement I see
clearly that there are ten accompaniments of this, one is,
you cannot expect, and we must ni.t expect, the labourer to
take both sides of the bargain. You must not aspect him to
suffer loss, and sometimes there is loss. If he is working
from week to week, he cannot, unless he has him-elf become
a capitalist by saving, work without his cally and weekly
wage ; and therefore you have to pay him a share of the
profit, and not to make pim responsible for a share of the
Loss. Well, that at oncb alters the case. Be cannot then
be said to be a sharer in profit and loss; he Is only a sharer
in the pr. It. Then, again, If it was generally done we
should tied it simply a mode of payment, perhaps • more
satisfactory mode of payment ; but I am not sure we
should not have &rain disputes as to what should be the
share of the profits. That does nct prevent our watching
these experiments with great care, anxiety, and hopeful-
ness The other mode of 00.09 ration, which I may call oo-
cyerafton proper, is that in which the employer, sometimes
, counting his labour as capital, arranging so that it should
be considered as capital, Is actually a shareholder, and puts
la some little saviugs also as an actual shareholder In the
enterprha Allusion has been made In the course of our
discussions to the great success of ti is kind of co-operation
in di itribution. We knew of it very well In Bradford,
and especially in neighbouring towns; and of the enormous
and most tailed actory success, for Instance, of the Rochdale
Cooperative Store It is more difficult to apply it to pro-
duction, but still lain most a! aloes tests these experiments
scientifically observel. I ani told, but Ido not know
whether the statement is an °gather borne oat, that co-
operative mills have been tried, and have to • great extent
succeeded Lancashire; that cotton mills have been "stab-
. ."

.-
11. bed, and that they have stood through commercial crises
with great stability. (Applause ) All experiments of the kind
are moat interesting. I can only say that I welcome them
with great bopi-fulneis. As an empLyer—for I canmd forget
that lam still an employer—l think there la an immense ad-
vantage In working men thin! employing themselves and
finding out the dlfildultite that attend the position of the
capitalist, and also discovering that there is not always
profit, but that there I. sometimia loy. (Applause.) We
mud not, when we look at men who bilfte made large for-
tunes forget that fortunes have been lost. But as • politi-
cian, as a man who cannot aspire to be • statesman, (laughter
and cheer.), but as one who haa to do with the government
of this country, I hall the success of these experiments still
more hopefully They say that one of the great causes of
stability in America, and eves in France, am d its conga
Mons, is the large numb, of peasant proprietors. Well,
think we should have somewhat if the same ground is
stability and order in this country II we had a very large
number of working men with their own share of the capital
and stake in Its prosperous and orderly government, .