The Press.
London, England, 1853-12-03 00:00:00

STRIKES AND POOR LAWS.

Ix the sweat of his brow shall man earn his bread,
and, so long as he is willing to work, bread he may
Attila as a right. This right we recognise by our
Poor Laws, and the amount of relief they are intended
to afford, whilst sufficient to preserve health, is less
than could be procured by the wages of lahenr. It
is only in periods of great distress, or when there is
something wrong in our soeial condition, that the
workhouse can be voluntarily resorted to by men able
to labour. In Lancashire the workmen out on strike
have, to seine extent, applied for parochial relief, and
it has been granted, whilst threats have been uttered
that this is only a commencement, and that they will
enter the unions en VIIINV, for the double purpose of
sustaining themselves and of raising the rates. Now,
it may well be a questi whether, under the eireum-
stances, these weavers and mechanics can claun to be
maintained at the masters' expeake if the masters
will not raise their wages. It is clear that if a person
chooses to live at another's cost, that other has a
right to require his services in return, and, if they are
not given, to withdraw the support granted ; there-
fore, if the weavers execute their threat and resort
to the unions in thousands, the least they can expect
is that they should be compelled to work.
But suppose the work selected should be that in
which they are skilled—suppose it should be their
own trade—suppose they should he allotted or
assigned in gangs to the master manufacturers,—
where would be their ten per cent. then—where their
weekly wages—where their honest independence?
Nor is this supposition a vain assumption without
substance. To this it must come at last; and many
of them must remember when it was a system
widely existing in England. Under the vicious
working of the old poor law, when a majority of the
lailumring classes received parochial relief, wages
were, in effeet, paid in rates. The evils of this sys-
tem were monstrous ; the men were idle and de-
grit,leol; gaining little by their labour, they dill not
work with a will," whilst the amount of rates ex-
ceeded what wages would have been, because in the
workhouses the waste was universal. But bast as this
system was, it is clearly better than to have high
rates and no labour in return ; and the men on strike
may depend upon it that if they execute their threat
the consequences we have indicated will follow. e
are not now expressing any opinion on the IMAM
question, but only on one isolated act by which the
men threaten to carry on the contest. But when wo
read that one D. Nrrren demanded an advance (.f
*IL per cent.,—" not because he thought the trade.
•• would allow it, but because lie thought the state la
society wanted renovating,"—and when we Inrther
learn that Mr. D. NUTTER is one of the leaders of the.
movement, we cannot but suspect the prudence of
those who act under such guidance. To renovate.
society by demanding an impossibility—why, oil ity—why, what stuff
is this! In Burnley and its neighbourhood are fifty-
seven firm s:whose action on this question is united. The
population of 'hitt tthitrict is nearly 110,0011, of whom
at least 0111.000 heretofore rotund employ ment in the
mills. The number of looms is about 50,000, the

' Mill