The Express.
London, England, 1853-11-03 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY

and spinners, under which last division come the self-
actor minders. The card-room hands earn lkom ss.
to 12e. a week. The weavers get from Be. to 18s.,
and occasionally more. The spinners and self-actor
minders may earn as much as 25e. per week. Ob-
serve that there is nothing abstruse in the work of
the labourers at mills. It can scarcely be called
skilled labour. A few mouths will make a good
weaver out of a card-room hand. And the conse-
quence of this is that the card-room hands are per-
petually pressing forward to become weavers, thus
making a scarcity of bands adapted to the lower
kind of labour. So much for the composition of the
lifeblood that ought to be circulating through the
veins of the dead giant.
In the spring of the year application was made by
the spinners in a few mills for increased wages. This
was in some cases acceded to. Later in the year a
general application of the same sort was made, but
the terms demanded were specified, 10 per cent. in-
crease. This was after similar terms had been agreed
upon in Stockport. The masters in some instances
agreed, but the fact of the Stockport rise being taken
as a ground for the rise in Preston seemed to be
pregnant with grave consequences. Was there a
general conspiracy for an equalisation of wages
throughout the trade ? The masters met several
times on this question, but ended by a partial conces-
sion. On August 13 they agreed to give the 10 per
cent. on weaving and spinning, but not on carding.
Remember the card-room hands are the lowest in the
scale, and furnish the material for the weavers and
spinners. Why was the exception against the carders
made ? Because, say the masters—l am telling the
masters' story throughout—because those "hands"
had received already an increase quite equivalent to
10 per cent. Some of the owners, in fact, say that in
their particular mills the card-room hands had re-
ceived an increase equal to 15 per cent. The demand
for an additional 10 per cent. in this case is, on the
face of it, unfair. But this is the grand feature in
the strike. The men in the first me take the
maximum of wages as that upon which to make
their calculations, and then demand a 10 per cent.
upon that. They insist first upon an equalisation of
wages in the various factories, and then upon a rise
of 10 per cent. They utterly ignore all the differences
which exist between the capacities of various mills,
but insist upon treating all owners as standing upon
one level. Nothing, nevertheless, is more notorious
than that the progress of mechanical discovery tends
to make each loom more efficient than its predecessor.
The "hands" can perform much more work with an
improved machine than with an old one, and they
wish to tax the master for the perfection of his
machine. The new loom produces more, and they
demand 10 per cent. upon the increased produce, thus
depriving the manufacturers of the advantage which
they ought to receive from the extra capital which
they have invested in the improved looms. Labour
is to dictate its own terms, and capital is
to be deprived of what is strictly its own.
The owners begin to think that they see a principle
is looming through all this, which must be combated
at any risk. It is not so much the amount that is
quarrelled with as the principle at issue. So true is
this, that one mill which" locked out" its hands, 700
in number, did so on account of a demand which
would only have made, if acceded to, a difference of
thirty shillings per week to them ! Observe, the con-
test is receding now from what was at first the
actual position, the mere amouut of money; it is one
of principles, if not of persons. A property of the
value perhaps of one hundred and fifty thousand
pounds is reduced to inaction for a sum of thirty
Shillings. This firm were willing enough to in-
crease their ordinary payments of sevenpence half-
penny to eightpence farthing, a legitimate
10 per cent, but they refused, and as it appears with
justice, to make • rum of one penny upon work for
which they had originally been paying eightpence.
The hands insisted upon this; they wanted the
eightpence to be made ninepence—a rise equal to
121 per cent., instead of 10 per cent, their original
demand. The men state this case rather differently;
but I am concerned now enly with the masters'
representations. It is matter of fact, however, that
the muters offered a rise of three-farthings on the
eightpence, while the men demanded a penny. If
you take this SA a measure of the justice, or injustice,
of the question, you will see that while the muters
offered 1-16th too little, the men demanded 140th
too much. The relative injustice of the two parties
in this case is u one on the side of the masters to
four on the side of the men.

The reasoning of the masters then, may be summed
up as follows :—The present Strike is a dead set at
capital, and our only resource is to make a dead set
at labour. The men arc actuated by nothing but a
mere piggish desire to get as much as they can with-
out any consideration as to the practicability of
their obtaining what they want. They first insist
upon equalisation of wages, utterly ignoring the
fact that the facilities which one proprietor gives to
his men are far greater than those afforded
by anther. They are just as forgetful of the
differences which exist amongst themselves. They
demand that in all mill. all " hands" shall be paid so
much per "cut." When this is obtained, and not
till then, they wish to levy the 10 per cent. on the
maximum rate. The masters claim the right of
making their own bargain with their own men.
They say that they themselves must be the best
judges of what they can afford to give. They deny
most emphatically the statement made by the men,
as to the following out of the conditions of the vir-
tual arrangement made between masters and men in
1847. In that year, on account of the unpro-
mising state of affairs, a reduction took place,
accompanied, say the men, by a condition
that the reduction, 10 per cent, should be
made up on the advent of prosperous times.
The men say wages have been stationary since
then. The masters deny it, and, as a proof
of the truth of their assertion, ask why no de-
mand has been made for an increase during the in-
terval. They say at the same time that a demand
which they might have acceded to a year ago, when
trade was brisk and money was cheap, cannot be lis-
tened to now that both them conditions are altered.
The large proprietors have a little better reason than
this for holding out. They tell you that the
' men have made one of the greatest mis-
take+ that it was possible for them to make.
Their warehouses are glutted. They have twenty
weeks stock on hand. The China market is closed.
There are goods enough in the Indian seas without
purchasers, to supply the markets when the trade is
opened for months. They say that they were never
in a better position for fighting the question than
now, and they will fight it out. They are under a
bond of 5,0001. each not to commence working,
except with the joint permission of the society, and
they intend to support the weaker members of the
union by contributions. I have heard, from good
authority, that one firm has stated that the ten per
cent. on the whole wages would swallow up all their
profits. So much for the case of the manufacturers.