The Sun.
London, England, 1869-09-30 00:00:00

THE AGRICULEUUAL LABOURER.

Passing to the department of Economy and Trade, the
right honourable gentleman devoted much attention to the
agricultural labourer difficulty. "By some," he said, "it is
contended that as the tiller of the soil is paid less than he
ought to have, the supply of labour must be in excess of
the demand, and therefore the State ought to promote and
encourage emigration, in fact to give it direct assistance. But
admitting that the younger and more active might, with
advantage to themselves, emigrate more largely than they
do, it still remains a question whether the State should aid
them in the matter. It should no doubt as far as possible
remove any artificial obstacles which impede their freedom
of action, and should take care that every one has
fair play ; but to give an artificial stimulus to emigration,
for the purpose of reducing the supply of labour in this
country, appears to me to be a policy not hastily to he
adopted. The business of farming is like any other busi
tress, and must be subject to the same general conditions as
the business of cotton-spinning, ship-building, or machine-
making. If a man is to conduct his business at all, he must
contrive to conduct it to a profit. For this purpose he
must economise his outlay ; he must spend no more
than is necessary to produce his result; he must
not buy costly implements if cheaper ones will
do equally well; neither must he employ more labourers
than are sufficient to do his work; nor can he afford to pay
them more than their work is worth. If then a philan-
thropist were to go to a farmer and say "Your wages are
too low ; you are giving your men only Ios. a week, and
you ought to raise the amount to 155.," the farmer would
reply, "If I am to add 50 per cent. to what I pay for my
labour, and am to get no better return than I get now, I
shall be ruined ; and I don't see why I should ruin myself to
please you." The answer to this, of course, is that he need
not be ruined, for that by paying his labourers better he
would get more work out of them ; that ten men, at 15s. a
week, would do as much work as fifteen men at 10s., and
would cost no more ; and that, if ho were put to it, he
could find many ways of making up for the less he would
iu the first instance sustain by the rise of wages, as for
example the introduction of more machinery and
the diminution of the number of hands by that means.
But it remains to be proven how far increase of pay would
produce a proportionate increase of work. And, moreover,
if by improved machinery a number of hands can be dis-
pensed with, what would become of those who would be
turned off ? The one thing needed is that the labourer
should have opportunity to improve himself, that his work
should be paid for in such a manner as to make it his
interest to do his best, that he should be encouraged to form
habits of 0P;.9,=.,.•.. ;--1-pilndence, and should be made to
to it hisAVt. lifri fact, :
to ;-• ;
eralC
dual, and to make him work cut his own improvement.
I take my side, not with the believers, in the trades
union system, but with the believers in pic:.T-worl:. Not
that I dispute or doubt the reasonableness of such an
organisation of labour as is sufficient to protect the indi7i-
dual labourer against the possible exactions of the ea: I-
talist ; if trades unions or labour unions could be confined
to that object they would be deserving of respect and sym-
pathy. But when they go further and demand of their
own members that they should limit their individual exer-
tions so as not to produce more cr to earn more
than their fellows, they introduce a principle at
once unjust and dangerous. The theory of co-operation is
indeed a beautiful one, but it seems better suited to tho
Republic of Plato than to the atmosphere of this work-a-
day world. It will no doubt commend itself to those who
abhor what they call privileges, who prefer equality to
liberty, and who look to the State to exercise the evils of
the inequality which Nature has unhappily inflicted on the
human race. This is the theory which finds its latest
expressions in the proposal of one of the societies repre-
sented at the late National Labour Congress at Philadel-
phia, " that when an employer refused to make an advance
in wages or a reduction in the hours of labour, the State
should employ such workmen." I presume that in such
case the workmen would both fix the amount of wages
they would like to receive and name the amount of work
they would like to do in return, leaving the taxpayers to
make up the difference between the two sides of the
account. It is a theory which may well find advocates.
But to many of us, I hope to the majority of us, individual
freedom and fair competition are the very breath of
our nostrils, and long may it be ere we are deprived of
them. What I have said of the artificial system of the
trades union applies, I think, at least in a degree, to the
artificial system of assisted emigration directed to the
diminution of the supply of labour. Ido not believe that
in this country there is a real surplusage of labour.
Population advances very much less rapidly than does
the accumulation of capital ; and were it not for the very
rapid increase of machinery our labour supply would now
be extremely deficient. I look for the improvement of the
condition of our labourers generally, and of that of the
agricultural labourers among them, to the free play of in-
dividual competition under favourable circumstances
rather than to any artificial remedy. But do these favour-
able circumstances exist? Has the agricultural labourer
really fair play? Has he the opportunity for raising him-
self ? Has he the inducement to exert himself ? I fear
we cannot give a wholly satisfactory answer to these ques-
tions. I cannot doubt that the system of the Poor Law,
taken as a whole, has exercised and still exercises
a deadening influence upon our labourers, or
that it tends greatly to neutralise the whole-
some spirit of competition and self-reliance which it is so
important to arouse. If the labourer be trained in his
youth to recognise the duty of laying by a provision for
his old age, if he be early taught prudence, and fore-
sight, and self-denial, and if at the same time the means
are provided him of investing his savings with perfect
security, which he, has now great difficulty in
doing, a great step would be taken in advance;
and if his employers be brought to see the wisdom of so
regulating his wages as to enable him by additional labour
to earn additional remuneration, and so encourage him to
increased industry, the heavy weight of pauperism which now
oppresses the energies of our people might to a very groat
extent bo shaken off. The means for commencing this are
not far to seek. The Government may develope tho bene-
ficent system of the Post-office Savings' Bank, for which
we are so largely indebted to the present Prime Minister,
and may protect the labourer from that great evil which is
the cause of such frequent sufferings to him—the loss of
his savings in ill-managed or fraudulent sick clubs. The
employer may make more use than he now commonly does
of the great engine of piece-work; and the landlord may
co-operate with him by the improvement of his cottages,
and by the extension of the garden allotment system.
Whether the peasantry of England would gain any
real advantage from an attempt to convert them
into the owners of land is, I think, very doubtful ;
but there can be no doubt that it is of great
advantage to them to be enabled to occupy small
allotments of land at a moderate rent."