The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-10 00:00:00

through gravel or sand cannot possibly remove
this impurity, which will putrify in warm weather,
and the Serpentine will continue to emit effluvia
as it now does." Indeed there cannot be one mo-
ment's doubt of it upon reflection—that this sum of
£17,000 will have to be repeated again and again
before any appreciable result can be obtained
by any such means for the purification of
the waters of the Serpentine. Regarding even
which advantage, however, really to be at last by
some such means attained—there would still re-
main those perillous holes and pits of death at the
bottom of the Serpentine unfilled-up to the last, and
insuring still the chance of accidental destruction
to many and many an unfortunate, fond of bathing
but unskilled as a swimmer. Reflection, indeed,
only serves to convince us more and more tho-
roughly that the apparent economy of this sum of
£17,000 is a real extravagance! That the only
secure, and in the end really economic plan for the
cleansing of the Serpentine, will be by a repetition of
the very plan so happily and admirably carried out in
St. James's Park—by drawing off the water—by
clearing away the mud—by filling up the holes—by
reducing all to one uniform level, save at the mar-
gins—by lining the bottom with concrete and then
running pure water into the (thus) renovated bed of
the Serpentine. Surely it were more rational to
spend £50,000 or £60,000, or even (if necessary)
£lOO,OOO, in this way—than to spend £17,000, as
Mr. FITZROY proposes, in these experiments of
dirty cleanliness !

The testimonial presented on Saturday evening
to the Countess of SHAFTESBURY was a graceful
and nobly-merited tribute of gratitude from the
factory operatives to her distinguished husband for
his memorable labours in their behalf as a true and
practical philanthropist. Elsewhere in our im-
pression of this evening will be found an interesting
record of the circumstances of this presentation.
It took place, as will be observed, in the midst of
an assemblage of four thousand artizans, collected
together to that end in the Free Trade Hall at
Manchester. The gift itself was in every particular
an appropriate and touching evidence of the grate.
ful remembrance by the operatives of that beneficent
Ten Hours' Act, which will honourably perpetuate
to after time the fair fame of ANTHONY ASHLEY,
seventh Earl of SHAFTESBURY. It consisted of an
address, simply but eloquently expressive of
this grateful remembrance, and accompanied
the address with a fine marble bust of
the good earl himself—a bust carved to the life
in marble by the skilled chisel of MATTHEW NOBLE,
one of the most gifted and popular, though happily
also, one of the youngest of our eminent English
Sculptors. The circumstance of this presentation
occurring at Manchester, in the very midst of the
deplorable strike among the London Builders, with
a view to secure, if possible, by the main force of
sheer intimidation, the triumph, not of a Ten, but
of a Nine Hours' movement, tends considerably to
enhance the interest with which the generality will
regard this tardy but fervently heartfelt hom-
age for the championship of the cause of the
labouring classes years and years ago by the Earl
of SHAFTESBURY—as one not in word only but in
very deed entitled to the glorious and Christian
appelation of a philanthropist. The spokesman of
the factory workers on Saturday in the Free Trade
Hall at Manchester observed appositely enough in
his spoken address to Lady SHAFTESBURY, that he
believed" very few employers would like to return
to the long hour system, and that no spirit of
hostility was kept up between masters and men on
this important question." He added that
" their interests were in fact identical,"
and remarked that " the operatives envied
not their employer's wealth," asking merely for
" labour's toil—sweet competence—and nothing
more." The language in which the Earl of
SHAFTESBURY himself enveighed against the
mingled folly and atrocity of what is called a
Strike was yet more appropriate. To those earnest
words of the noble Earl we refer our readers,
as to a timely avowal of the opinions entertained
in his heart's core upon this vital question—vital
to so many hundreds of thousands of our industrial
population—by that eminent Benefactor of the
labouring classes, who may be termed with the
utmost accuracy of expression the benignant
Author and the triumphant Champion of the Short
Time Movement.

One of the most important social questions still
in want of a practical solution is unquestionably
the true relation between capital and labour. The
commercial, like the physical atmosphere, is from
time to time subject to violent convulsion ; and the
transition from a state of ordinary calm is often
equally sudden and unanticipated by those pro-
fessedly most conversant with the phenomena per-
taining to the one or the other. Storms of thunder
and lightning and devastating floods occasionally
destroy the property of capitalists and the food of
the people. The privation consequent upon such
atmospheric perturbation is always disastrous, and
often, in a local sense, overwhelming. But the
philanthropic mind and the liberal hand are ever
active in the alleviation of suffering resulting from
what all the world feels and acknowledges to be
one of the conditions of terrestrial existence. But
when the ordinary routine of commercial action is
paralysed by the now somewhat frequent convul-
sions, which are technically termed "strikes" and
" lockouts," no such sentiment of resignation to the
force of inevitable and inscrutable law is or ought
to be manifested. The evil men bring upon them-
selves, although to be regretted, inasmuch as it is,
to a large extent, the result of either the cupidity
or the ignorance of the sufferers, must be dealt with
in a somewhat different spirit.
The question is, however, full of difficulties. It
has baffled the senatorial wisdom of the nation for
several centuries. From the time of EDWARD 111.
to the present century, numerous:statutes have been
enacted with a view to regulate not only the price
of labour, but to limit the action of capital itself.
An examination of some of these statutes at the pre-
sent time by the belligerent parties not only dis-
closes some curious facts in commercial legislation,
but imparts considerable practical instruction. For
instance,what capitalist or workman, however partial
to the " good old times," would wish to see revived,
even in a very modified form, such legislation as
prevailed at the time of EDWARD 111., when all
labourers and artificers were compelled to remain in
their own parishes ; when those who left a service
once undertaken were put into the stocks, and
branded on the forehead with the letter F, " in
token of falsity ;" when butchers, bakers, poulterers,
and other tradesmen, were ordered to sell their com-
modities at a price dictated by Act of Parliament ;
when workmen were restricted to one trade or
mystery, and merchants were permitted to deal in
one kind of merchandise only, on pain of fine or
forfeiture? An Act of RICHARD 11. (1388), after
fixing the rate of wages to be paid, punishes the
giver or receiver of any higher sum by a fine equi-
given or taken ; double the
valent to the excess so
amount for a second offence ; and for the third,
treble. Nay, as recently as the first year of the
tVo I.
labour the l e gai
ts 1 asttnaz
t(eevni
paucraiticened;:t
ahnhadet
reign of
should be branded with the letter V
di fe
a rmeadn aEr oriel f\al lvvsAeeßdfpor two years to any one
who

should demand him. If he attempted to escape, an'
additional letter S was burnt on his cheek, and he
was decreed to be a slave for life. For any further
attempt to escape he suffered death as a felon !
Severe penalties were enforced against " sellers of
victuals," who, " not contented with reasonable and
moderate gain, conspired and covenanted together
to sell their victuals at unreasonable prices."
Similar treatment was awarded to artificers, han-
dicraftsmen, and labourers who "made confedera-
cies and promises," or " swore mutual oaths not to
meddle with one another's work, or perform and
finish what another had begun ;" or who presumed
"to appoint how much work they should do in a
day, or what hours or times they should work."
Parties belonging to such combinations were sub-
jected, for a first offence to a fine of ten pounds, or
twenty days' imprisonment ; for a second offence,
to a fine of twenty pounds, or the pillory; for a
third, to a penalty of forty pounds, or the pillory
and amputation of the ears ; with the further
consolatary reflection that, "at all times after-
wards," any one so convicted was regarded by the
law of England "as a man infamous," whose
" deposition on oath was not to be credited."

But it may be said, these are very ancient
statutes indeed, and were passed to meet the re-
quirements of a very primitive, if not barbarous,
state of society. Perhaps so ; but, nevertheless,
the age of ELIZABETH and EDWARD VI. is often
lauded as one of the most resplendent pages in the
history of Britain. Such laws, however, continued
to be enacted until a very recent period. In 1720
an act was passed with the especial object of " re-
gulating journeymen tailors." This act denounces
all covenants or agreements for the advancement of
wages, or for lessening the usual hours of work, as
illegal and void, and sultjects all offenders to two
months' imprisonment, with hard iabour ! The
men are ordered to work from six in the morning
till eight at night, with an allowance by the
employer of " one penny halfpenny a-day for
breakfast and one hour for dinner." It likewise
declares that if any workman quitteth his labour,
or if he, "not being retained or employed, shall
refuse to enter into work or employment, after re-
quest made for that purpose, by any master tailor,"
except under special circumstances " to be allowed
by two justices of the peace," his Utopian notions
respecting personal freedom are to be subjected to
the discipline of hard labour in the house of correc-
tion for any period not exceeding two months !
The employers' liberty of judgment or action was
not a whit more respected. Any master tailor
who presumed to pay greater wages than the
act prescribed, was mulcted in a penalty of five
pounds ! one-half of which was presented to the
informer, as a reward for his rather questionable
patriotism, and the other half to the poor of the
parish. Five years afterwards an act was passed
" to prevent unlawful combination" amongst the
workmen employed in the woollen manufactories.
The 22d Geo. 11. c. 27, prohibited all combination
amongst workmen of every class. The right to
dispose of their labour to the best advantage was
thoroughly ignored. In 1768, similar restrictions
were again enacted with regard to the London
journeymen tailors; a penalty of .£5OO, was also
imposed by the same statute upon any " master"
who sought to evade the provisions of the act by
the employment of workmen who did not reside
within five miles of the City of London !
It was not until the 54th Geo. 111. (1814) that
the act of ELIZABETH restricting the exercise of
any " art, mystery, or manual occupation" to parties
who " shall not have been brought up therein seven
years at the least as an apprentice," was repealed.
Many other acts of a similar character have
been passed at various periods, but the above are
sufficient to illustrate the spirit of legislative
interference with capital and labour which
obtained in " free England" for several centuries.
Mr. PITT was the first statesman who raised his voice
against this species of obstructive and irrational
legislation. He wisely observed that " Trade, in-
dustry, and barter would always find their own
level, and be impeded by regulations which violated
their natural operation and deranged their proper
effect."

Thus, after centuries of abortive effort, commer-
cial freedom has at length been pronounced by the
general voice to be essential to commercial pro-
sperity. What workman would wish to restore
the slavery of even the latter portion of the
eighteenth century ? What capitalist would re-
joice at the resumption of the parental authority
of the State over the details of his commercial
arrangements ? No ; the intelligence and the free
spirit of the age would scout as foolish, tyrannical,
and futile all attempts at such retrogression.
The great question now to be considered, and
towards the solution of which the true patriot and
the friend to social progress ought to devote their
best energies, is the precise nature of this commer-
cial freedom. It is obvious, if the great prin-
ciple in political economy that " supply and
demand" regulate the value of labour, as of
other commodities, that the buyers and sellers
must stand on an equal footing in the public market ;
that all attempts, either on the part of " master" or
"man," to dictate the terms of such bargain, is a
flagrant violation of this principle. The seller of
labour has as much right to withdraw his. com-
modity, if it so pleaseth him, as the seller of corn,
cloth, railway scrip, or tobacco, has to withhold
his property from public competition, if he fancies
that, by so doing, he will eventually obtain a more
remunerating price. But the possession of the
right does not imply the possession of the requisite
wisdom to effect this object. Many capitalists
have lost thousands, and many associated bodies of
workmen have done the same, from ignorance of
the true action of commercial. law. But in such
cases each speculator must abide by the conse-
quences of his own voluntary act, and endeavour to
extract a little additional wisdom out of his past
blundering.

There can be no doubt, likewise, that; by the law
of commercial freedom, any body of workmen have
a right to combine together for the purpose of en-
deavouring to realise the maximum price of their
labour ; just as any number of farmers in the public
market may both legally and morally agree not to
dispose of their stock of grain until they can obtain
what they may think its true commercial value.
Capitalists combine in partnerships and in joint-
stock companies, and free competition demands a
similar privilege for the sellers of labour. But this
right, granted to one, must be extended to all, or
what becomes of its boasted equity or of individual
liberty ? The violation of this principle is at the
root of all the rankling animosities and reckless
folly which have hitherto characterised the majo-
rity of " strikes" and " lock-outs." Workmen
too often forget that they, or rather a portion of
them, have no right to dictate to either the
masters or to any section of their fellows. Let the
discontented agree to ask what- terms they may
deem commercially just, and be content to abide ,
the result of the " hig,gling in the market" like
other tradesmen ; but it is a flagrant violation
of'all social, political, or moral principle for them
to insist upon those workmen joining their
movement who, from whatever cause, viewing
the qucstidn in a different light, decline
to enter into their combination. As it is the ,