The Sun.
London, England, 1868-01-01 00:00:00

" Here is Victor ITugo'S reply:—
" To LI. Louis Mynnparte, aux Tuileries.
" Sir,—l acknowleer, receipt of the lAtcr which the
director of the " Imperial OUon. Theatre " has written to
me. " VICTOR 111:40.

" Ilauteville House, Sth Dec., 1867.' "
--Guernsey Star.

APPRENTICES AND TRADES' UNIONS.

The Manchester Examiner has been requested to publisix,
the following correspondence :
" 94, Rochdale-road, Iklanchester, Dec. 19, 1367.

" Dear Sir,—Reading your evening speech at Oldham,
I met with the following passage In some parts of the
country employers are told they must not employ more
than so,l4anzsapprentiecs—what is the meaning of that?
It is to:Mr:,:,;f9-'''l7-7--nper the employer in the payr,ent of
wages, by prescribing to the employer the class of work-
men he must emp10y.",..4
" If you Wouldirindty perreirine to an,,wer'ycur query,
I should say that when men employed in -a certain
trade find that the market for their 'special labour is
overcrowded, and that many competent men are unable
to find employment, it is to limit in' some degree the
' supply ' to the demand,' by preventing masters
keeping any number of apprentices they may please at a
trade that is already flooded. It is, in short, to carry
out the rule, Self-preservation is the first law of na-
ture.' Then, sir, I think it should be remembered
that, though masters undertake to teach apprentices their
business, this instruction' is generally imparted by the
workmen, who have, therefore, a right to say, ' In view
of the overstocked state of the trade, we will only learn se
many apprentices their business.' Being an apprentice in
a trade where there are thousands of men out of work, the
effects that would follow from throwing the trade open, I
venture to think, would be to lower the present rate of
wages, to increase the number of unemployed, and to
make it more difficult for apprentices themselves, when
they become journeymen, obtaining employment.
" I trust you will excuse the liberty I have taken in thus
writing, but I felt that it was necessary that you should
hear both sides of the question.'—l remain, respectfully,
yours, " WILLIAm DARB.III.
" W. E. Gladstone, Esq., M.P."

" Hawarden, Dec. 28, 1867.
"Dear Sir,--It is difficult for me to corre.3pond indivi-
dually with those who may notice anything said by
me in public ; but I fear you might misunderstand my
silence.

" I therefore write to say my proposition is that all
limitations on the number of apprentices are a direct attack
upon the property of the working class, by diminishing the
amount paid for their labour.
"Apprentices would be employed only when their
labour was more efficient ; the employer getting (relatiVely
to cost) more efficient labour, would employ more of it,
and pay more for it. If we consider them as paid 'ix
instruction, a larger nuusberof skilled labourers would be
reared, and the labour of' adults would be more effective
from having combined with it that amount of apprentice
labour which freedom of choice would dictate.
" I have seen what I consider deplorable cases in this
country of bad production, trade kept abroad, and cries of
protection at the expense of the community, all closely
connected with this system of limiting, by arbitrary rule,
the labour of the young.

" I apprehend there are also, in some or many trades,
rules against piece-work, and rules preventing the best
111011 from doing all the work they can in a given time.
Such rules are utterly fatal, as far to they -go, to the wel-

fare of the labouring classes, wh6':#ndoillitedly in these
matters sin 'n-ineh -more- "against Arteruseive3 than again3t
the rest of the ceaminaity.-I"ain,' dear sir, 3.
obediently, W. E. Gral/:3ToNs.
"-Mr. W. Darrah.
" You are at liberty to deal with this lett2r as you may
think tit."

yours