The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-05-22 00:00:00

THE SILK TRADE.

The object of these petitioners is to prevent any alters.
tion of the present law, which leaves the wages of jonr-
nevmen silk weavers to be regulated by 'Magistrates.
1 he law in question, which it is now proposed to repeal,
is, as the petitioners allow, 50 years old, and they appear
to consider its antiquity as no inconsiderable claim in
ripper. of its cOnliatiance. The fact is, that it ha, been
clearly ascertained, by this tune, that all laws, restrictive
of wages, or regnlatiug wages by legal interference, are
mischievous to one or other of the parties concerned, and
highly detrimental to the public interest. Since the
discovery of this fact, it has been proposed, and wifely
proposed, to abolish all these laws as quickly as circum-
stances would permit, and to leave all questions of this
description to adjust themsel Yee. Thus the master and
the workman wili each have the benefit of a choice of
the pers-en with a hum he deals, and the price at se hicb
the dealing shall be regulated; and this arraneemen'e
by inviting competition and promoting industry,
will benefit the public who consume the article produced
by this competition and industry. it is idle and iebairil
to think of regulating wages by a stale to be se'tleti by
magisterial interference, which cannot, of course, ascer-
tain the different degrees of skill and attention to which
every naves adverts in the engaging of a ssorkman.
We should sp'ak of the petition in question in very
severe term', if we did not recollect that it proceeds from
a class of persons whose ►ery errors and prejudices
singlet to be treated with consideration, if not with ten-
derness. They are the working classes, whose interests
P:ey themselves think, will be affected by a removal of
the Regulatioos and Restrictions which it is proposed to
remove by the present Bill. • But, even if they be taken
on their own ground, and if it beconeeJed to them that
their individual interests will suffer by the proposed mea-
sure, (Ices it not follow from what we have observed,-
tb it like throwing open of the market of skill and in-
dustry will benefit the public ?—And if this be correct,
o•irhs not individual interests to yield to the gener,l
goad? It is impossible to resist the Bill in question with
any thirty like reason or argument. sod it will rise, un•
oaposed by any man possessed of the cne, or calaible of
aderancing, the other.
It ie trite that, if it should happen that by this measure
of 'general utility, a Dumb.: of persons should be thrown
ou•of employ, they may be thrown upon the parish, and
cr Ate an additional burthen upon its funds. This sup-
position is founded upon a very remote possibility; for
it is highly improbable that all the persons to be affected
bi this Bill, should be thrawn out of employ, and shutild
e aharrass the local funds of their particular parish.--
Should it happen, however, the answer to the objection
is obrioers. Parliament can and will, (in consideration
of the general benefit to the public, and local injury to
th- particular parish) grarit a sum in aid of the parish
funds thus htireted.—ln short this Bill ought to pass ;
and we trust it will pass.