New-York tribune., 1868-06-26
rnE nRLcKL1yERS STRLKE.

TIE ERICh LH1 Eho' C4hIhL'
Our long, hard Winter, not long departed,
was signaIzed by very general interruption
ton Of out door labor especially in Building.
Thousands had 10 work for months; many
were reduced to subsiSt on public or private
charity. Never befOre-nOt even in the darkest
hours of our great strugglc-was beggary so
abundant and importunate. At length, we have
Summer weather and Summer work when
Building is again Suddenly arrested by col
lisiOn between the bricllayers and their en-
ploycrs-in short, by strike"
The journeymcn had raised their wages from
81 and 81 so to s. for each days work OF ten
hours; and that advance was submitted to-
They next demanded a reduction Of the work
ing day to eight hours, with reduction of the
days wages to s. 80 only. This the great body
of employers rejected-hence the "strike."
But the employers (now that their hand is in)
protest also against the journeymen's refusal to
work on the same job with "boss," unless he
is a member of their Association, and bound by
their rules; they object also to the journey
mems exacton that 10 employer shall have
more than two apprentices at any time. They
say they will no longer submit to these require
ments-hcnce, war.
Thus far, the dispute seems to have been
conducted with singular moderation and good
temper Neither party has resorted to yio-
lence or intimidation. The employers have
put forth clear, temperate statement of their
side of the case; the journcymen virtually con-
cede its substantial accuracy. And since the
right of each party to pursue the course it has
chosen is uncontestcd, we trust that the con-
troyersy will be prosecuted in good temper to
the end.
We profIer few suggestions in the interest
of all concerncd:
The masters complain that they are required
to pay good and bad woIkmcn alike, though
the former do twice the work performed by
the latter. They further say that jouIneymen
lay far fewer brick per day than formerly,
when wages were much lower. Why not agree
on n fixed price per thousand for laying brick,
and let each journcyman work eight, ten, or
twelve hours, as he may choose? 1t certainly
seems that this would be faircr, and more gcner-
ally satisfactory, than wages by the day Some
men are quick, and can do q fair days work
in eight hours, for which others would require
ten or more. il seems to us that an adjust
mcnt of the difference on this basis Is prac-
ticable hence, we commend it.
We urge the ioumeymcn not to insist on
their rules which deny " boss the right to
work on his own job or to have more than
two apprentices. These rules will not abide
the test of discussion.
We would not conceal our own conviction
that the Wages system is radically yicious-a
great advance, surely, on chattcl slavery, but
still far short OF the standard of ideal justice.
We hope to see the day when iourneymcn and
laborcrs in almost any trade will choose thelr
leaders. aud take houses TO bDild app0ruohlng
the work and the pay for 1t on scale preN-
ously fixed by themselves. We regard pay
ment for work by the day, without reference
70 the quantity or quality of the product, as
but n slight advance from the rude devices OF
barbarism. We wish the builders and brick
layers might so adjust their difference as to
make future collisions impossible.
Just a word here to the iouneymcn:
You say that eight hours work per day
ought to earn q mans living and so far we
agree with you. But suppose man has two
months leisure in a year, is it so clear that
eight hours work per day for the remaining
ten months will suilicel
Who knows the relative product of an eight
hours and ten hours days work Do we
we not need light ON this pointi Men and
brethren try 10 agree