The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-12-29
Free Trade In Labor.

| restrict, unQer CerCdlu Sell-lupOocu COhui-
tions, the sale of their labor, must needs be
at variance with the fundamental axioms OF
political economy, as being opposed to Free
Trade This position overlooks distinc-
ton of great importance, the distinction be-
tween freedom of exchange in the products
of labor and unrestricted competition for
labor itself. Recent legislation in England
fully illustrates this distinction. After q
controversy which exhausted all the argu-
ments derived both from theory and practice
the nation became convinced that the eXer-
else OF the power OF buying and selling COM
modities according to the dictates OF indi-
vidual self-interest alone, was the mode by
which the wealth of the country and the in
terests of all classes in it were most efectu-
ally advanced. In England, the principle OF
freedom of exchange, or Free Trade, reigns
paramount and unchallenged. But concur
rently with the statutes which have given
effect to Free Trade, the Legislature sane
toned sensible restrictions upon freedom Of
labor. Was Parliament upholding the cause
of truth and freedom with one hand, and
shifting it down with another?
No writer states the case more clearly than
the Duke of Argyle, who, while he strenuous
" upholds the doctrine of free exchange Of
commodities, points out what are those
principles and motives of human nature,
which inevitably tend, unless legal restric-
ton be interposed, to produce competition
of labor destructive to health, morality and
the higher interests of society. Children
who, exercising no volition OF their own, are
bound over to their taskmasters by the Gu
pidity or selfshness of their parents, cannot
be regarded as "free laborers."
Similar considerations apply to female Ia
Dor. 1t is not free competition, but authori-
ty or coercion which drives a large number
ofwomen into the labor market. And with
regard to men, who are willing and free
competitors for labor, it needs only little
consideration to see how liable they are, un-
der the pressure Of competition, to sacrifice
their own highest interests. Upon this sub
iect the Duke of Argyle, in ''The Reign of
Law" says:
sin all that wide circle of operations which
have for their immediate object the getting OF
wealth, there is q sagacity and a cunning In
the instincts oil labor and in the love Of gain,
compared with which our legislative wisdom
Is ignorance and folly. But the interests OF
labor, having for their conscious purpose the
acquisition Of wealth, are iustiHcts which, I'M
der the stimulus and pressure of modern So
cicty, are blind to all other results whatever.
They override even the love OF life they
silence even the fear Of DEATH Trades in
which the laborers never reach beyond middle
life-trades in which the labor is uniformly
fatal within few years-trades in which those
who follow them are liable to loathsome and
torturing disease-all are filled by the enlist
ment of an unfailing series Of recruits. If,
therefore, there be some things desirable or
needful for community other than the acqui-
sition of wealth-if mental ignorance and ply
sical degeneracy be evils, dangerous to social
and political prosperity, then these results
cannot and must not be trusted to the instincts
of ofindividual men. And why? Because the
few motives which bear upon them, and which
consequently determine their conduct, have
become almost as imperious as the motives
which determine the conduct Of the lower ami
mails.
If then, in the words OF an Elin6u'gh Re
ute,cc,', some interposition be necessary to
save those who are enslaved either to the
cupidity of others, or to their own thirst OF
gain, from the consequences of such excess;
if it be necessary that some check should be
placed on the freedom of individals who
would madly sacrifice their own interests,
and those Of others also, in blind pursuit
of selfish advantage-then may the Legisla-
ture, as representing the national will, inter-
pose to restrict the competition of labor
within the limits which the paramount in
terests of the community prescribe.
This restriction is no invasion of the true
province of political economy. That science
proceeds on the assumption that the princi-
Piles of human nature and the circumstan-
ces OF mans external situation are so adjust
ed, that to leave free scope to the natural
impulses Of men is the surest way to bring
about the general advancement OF wealth
and social improvement. In regard to the
exchange Of products, experience fully con-
firms this assumption. But in regard to the
operations of labor, the same ground fails.
The principles Of human nature, left un-
checked, do not tend to promote the we'll
being of all, or even Of the individual. To
the frightful moral evils produced by unfet-
tered indulgence, the nation applies leSis-
latiye check. And if the will of the nation,
expressed in coercive statutes, may, without
infringing sound economic laws, step in to
restrict the competition of the labor market,
why may not voluntary combination do the
same? If Parliament, in the interest OF
the workmen, is competent to limit the hours
of labor in factory, why not the workmen
for themselves?
Trades Unions do not, according to these
views, involve ipSo tacto, violation OF Geo.
nomic principles. Free Trade not necessa-
rily violated. whenever men agree together
~, cnooifoI