Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-04-03
Labor and Capital.

us is as general ruIe, HWY
than real. This, like every other gen
eral proposition, has its exceptions. IL
was not always so, for, during years ana
centuries. a bitter contest was waged
between the two for the supremacy. For
centuries, wealth possessed a despotlc
and depressing control over labor, SIMPLY
because it had the power so to do, ana
because mankind = the possessors OF
wealth and the weilders OF labor alike
were not intelligent to degree sufficient
to understand their true interests ana re-
lations. These were the days OF the
feudal system throughout Europe. We
refer more particularly, OF course, tothe
lower development of that system, In
its relation between the more petty
masters on the one hand and the lower
class of forresters on the other hand. IL
had later illustration in the sertdom
Of Russia and in slavery in our own
country. There was, and could be, no
true development of the country, or its
resources, under such system, because
1t was unnatural. Wealth was concen-
trated in the hands Of a few and was
used, without intelligence, in in oppress-
ing the laborer. All enterprise was
naturally repressed. The laborer, ig-
norant and chained down as he was, had
aspirations for something ~higher and
better. lie felt, why he could not tell,
that he was not in his proper situation.
These thoughts and feelings showed
themselves, occasionally in outbreaks,
which, for want of better name, were
called seryile instructions These were
real strifes between labor and capital.
The oppressed and ignorant striving
against the oppressor, who was just as
ignorant, only in another form and di-
rection. In the progress of events this
is all changed. The spread of civiliza-
ton and the general diffusion of know
ledge has taught mankind better. There
is and can be no antagonism between
intelligent wealth and intelligent labor.
The laborer is just as honorable and just
as much respected as the possessor of
wealth. Labor is honorable, and wealth
is only honorable because it is the
representative of labor. The only real
distinction between wealth and labor
has been described as the difference be-
tween the obtaining and obtained"
This is, this must be so. Wealth, in and
of itself, is useless and worthless. 1t can
only benefit its possessor by procuring
the products of labor. Labor-aside, of
course, from the mere physical exercise
--avails only from that which it pro-
duces. Wealth and labor are not an
tagonistic. The one is worthless with
out the other. Wherein is man bene-
fitted by the possession of great wealth,
if he cannot procure with it labor or the
products of labor Wherein does the
power to work advantageth man, un-
less its exercise produced wealth or the
representative of wealth in some form
or degree? The one is absolutely indis-
pensable to the other. They cannot ex-
list apart. The capitalist knows and I'M
derstands that he is powerless to con-
duct any of his operations without the
aid of labor. The laborer knows that
he is dependent upon the capitalist for
employment. They both work to-
gether. Apart or antagonistic, they are
each equally helpless. This is true of
the least skilled labor. How much more
does the dependence-the one on the
other-increase as the labor becomes
more and more skilled Every reading,
thoughtful, intelligent person knows
capital and labor. Each and every one
knows that there can be no real strife
between them. Yet strifes and conflicts
do occur. They are, however-they
must be-apparent, temporary or OPP
pressive. We say apparent, because we
do not believe that strikes" as they
are generally termed, represent in any
true sense such conflict. So far as it
is, in any true sense, strife between
capital and labor, it is oppressive on the
one side or the other We do not pro-
pose, at this time-we may hereafter
to consider the general question of
strikes, of g trades union, or of other
combinations of labor or of capital.
We believe the general proposition to be
true-we do not now recall an exception
thereto-that the laborer has the right
to work for whom he will, and at wages
that may be agreed upon, without dicta-
ton, let, hindrance or attempt at in
timidation from any man or body of
men. We believe, also, that the same
right belongs to the capitalist, to en-
ploy whom he may, and at such remu-
neration as may be mutually satisfac-
tory to the employer and employee.
Labor, and the wages therefor, will reg
ulate themselves, as general rule, like
commodities in trade, in accordance
with the demand and supply. Any in
reference with this may produce an APP
parent, but not real, conflict between
wealth and labor This interference
may, perhaps, be carried to such an eX-
tent, by combinations or otherwise, as
temporary and oppressive, conflict
There is, however, no necessity for such
state of affairs, and they should not be
permitted to exist The capitalists, by
combinations, can become as oppressive
as the laborer can by similar means 1t
is not for the interest of either class, or
for the community, to have suck state
of affairs exist. 1t cannot exist for any
great length of time, and, while it lasts,
is productive only of distress to the
laborer and loss to the capitalists, as
well as general arrangement to the
business of the community. We see
that the periodical strikes have again |
commenced. One party is generally, if
not always, in the wrong, and is com |
PEELED to yield in the end. The more !
intelligence is diffused and the more
wide spread education becomes, the less
frequent will be the recurrence of these
orr l. I,t l., ~.