New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-08-25
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
.r,,r wopK1yGMAN AND THE STATE.

NJ r.po lo,dboolS one of the latest if not the
cI nr,3uction of the lamentcd author. was writ
,cn for the series of volumes which the publishers
ar, devoting to he rights and duties OF Inc f"H
lish Citizen mt since it deals with the gehe'"'
i,lcs of law rather than with statutes II Is APP
nlicable to other countries equally with "l'a'
britain. ana contains much that is especially PERU
nent 70 the United states. We have used the 'A-
rressiop the general principles OF law ont ilo-
5ossor Jeyon, asks us at the outset to. III our
minds of the idea that there any such 'hhSS }"
social matt rs as abstract rights a. soIute prih'I0
iudcfcasihlc laws. iralterihle TueS' OF an! ,'""7
whatever of an eternal and nieHloe NAHUM"
fakes the broad ground that e" no laws 10 '"'''"'
no rights of property are 80 sacred tha' l"'S may
mot lie made away with If it can DC ''"II9 S''""
,hot tbey stand in the way OF the
$50, ba,rine>s." Hence there need be no scru-
nile about interfering with individual liberty "h'h
Tho STA q hv so doing can add to the sum total Oh
lana,ucs-. Liberty is a means toward an end not
IN, end itself Puma facie. restrictions upon ihou'-
FRY ara bad because the action OF the natural forces
of evolution VII; insure welfare better than the III,
considered laws OF the prcjullced and unsN"l"
legislator; but there aro cases IN when eAleI''N'
shows that restrictions, C. T., t. protect tne l'o "
health of the workman, arc highly benehc'"I' anu
Whenever. upon the grounds OF clear eNpeI'''''
interpreted 10y logical reasoning We can sec "Ui way
Il a definite Improvement III SUNNI N''''' 20
without iniuring others, We are under the oOh-
cation of endeavoring to promote that improve
neut"
The ion of the State 70 labor Is a question
,i only of the direct restraint of the laborer Dy
law but also of the regulation of the voluntary ana
Unauthorized legislation of the aborers themselves;
so that the work of the state sometimes consists III
increasing rather than ieSscning the liberty Oh the
individual workman. Under the head OF direct re-
straint NAV I've included laws to limit the employ
ment OF women and children III factories laws lof
the protection of life i'm mills and Mines ana III
sncctlon laws. by winch the Government protects
consumers against adulteatIon, snort W"gn'
commercials. etc IN commodities of which the Pur-
cbas.rs cannot we'll Judge for themselves. All these
are proper subjects for Interference al"
Professor Jeyons would carry tie
ontbority OF the state still further Than The present
limits practically assigned to it: lac believes that
the employment of women in factory labor ought 10
he unch more vigorously dealt with he Is not sure
whether the law iglt not do something lor Tie
relief of shop assistants and to enforce cary
closing: and if 1t can he shown that tho limitation
OF adult male labor III associated OodlcS OF WIN
men-as in factoTies-woUld be OF utlity' thero Is
neither principle, experience nor precedent ~
forbid the idea of state interference there too All
sncb ouestions must be decided by the unitarian
rule. applied in the light Of experience and not by
any fancied principle of individual liberty.
The other branch OF the subject, how far the state
may control the individuals control over other ndl
vjduaIs is more difficult 1t includes the consldeTa-
ton o. trades-unions strikes, consprlcles eic' ana
for its comprehension it demands comprehension
of the nature Of wages Professor Jevons cohtro-
vert, two fallacious theories Of tits fundamental
question: one known as the wage-fund theory
represents the rate of wages the dividend found
b. dividing the amount OF capital when employers
think proper 10 disbuIse III wages by the number OF
laborers; the Other adopted by many trades-union-
lists. imagnes that the wages actually come out OF
the EMPLOYERS pockets, and that the higher the
wages the smaller his profits. Against these
theories the author maintains that INC
production of wealth consists in the
uniting together OF certain materias,and the work
ing them up into some novel form by the ala OF
labor The product IS JOINT result to which many
persons some capitalists and others laporerS nave
contributed. AS it is impossible to say what part
Of the product is due to any of the contrbu tons
no natural necessary or legal principle OF Ovid
ing the proceeds can be assigned. Rent pr0ht, IN
terest and wages must all be paid out of the pro
Deeds of the business, and each partner must asa
for his share the mos that he has any chance Oh
getting and b. content with the best that lie sue
ceeds III securing he wages constitute the WORK
mems share and the rate will be governed by the
law of supply and demand. a workman cannot eA-
meet 70 get forty shillings n week while all equally
good workman is ready to take thirty-h7e shillngs
nor. when workmen are scarce, can he claim SO
large a share of tile profits for his wages as to drive
the other contributors TO find business where their
shares will be better The conflict OF labor with
capital is a delusion The real conflict Is between
producers and CONSUMERS.
Rearing this in mind, we can feel the force Oh
what the author says about restrictive trades-un-
ions: Whosoever tries to raise his own wages by
preventing other persons from working at ms trace
and thus makes his own kind OF labor scarce, at
tennis 70 levy contributions from other people. II
IS simply case of private taxation" Ana hc
shows. with admirable cleaTness that since those
whopay the private duties levied by exclusive
trades are not the capitalists (whO are partners IN
the producton) but the Consumers, the loss falls
principally upon the working class, which Is always
the largest consuming class High wages Tor nat
makers mean high pncc, for hats, and 50 much out
of the pockets of hat-wearers, by far the larger
number of whom are woykmen. Artificial restrlc-
lions in the building trades Impede the
cons ructlon and raise the cost OF houses
and thus bear with especial severity
upon the poor. And several trades usu-
ally act together in the production of any
important commodity, it follows that comblna-
ticn in one trade TO raise wages, and lessen pro-
ducon is directly against the interest of the other
Trades Workmen are and must be competitors. and
every rise OF wages which one body by mere
exclusive combination represents a certain amount
sometimes "a large amount, of injury to the other
bodies of workmen. " On the whole, then, we con-
clude that il is quite impossible for trades-unons
in general 10 effect any permanent increase OF
wages and that success IN maintaining exclusive
monopolies leads TO great loss and injury 10 the
community in general What is said here of
trades unions applies OF course to strikes.
With regard W state interference with strikes