The Labor enquirer., 1886-12-04
ROBBERS OF LABOR.
A Clear and Impressive Disssrtation en-
tho Iniquity Of the Wage
Labor system.

c0u.Q 6ettle the 6trlK6 IN tnIee nouIs IL
we could deal directly with the men"
and he might have added. aand we could
settle it exactly to our satisfaction too"
Conselman's opinion is no doubt a
true outline of the feelings of the pack
ers. 1t is in fact confession. that the
packers, though combined and acting, as
a unit, are unable to longer dictate rules
of action, prices and hours of labor to
the men, and they must either destroy
the organizations or allow the workers
to say how long they will work and
what pay they shall have.
The money power considers 1t a great
calamity that working people should 80
combine that they can say how long
they will work and what shall be their
pay. This is, of course, a great calam-
ity to capitalism, for It takes all the
slave-drivlng power away from it.
When the workers are eble to fix their
hours and pay in all emplovments, and
also fix all shop rules, then, and not till
then, capital will be servant and not,
as now, master of labor, and this is the
whole gist of the fight.
Conselman says: "We propose to find
out whether it is to be freedom for the
Knight of Labor and slavery for us and
everybody else." The words land
everybody else" are only thrown out to
catch sympathizers. The full text of his
sentiments and the plan of the whole
packers combination is just this: ave
propose to find out which party are to
be the slaves and which party are to be
the masters" They accuse the Knights
of trying to reverse the old situation.
They say in substance and effect that
the disconnected and ambitious Knights
are no longer willing to be slaves and
that these strikes mean that they have
decided to be the masters, and to enslave
the capitalists; and thus make the capl-
talists in fact what they have always
hvpocritically pretended to be; namely.
the servants of the people. He who re-
ceives most pay should serve most.
This is good policy. A capitalist
should be slave of the people and alb.
solutely subject to their dictates in all
things, in proportion to his income or
the money he receives.
This of course is reversing the old
rule Of most pay for least service, and
least pay for most abject servltude; and
to reverse the old rule is special aim
of the great labor movement.
Conselman further says: Every man
who comes to US for work must sign a
resignation from any and all labor Or
ganizations, if he belongs to any, before
we employ him. Having begun anew
with free men, we propose to protect
them ard care for them" His definition
of free man is very striking. There is
no possible difference between his free
man and the most abiect slaves. His
free men must deposit So per week in
the custody of his employer until il
amounts to 500, and he must sign a
bond that be will forfeit this 500 if he
ever Joins with any of his fellows in any
manner to increase or sustain his rate Of
wages, or to diminish or sustain the
length Of his work day. This is glori-
Gus freedom certainly 1t is not to be
wondered at that the bosses are in a
raging fear that they will be compelled
to swap places.
The argument of the masters against
the abolition of negro slavery was that
the poor slaves would have no master to
protect and care for them. Conselman
repeats this big-hearted thoughtlulness
concerning his slaves when he says
Having begun anew with free men we
propose to protect and care for them. "
First taking from man his every means
for sustaining himself and then offering
to take him as a servant and protect and
care for him is certainly very generous
and while capitalism holds this position
it will hardly receive universal respect.
1t is well settled fact, proved be-
yond all question, that the average
amount Of food, clothes, shelter, travel
and education. all put together. that is
consumed by a laborer's family does not
represent an hours labor to produce it
and deliver it; vet, to get 1t the laborer
must work on an average eleven and
one-half hours per day, and capitalistic
wealth is being piled up by the billions
each year. Yet when the laborers com
plain they are told that they fare better
than their ancestors did or than people
do now in other countries. Such an an
swer is simply adding insult to injury.
Who produced all these advantages if it
was not the laborer? When a laborer
by study, ingenuity and hard work opens
out principle by which he can supply
all his requirements by an hours work,
the capitals: then tells him he should
be satisfied with working ten hours, be-
cause his father had to work sixteen.
The capitalist says in substance to the
laborer: Your fathers had to work ten
hours to produce the requirements for
himself and for my father who was his
employer. But my folks wanted more
than bare living and so he worked
your father sixteen hours. l don't work
you but ten hours" Yes" answers the