The Labor enquirer., 1886-04-24
A FALSE SCENT.

The apparent lmpo SslDlllLf vi hen
in one position to comprehend men in
another is we'll illustrated by the letter
of the government employe, the nelter
of the mint, to the Tribune-Republican.
One would Judge from reading the ema-
nations from this man on the silver ques-
ton. and from the wording of his letter
on the boycott, above referred to, that he
is man of some learning and intelli-
gence, and yet his ignorance on ques-
tions of political economy is so glaring
and absurd when he refers to subjects of
labor, that child, though fool, can
see it.
l have no doubt that Mr.. Wilson is
WILL meaning man and that his errors
are of the head and education, and not
of the heart. 1t is pretty hard and not
in the nature of events for man raised
surrounded by plenty, and with sut1-
cient influence with the powers that be
and the system that is, to be placed in
position where for the smallest amount
of labor he draws a sal trY sufficient to
keep himself in luxury, to Judge of mat
ters, unbiased, that more especially be-
long to men working from daylight to
dark for plttance that hardly suttices
to keep themselves and families in run
ming order.
If men would only understand that
there is want and misery in the land
that the great majority of our. fellows are
living from hand to mouth, and the chief
care of their lives ls to know how
they shall clothe and feed their
families; then hundreds OF thousands OF
sble-bodied men are not able to procure
employment, whose only education has
been to work and eat and sleep; if they
would only see that large class of men
are already rendered desperate by the
situation in which they are placed and
the future outlook, they would not be 80
ready t. kill the eve lamb of the poor,
but would devote all their spare time to
feeding their hungry lion, before it bursts
It's bonds and devours them. These
questions must be discussed from prac-
tical standpoint, and not theoretical.
l started out to say something about
Mr.. Wilson's letter on the boycott, but
on reading it again l find no hing in it;
nothing, because the arguments on
which it is based are false. He appears
to think that the interests of capital and
labor are identical, while the fact is
they are directly opposed. To strengthen
his argument he quotes from one Bastiat
another deluded mortal, who mentions a
case where pane of glass was broken,
costing SIX francs. 1t belonged to man
who was wanting pair of shoes that
would cost the same amount, and who
had now to do without the shoes as he
could not afford both. Now, Mr.. Wilson
thinks the breaking of the glass was a
loss TO labor, because, says he, labor has
to endure the burden of making it
again" Why, the poor innocent crea-
ture should be pitied for his ignorance
The greatest Ounce we have in the ranks
oflabor could be teacher to him and
tell him that labor is clamoring for en-
ployment, and by it they live, and il
they get none, they must steal or starv g.
If all the windows and buildings in
the country were DESTROYED and had t 0
be replaced as soon as possible, what a
harvest it would be for l4borlng men,
and how the million idlers would exult
and take advantage of the fact to get big
wages. The burning of Chicago was 10
loss to labor, but boon. l. is such ac-
cidents, or rather blessings, that act as a
brake on the present economic system,
preventing speed in Capitalization of
wealth.
The man who had his window broken
was wealthy enough to own a house con-
tanning panes of glass worth six francs
each. If he had all his windows broken
he would only postpone the purchase of
his shoes short time, as such men
don't uo harnfoota6