Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1886-05-07

IL IL eau DC flkhbJ WIN e"u Ah'''AJ 49,.
The reasons urged for II seem SOLO.
Most men In this country, in all pursuits
work too long aud too hard. The condi.
tlops Of labor In hosts Of our factories and
mills lend increasing urgency 70 the need
OF shortening the hours Of toll. Anyone
who has watched the faces and forms Of
the operatives pouring out iron some OF
our huge factories, needs no furtner ar
qument az 20 the deslrability OF Looping
on an hour or two from such toll.
Such reduction Of hours, it IL claimed,
! would open work for the unemployed.
Manufacturers could be trusted 70 desire
not 70 diminish the present productivity
OF their costly plants. Self.inierest would
be a sufficient spur not 10 let these plants
| lie In idleness To keep them prontably
at work, the hosts 10 the marketplaces,
now standing idle, would be called In.
| This Is probably true, 20 certain ex-
tent. Some Of as would like further light
az 10 the reach OF this "certaln extent"
! This employment Of now idle labor would,
/ n realized, certainly start an Immense
increase Of demand through every line,
which would spur industry and trade stlll
| further. The over. production OF
which 30 many foolish folks
| complain * the most mythical Of all
myths. Tens Of thousands throughout
our land 20 with half loaf when hungry
enough for whole Loaf, and with tattered
clothes when longing for good, sound,
decent garments. Put into the hand OF
every idle man in the land O weeks work
aud It's wages, and every little store
throughout the country would feel the
impetus, and the biggest sort OF a boom
would start through the land.
Two hours taken from factory toll
would undoubtedly give our workingmen
the needful opportunity Of self-improye-
ment. man must needs be desperately
hungry for culture, who, after ten or
twelve hours labor under the unfayorable
conditions Of our great barracks OF In
dustry, goes home and takes up any solid
piece OF reading. lie probably goes 10
sleep AS soon ns he can, or II he seeks
any occupation II IL OF such nature
AZ will spur his iaded energies and
bring flash Of momentary Joy
10 his tired frame. Every man has the
right and the duty OF making man for
himself upon this earth, and that he may
do this society needs, II possible, so 10
organize affairs as that he will have Il
chance for some serious study al self
improvement.
~ - uol OHlJ u VutNllOu VI lHhlfluuut
Improvement but OF the Improvement
OF labor at large. This elevation depends
upon the power OF associations and this
again upon the development OF the indi-
yidual units. The Improvement which
American labor has already won for itself
has been largely due 10 ite finding time
and opportunity for association. This
needs 10 be pushed further along wise
aud tFng ttuHa haIg.Vn mil tut IA
TO come
What then are the objections to the
movement and how do they weigh In
such scales az possess2
First Of all, plainly, the economic OBJ
lection that with diminished hours of
work there would be diminished pro.
duction Of wealth. II this be d fact, IL IL
the end OF the matter. We plainly
need not less wealth TO distribute
but great deal more wealth TO divide
up. The local problem is quite as much
one OF far larger production as for a
better distribution OF wealth. The testl.
mony Of experience, however, seems to
| go against the objection. The hours of
labor have been reduced In England
| without the expected decrease OF produc-
| tiylty. The facts appear TO be plain. The
reasons for II appear TO lie In the stimulus
| given to labor TO work more heartily and
more vigorously and In the use Of relays
OF hands in many industries. So CON
servatiye authority as Leone Levy 81 am
not against shortening the hours OF labor.
The factory regulations In this respect
have increased, not diminished produce
tion." The experience Of Massachusetts
seems To confirm this result unmlstaka.
bly,. She has got as much out OF her OPP.
eratlves under ten hours as she had done
under eleven and twelve hours.
| Plainly, however, there IL limit
| beyond which labor's increased
vigor will not make up for the lost houre,
and this needs to DO carefully ascertalned
not by theorlhlng, but by experience.
IL Ia said that there will he less profits
for the manufacturer, and that therefore
he cannot be expected TO accept the pro.
position. II II be so the argument may
simply point in the direction OF the need
OF their being fewer employers, hint
which nature has already found out, and
which she Is applying 10 the process gong
on In our midst the development OF huge
Industries, with their capacity to run on
} smaller margins because OF their greater
production. II what IL claimed be true,
} however, concerning the possible relative
production under ten-hour system. this
objection would be answered. As a
! matter of fact the experience OF Massa,
chusetts seems to show that employers
themselves have been quite as ready
after trying reduction OF hours
TO stand by the change a.
the operatives themselves In the repor,
OF the bureau OF labor for 1872, OF seven
ty-two respondents among the maauiac
lures who are quoted, thlrty-nve report
In favor OF the ten.hour system and thirty
against IT,
Z II Is said again that dlminntion OF
, hours would inevitably imply dimlnu,
ton of wages, tit DC so, then 1t will be
a question for workingmen themselves "a
consider whether they will pay for theII
! leisure The testimony OF experience,
! however, again seems 10 bear against
this objection, The same report OF the
Massachusetts bureau sums up the con.
illusions Of careful investigation of the
J subject thus; "Thls la true as q rule
, that wages are lowest whore the hours of
, labor are longest, aud wages are highest
/ whore the hours OF labor are shortest Y
5 In this general form, the rule commends
: itself to every one's experience. England
: records the same story, Their Is neither