The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-05-02
THE E1eHT-HouR MOVEMENT.

THE EIGHT-H0UR MOVEMENT.
This is an exceedingly unfortunate time in
which to inaugurate an eighthour system, or
any other radical reform looking to the en-
hancement of the value Of labor or product
We have had, and still have, not only in this
country but througout Europe, and, in fact,
in all civilized countries, great depression in
trade and industry A blight seems to have
fallen upon business and commerce; and over
and above that there is an utter lack of con-
6dence in an early betterment in affairs that
might lead to that activity and enterprise in
business which can alone bring about the
good times that all so earnestly hope and pray
for Added to this condition of things in this
country the local strikes Of artisans and wage
workers in almost every city, and immeasur-
ably above these, in direct and collateral eff
fects, the railroad strikes in the Southwest
absolutely destroy the hope of an early re-
sumption of prosperity.
Before these great strikes were inaugurated
business appeared to revive somewhat and
give token of life; but the strikes coming
without warning so far as the public were ad-
vised, and unwise and unwarranted, taking
even General Master Workman Powderly as
authority, indicate clearly such an unstable
and even inflammatory condition Of things as
not only to weaken but destroy the hope Of
brighter future even to the most sanguine.
The wise employer, or if one might use the
red-fagged name of capitalist, is unwilling to
venture into new contracts until by the lapse
of time the stream on whose bank we are now
standing shall have cleared and its depth been
disclosed.
The talk Of the elevation of labor by laws
and unions is humbug and catch phrase to
deceive the unthinking. Labor alone is hon
orable and dignifed; it is idleness that is dis
honorable and base. The education and ele-
walton of the laborer is a great end to be at
tanned. If by eight hours of labor out of
twenty-four man can earn enough to support
himself and those dependent upon him in COM
fort and at the same time lay aside surplus
sufficient for the rainy day and old age, and
his other waking hours are given to self-im-
provement, he does well to work eight hours
and no more, if he SO pleases. The same rule
applying and in force by all the people in the
world, their intelligence, refinement, morality
and knowledge would be greatly en-
HANGED. If the eight-hour rule were
universal, then wages and prices
would adjust themselves to that standard, and
the relative condition of labor and capital
would remain unchanged, with greatly in
creased degree of civilization and knowledge
But it must needs be universal, or, at least
nationwide, to be just and equitable to all. If
the rule were universal, in times Of over-pro-
duction the price of labor and the price of ev-
erything else would be lowered, and, in times
of scant production, wages and prices would
advance. But if in one city, or one State, or
country the eight-hour rule prevails, and in
another the ten or twelve-hour rule, one of
hour wage-worker must get less pay, or the
employer of the ten or twelve-hour labor
could and would undersell the eight-hour
employer, and, by that reason, compel
the latter to go out of business. This propo-
sition is so plain that it requires no argument
to sustain it. The eight-hour rule, except as
to minors. and exceptional employments, or
any other hour rule fixed and enforced by
compulsion, either of statute law or mob law,
is unwise unjust and pernicious. If one
body of men may organize to work eight hours
a day and no longer, another body of men
may just as clearly and with equal right or
ganize to work ten hours or twelve hours and
neither has the right to say to the other nay.
One man may say, 81 prefer to work eight
hours day all my life to support myself and
family, and improve and enjoy myself as I go
along" Another may say II prefer to work
ten or even twelve hours day in early man
hood, that may. after the merid-
ian of life is passed, enjoy the fruit
of my labor, where and as / please"
Each has his equal right. So any number
of men may agree to either rule, and neither
man nor body has right to interfere with the
other, and whoever, be it individual or body,
that does interfere with the other is wrong
doer, and should be compelled, by public
opinion or, if needs be, by force. to desist.
Il may be safely left to the honest indus