The Press., 1890-12-11

Issued Every Thursday Evening.
 (For The Press. Continued)
 AH EXAMINATION OFTHE LABOR PROBLEM. SECOND PAPER.
 There is seldom discussion of the labor problem in which it is not asserted that the relations between employer and em- ployei must finally be settled according to certain well defined, unalterable laws, whose action is inevitable. The law or principle that of competition. It is maintained that not only will tree competition settle all differences between employer and em- ployed, but that it will also redress all economic grievances and settle all inequal- ities. Competition, sometimes called '.the law of supply and demand" ]" and known also by other titles of .as little meaning, is held by it's advocates to be law 50 immut able that any attempt to interfere with it by legislation or other agency is an eco homie wrong. This theory assumes that the employer and the employed under stand what is for their highest interests, and that each will reach out for that re- gardless of all other considerations !; that the employer will unfailingly strive to get his work done at the lowest price, and the employe will as persistently struggle to se- cure the highest wages, and that out of such contest, waged by each with all his might, perfect justice will result. If at any time, for instance, wages are too low in given place or industry, then, under that perfect freedom of movement which the theory of competition assumes, labor will seek that place or that industry in which better wages are paid, and thus ex- act justice will be established.
 | Such, in brief, is the outline of the the ory of composition; but there are many weighty and serious objections to this the. can be that mobility of labor, that pc rfect facility of movement from one place or one ! industry to another, which is the sole basis upon which the theory of competition rests. There exists, it is true, certain degree of mobility, ,but it is not as extensive nor as certain and unhindered in it's opera. tion as is necessary to sustain the theory of hCompetition. The freedom of movement of labor is perhaps greater in our own coun- try than in any other, and yet the facts show that there are even here such obsta. cles to that freedom that no sufficient the- ory can be based upon it. The presence of such obstacles is shown even by the course of our Legislation. The ''anti. Chinese bill'i and the ''contract labor bill" by which the Chinese are excluded, and foreign laborers coming in under con. tract are forbidden, as well as the bitter hostility shown in the mining regions oi Pennsylvania, Ohio and other states, tc Italians, Hungarians. and Poles, are evi dent obstacles to the free movement of la. hor; for where such legislation obtains and where such opposition exists labor cannot be said to exercise that perfect free. dom of movement which is necessary tc sustain the theory of competition. Anoth or impeachment to the free movement of la. bor is the ''blacklistine" or "scabbing' which striking iaborers often practice upo1 those who do not join with them or who show 6 readiness to fill the strikers places This violence toward other laborers whict often marks the conduct of strikers is SC familiar, that no more than mere men tion of it is needed to show that fear O violence to person and property must of ten prevent labor from moving to the bes market, must often obstruct that mobility which the theory of competitor assumes tt exist. But where there is neither per sonal violence nor wilful destruction o property, there is another class of obsta cles to the mobility of labor which aris, from the environment and natural inclina tion of the individual, which are no less powerful and are more universal thai the obstacles already mentioned. Promi nent among these are the ties of home friends and neighborhood, or, worse vet the obstacles to the free movement of labo which arise from the lack of means upol which to subsist while seeking for the bes market; for how can 8 laborer who i weighted down with family and debt change his location or seek new employ CT? So far as such one is concerned the mobility of labor is 8 delusion, an, any scheme based upon mobility whic pretends to secure justice to the laborer hypocritical farce.
 In the face of these hindrances to nc bility it is difficult to understand how tn theory of competition, founded upon thi false assumption as to the free movemen ' of labor, can be seriously offered as a rem edy for labor difficulties. Neither can 2 be urged that these hindrances are excer tional and temporary. for experienc shows that they are for the most part COT stant in their action, and that many ( ltAOAA@ AS0oA "AtAA A0RAoAy AhSAOooAh6 AAS quency.
 hayesdwelt@upon this topic of mobility n or the free movement of labor, because ' am now dealing with the theory of comp, a tition, totwhich theory mobility is nece sary condition and if for any reason th assumption of mobility fails, either
 whole or in part, then to just that exter the theory of competition which is base upon mobility fails or becomes inoperativ, and does not furnish a method for the pr
 vention or the hesettlementofla labor difficultie
 But there is another direction in whic the theory of competition either fails alt igether or is subject to control and regul
 tion.a This is in the assumed sufficiency
 .the law. of supply and demand, anotht
 way of stating the potency of competition
 This law is assumed to affect and regula
 wages in two ways: First, the supply
 labor increases or decreases wages, as tI
 supply is less or greater than the demand
 and, secondly, "the supply of goods pr
 duced, in proportion to the demand f,
 the same, fixes their price, and indirect
 the wages that can be paid in their pr
 duction.' That this law has an effect
 both of these directions, and that it fai
 to act altogether under certain condition
 cannot be questioned. While this law h. beon srormitted cartain rance thara a