The Bennington banner. [volume] (Bennington, Vt.) 1858-1894, 1892-08-05
CAPITAL AND LABOR.
Their Relations Reviewed by DIR. Blram
Orcutt, I'm the Boston journal

copy from the Cbristidn linton:
l. What remedy has the individual
laborer for injustice at the hands of sell
fish and greedy employers?'
2. Are the relations of laborers and
capitalists those of master and SER
wants, or of partners in common enter
prise?"
8. "What rights, if any, have the
laborers in the industry which their
labor has helped to build up?"
4. SIS it well for the labOrers to COM
bine in trade unions and similar organi-
zations?'
l propose to answer these questions
directly, but briefly.
First, l will remark that. as a rule.
employers are not disposed to treat their
employees with injustice. There are, no
doubt, exceptions, but these exceptions
prove the rule that wage workers are
usually fairly dealt with by those who
employ their services. The question,
then, is, what remedy has the individual
in cases where greed and selfshness CON
troll the employer? l answer, he may and
should leave and seek employment with
those who deal justly with their men. |
know OF no other safe rule of action.
Secondly, the relations of laborers and
capitalists are not those of master and
servant, as these terms are usually un-
derstood to imply involuntary servitude.
with compensation. The employed serve
the employer voluntarily, for stipulated
wages which they have consented to ac-
cept for definite amount of service.
Either party may annul the contract
when TIE other party fails to fulfill his
part OF 1t. As men they are equals, each
nptiDn in hic
ana capltallst are IN no sense partners, as
partnership implied that each party has
invested more or less capital in the plant.
The laborer has no ownership in the
mill IN which he works. He simply sells
his service, for its net value, to his en-
ployer, and hence has no claim upon the
profits of the business. He could NOT
become partner without the consent of
the owner, and, as l have said, the in
vestment of capital. Hence, it is absurd
to claim that he has legal or moral right
to part of the dividends.
In direct answer to the third question.
will say, laborers have a right to receive
fair compensation for all services render
ed, and they should never forget the debt
of gratitude which they owe to the cant
talist who has so invested his money
that they may find constant employment
and thus support their families, Sun
posing the builder of the rolling mills of
Homestead, instead of establishing that
great mandatory, had invested his
money IN Govel nment bonds, and never
built his mills, or, supposing these law
less strikers should burn up these mills.
after they have killed off all the overseers
5O0O laborers would be, by necessity, de-
prlVed OF the opportunity to earn money
10 support their families And if this
destruction of the plants of capitalists
should become universal, the millions of
laOorers who now earn good living for
themselves and their families would be
helpless and ruined. Thus l define the
rights OF laborers in the industries which
they nave helped to build up.
But is 1t well for the laborers to COM
Dlne IN trade unions and other organiza-
tlons? This is the burning question of
the hour, when an object lesson like the
scenes OF anarchy and bloodshed is being
witnessed at Homestead, Pa. If the
question were, is it lawful for laborers to
combine toT the protection of their own
interests? | should answer, Yes. There
is no legal objection. The moral right
depends upon the question whether they
have the right to jeopardize their own
best good. If any real gain is secured to
individual laboTers by such unions it is
well; but if evil, and only evil, results il
Is not well. 1t is mine to believe that
tnese unions are curse, instead of a
blessing, to the laboring classes:
L: Because the object of these organi-
cations, viz, to force their employers to
pay them more wages than they can af-
fora, ana more than nOn-union men de-
mand. They deny that corporations
have the right to manage their own bust
ness and demand that they shall deal on
ly with their officers. This position is
2. Because the means employed to
enforce their demands. These means
include strikes, boycotts, intimidation
and violence. Without these the union
could accomplish nothing. But main
TAIN that such means are not only wrong
IN principle but ruinous in practice.
1 hey are wrong, because every employer
mas the right to employ whom he pleases
TO decide the amount of wages to be
paid, and If not accepted by union men,
10 employ non-uniOn men who are will |
ing to accept. They are ruinous. first.
because the tend to destroy the friendly
relations which would exist between the
contracting parties; second, because
they infringe upon the inalienable indi- !
vldual rights of others, and third, be-
cause they result in an absolute loss to |
the strikers themselves. Ichallenge any |
man, on this last point, to show me an |
Instance of a large strike where the |
strikers have not suffered a pecuniary
loss.
Take the Homestead strike, for exam
pie. Let us count the cost. Because |
300 men were to receive, for a time, less |
by a small per cent. deduction from their |
wages, 1000 men leave work. Here is a |
loss OF so much wages for weeks and |
months. Their families have to be SUD- |
ported. As the result of this strike and |
The lawless course of the strikers, six of |
inc men have been carried to their graves.
ind their families must be supported. |
Other sympathetic strikes have resulted |
N heavy loss of wages and heavy taxes
20 support the idle. Now, add to this
sum the salaries of the officers of these
$4,000 to $1,000 per year, all
IL which expense must be paid by the
a6orers who belong to this or some other
lnlon. Now, suppose the strikers win
md the salary demanded is paid them.
what but ruinous loss TO those engag-
I'd in the fight can result?
D. Because the selfishness of the strik-
rs. Non-union men have an equal right
% earn living as union men have. Yet
by intimidation and violence, the strik
rs have done their best to keep non
lnion men from accepting the places
which thew left Tndead IL coet tho |