The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-01-11
THE INCORPORATION OF LABOR.

The current number of the Forum con-
tains an article entitled "The Incorporation
of Labor" by Hugh McGregor, in which is
set forth the aims of the leaders of the or
gaRization Of labor known as trade unions.
Mr.. McGregor is not so well known as some
of those who are called leaders in labor
movements but of those who advocate
conservative methods. like President Comp
ers, he is, judging from this article, one
Of the ablest and most thoughtful leaders.
He evidently has no faith in any of the
theories of socialism or even of co-opera-
ton which are designed to make the mass
of laborers other than they now are
wage-earners. 1.-THE essential feature dis
tinguishing the modern trades union,' he
says, lis that it is based on recc ,nition of
the separation of functions of the capital
list and of the workman. Ere 'kly ac-
cepting that separation as a permanent
one" he goes on, 1.-The union seeks sys-
tematically to regulate the relations be-
tween the employer and the employed-be-
tween the two great classes of modern So
ciety. Cancellation, that is, mutual discus
sion by the contending parties of their
spective rights and reciprocal duties" is
the means employed by the union. When
this fails the strike and the boycott are
resorted to as war measures. II is evident
that Mr.. McGregor does not share the
prejudice which some would excite against
capital. The more capital the employer
has the better for labor. On this point his
views are most emphatic. He says:
1t is notorious that the worst abuses of
our Industrial system are those emanatlng
from employers with insufficient capital,
and that the smaller the employer the
harder the taskmaster and the worse the
paymaster. All this is not to say that the
humblest workman. who. by gift or be-
quest, I finds himself in possession of suf-
fcient wealth, should not become an en-
poyer. But it must be distinctly under
stood that, to improve the condition of the
worker as a worker, and not as something
else is the workers best and most perma-
nent interest. and that while striving to
secure for himself and others the best pos
sible livelihood all attempts to accumulate,
with the view of becoming an individual or
a cooperative employer, should be regard
ed as anarchical and highly detrimental to
working-class welfare.
Passing on to a statement of what -the
real leaders of trades-unionism demand,
under the organization or, in his words
"the Incorporation of the working class"
Mr.. McGregor makes the following declara-
ton:
First and foremost the union demands
for its members and. consequently. for the
whole working class "a minimum wage
wage which, when expended in the most
economical manner, shall be sufficient to
maintain an average-siZed family in
manner consistent with whatever the con-
temporary local civilization requires as in
dispensable to mental and physical health
or as required by the rational self-respect
of human beings" The second demand of
the union is an ''eight-hour work day" or
progressive reduction of hours of labor,
so as to secure, soon as may be, a nor
NAL workday. affordng to the workers
leisure to live, leisure to love, leisure to
taste their freedom"
If the conditions in the different countries
were similar it seems that it should not
be difficult to accomplish the aims set forth
in the foregoing extract. But they are not.
In some European countries which have
become sharp competitors in the worlds
markets the working class (Mr. McGregor's
phrase) is accustomed to a scale of living
much lower and less expensive than that
which prevails in this country. Their food
consists of inferior bread, potatoes and lit
tie meat. Labor in this country employed
in the production of the same lines of mer-
chandise has a much costlier diet 1t is
probable that American workmen would
not be sufficiently nourished for their work
if forced to adopt the scanty food of some
European competitors. What one local
civilization" recognizes as indispensable an
other recognizes as lavish or inadequate.
When the products of these two compet-
itors-the one whose living makes its labor
costlier and the other whose cost of exist
ence is less-come into competition in the
open market there must be clash, which
must end in the victory of those who pay
the smaller wages. To-day New England
cotton manufacturers declare that they
cannot compete with Southern competitors
because the latter employ cheaper labor
and work more hours in a day. The South
ern cotton spinner finds in that country a
native labor which is accustomed to a less
expensive living than is the employee in the
New England mills. In this era of COM
petition the New Highlander cannot hold
his own by paying the highest wages in
the world, and wages which. now that the
New England employee seems to be accus-
toned to them, are necessary to maintain
the higher grade of expenditure which the
local civilization may recognize as indis-
pensable. Until such conservative cham
pions of labor as Mr.. McGregor can per-
suade the Southern workman to insist upon
fewer hours in day and to demand wages
nearer the New England scale there seems
no remedy but accepting the lower wages
Tariff discrimination in favor of home
production will save us from the lower scale
of compensation abroad, but competition
with cheaper home labor is a more difficult
problem.