Waterbury Democrat., 1902-12-12

Although LnlS age Is pTe-enulnenI III mechanical achievement, the belief IS still general in many quarters that labor saving methods are detrimental, that only a few profit by them to the disadvantage of the rest. It is 3 i strange paradox to find an ingenious and enterprising people actually doubt 1 ing the value of methods that enlarge human capacities and enhances the eff l fectiveness of labor.
 l This confusion as to the effect of machinery is due to the difficulty of comprehending the workings of our complex industrial system, and the in- ability to discriminate between the l benefit society desires from labor say- 1 ing methods, the abuses associated with them and the disturbances that are incidental to progress.
 The economy of a primitive com munity that consumes all it produces l is readily understood. It is seen how every increase in the productiyeness of the members adds to the general pros l perity, and how each one participates l in the wealth of the whole. In 8 more developed society with it's high l ly specialized and therefore more eff ficient methods, only part of the plan l is observed at a time and it's intricate 1 workings become confusing. Sudden 1 ly the laws that operate so beneficently l in the small community appear to be 1 reversed. Labor saving methods seem 1 to be calamity, because the effect is l to interfere with present pursuits, and 1 deprive some of their accustomed
 means of a livelihood, to render useless skill acquired after a lifelong training. The benefits all seem to accrue to the
 person who first uses an invention,
 while the ones displaced are apparent 1 ly shut out of the industrial system.
 It is not noticed how they are gradu> l ally absorbed into other channels of 1 employment that open up as the cost of production is decreased. If such
 were not the case the whole industrial
 mechanism would soon come to a
 standstill, considering the progress of l inventions supplemented by the army
 of aliens that arrive yearly and the Increasing proportion of women bread
 winners. An adjustment coincident 1 with the displacements must evidently l take place somewhere, or the number l of unemployed would be appalliug. l This is the pith Of the problem The 1 immigrants and the women introduced l into a factory become in turn buyers, and hence create demand for goods i that results in the employment of as
 many as they have displaced. The evil of immigration is not that the 1 aliens take the places of native labor CTS, but rather is due to the crowding l into the most available oecuDafions 1 that offer them the means to tempo rarily live to their lowest standards of living and general helplessness which l Is taken advantage Of to the detriment Of those whe~are striving to uplift the l standards. The same applies in de- gree to the women partly dependant l upon their earnings, and who do not l possess the ability of the men to act l in concert, and therefore are made to 1 accept less than men for the same l work. -
 When the sewing machine was intro duced by Howe in 1845, I have heard old tailors say, that the direst conse- quences were predicted, but instead of l deprlylng them of work the machine l was the means of augmenting it. The cost of clothing having been Iessened
  The well known evils of clothing man. ' ufacture are not the results of the ma- chine, but due to a pernicious system of work made possible by manufactur- l ing on a small scale ?.
 There are also many undertakings that could not be carried on at all were 1t not for improved methods, as.a for instance, great works of construction such as tunnels and bridges. railroads and steamships, and the erection of large buildings. As self-eyident as 1 this seems when attention is called to It, yet 1t is lost sight of when discuss 1 ing the problem. The temporary loss of employment by some is alone con- l sidered, while the compensating fea- lures pass unnoticed.
 There are some occupations how ever, where the perfection of machin- cry proceeds faster than the increased consumption, and the effect. therefore. l Is to constantly decrease the number of worlSrnen required Tn such cases l it is far better for the Workmen to face I the stern realities of the situation and I make Up their minds that some will have to relieve the pressure by seeking employment elsewhere than by intensi- flying the distress through keeping in the trade more than it will sustain. otherwise wages will tend to lower. or l be prevented from rising, and work be- come more unsteady.
 l Here we touch the vital question of the limitation of output. The British unions are charged with pursuing the policy of limiting the product of the 1 members as a means of providing more work for all. The American unions are also charged with the same ten- dency as they gain in power. The an- swer is that the restriction placed upon l the speed of the worker is intended to prevent rushing or undue haste, that ] if such was not done the quickest work
 men would be made to set the pace 1 for the rest. and whether the pay be based upon week or piece work, wages or prices will be determined by what the most rapid workman is able to perform. Restrictions imposed for the 1 purpose of abuses of that kind are ] clearly justifable. There is, however, a conviction that the unions go beyond 1 that, that the ability to enforce such 1 restrictions prompts them to shirk req sonable tasks. That is of course, de-