Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-06-08

OuS ana the most COHipISA pAoptSA- - the industrial world to-day. It is a problem with which the average trade unionist is not at all familiar, al-i though the question of wages and trade-unionism are so closely connect ed.
 We hear a good deal from time to time about wage slavery, and ma many who advocate the abolition of tlae entire wage system. some of them who have probably given the subject I little thought and who are ever ready to chase illusions rather than grapple with actual conditions.
 It Is not my purpose here to attempt to picture a condition in which there would be no wage system. will leave 1 that to the theorists. and content my self with stating a few facts about | wages that may furnish some food for thought on the problem as it ex- ists.
 At meeting of trade unionists re- gently prominent speaker and a close student of economic conditions made the statement that there should be no limit to the demands of the un- 1 ions for increased wages. His state ment was vigorously applauded, be.- was he right? am not ready to ad- init that he was right from an eco homie standpoint; that he was wrong l as q matter of business policy from 3 l trade union point of view, I am satis- | fed
 The most difficult practical problem confronting the unions today is to de- l termine just how far the demands for 1 increased wages can be pushed with out overtaxing industry or infringing on the right of capital I say prac- tical problem advisedly, because un- 1 der our present system the right of capital must be considered, although I am aware that there are those among the trade unions who believe l that capital has no rights. Tn fact, 1 it cannot be disputed economically that the interests of the worker are best served when labor and capital and brains are cooperating It is only through such cooperation that the highest productivity is reached, and it is only through larger produc- tion and distribution of goods that wages can be increased
 N Wages. properly speaking. arc not measured in dollars and cents. If they were it would be simple matter to let every worker have high wages It could be done by increasing the vol ume of money in the country by the issuance of paper or otherwise. This, however, would do the worker no good, as increasing the money of the l country would not increase the vol ume of production and the common l laborer might receive S1O day and find he could barely subsist on it.
 Wages are measured by the amount of the necessaries of life that can be got in exchange for given amount of labor. so that the Fundamental principle upon which wages rests is the efficiency and productivity of la. bor. The question. therefore, is, a very complex one. and when we con sider 8 method of increasing wages We must find method of increasing the efficiency of labor at the same time. Tn fact, if we do the latter the former will necessarily come
 To the superficial observer it may not appear that the wages paid one section of workers has any bearing or another section. but it has. neverthe less: For instance, an increase ir wages to the garment worker means a decrease to the carpenter, machin ist or any other worker because ii dtlu0 tO lhC pLlCe 0L luG1 CiOlulllS Ht has to wear So it is all along the line. But the increased wages adds to the productivity of the worker.
 Notwithstanding the fact that trade unions have sometimes made mis takes. it must be admitted that they have been the agency through which wages have been advanced and a higher degree of efficiency obtained They have done this. too, not alone in the face of opposition from the em pIoyers. but in spite of the teachings of certain school of economists. who in the early days of trade unionisn taught the fallacious doctrine knowr as the wage fund theory" By this doctrine the economists tried to prove that combinations Of workingmer were powerless to improve conditions
 that wages were fixed by a1 iInnu
 table law.
 This wage fund theory" whicf
 was accepted by many economists III
 to quarter of a century ago. was ex
 plained as follows: There was cer
 tain amount of capital at any giveI time to be given away as wages, anf
 that the average wages depended
 upon the number of workers employ
 ed among whom it had to be divided
 If any section of workers got an in
 crease in wages, some other sectioI
 had to suffer in proportion.
 In connection with this theory was the principle of population taugh
 by the same economists. who said nt
 permanent advancement could bt
 nude by the unions because if the! evaded the wage fund law and SC
 cured an increase in wages the popu ] lation would increase under the i'm
 proved conditions. and because of
 surplus supply of workers the wage
 would again be forced down to thei
 former level. This doctrine wa
 taught by as eminent student al ' John Stuart Mills. although in 1S6! he repudiated and acknowledged it
 fallacy.
 Instead Of the theory being correc it has been proved that the birth rat, is highest where the greatest povert. prevails, and that it has fallen off a an alarming rate where the most i'm
 proved conditions obtain. Neither ha