The daily Nome industrial worker., 1916-11-06

but few large concerns and quite re- gently a very elaborate analysis was made considering at length why it was some large trustified firms did not hold their own with smaller firms and it was to be explained only by the insistence upon the part of the trust of the long twelve hour day. A notable case of this is the steel trust Time and time again, notwithstanding the enormous plants and the tremendous capacity ot equipment, the steel trust, the United States Steel Corporation, was beaten in competition with firms ot one fifth the capacity and one tenth capital which they out-bid in the markets.
 The steel trust noting this has sought to maintain the same rate per capita as the eight hour day firms. working their men twelve hours. and by simply obtaining a constant supply of men through i'm migration. Hence it is that men in the employ of the steel trust are so soon scrapped. They can't stand the pace set, and it is vital neces sity to the trust that constant and amending stream of fresh employees be obtained.
 This waste of human labor has led to a great outcry. The states wherein the trust operates has to foot the bills for these industrial de- relicts that are being cast upon the labor market in ever increasing numbers. literally prematurely brok- en down and unemployable.
 A New York social worker has made an examination of the unem- ployable and he finds that most Of these are such industrial derelicts who were compelled to work long and unsanitary hours to suffer a break down and collapse which un- fitted them to labor at practically any industry.
 Taken generally, the idea at the back of the eight hour day is not as we have said, to better the con- ditions of the workers for that bett- erment per SC. But to conserve the community; to protect the race; to make stronger and healthier men and women, better and healthier fathers and mothers and to increase the public health by maintaining the shorter work day, increased leisure and less unemployment, and for employers to improve the effl- ciency of the labor.
 Therefore it is, there can be urged no practical objection to the eight hour day upon the part of anyone. The business that cannot stand the eight hour day is mighty ricketty any way, and the tin-horn hay-wire outfit which is sure to break down if it were operated under twelve hour day sooner or later, might as we'll break down first as last. The camp and the community are better without them. The camp and the community are always improved when man and women work under of labor where their health is not subjected to the har- assing and unenduring strain of the longer work day.
 To some it is nothing that their dollars come out of the flesh and blood of wearied and broken work CTS. Their profits are their delight. But they are fouled just the same and profit no community and nc camp.
 From the workers point of view which we have dealt with but casual ly in this editorial, there should be not the least question nor any hesi- tation. It has only one side: the eight hour side. There can be ques- tion that it is to labor's benefit that the work day be cut down. The more leisure the worker has the better he feels. Besides, it shortens the individual shift and increases the number employed. Tn increasing the number employed it eliminates or lessens competition. It is only step, and true enough, mighty small step on the road to industrial freedom. It is one that should be regulated by the workers them selves and in tbeir own halls. But when an expression of opinion is invited, what worker that is at all in improving his own con- iition and that of his class, will re-