The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1917-09-08
RIGHT OF THE WAGE GARNER

capital is collective capital!
The Question of Collective Ownership.
/ Let it be clearly understood the
above train of thought is not an argtl-
ment in favor Of collective ownership
of capital. No doubt such argu-
ments are to hand. But the present
writer would be exceeding his sphere
II, in purporting to give a Papal pre-
sentiment of the Social Question, he
identified it with any one existing
school of political or economic
| thought
The train of thought developed in
the foregoing paragraph is an appeal
| to those who do not look favorably
on Living Wage as the first charge
on revenue. (That this doctrine of the
Living Wage can be made an article
or any political party may be evi-
| denced by the fact that Archbishop
Bagshawe, in his Mercy and Justice
to the Poor quotes Devas: Every
man has right to live He may claim
| in virtue of the Divine Law a
minimum of sustenance, of rest and of
recreation. ..... Our efforts must be
directed to secure for every family
the opportunity of decent existence
and to make this the first charge on
the produce of labor" Yet Archbishop
/ BagshaWe was a Liberal and Deyas
seems to have been a Tory. The
| same train of thought suggests to such
economists that they themselves are
| the strongest argument for Collec-
| tiVism. If, indeed, it be true, as they
say it is true, that private capital is
not equal to the task Of giving a Liv-
ing Wage, then the claims of Collec-
tivism are irrefutable.
Wage Boards.
Perhaps in this doctrine of the Liv-
ing Wage we have that unit of COM
promise without which no war has
ever been ended. Both combatants
might we'll agree that for the present.
legislation or aforementioned boards
should fix the Living Wage There is.
OF course, the great danger, lest these
wage boards might bring in that sys-
tenn of compulsory labor which is
rightly dreaded as slavery. But if the
liberty as well as the life of the wage
Garner is safeguarded, then common
agreement about the Living Wage
might be given hundred years of
trial.
Capital has little to fear by such an
agreement; unless, indeed, it signs it's
own death-warrant by pleading it's
roWerlessness to give the Living
| Wage.
Labor, too, has little to lose and
much to gain. So long has labor been
working at a killing wage that it has
no resources. The only alternative to
the compromise Of a Living Wage is
deadly class-war. Now, war is a
legitimate and sometimes a successful
means of arriving at ones objective.
History does not fail to record right
eous wars which have punished wrong
doing and brought justice back to it's
throne. Yet it is not war, but success
full war, that has a valuable social
function. Labor should not risk war
which, according to the laws of nature
must turn out failure Of course, the
age of miracles is not past; the laws
of nature are still patient of a divine
Encouragement. But Labor must be
in new mood if it's chief hope of VIC
tory is in the Lord God of Hosts.
Labors Future.
Trust in God, and keep your pow
der dry was the active principle of
one of England's greatest fighting
men. But nowadays this Cromwellian
principle does not go to the root of
the matter We must re-state it in
terms of modern lack-powder. How
| can man keep dry a pouch of pow
| der which he does not possess? How
can Labor war against Capital when
all the arms and ammunition are on
| the side of it's enemy? Bravery is no
substitute for preparedness. Indeed,
the greater the bravery the greater
the slaughter. Kitchener slaughtered
thousands at Omdurman because the
enemy were many brave men with
foWling pieces, and his army were a
few brave men with machine guns
| Would weavers using only the hand
loom like to compete with weavers
using modern machinery? Will the
o1d-fashioned cord-wainer undertake
to keep up with modern boot factory.
Will a row-boat challenge a torpedo
destroyer. And will any body of
working men lay sixpence on the
chances of the hand-maker against
the machine-maker in the cost and
sWiftness of production2
Therefore, even if war were the
only means of laber's salvation, labor
must above all things obtain the
means of war. It's funds are almost
empty. Strikes have always wiped out
labor's savings. The Insurance Act
has ear-marked a 1.-THE of its hard
earnings for the supreme control of
the State. A hundred years of Living
Wage would:not be too much to give
Labor that preparedness without
which war would be only. ,tboughtless
suicide.
l. "
r French Priests Honored