New-York tribune., 1918-12-14
Work, Wages and Women

Work, Wages and Women
The soundest economic sense preached
in England to-day touching the labor
problems after the war comes from a
woman. Miss Christabel Pankhurst. She
is the leader of the Women's party,
strong in it's win-the-war nationalism;
she edits and publishes BRITANNIA"
weekly organ of her party, and she is
standing for election to the House of
Commons in the current election. In
little pamphlet called Industrial Saliva
ton she sets forth her faith and the
faith of those who believe with her.
What she says is of especial interest to
Americans, for it falls directly in line
with our national bent toward indi-
vidual ambition and freedom and away
from the guild or committee control of
industry.
The goal of Miss Pankhurst's propos-
ais she thus states:
1t is not the bourgeoisie that must be
abolished. On the contrary, it is the pro-
letarat that must be abolished. What
we mean by that is that the conditions
under which the proletariat live at
present must be brought to an end, and
it must enjoy the same advantages as
the bourgeoisie, so that the two become
indistinguishable.
It is in her analysis Of the route by
which this goal can be gained that Miss
Pankhurst shows her clear thinking.
"First and foremost by the increased
production of wealth." is her main di-
rection. Certain Socialists, who ought
to know better, she proceeds, have false
ly taught that the poverty or seni-pov-
erty of the many is due to the luxurious
living of the prosperous sections of the
community. This is not the truth. AS
Miss Pankhurst puts it, "If through all
the years of Socialist preachings the
result of each years industrial effort
had been divided equally among the
members Of the community, there would
have been no appreciable increase of
prosperity for any, and there would
have been one dead level of poverty
for all"
Now, in opposition to this increased
production of wealth, from which alone
general prosperity can come, Miss
Pankhurst sees two forces One is the
prewar trade union conditions and
workshop practices, with their restric-
ton of production. The other is the
mania for so-called "democratic con-
trol' of industry.
The former is a robbery Of the COM
munity in general and of the poorer
sections in particular. 1t must be
ended. More, increased production
must be urged and stimulated. If the
standard of living of the mass of the
people is raised, there can be no danger
of overproduction. Miss Pankhurst
would increase wages in pace with the
Increase in production by basic rate
of wage, graduated according to skill,
plus 'proportionate share of a COL
lectlve bonus on total output
Whether or not you agree with Miss
Pankhurst's precise method of fixing re-
wards, there is no denying the sound
ness of her fundamental proposition
that only through increased production
can living conditions be adequately bet
tered.
Her argument against committee
control of industry, such as that which
has paralyzed industrial Russia under
Bolshevlsm, runs along parallel lines:
Shop stewardsm, committee control
and the rest of it WILL unless nipped in
the bud, destroy the possibility Of real
izing the great aim of securing to the
mass of the people the comforts, re-
tinements and luxuries as yet enjoyed
only by the few. This, as we have shown
can be done only by a vast increase in
production; whereas, under committee
control (Which means mudde, delay, con-
fusion, divided counsels, stagnation and
retrogression) the production of COM
modties will fall instead of rising pow
living will fall to its lowest point Only
grown-up children, exploited by those
who know perfectly we'll what they arc
doing, would make the demand that
exists in some quarters for committee
control of industry.
Miss Pankhurst attacks the British
class system with fervor, and what she
says is of interest to Americans, even
though her words bear much more
lightly here. The view that manual
labor is degrading must end, and she
sees promise of aanew point of view
to result from the fashion in which the