The Workman's Advocate. — 1865-10-21 (London, England)

TRADES UNIONS AND THEIR DETRACTORS.  HOWEVER moral or powerful an institution may be in itself, it cannot afford to allow the voice of calumny to take away its reputation. Like Cmsar's wife, its character shottld be above suspicion. And this is the case with trades unions. As institutions their organizations and laws are most perfect, and as guardians of the interests, welfare, and morals of the masses, there are no associations in the world possessing greater influence. But mighty as is their influence, and perfect their organization, it is not advisable that they should always be silent under the lash of their opponents. Occasions will arise when it is necessary that their advocates should speak out, not so much to refute the base accusations of malevolent detractors as to remove false impressions which have been created in the public mind. One of these occasions has just occurred. The National Association for the Promotion of Social Science has held its session in Sheffield, and naturally enough its debates have turned upon various matters connected with trades and trades unions. To say the public have been enlightened by the manner in which the subjects have been introduced is more than we should like to venture to assert; but we have no hesitation in expressing our belief that every trades unionist, like ourselves, will be utterly astounded at the flagrant and unauthenticated charges which have been hurled at the door of trade organizati, ns. Could these charges be seriously entertained it would appear that trades unionists must be every tbing that is villanous—that they have committed violent outrages, burnt factories, murdered women and children, made war against machinery, and committed such inhuman excesses as to place them without the pale of society. Do we believe such extraordinary accusations? Certainly not, for we know there is nothing in the rules of any trade union that would sanction violence or outrage of any kind. But the graver question is— Do the public listen to them, and is it ready to give credence to what Mr. Hughes and Mr. Fawcett have stated upon—not what they know—but upon what they have heard? The most charitable of men are sometimes the slaves of prejudice, and we cannot expect that a general public, who take their standard from what they read or what they see, will be in a mood to investigate charges which would compel them to become acquainted with dry details and volumes of facts connected with the history of trades unions from their formation up to the present time. But if we may not expect a general public to weigh evidence with the patience of a body of jurymen, we know it is ever desirous of arriving at the truth, and as it has already been surfeited with opinions upon one side of the question, it will have no objection to hear what the accused have to say for themselves. In our editorial capacity it would be an easy task to come forth with an eloquent defence, but we should be met that we were only writing from our own view, which must, to a certain extent, be limited, biassed, and partial. The battle must therefore be fought, not by editors, who have never mixed in the arena of labour's 3trikes and struggles, but by men whose names are known to the world as leaders of trade movements, and whose characters for honesty and truth are beyond the power of th 3 traducer to assail. E then becomes our province, as the organ of trades unions to find these men, and to give them, through our columns, an opportunity of stating their own case; and to do this effectually we shall from week to week insert such speeches and writings from the representatives of trades unions as will be conducive to this result. To commence this week we have given in another portion of our paper the first chapter of labour's chronicle, under the head of " Opinions of Trades Unionists upon the Great Social Questions of the Day," to which we refer all readers who seek for truth, and who desire to see the sons of labour plead their own cause.