Year: 1876




son and other employers-especially in
the cotton districts--take similar view Of
the question, and maintain that shorter
hours by no means signify less production;
and facts have been quoted by them which
strengthen an argument which will be
used further on in these pages.


The above proposition, stated in general
terms, il Of course true in particular in
stances. 1t would, however, be an insult
to the intelligence Of the reader If special
applications were made to particular
trades. 1t is quite evident that If all the
W savers of . certain material be employed
full time at full wages. and that the con-
sumption of the commodity 10 proceeding
as rapidly as its production, there can be
no reduction of hours without injury to
the community at large.


No action Of The trades unionists has
been crowned with such signal success as
that taken to bring about the reduction of
hours. The State itself watched the
.strAiniug effoEts that we're being made,
both recently and in years gone by and
when there was q sign Of tottering or fail
ure, came to it's assistance. The demand
is against the laws Of political economy"
cry the masters. ''Me ask a blessing"
reply the men, but are not strong enough
to force II. So Parliament steps in and
gives Factory act inst as when the men
(not the masters complain that their Union
is not strong enough to better the condition
Of miners when underground, the House Of
Commons passes Mines Regulation act
The support which the demands of the
Unions are receiving from Parliament is a
very significant phenomenon in the history
of England


What is very surprising is that the mas
ters believe they can get more work out Of
a man when they work him to death
They forget that it is not the miles one
travels, but the pace, t at kills They do
not pursue such policy III regard to their
horses. The fact is, that they are not
thinking Of their men. They are brood
ing over their valuable machinery stand
ing idle, and calculating what it would
bring them if it went on working a few
hours longer. The manufacturer sitting
in his counting house, within sound Of the
murmur Of his machinery and the chink-
ing Of his engine, huns to himself at each
clAck Of the fG-wheel, $50 much for me-
so much for me" And when he beholds
his hands" leaving for home on a sum
mer evening while 1t is yet light, and no
longer hears the heavy beat Of the beam
or the rattle of the shuttle, he looks upon
the stiffness as the symbol Of his loss.
Such men must De very miserable on sun
days.


1t Is now, however, a well ascertained
flct that, within certain limits, more
work is done as a rule where there is a
prospect of an early cessation from work
than when men know that they are doom
ed to several hours of continuous EN-
piOyment. A few years ago the average
days work in England was ten hours On
the Continent 1t was twelve, in Russia
sixteen or seventeen and yet it is calcula-
ted that two English mowers would do iu a
day the work Of SIX Russian ones; while
Russian factory egysAglves worked seventy
hEe hOurs AZ si4so .Woekr when those in
England only GasA-i sixty, yet the work
Of the former Is oaly one nth Of that #
the latter. When the average working
hours Of miner in South Wales was
twelve hours day, those in the north Of
England only worked seven, yet the cost
Of getting Goals In Aberdare was 25 per
cent. more than in Northumberland. As
has been well said, The workman who





worth his salt.


There are several other objects for which
men strike or are locked out. The nature
Of this essay, however, is too general to
admit Of their peculiarlties being inquired
into or their merits discussed. 1t is suth-
cient to say that when men strike 1t is ''io
better their condition" or to demand
something which they think will have that
result. Some persons object Oh principles
to piece-work. A little consideration,
however, shows that such system may be
right-nay, must pe right-in soins trades,
while payment by the hour may be equally
lust right In others. Surely, the task Of
watching machines, the production of
which never varies, can be paid for BY the
day, but occupationsu upon which the amount
produced depends 1pon the industry
of the operative ought certainly to be paid
by the piece. The Justice of this Is SO pa
tent that 1t would be a sign of obtuseness
on the part Of the men V they could not
show that piece-work is the general rule in
almost every trade with the exception Of
the building and engineering and it must
be mentioned that in the former the mas
ters are agreed with the men on the point


Al ohO"Ahk VIC CAASaSg VI y IL
ions, and in maintaining the justice Of
their demands, 1t must not be thought that
the author imagines they never err. No
one will pretend to deny that the Unions
have done what many people do not ap-
prove, and which they themselves, on
caln'er reflection, do not approve. But
this, as Mr.. Bright says, only shows they
are not immaculate, and that their Wis
dom, like that Of other classes, 10 not per-
feet. One is tired of hearing that the re-
suit of Trades Unions was Broadhead,
Crookes, aud Hal!am that its means were
ruthanism and murder its ends, never
inquired into. These men were not the
result Of UnIonism, bnt Of the attempt to
crush Unlonism. The laws of the coun-
try made all Unionists conspirators. Even
the 81 nplest actlons-which are now al
lowable-were illegal, and when what is
morally right is decided by tribunals to be
legally wrong, the culpril has more respect
for himself than he has for the law. I'm
ionism, however, needs nc defence here on
This head. The press may croak about the
three miscreants above named until it is
hoarse it can have little effect upon an
institution to which Thomas Burt, VIM.
Allan, and John Kane are proud to be-
long.