New Age, Vol. 13, No. 24, Oct. 9, 1913
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
VOl. xII1. NO. 24. THURSDAY,OCT. 9, 1913. I I NOTESOF THE WEEK .................. THE STEAMCloud By Arthur F. Thorn ......... CURRENTCANT ..................... VIEWSAND REVIEWS.By A E. R. ........... FOREIGNAFFAIRS. By S. Verdad ............ FROM“MULTATULI.” Trans. from the Dutch by 1’. Selver THE SOLEMNFARCE AND COVENANT ............ ARISTOPHANES OR TAILHARDE? Fy T. K. L. ......... !h EXAMINATIONOF THE NATIONALGUILD SYSTEM-11. By H. Belloc ........................ ART. By Anthony M. Ludovici ............... DRAMA.By John FrancisHope ............... TOWARDS A NATIONALRAILWAY GUILD-XI AND XIJ. By Henry Lascelles .................. PASTICHE.By J. A. M. A, C. H. C., Charles Cunningham LETTERS TO THE EDITOR from Frederick Taylor,John .A PILGRIMAGE TO TURKEYIN WARTIME--V By Marmaduke J. Pickthall ..................... Hereford, Welsh Noncomformist,Press-cutter, S. WHATDOES LITTLE BABU SAY? By C. E. Bechhofer ...... Verdad, Otway M’Cannell, National Guildsman, Ed- ward Stafford, Bilmen Kim A. E.R., Sydney Walton THE APPROACHTO PARIS-VI.By Ezra Pound ...... Anti-Caxton ..................... READERSAND WRITERS.By R. H. C. ............ steed and other economists), the personal element in the factory is of much more concern than any material ele- mentwhatever. The conclusion,therefore, in this Beehive affair is that on the merits of the case alone and apart altogether from any principle, the men are fully justified in strikingagainst a manager underwhom, they say, theysimply cannotdo their bestwork. The strike, however, calls in question by reason of the per- UNLESSthe cotton employers have some private reason sonalelement in it, a principle of ahigher degree of for pushing their threat of a general lock-out into exe- concern to everybody thanthe principle of mere cution, we do not believe that the present dispute will mechanicaladministration. Men maystrike for higher arrive at crisis. It is true that from one point of view wages or for shorter hours without arousing any feeling thecause of thedispute is sufficient tojustify any beyond irritation in theiremployers. They are even extreme measure upon either side; but the importance cynically expected to do this as the established method of asking for their share in better trade. But in strik- of the principleinvolved is notyet clearly enough ingagainst the managerial personnel, they are touch- recognised to make an immediate fightupon it probable. ing uponnot administrationmerely, or uponconcerns The principle involved is no less than the right of the individually important to themselves, but upon the sanc- trade unions to“interfere” with the management of tity of their employers’ property. Themagic of pro- the businesses in which their members are employed as perty we may say in the case of the cotton employers hey havehitherto exercised theright to “interfere” is not so much in possession as in the sense of power. withthe wages paid. It isonly naturalthat the em- They enjoy the feeling of beingable to do what they pleasewithout consulting their workmen. lhe latter ployers,being for the most part mereschoolboys, may grumbleand finally bethrown a bone on such shouldresent this claim and shouldeven prepareto triflingmatters aswages and hours ; but when they .arm themselves against the very shadow of it upon the aspireto criticise the management theymust be told horizon. Nevertheless, we are convinced thatit must that the directors admit no right of criticism to their comein time, for on its affirmation and establishment men, and regard their position as being as far removed depends the whole future of Trade Unionism. For the from trade union control as the Stuarts believed thcm- selvesabove the control of Parliament. present, it is clear, the Trade Unions themselves are less *** aware of what is involved in the dispute than are several That this divine right o.f employers is disputable in of the employers-Sir CharlesMacara, for example. theory is obvious; and thatit will he more and more Butthey will becomeclearer under constant instruc- disputedin practice is certain. For we now know as tion ; and in no verylong time we prophesy that the absolutely as we can know anything that by no other .unions everywhere will be demanding explicitly the very means than by “interfering” in management can trade rightto “interfere” in management whichthey now unions ever raise wages. A priori it might be supposed appear to disclaim. thatwages could be raised withoutdisturbing the *** whole system of existingindustry; as easily as the Norse hero believed he could lift the witch’s cat; hut We need not enter into the details of the affair at the actually it is no more possible than his feat for in both Beehive factory, for, apart from the principle at stake, casesthe thing to be lifted is practically theworld the incident is of smallimportance. On the face of it, We have seen in fact, that successive generations of if it is conceded that workmen have the right to refuse cunning men have tried to raise wages without revolution $0 work under distasteful mechanical circumstances, it revolutionising industry;cunning men are at thetask still. shouldalso be conceded that they havethe right to Rutfor all past effortsand for all the efforts o,f the :refuse to work under distasteful personal circumstances. same kind that have been or can be made, wages will An unpopularmanager, in otherwords, is quite as remainprecisely what they are by nature,the market legitimate a ground of offence and hence of a strike on price of labour as a commodity. It follows from this- :the part of theworkman as a dangerousmachine or andthe fact is demonstrable-that wages in England overlonghours or bad ventilation or low wages. In have really notrisen very muchsince theFeudal sys- fact,remembering the supreme importance of psycho- temfirst created a proletarian class. Wages have not, logy in industry(recently dwelt upon by Mr. Wick- in fact,risen in all that time. It took so much to 682 support a workman and to induce him to breed in those labour troubles within limits are good for profits. The:, days; relatively and perhaps absolutely it takes no more clear the bile of the workman ; they sharpen his wits ;, to-day;and that is all theproletariat get. Nor can they provide him with a kind of emotional holiday and this detail of the capitalist system be changed without sendhim back to workwith a newzest. Thelabour changing the whole system itself. To raise wages it is troubles on the Rand, for example, have puta new spirit necessaryto revolutionise industry; and sinceto revolutionise- into the men, with the result that the gold returns since industry will require theabrogation of the the strike have been the greatest ever known in South principle of th’e divine right of capitalism,th,e sooner Africanindustry. And notonly hasthe output in- this is challenged ,the better. The men on strike at thle creased, but the wages-bill, owing to economies and to Beehive mill certainly donot know what they are increasedefficiency, has beenreduced. The same, in striking for. Their Association is even more completely perhapseven a greaterdegree, is true of industryat in thedark. A fewmasters know, but the rest are home. The iron and steel companies, in particular, are probably ignorant. Nevertheless, everybody has th’e having the time of their lives. The profits ofnineteen feeling thatthings are getting down to the nerves of of the largest companies for the past year were nearly industry. double those of the previous year ; and in three cases, *** theywere treble.Nobody will attemptto maintain let US hope, that wages have risen with profits. On the Numerous,are the attempts of economistsand poli- contrary,wages have fallenwhile profits havebeen ticians to prove by theory or by practice that within the booming. And in thatfact, for anybody with eyes to ambit of the wage-system wages can be raised. On this see, is the crux of the whole labour problem. supposition, indeed, the most extraordinary propositions *** are advanced by peoplewho ought to knowbetter. Messrs. Webb andShaw, for instance, of the “New We state as conclusions to be drawn from the fore Statesman,”propound as their latest device the more going facts, in the first place, that wages have practi-. equitable division of the returns of industry as between cally no relation with profits ; in the second, that while thesalariat and the wage-earners. Th,eywould, it labour remains a commodity, its wages cannot by any seems, leave Rent and Interest untouched ; in fact, if we device whatever be raised above its market value ; a:d understandthem, they are prepared to guarantee the in the third, that no amount of trade unionorganisa- payment of Profit as well. Butwhat occurs to them tiondirected solely to raisingwages will havemore as a fair means of raising wages is to reduce salaries thanthe smallest effect. What, we ask, has been the and to distribute the savings among the wage-earners. net economic effect of all thestrikes of thelast few There’s a proposal, if you please, to come fromthe years? Profitshave beenincreased while wages have so-much-advertised “representative Socialists” of to- been falling or stable. But that, beit noted, is not to, day ! It does not seem tto have struck them that apart condemnstrikes, or to declaretrade unionism to be from the ridiculous impossibility of the plan, the sugges- ineffective. It is only to condemn the objective hitherto. tion is a counsel of despair. If Rent,Interest and assumedfor strikes, and the theories on which trade Profitsare not to be touched butare to be held as unionsproceed. For example, itis assumed that by sacred,the whole of the remainder of thereturns to striking a union can actually raise its wages relatively industry, even if divided equally, would not amount to to profits. Well,itcannot. Itis similarlyassumed more than about a shilling a week in addition to present that by collective bargaining a trade union can induce wages.