i r / 1^1 A A..A A^^'/./2^/iu.^ '- - _ _ - - ^ 
 
 ^ . - 

 
 TRADES UNIONS: 
 
 AN' I.NariRY INTO 
 
 THEIR RULES AND WORKING 
 
 BASED ON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ROYAL COMMISSION: 
 
 THE FOLLY OF ALL ATTEMPTS TO EAISE AVAGES BY 
 
 VIOLENCE AND STRIKES, 
 
 AND THE BEAUTY AND EXCELLENC'K OF THE DIVIXE LAWS GOYERNIKG 
 
 WORKMEN AND EMPLOYERS. 
 
 BY EGBERT JOBSON. 
 
 {Re^vinted from the "Free Labour Jofenal.") 
 
 LOXDOX: 
 
 XEWS-AGENTS' PUBLISHING COMPANY (LIMITED)' 
 
 147, FLEET STEEET, E.G. 
 
 AND MAY BE HAD AT 
 
 MANCHESTER: John Heyayood. GLASGOW: William Love. 
 SHEFFIELD : E. Weston. 
 
 i> :ei. e c e: •jc -vir o 3e« e: n^ c n.
 
 TRADES UNIONS 
 311 ^r!5c aJs'&iji. 
 
 "The (Divine) law requires us only to tuke another's place, and to consider what our prin- 
 ciples would require us to do under the other's circumstances. If one is a seller, he is to 
 consider what— if he were a buyer — he would consider it ri;;ht that a seller should do. If he 
 is a master, what— if a servant — he would expect a master to do. By thus placing ourselves 
 in the position of those witli whom we have to do, we learn to be more just and meiciful — to 
 demand less, and to give more; in a word, to be more equitable. What a different world it 
 would be, if this great lav,- were in any considerabie measure the lule of conduct! 
 
 Tlie law of equity is the practical form of the law of love to the neighbour ; 
 
 practically, to love our neighbour as ours.lvcs is to do to him as we would that he should do 
 to us. This is the law of Heaven." — Bkcce. 
 
 Ix this paper we purpose placing before j'ou a clear view of that im- 
 portant question, Capital and Labour, now engaging public attention. 
 In endeavouring to do this, we hope also to show the influence Trades- 
 Unions are exercising on the trade of this countrj'. AVe shall also tuke 
 into consideration the character of their rules in relation to fixing the 
 price of labour, piece-work, apprentices, machinciy, " chasing-, "' the 
 relationship of master and workman, and many other points, all bearing 
 on this important subject. Xie shall also consider the subject of 
 picketing, strikes, &c. ; their nature and results. And, in doing this, 
 we shall, as a basis for our arguments, seek to be guided by the divine 
 law — " Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so 
 to them." This law is applicable to employer as well as to workman ; 
 both are to be guided by it in their dealiuga with each other. If we 
 examine all good human laws, we shall find that this simple but divine 
 law forms their essence ; and it brings happiness or misery, just as it is 
 observed or disregarded. AYe cannot too well remember the excellent 
 words we have chosen for our motto, that " the divine law requires us 
 only to take another's place, and to consider what our principles would 
 require us to do under the other's circumstances. If one is a seller, 
 he is to consider what — if he were a buyer — he would consider it right 
 that a seller should do ; if he is a master, what — if a servant — he 
 would expect a master to do. By thus placing ourselves in the position 
 of those with Vthom we Lave to do, we learn to be more just and 
 merciful — to demand less and give more ; in a word, to be more 
 equitable." Vie are therefore to apply this as the standard by which 
 we ought to measure the conduct of the employer to his workman, and 
 of the workman to his employer. With such for our aim, and entering 
 on the subject in a becoming spirit, we have no doubt that the result 
 of our inquiry will be in every way satisfactory and profitable. 
 
 We will now proseed to consider the subject of capital and labour, 
 and the law that regulates the rise and fall of prices. Capital stands 
 to the employer in the same relation that laboin- does to the workman. 
 If the demand for money is great, the value of it will rise accordingly^ ; 
 hut if the demand for it declines, its value '.vill decrease in a like ratio. 
 For instance: in the month of May, ISGG, money was in so great 
 demand that the bank-rate rose to ten per cent. ; but from the month of 
 July, 18C7, the demand has so decreased that the bank-rate has fallen 
 to two per cent., at which rate it has since remained. It is the same 
 not only with money, but with other commodities — such as tea, sugar, 
 
 A 2
 
 coffee, corn, cotton, coal, or wood ; for these things are only capital in 
 another form. If there is a great demand for tea and sugar, the prices 
 will naturally rise; and if the supplies are short they will rise the 
 quicker. But if there is little demand for them the prices will naturally 
 fall ; and should the supplies be large they will fall the quicker, until 
 they attain their own natural level. There are, of course, exceptions to 
 this, when prices may advance more than is justified by the actual 
 consumption ; such as, for instance, when corn becomes scarce, 
 speculators will buy up and hold for advanced rates. Or, again, when 
 there is no great want of the article, they will combine, buy up, and 
 hold, thus forcing the prices up to an unnatural level ; for " bulls and 
 bears " are to be found in commerce as well as on the Stock Exchange. 
 In the first case the speculation is legitimate, because the short supply 
 justifies it ; and it serves a useful purpose in conserving a universal 
 article of food by compelling the consumer — from its enhanced price — 
 to partake more sparingly of it, or to seek for a substitute in another 
 article of food until fresh supplies of corn arrive. In the latter case 
 the speculation is not legitimate, because the quantity in the market 
 does not warrant an advance in price, and therefore it partakes more of 
 the character of gambling than of fair legitimate trading. Both these 
 cases, however, are exceptions, and they only prove the general rule, 
 that suppl}' and demand — if left free and unfettered — will regulate 
 themselves. 
 
 Now, labour may be regarded in the same way. When work i3 
 plentiful, wages, or the price of labour, will rise, and more so if the 
 labourers are few ; but when work is scarce, wages will decline, and 
 still more so if labour is abundant. Let us give you an illustration of 
 this : Before the discovery of gold in California and Australia, wages 
 were moderately low ; but immediately these great gold fields were laid 
 open, the demand for every kind of workmanship gradual!}' rose until 
 the price of labour attained an almost fabulous height. Carpe^itcrs, 
 joiners, shipwrights, seamen, masons, bricklayers, and diggers, all were 
 wanted, and in proportion as that demand rose did wages increase ; but 
 when the gold fever gradually died out, wages gradually decreased. 
 This law of supply and demand in its operations is altogether wise and 
 good. Its admirable action is obvious. The low price of an article is 
 an announcement to all concerned that there is more than enough of 
 that article already in the market, and that it should cease to be pro- 
 duced, or be taken elsewhere. The high price of an article is, on the 
 other hand, an intimation that more of the article is wanted, and it 
 invites a supply from wherever the article is possessed. Nothing can 
 be conceived more simple, clear, beneficial and beautiful than the divine 
 law, and nothing more fully proves the truth, that the important sub- 
 jects of capital and labour have not been left to the guidance of blind 
 chance ; but that thej', like all other things in the economj' of nature 
 and of man, are under the control of wise and beneficent regulations, 
 the safeguards of a Divine Providence. 
 
 Here, then, is a simple law in political economy, which every child 
 may learn, but ignorance of which has led to many unhappy diiiercnces 
 between master and workmen, as we will proceed to show. Now, then, 
 what is the principle the trades- unions go upon in selling labour? It is 
 this : They fix a minimum rate of wages for each workman —good, bad, 
 or indifferent. The masters are at liberty to give more it they feel 
 inclined, but the men are not at liberty to accept less, whether they 
 feel inchned or not ; and that minimum rate is oftentimes fixed b}' the 
 unions in an arbitrary manner, irrespective of the state of trade with the 
 masters, whether it is brisk or slack, or whether labour is scarce or 
 plentiful. On this point we will allow the men to speak for themselves. 
 Mr. W. Allen, Secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers,
 
 in givin^r his evidence to the conimisioners appointed to inquire into tl:e 
 organisation and rules of trades-unions, answers thus : — 
 
 Qtiesli'm 852. (Commissioner). — I think you said that a great number 
 of the strikes arose from the resistance to a lowering of waives? — 
 Yes. o o 
 
 (i. 853. When provisions rise, I suppose you sometimes ask for a 
 rise of wages ? — It has only been, as I have said, within these last 
 twelve months that any material change has taken place, except in the 
 north of England and in Scotland. 
 
 Q. 854. IBut when the masters endeavoured to lower the wages, did 
 they ever state that provisions had fallen ? — No. 
 
 Q. 855. They never gave that as a reason for wishing to give a less 
 rate of wages'? — As a rule, they assigned no reason at all beyond the 
 simple flict that they want to reduce the wages inasmuch as the orders 
 are not coming in so rapidly as they should; that trade is bad, in 
 fact. 
 
 Q. 85G. Then, the reason they give is slackness cf trade?— 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. 857. But you have never heard that masters have said that as 
 the wages were raised when provisions rose, they thought they ought to 
 be reduced when provisions fell ? — Xo. I have heard that employers 
 sa\', " When trade is good we have given you an advance of wages, and 
 when trade is bad you ought to submit to a reduction." 
 
 Q. 858, But that position of the masters has been resisted ? — It has 
 been resisted, and is being resisted now at Blackburn. They 
 propose there to reduce the wages two shillings per week, and the 
 men are all on strike in consequence of refusing. 
 
 Q. 859. At Blackburn has there ever been a rise of wages in 
 consequence of a briskness of trade?— Yes. 
 
 Q. 860. And the men, being pleased with that, have not yielded to 
 the design of the masters to lower the wages when the trade is slack ?— 
 Precisely so. 
 
 Q. 861. So that you have one rule for yourselves and another for 
 your master? — We keep what we can get, as a general rule. 
 
 According to this evidence, whether trade is slack or brisk, it makes 
 no difference to the unions. If the masters attempt to reduce the wages, 
 they strike. Now, can anything be more unfair and foolish than 
 conduct of this kind ? And is^not this going against that healthy law of 
 political economy — that wages, like capital and merchandise, should be 
 allowed to regulate themselves according to the demand for labour ? It 
 is not only a violation of that law, but it is a violation of that higher law, 
 which the Divine Law-maker has planted in the minds and hearts of all 
 men — that law which says, " Do unto others as ye would they should 
 do imto you." The men quietly take an advance of wages from their 
 masters when trade is good ; but when trade is bad wtth them, they 
 show their gratitude by making it still worse, by ceasing to work. The 
 masters have the sense to see that it is better to work for a small profit 
 instead of allowing their hands and works to stand still, but the men 
 answer, '^ Profit or no profit, we mean to have our full wages ; and if 
 you cannot give full wages we won't have any." 
 
 Again, the same witness thus answers: — 
 
 Jl. 948. You have said that when an employer proposed to reduce 
 wages, you generally resisted that on the principle that, having got what 
 you desired to get, you would endeavour to retain it? — Certainly. 
 
 Q. 949. Do you, on giving advice on these matters, take into account 
 questions of competition between different parts of the United Kingdom, 
 or questions of foreign competition, and how far it is possible for 
 employers to compete with each other, if certain wages are given? — We 
 know nothing, in fact, of the circumstances of the employers' com-
 
 petition, and, therefore we are not in a position to deal witli it ; but aa a 
 rule I would say, if one emj)loyer runs into competition with another, we 
 would decidedly ohject to allow the employer who has reduced the price 
 of the article to reduce our wages to meet that. 
 
 Q. 950. But where the employers give you as a reason for a reduction 
 in the price of the article that the demand is diminished, do you pro- 
 cure any information for your society which Avould enable you to judge 
 whether such a statement is founded on fact, and whether, with the 
 diminished demand for the article, the masters' wish to lower the wages 
 is unreasonable ? — We generally make inquiry, and we have, as a rule, 
 means of ascertaining pretty accurately the condition of things before 
 we give advice, 
 
 Ilere, then, the refusal to lower wages is not only damaging to the 
 masters, but to the men themselves. Labour on the Clyde is cheaper 
 than it is on the Thames ; so that the Scotch shipbuilder, by offering to 
 build ships for less, is able to carry off the trade of his English com- 
 petitors by the English workmen refusing to lower their wages to their 
 natural level ; and the result is this : — The English shipbuilder loses 
 the contract, and the workman his wages. And this will apply, not 
 onlj- to shipbuilding, but to every other branch of trade. 2>row, let us 
 suppose that the principles of trades-unions in this respect v/ere to be- 
 come general ; in short, that England was to become a huge trade- 
 imion society, maintaining the price of labour in the face of Scotch or 
 foreign competition — what would be the result ? It would be this : that 
 as men buy in the cheapest market, they would, as a matter of course, 
 leave the English goods, and buy the Scotch or continental goods. 
 This artificial restraint on the price of labour cuts two ways. It harms 
 both the master and the workman ; and when the former sees that 
 through these trade rules he has lost the contract, he Avill very 
 iiaturallj^ turn his capital to some other business wliere he is not 
 hampered by them, leaving his obstinate workmen to reap the fruit of 
 their folly, the charity of the public, or the tender mercies of the work- 
 house. 
 
 There is another important fact bearing on this branch of the 
 subject, which English workmen do not sufficiently recognise. That is 
 the competition between English labour and foreign labour. Owing to 
 the great advances made by science, time and space are gradually 
 becoming lessened — we might almost say, annihilated ; and this is most 
 materially affecting our commercial position. Countries that were 
 formerly strangers in more ways than one are drawing closer to each 
 other, and are becoming more tirmly knit together in the great brother- 
 hood of nations; and by these civilising agencies, that da}' is slowly, but 
 surely, approaching when the prayer of the poet shall become a reality - 
 " And man to man the world o'er, 
 Shall brothers be for a' that." 
 Steam, railways, and electricity, are three of the great instruments 
 employed by Divine Providence in bringing about this happy state. 
 Our intercourse with Europe is every day increasing, while our con- 
 tinental neiglibouvs are gradually following our example, becoming 
 more and more " a nation of shopkeepers," finding that this is better for 
 their health and purse than wasting their life and treasure in useless 
 wars. And one of the results from this is, that British capitalists are 
 taking advantage of the cheapness of foreign labour. Iltnce we have 
 from Norwa}', Sweden, and llussia, large quantities of flooring boards, 
 mouldings, doors, and even wooden spouts ; and from Belgium, great 
 supplies of nianufactured iron, such as rails, steam-engines, &c. From 
 a return of the Board of Trade, we learn that in 18G2 the export of 
 ironwork from Belgium was £1100, while in 18G5 it had increased to 
 £95,000. From the same source we also learu that £92u,39G worth of
 
 cotton goods were imported from the Continent into England in 1866. 
 These, then, are a few of the results of advancing civilisation. They 
 form a picture with two faces. Tiie first, a happy one ; the second, an 
 unhappy one. The bright side shows that the influence of commerce, 
 science, and knowledge are advancing, and that by them " the sword 
 shall be turned into the ploughshare and the spear into the pruning- 
 hook," and gentle Pleaven-born peace shall one day reign in the place 
 of the demon — "War, that 1k;s so often desolated Europe. The 
 unhappy side of the picture shows that these large importations of 
 foreign goods are caused to a great extent hy strikes and the high price 
 of labour in England; so that the profit and wages on them made by our 
 friend, the foreigner, are lost to the English employer and workman. 
 To the British workman, therefore, we strongly recommend a careful 
 stud}' of this interesting, but unhappy side of the picture. 
 
 We now come to consider the question of the minimum rate of wages. 
 Mr. GeorG;e Howell, a member of the Bricklayers' Operative Society, 
 thus testified before the Commission: - 
 
 Q. 1702. You fix a minimum rate of wages? — Yes. 
 
 Q. 1703. In the case of a clumsy, slow, and inefficient workman, 
 who cannot do anything like the work of a quick and adroit workman, 
 you do not make him work longer hours, or at a lower rate of wages ? — No. 
 
 Q. 1704. The maximum is paid to the superior man, not by an addi- 
 tional rate of wages, but by allowing him an an hour's work w-hich he 
 does not in fact do ? — That is frequently done ; but I admit that in many 
 instances more money is paid. 
 
 Q. 1705. In point of fact then, there is no encouragement for men of 
 ability and skill to work more ? — I very much regret to say that is true. 
 
 Q. 1706. You think it prejudicial, not only to the general interests 
 of your particular trade, but to societ}-? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Coulson, member of the Operative Bricklayers' Society, 
 answers : — 
 
 Q. 1479. Supposing two bricklayers to be engaged in the same de- 
 scription of work, the one being a very adroit workman, and the other 
 a very slow and feeble man, have they the same rate of wages ?^They 
 have both the same rate of wages. Again, IMr. Howell answers : — 
 
 Q. 1718. AVhat do you understand by the minimum rate of wages 
 which you fix? Does it not mean merely this, as much as j'ou can get 
 for the trade considered as an average ? — Yes. 
 
 Q. 1719. Your complaint of the masters, as I understand you, is that, 
 after being compelled by the union to give as much to all men as the 
 trade can get, they will not pay something more for skilled workmen? 
 —Yes. 
 
 Q. 1720. Does the minimum rate mean the lowest rate which a 
 skilled workman is paid? — Yes; which we think he should take under 
 any circumstances. 
 
 Again, another of the men, Mr. R. Harnott, answers : — 
 
 Q. 1225. Supposing that an employer says, I should be glad to take 
 John on at os. a day, which is rather above the contract, he being a 
 verj' good workman, and I should be glad to take Thomas on, but not 
 give him more than 4s., which is rather below the contract, he being a 
 bad workman. Can he do that, supposing both of them to be union 
 men ? — So far as the society is concerned, it does not interfere with a 
 superior man receiving what he can get, nor does it interfere with an 
 inferior man who is not up to the average. 
 
 Q. 1226. But would they leave the employer to decide that, or 
 would the lodge decide it for him ?— The lodge, by the evidence of the 
 men working in the same shop. 
 
 On this principle, therefore, a good workman is paid no more for his 
 work than an inferior one. Of course the unions say the masters ought
 
 to pay him more than the minimum rate, but the masters answer very 
 justly, " You by your rule fixing a high minimum rate compel us to 
 give an inferior workman more than he is really worth, therefore we 
 M-Q not able to give more to the superior workman. If you wish it, we 
 will pay them according to their respective merits, by adding to the 
 wages of the good workman what Ave deduct from the wages of the 
 inferior one." 
 
 To see the injustice of the minimum rate, let us suppose for argument's 
 sake, that a carpenter or mason, after he had finished his week's work 
 and received his pay, went into a tailor's shop and said, "I want, sir, to 
 buy two coats." The tailor immediately produces two, one of superior 
 cloth and make, the other of inferior cloth and make. " There, my good 
 fellow, there are two coats price three pounds each." The workman 
 examines them and immediately fixes on the good one. " I'll take this 
 one and leave the other," says he. " Oh no, you won't," says the tailor; 
 '•if you take the one you must take the other." "What!" says the 
 workman, " do you charge the same price for an inferior coat that you 
 charge for a superior one?" "Yes," answers the tailor ; " and wh}"^ 
 shouldn't I? You sell your labour on the minimum scale, and I sell 
 n^y coats in the same way ; so the bad must go with the good." Now, 
 the workman very naturally and very reasonably objects to pay the 
 same price for an inferior article as he pays for a good one; and for pre- 
 c'sely similar reasons the employer is justified in refusing to give the 
 same price for inferior workmanship that he gives for superior. You 
 pay more for a good lawyer than you do for a less able one ; more for 
 an experienced physician than for a less experienced ; more for a highly 
 talented than for a less talented artist ; and so on through other profes- 
 sions ; and this is as it ought to be. But the practical working of trades- 
 unions is to deny this, from their overlooking the important fact that men 
 are variously gilted. You will remember the beautiful parable where 
 our Lord likened the kingdom of heaven unto a man travelling into a 
 far country, who called his servants and delivered to them his goods. 
 Unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one ; he 
 gave to every man according to his several abilities. The master then 
 departed, and the servants went and traded with their talents. On his 
 return he required from them an account of his money. The one that 
 had received five talents came and brought other five talents ; he that 
 had received the two talents made two more ; while the third, instead of 
 usefully en)pl()}ing the one talent, went and hid it in the earth. And flic 
 same lesson is conveyed in the parable of the nobleman, where the 
 servant that had gained ten talents was made ruler over ten cities, and 
 he that gained the five talents was made ruler over five cities. We 
 learn, then, from this, that men are of different capacities, and 
 according to that capacity do they receive, and according to their 
 work are they rewarded. Now, trades-unions ignore all this. They 
 try to make it out that there is little or no difference between the 
 talents of their artisans ; that each must do a certain amount of work 
 and no more ; and that all are to be paid alike. You will, therefore, 
 see at a glance the difference between the Divine system and their 
 system. The first is natural, perfectly suited to man's capacities ; and 
 for the free and full development of his powers, and that in proportion 
 as he labours in that proportion is he paid. On the other hand, the 
 system of the trades-unions is unnatural and artificial. It does not 
 jsroperly develope the faculties, but tends rather to cramp them by 
 placiug'restraints on a workman as to what speed he shall work at. It 
 says that the labourer must not do a bricklayer's work, or a bricklayer 
 a mafon's work, even although they are quite able to do it, and which, 
 logically carried out, means that a labourer, a bricklayer, and a mason 
 must continue a labourer, a bricklayer, and a mason to the end of his
 
 days; that piecework and apprentice work are to be limited, although 
 the master is quite willing to take more of them ; and, lastly, that each 
 class of workman is to be paid a-ike. Now, all this is the merest folly 
 and absurdity ; and if you turn for a moment to Nature, you will find 
 that the Creator there, too, protests against it, and corroborates in His 
 works the teaching of Ilis Divina Word. " There is one glory of the 
 sun, and another glory of the moon;" and as " one star differeth from 
 another star in glory," so one mind differeth from another mind in 
 power, and one hand differeth from another in strength and skill ; and 
 Nature and Eeason, as well as Sciipture, repudiate the very idea of all 
 these being measured by the same fixed standard, or rewarded on the 
 same fixed scale. The talents of the artisan, like the talents in any other 
 business, ought to be paid according to their real worth and intrinsic 
 value. They ought to stand solely on their own merits, and not be 
 dragged down by the skill of a second, third, or fourth-rate character. 
 And when they are not so considered, a serious injury is done to their 
 owner by taking from him that incentive which is ever urging him on 
 to rise higher and higher in his profession. He says to himself, 
 " What is the use of all my efTorts to improve ? I have no encourage- 
 ment ; for I am paid no more for my work than my mate here, 
 Avho sclJoai or never makes any exertion, and who has little or 
 no energy and activity in him." It is not the master's fault the good 
 workmati is not paid more. It is the fault of the union in fixing a 
 minimum rate ; and until that mode of payment is abolished, the really 
 good and deserving workman will be underpaid. Besides, the mini- 
 mum rate is unfair to the inferior workman as well. "When, for 
 instance, trade is brisk, the employer takes on say 500 men ; but when 
 trade becomes slack he requires to pay a certain number of them oflT, 
 and who amongst them does he discharge ? Why, of course, the inferior 
 workmen, and he keeps on the good ones. 
 
 Mr. Geo. Smith, of the firm of Smith and Taylor, contractors for the 
 Foreign Office, thus speaks in relation to this point, in his answer to 
 Question 2823: — " I think that the greatest mischief, however, ai-ises 
 from the fixed minimum. It throws a vast number of men out of work 
 who would be receiving fair wages, because in every establishment there 
 are men, whom I will not calf inferior, but who are physically inca- 
 pable of earning as much as others; for instance, a man may be so from 
 age. The consequence of our being obliged to pay almost a uniform 
 rate of wages is that the moment there is a reduction, the shops or the 
 works are gone through, and all these poor men are picked out and dis- 
 charged. I mean those who are receiving a greater rate of wages than 
 they are fairly entitled to." 
 
 Q. 2851. I think you stated that the effect of a uniform rate 
 of wages was injurious to the skilled workman by taking from him 
 his zeal in the execution of his work, inasmuch as he got insufficient 
 remuneration for it? — Yes. I do not think there is that incentive 
 which he would otherwise have ; and K is also a very great hardship 
 u[)on the less skilled, those who may happen to have met with an acci- 
 dent, or who are not so active as they were, because they are as it were 
 a sort of outcasts, who go from shop to shop, and ultimately come to a 
 workhouse. I believe that all these attempts to carry out an artificial 
 system are injurious alike to men and masters. 
 
 Q. 2Sj4:. So that there is first an injurious operation upon the 
 superior workmen, because they are prevented from earning accord- 
 ing to their worth ; and at the same time there is an injurious operation 
 upon inferior workmen, because in times when work is scarce they must 
 be the first discharged V — That is my view of it. It is far better tliat all 
 should be employed, than that a certain number should be wandering 
 about subsittin::; on alms.
 
 10 
 
 There ia something dehisively attractive in the idea of a minimum 
 price of labour being fixed, inasmuch as it may be said, with some show 
 of reason, if you employ a man at all you must pay him not less than 
 such or such an amount necessary to his comfortable subsistence. But 
 the fallacy of such an idea appears at once, when we reflect that the 
 natural — that is, the Divine — law will give a man what the state of trade 
 will allow, and anything more than that would cause the trade to stop 
 by hastening the ruin of the employer, and therefore the stoppage 
 altogether of the wages of the workman. Low vi-ages warn the 
 operative away from the particular branch of labour in question, which 
 in time will produce a rise, because the demand will continue and the 
 supply decrease ; but an artificial elevation of the scale of Avages 
 invites more labour even when the trade is fully stocked, and hence 
 tends to perpetuate and increase the downward tendency. "We can thus 
 see in their operations the essential difference between the Divine law 
 and the artificial Union-made law. The first, like all God's laws, is not 
 only a law of wisdom, but a law of mercv, for it acts like a beacon to 
 warn the worknsan away from danger ; the second, like a false light, 
 luring and tempting him into danger. 
 
 Look at this question how you will, and from any point you choose • 
 turn it inside cut, and examine it with microscopic closeness and keen- 
 ness, and j'ou will come to the same conclusion. The idea of fixing a 
 minimum rate was conceived, in order to get by fair or unfair means as 
 much as possible out of the employers ; but like everything begotten of 
 selfishness, it has outwitted itsslf. The mind's eye of the individual 
 who originated the idea must have been afflicted with asquint: he 
 could not have seen straight ; and in attempting to cheat others, he has 
 cheated himself. By the inexorable law of the trades-union, the poor 
 workman is bound to take according to the minimum principle. He 
 has no alternative. All are to be paid alike, good, bad, and indifferent. 
 Classical tradition tells us there lived once upon a time a famous robber, 
 named Procrustes; and this robber liad a bed on which it was his cruel 
 practice to lay all his unfortunate captives. If they were too short for 
 the bed, he strained and racked their limbs until they attained the re- 
 quired length ; and if they were too long for the bed, he cut and 
 maimed and mangled them until they exactly fitted in. The trades- 
 unions of England are like unto this robber ; for in them they have the 
 bed of the minimum wage, and on which it is their cruel 
 practice to lay ail their unfortunate members, and by which they are 
 measured and mangled by this modern Procrustes 
 
 The endeavour on the part of the unions to fix the price of labour 
 according to an arbitrary ride is very similar in character to that made 
 in olden times, when the justices of the various counties fixed the 
 labourers' and vrorkmen's wages. On this subject we have some very 
 cui-ious and interesting information. About the beginning of the year 
 1685, the justices of Wai'wiekshire, in the exercise of a power intrusted 
 to them by an Act of Elizabeth, fixed at their quarter sessions a scale 
 of wages for the county, and notified that every employer who gave more 
 than the aiithoriscd axxm, and evei-y working man who received more, 
 should be liable to punishment. The wages of the common agriculfciu-al 
 labourer, from March to September, vrere fixed at the precise sum 
 mentioned by Petty — namely, 4s. a week without food. Fiom September 
 to March the wages were to be only 3s. Gd. a week. 
 
 Again, " The magistrates of Sutrblk met there in the spring of 1682 to 
 fix: a rate of wages, and resolved, that where the labourer was not 
 boarded, he should have 5s. a week in winter, and 6s. in summer." 
 
 Again, "In 1601 the justices at Chelmsford fixed the wages of the 
 Essex laboiu'er, who was not boarded, at Cs. in winter, and 7s. in simi- 
 mer."
 
 11 
 
 The wages wlien so fixed -svere announced by proclamation at the 
 market-places, and were to continue until the justices thought proper to 
 alter them. 
 
 About the year 1610, a bailiff of husbandry received 52s. a year, or Is. 
 a week ; an agricultural man-servant of the best sort, 50s. ; a common 
 servant, 40s.; a middling servant, 29s. ; a boy under 16, '20s., and soon. 
 A mower received Sd. per day with his meat; a man reaper, haymaker, 
 hedger or ditcher, 4d ; a woman reapei*, 3d. ; a woman haymaker, 2d. 
 If no meat was given, these sums were to be exactly doubled, except 
 that the woman haymaker was to receive 5d. instead of 4d. A master 
 carpenter's wages was 8d. per day with meat, or Is 2d. without ; a 
 chief joiner or master sawyer Gd. mth meat, or Is. without; bricklayer 
 5d. with, or 9d. without, meat ; and tailors 4d. with, or 8d. without.* 
 These were the rates of wages at that period as gathered from an account 
 printed in the ArclKPolor/iaii, and fixed by the magistrates for the county 
 of Rutland, and which continued from then nearly down to the breaking 
 out of the Civil War. One can scarcely conceive how the poor labourers 
 and workmen existed on such miserable allowances ; and their condition 
 was intensely aggravated by an Act of Parliament passed in the reign of 
 Elizabeth, in which it was declared that " The givers of greater wages 
 than what ^vere allowed by the justices were liable to ten days', and the 
 takers to twenty-one days' imprisonment." 
 
 Xow, this savage and inhuman system has long since been abandoned. 
 Justices of the present day would never think of fixing the price of the 
 workman's labour, and still less would they think of putting the man in 
 prison because of his taking a shilling or two more ; but the trades' - 
 unions wish to do something similar. The wages are by them to be fixed 
 by an arbitrary and artificial law ; and when so fixed, the men may 
 take more, but they must not take less. English employers have long 
 ago seen and acknowledged the folly of such a proceeding ; and surely 
 English woikmen will never be so foolish and insane as to adopt laws 
 and rules which experience has proved to be utterly worthless. 
 
 Before leaving this part of the subject, we would like to compare 
 the price of labour of this day with that in times past. It is very usual 
 to hear it said that all classes of the community are, and have been 
 advancing, except the labouring portion. The middle and higher classes, 
 we are told, are increasing in wealth, but the poor working man still 
 remains at starvation's door. There never was a greater fallacy foisted 
 on tiie public than this ; and the slightest reference to history proves the 
 contrary. Compare, for instance, the rates of wages as quoted above with 
 those at present received, and, making allowance for the depreciation in 
 the value of money, it will be seen that the wages of the v,-orkiug classes 
 have vastly improved. And this improvement has not been owing to 
 strikes, but to the gradually increasing wealth and prosperity of the 
 country, the resirlts of Free Trade and wise legislation. " I appeal to 
 every man," says Mr. Bright, speaking on the abolition of the Corn 
 Laws, " who knows the condition of the country, if it is not the fact 
 that in a majority of cases the rate of wages has been advanced from 20 
 up to 50 per cent. There is not an agricultural labourer — and he is the 
 poorest paid labourer in the country — whose wages have not been 
 increased, whose comforts have not been made more seciu-e, by the 
 abolition of the Law which was supposed to give ample protection to that 
 interest." f Unfortunately, while their wages have been increasing, 
 their education, moral and intellectual, has not been equally attended to, 
 and hence we have much discontent. Some among them have taken 
 advantage of this state of things, in order to sow the seeds of discord 
 
 * " Pictorial History of England," vol. iii,, p. God. Also " Eden on the Stato 
 of the Poor," pp. 125 — 127. 
 
 t Speech of Mr. Bright at Birmingham, October, 18G8.
 
 12 
 
 between tlie men and their employers. These parties are devising all 
 sorts of plans and schemes for the benefit of the working man, except 
 the right kind, and divertirig his attention from the quarter where 
 improvement onght to begin, llichard Cobden, one of the best and truest 
 friends the Avorkiug man ever had, says on this subject, " I wish to see the 
 great mass of the working classes of this country elevate themselves by 
 increased temperance, frugality and economy. I tell you candidly that 
 no people were ever yet elevated except through their own advancing 
 wealth, morality, and intelligence ; and any one who tells the working men 
 of this country that they may be raised in the social scale by any other 
 process than that of reformation in themselves, is interested either in 
 flattering or deceiving them. If you trace the rise and progress of the 
 middle classes in this country, jon wiU see that in proportion as they 
 became intelligent, as they accumidated wealth, and as they improved in 
 morality, did they rise in political and social importance." Mr. Cobden 
 wished to see temperance, frugality, and economy practised amongst the 
 working men, while Mr. Allen, of the Amalgamated Engineers, shows 
 how highly he appreciates these virtues by spending £'40,000 of the 
 money of the Society of Engineers the first six months of the lock-out 
 of 1852 ; and, from his own confession, the men were even worse at the 
 end of this strike than they were at the beginning.* 
 
 Beware, then, Working Men, of your advisers. It is not by warring 
 with your employers, and casting your hard-earned savings into the 
 bottomless pit ol strikes, that you can improve your position. Your 
 little will be made to go further by " temperance, frugality, and 
 economy ;" and the comforts of your homes will be sweetened by con- 
 tentment. Remember the advice of your true friend, Ivichard Cobden 
 — advice which he embodied in his own pure and unselfish life — and 
 whose " unadorned eloquence " pleaded your cause and cheapened your 
 bread, that it is by the practice of honesty, industry and intelligence in 
 all your daily duties, that you can better your condition; thus rendering 
 your services indispensable to your employers, who, sooner than part 
 ^vith faithful servants, will rather part with higher wages for you to 
 remain. It is in this way. Working j\Ien, you can truly raise your- 
 selves in the scale of social life. 
 
 We come now to another evil connected with this branch of the subject, 
 and that is the unions not allowing a man to accept less wages if he is 
 willing to do so, and forcing him to siipport the union. The union acts 
 the part of the tyrant to the employer in not allowing him to give less, 
 audit perforns a similar duty to the workman by not allowing him to 
 take less. Mr. TroUope thus answers 
 
 Q. 2912. I think you said that there was a disinclination on the part 
 of the unions to allow inferior workmen to take less than a certain rate 
 of wages ? — They cannot do it; they would be worried out of their lives. 
 
 Q. 2913. If men were to come to you and say, " We are willing to 
 work for 4s. Gd. a day," while the standard rate was 5s., they would 
 not be allowed to do it ? — At the present time we should not entertain 
 such a proposition ; in fact we shouldn't be able to do it. I have known 
 a case in our shop Avhere an old joiner has been at work, and we have 
 been paying him less wages, and he has said, " I am sorry, sir, I cannot 
 stop, but the men worry me out of my life. I know I am not worth 
 what they are ; but I am not allowed to take less wages." 
 
 (2.291-1. And if he persevered in working with you without the con- 
 sent of these men, they would probably strike ? — Probably they would 
 stiike, but they would first of all try to worry him out. 
 
 Q. 2915. And in the event of their failing to do so, they would 
 strike ? — Yes. 
 
 * See evidence before Eoyal Commission.
 
 13 
 
 Q. 2916. Do you know anything about picketing? — In 18-59 our 
 ■works were picketed morning, noon, and night. Several of the men 
 who came up from the country said, " I am sorry I cannot stop ; but when 
 I go out the men follow me, my wife is annoyed, and my children get 
 hooted at in the street ; and therefore I really cannot stop." 
 
 Q. 2911. So that, in short, although there is no actual physical 
 violence towards the man, there is that sort of social violence which pre- 
 vents him following his employment ? — Quite so. 
 
 This is the evidence of the masters, and it is corroborated by the men 
 tliemselves — in fact, their rules sanction it. The Manchester Operative 
 House Painters' Alliance have a rule in the following words : — " That any 
 person when asked to join the association, being obstinate, and causing 
 delegates, deputations, or any other expenses to be incurred by their 
 obstinacy, shall pay all such eirpenses, together with the amount of the 
 entrance or re-entrance fee, as the case may be." 
 
 llule 23 of the Bradford Plasterers' Union says : — " That no plasterer 
 be allowed to work in any shop more than six days without giving satis- 
 faction to the shop steward that he is a member, or will join the society." 
 And we will here give you an instance, showing to what a pitch of 
 audacity these plasterers had risen in enforcing these tyrannical rules. 
 A Mr. Howroyd, of Bradford, had four sons working with him. They 
 ■did not belong to the union. The union men thought they ought to 
 subscribe to its funds, and for this purjjose they sent the following 
 letter to the father, dated 7th January, 1867 : — ■ 
 
 " Mr. C. Howroyd, — AVe, the operative plasterers of Bradford, do hereby give 
 Tou notice that all your sons that are working as plasterers which are above 
 twenty one years of age, are requested to join the society on or before Saturdaj' 
 next ; and failing to do so, all our men will cea^e work on Monday morning next, 
 and not return again unless you paj- all the expenses of the striUe. — We remain, 
 yours, '• The Orkrativk Plasterers ok Braeford.'" 
 
 Mr. ITowroyd's sons did not wish and would not join the union, and 
 their father would not force them to do so ; therefore the men struck 
 work. In relation to Mr. Howroyd's case, we may also notice that one 
 of the reasons given why the men struck was that he did not obey Eule 
 27 of the Bradford plasterers, which is in these words : — 
 
 ' ' That no member of this society be allowed to work for any firm 
 consisting of more than two masters, unless every partner's name is 
 publicly stated in full." 
 
 Imagine the clerks or the warehousemen of the City, or Messrs. 
 Barclay, Perkins, and Co.'s draymen going to their employers and addres- 
 sing them thus : — " Gentlemen, — Unless you put up on your signboard 
 in front of your premises the names of each of your partners, we shall 
 be compelled to strike work." Here is another case which occurred ou 
 the 1st March, 1867 :— 
 
 "Mr. Foster, — Sir, — You have three men in your employ that do not belong to 
 any society. I am requested to inform you, that if they do not become members of a 
 society on or before the 11th of Jlarch next, your shop will be called a black shop, 
 and no society man will have to work in it. — I remain, yours respectfully, 
 " J. Hayes, Secretary 
 "Blackpool Operative House Painters' Association." 
 
 At Bath a similar case occurred to Mr. Joseph Bladwell. A workman 
 went to him, and said, ' You have got a non-society man in your 
 employ ; if you don't discharge that man, I will call off all the rest of 
 your men, and none of them shall work for you." This time the union 
 reckoned without its host. Its emissary was taken before the magistrate 
 on the charge of interfering with the master's business, and he received 
 a month's imprisonment. Now we could fill whole sheets with cases of 
 this kind, and not confined to one particular trade or locality, but to 
 almost all the trades, and from every part of the country, from Man-
 
 14 
 
 Chester. Liverpool, Bolton, Derby, Yorksliire, Scotland, and even America. 
 In some eases tlie men's tools have been stolen, the masters' property 
 destroj-ed, and even murder itself, as in Sheffield and Manchester, has 
 been committed. We hope, and we are quite wilUng to believe, that the 
 Sheffield and Manchester outrages are exceptional, and that they ought 
 to stand apart and he judged by themselves ; but at the same time we 
 cannot hide from ourselves the fact openl}^ staring us in the face, that 
 where trades-unions have been planted and allowed freely to grow, they 
 have invariably developed the same lawless spirit, manifested the same 
 disregard for the rights of others, and produced the same evil fruit. 
 " Men do not gather grapes of thorns, or tigs of thistles ;" and as we 
 are commanded to judge the tree by its fruit, we are driven to the con- 
 clusion, that not only the tree, but the very seeds of trades-unionism 
 are evil. Here then are eases where a man is willing to take less than 
 the minim:im price, but the union steps in, and says he must not. Is 
 this freedom ? Is this the liberty of which English working men are 
 50 fond of priding themselves, and about which they so continually talk 
 and preach ? True liberty allows everyone to think and act for himself, 
 without any compulsion of this kind. But this is the modern Procrustes 
 over again. Not content with plundering the workman of his wages 
 by his absurd rules and strikes, he is now robbing both him and his 
 employer of their liberty. This spirit of intimidation is utterly foreign 
 to every principle of right and justice, and ought to be held in abhorrence 
 by every honest man. We have no right to interfere between a 
 master and his workman by saying to the one, " You must pay so much," 
 and to the other, "You must accept so much." That is a matter entirely 
 between a workman and his employer, just as his religion is a matter 
 between him and his Maker ; and trades-unions are no more justilied in 
 interfering in the one case than a body of religious inquisitors would be 
 justified in interfering in the other. Happily for us we are not left to 
 the unions for light on this subject. We read — " Then came the Pub- 
 licans and said unto Him, Master, what shall we do ? and the Master 
 replied. Exact no more than that which is appointed you. And the 
 soldiers likewise demanded of Him, saying, And what shall we do ? 
 And He said unto them, Do violence to no man; neither accuse any 
 falsely, and be content with your wages." * These words were uttered 
 1800 years ago ; and yet so fresh and appropriate are they for us at 
 this very moment, that they read as if only spoken yesterday. To- 
 all honest working men then we say — Abandon those false friends and 
 teachers who are wasting your substance and destroying your character^ 
 and follow the advice of Him whose -wisdom never fails. 
 
 Let u'j now consider another important part of this subject — namely, 
 the rule by which no bricklayer shall be allowed to do the work of a 
 mason, and no labourer the work of a brickhiyer, although quite com- 
 petent for it. We give the evidence of the men first : — 
 
 Q. 2245. Suppose that I, as a master, were to put on certain work 
 three or four labourers whom I consider fit to lay. bricks, would your 
 members say that, in their opinion, these men were not fit to be brick- 
 layers? Certainly ; the bricklayers would know whether they were fit 
 to he bricklayers, 
 
 (}. 224G. But, even though these men had satisfied the master, 
 your members would still persevere in their objection to work -with 
 tlicra? If labourers were put to bricklayers' work, they would refuse 
 to work M'ith them. 
 
 Q. 2247. That is to sav, they would not allow the employer to 
 judge of their capacity? They do not interfere with the master. 
 
 Q. 2218. Except by striking 'P—Yes. 
 
 * Lnlce iii., 14.
 
 15 
 
 Q. 1285. You do not allow a brickUiycr to lay a stone at all — do 
 you? — No. 
 
 Q. 1280. Even although he can do it ? — I do not know about 
 his beinjT able to do it. 
 
 (2. 1287. But, supposing a bricklayer can lay a stone, M'ould yon 
 prevent bis laying it? — Yes ; if he professed to be a bricklayer. 
 
 Q. 1288. So that if a bricklayer were to lay stonework, and there 
 were other work to be done on that particular job by stonemasons, they 
 would make him undo that work before they would go to their work ; 
 and that would be consistent with your regulations, would it not ? — Yes ; 
 but on the other hand, I maj' remark, that our men do not interfere 
 with brickwork. 
 
 The following letter was addressed to Messrs. Worthington and Chal- 
 loner, master house painters, Blackpool : — " Blackpool, April 18, 1867. 
 Sirs,— It having been brought before the meeting on Monday night 
 that your book-keeper has been doing some writing and painting, you 
 are requested not to let him, he not being a painter. By doing so, j'ou 
 will oblige, yours respectfully, The Committee Blackpool Operative 
 House Painters." 
 
 Here is another case, from Sheflleld : — " Sept. 12, 18Gi. To Mr. 
 Reynolds. Dear sir, — I am authorised bj^ our Lodge to state that all 
 our members are willing to turn out at the request of this Lodge, on 
 account of j'our employing persons to interfere with the work of the 
 bricklayers, contrary to our rules," and so on. 
 
 Here is anotiier case from Ashton-under-Lyne : — " Mr. Geo. Colbeck, 
 a joinerand builder, 'sentin December, 1865, a joiner, bricklayer, and two 
 labourers, to make some alterations in a house ; a door was 
 to be removed half the width of itself. The bricklayers built up the 
 part requiring it ; the joiner, having to stand idly by while this was 
 doing, proceeded to pull out the few bricks which had to be removed. 
 The bricklayer struck work and left the job. For Mr. Colbeck having 
 infringed the rules by allowing a joiner to pull out bricks which must 
 be done by a bricklayer, he was lined £2, which he paid." Now, 
 we could quote whole pages of instances of this kind from the evidence 
 before the commission; some of them, from tlieir arbitrary cruelty, 
 raising one's honest indignation ; others, from their utter absurdity, 
 liis merriment and laughter. Here is one from Nottingham. Tdr. 
 Murdy, a master plasterer, writes : — " Two years ago, a respectable 
 snan, who had formerly been in business as a bricklayer and plasterer, 
 but who had been reduced by circumstances to obtain his livelihood as a 
 journeyman, came to me for employment. Feeling sorry for the man, 
 and knowing him in better days, I gave him employment. After he 
 bad been at work a few days, tbe trade-unionists, in my employ, 
 informed me that I must discharge the man, as they had passed a 
 resolution ' That as he professed to be as much a bricklayer as a 
 plasterer, he should not be allowed to work as a plasterer, and he might 
 go somewhere else and work as a brickLayer.' I remonstrated with them, 
 but to no purpose. The poor man tried all he knew to retain his place 
 of employment with me. He offered to join their trades-union, and be- 
 come one of their body, if they would allow liini to work for his 
 living. He pleaded to them tliat he had a wife and a large iamily 
 dependent upon him for bread. ' But it was no use ; they were determined 
 that he should throw himself out of employment, otherwise the 
 whole body of men would strike against him. The result was, I had 
 to come to the understanding that he should leave my employment." 
 " Mr. William "Wiklsmith, of JManchester, in Nov. 1866, had a dispute 
 witli some of his bricklayers, two of whom waited on him and read 
 to him the laws of their Society, and concluded by coolly asking him 
 for their day's wages, amounting to 7s. each, and 3s. each for first-class
 
 16 
 
 railway fare from Manchester, for coming to give him what they 
 called their orders, which he had to pay." A master brickmaker, for 
 having m orked in his own brickgronnd, had the following notice sent to 
 him by his workmen, the Lancashire and Cheshire Operative Brick- 
 makers: — "And you must, if you take an active part in your brick- 
 ground, contribute to this Society, and you are not to employ any non- 
 society men in casting clay." (Q. 3428.) 
 
 The unions have similar objections to work done by machinery. 
 In Question 3209, an instance is given ot an employer having the 
 walls of his building, and many thousands of bricks, destroyed by 
 gas-tar, because the bricks were made by the machine. A reward of 
 £20 was oifered, but without effect. In Question 3217, we have 
 another instance. Mr. Israel Brooks, a master mason of Ashton-under- 
 Lyne, received a quantity of sawn base from Kerridge, near Macclesfield. 
 " Aly men refused to fix it, being polished, as it was against the rules, 
 and struck work accordingly. After standing out against what I consi- 
 dered this injustice three weeks, I was forced to submit to have the 
 polished part defaced, so that they might polish it again by hand ; 
 and the men declared after all this expense, it was not so good as -when 
 it came from the quarry." 
 
 Another instance of a similar kind is given in Question 3362, where 
 curved granite was brought to the men, but this time instead of de- 
 facing it, the workmen stood over the stone and did nothing, and 
 for doing nothing, the master was compelled to pay as if all the work 
 had been carved by them, ajthough they had not the skill to do it. 
 Now all this is the very essence of human folly and nonsense ; indeed 
 when reading it, one can scarcely believe that men could be guilty of 
 such stupidity. Fact is sometimes stranger than fiction ; and if these 
 facts had not been proved from undoubted evidence, they would have 
 defied belief Well might Mr. Gladstone say that such things were 
 worthy a nation of savages. The practical -working of trades- unions, 
 as thus manifested by their own naked monstrosity, is their own 
 condemnation. Comment is unnecessary ; but we would call our readers' 
 attention to this, that all these terrible things do not spring from 
 nothing ; on the contrary, they are the results of hidden but actual 
 causes. If you plant a certain seed, that seed will produce a certain 
 tree, and that tree, certain fruit ; and in the same way if you inseminate 
 certain principles into the minds of men, these principles will produce 
 certain theories, and these theories, when practised, certain results. 
 These, then, are the results produced by trades-union principles ; and 
 if these principles become dominant, the same frightful evils will 
 spread all over the country. We will not, however, indulge in prophecy ;. 
 the picture is already bad enough without investing it with the horrors 
 of the imagination ; but we will proceed to a fuller dissection of the 
 union system. 
 
 From this evidence there exist three evils in connection with the 
 system. The first is ; the unions seek to establish monopoly of labour ;* 
 
 * This mouopoly is carried out in the brick-making trade in Manchester in 
 the most systematic, and, at the same time, the most unjust and tyrannical 
 manner. A ban is placed on machine-made bricks, and the neighbourhood is 
 mapptd out into districtt: — Ashton, Stockport, and Manchester — so that brick- 
 makers, or builders, or carters, are not allowed to contract for or convey bricks out 
 of one district into another; and to carry out this villanous system, a staff of 
 inspectors, or, in other words, custom-house officers, are employed and paid by the 
 Union. It is the duty of these inspectors to watch all brijk-carts, so as to prevent 
 Stockport bricks being conveyed to the Manchester district, and Manchester bricks 
 to the Stockport diMtiitt. One of these inspectors, we are informed, had not 
 the honesty said to be proverbial among thieves; for he was not above receiving.
 
 1/ 
 
 the second, dictation and tyranny to the masters : and the third, injury to 
 the men themselves. "With regard to the first, the unions wish to keep 
 out strangers, in the shape of non-union men, machinery, apprentices, 
 and also by not allowing their fellow workmen to rise in the several 
 grades of their business. By this means they wish to confine the trade 
 to themselves ; for, they reason, the more work there is and the fewer 
 hands there are to do it, the higher will be the wages and the more 
 certain the employment. Here again you can easily detect that ser- 
 pent of selfishness in trade and commerce, whose head was bruised when 
 the corn laws were abolisehed. If trades-unions are necessar}- for 
 workmen to keep up the price of labour, why not have them for 
 grocers, bakers, and butchers'? These parties are as much eatilled to 
 protection in their business, as the members of trades-unions ; but if 
 they were to combine to raise the price of provisions, the very first 
 that would cry out against it would be those very men who are now 
 seeking to establish protection for labour. The answer to this question 
 was given when the corn laws were abolished ; and a monopoly in 
 labour can now no more be tolerated in this country than a monopoly 
 in food. It is quite true, as the defenders of trades- unions observe, 
 that there are other professions, such as barristers and brokers, 
 where similar restraints and restrictions exist. The answer to this is 
 short and conclusive. One evil does not justify the existence of ano- 
 ther ; it only proves that both should be removed. While, therefore, 
 we disallow the workman the right of monopolj', we grant him tlie 
 liberty of getting the very highest price he possibly can for hi? 
 labour, so long as the means he employs for that end are fair and legi- 
 timate. And here let us examine lor a moment the principles which 
 guide the unions in obtaining higher prices. In a lecture on Capital and 
 Labour delivered in their defence, Mr. Ernest Jones asks, " Is it 
 wrong for the manufacturer to withhold his goods from the market 
 in view of better prices ? If not, neither is it wrong for the workman 
 to withhold his work in view of better wages. Is it wrong for corn 
 merchants, or coal merchants, or iron merchants, or cotton merchants 
 to arrange together not to sell their wares under a certain price ? If 
 not, neither is it wrong for labourers, or miners, or spinners, or 
 weavers, to arrange together to sell their labour under a certain 
 wage." In answer to this, the workman, like the manufacturer, is at 
 perlect liberty to withhold his labour, in the hope of getting 
 a better price ; but neither workman nor manufacturer is justified 
 in resorting to combination to obtain that price. The two cases in 
 these questions are quite distinct. The first is fair and legitimate ; but 
 when, as in the second, we resort to combination, or as Mr. Jones 
 mildly terms it, " arranging together," which in plain English means 
 commercial conspiracy, then we overstep the bounds of legitimate 
 trading, and we destroy that honesty of dealing whicli ought to exist 
 between buyer and seller. Let us suppose, for instance, that the com 
 merchants were to unite as one man to raise the price of corn beyond 
 its natural level : their customers, the public, would denounce such con- 
 
 a.d pocketing a bribe from the carters, or, as one of the Commissioners happily 
 characterised it, " he cheated his employeis into doing right." From the evidence 
 placed before the Commission as to these districts, the most fri;4h!t\il atrociiies are 
 revealed. Needles have been placed amongst the clay, large quiutities of bricks 
 have been destroyed, bottles of gunpowder have been thrown into the houses < f 
 obnoxious and non-union enipl(i3-ers, while they in self-defence have been com- 
 pelled to watch, armed, at night to protect their houses and prcpertv ; and on one 
 of these occasions two policemen were attacked by a number i^f rullians, ar.d one 
 of them brutally murdered. All these terrible c'oings £.re clearly traceable as trade 
 outrages, being testified to by several witnesses.
 
 18 
 
 duct as being nothing else than extortion. The combinations of trades- 
 unions is often compared to that of railway companies and joint-stock 
 companies. Well, let us see how far the comparison holds good. It is 
 fluite right that a luimber of individuals should combine to raise the 
 necessary capital to construct a railway ; but after it is completed it 
 would be very unjust of that company to combine with other raibvay 
 companies on the same route, and then coolly to inform the public, 
 *'You are hereby informed that we have combined with our friends 
 over the way, and raised our fares from Id. to 6d. a mile." The com- 
 bination of tlie individuals to form the compan}' and I'aise tlie neces- 
 sary capital, is a means for a great good ; t)ut the combination of the 
 separate railways for the purpose of raising the fares is a means for great 
 evil and wrong. 
 
 Again, let us sup'fose the joint-stock banks were in some way cr 
 other to unite to raise the price of nione}' from its present natural 
 rate of 2 per cent., and then to tell tlicir customers, the public, " We, 
 the Joint-Stock Banks, have all combined, and if you want any more 
 money you nuist now pay 10 per cent.'' The thing is manifestly un- 
 just. There is then no harm in a number of individuals combining to 
 form a company, and carry on business in a fair, honourable, and 
 legitimate manner ; but there is a vast amount of mischief done when 
 these companies unite as one body to raise their fares, or the price of 
 their money or goods. The combination to form the single company 
 is necessary and lawful ; but the combination to unite all the separate 
 companies is a totall}^ different thing — a gigantic monopoly, and there- 
 fore most undesirable. 
 
 Now, it is exactly so with unions or companies formed for the selling 
 of labour. If the unions simplj' sought tiie privilege to form so many 
 separate companies, each of these acting independently of each other ; 
 each being at liberty to take a low price without being called in question 
 •by the others ; each competing with the other, as in other trades, to 
 keep down the price of labour instead of raising it, there would not be 
 the slightest objection to them , but the imions want more than this. 
 Their object is to form different societies, but all to act as members of 
 -one common body. Hence the carpenters of London have at times 
 singled out one large building firm and demanded from it an advance 
 of Avages. If it is refused, they strike, then picket, and are supported 
 while out of work by the different unions tliroughoutthe kingdom. The 
 building firm has thus to struggle not only against its own men, but it 
 has pitted against it the full power of this gigantic combination. Herein 
 lies the siing of unionism ; and the closer one examines it the less one 
 likes it B}' a combination thus formed, and having ramifications and 
 branches throughout the country, we fully believe that there is no single 
 ^building firm or railway contractor, however powerful, bat could be 
 overpowered by a co.mbination of this kind ; and for that reason, 
 therefore, we say of it, as we said of the j-ailway and bank combinations, 
 it is a gigantic monopoly, and therefore most undesirable. Let our law - 
 makers then pause before the}- legalise a combination of this nature ; 
 for if such is sanctioned it will beget another gi'cat evil, viz — the com- 
 bination of employers to resist tliat of the men. The conclusion we 
 ^arrive at then is ; — workmen are not justified in combining to raise wages ; 
 and employers are not justified in combining to lower them. No doubt 
 this " rigging " the market, as it is called, is to some extent practised in 
 comm.erce and on the Stock Exchange, and there is no written law to 
 prevent it; but gambling in these quarters does not justify gambling 
 amongst workmen and their emplo3"er3. Tlie natural course is the 
 right one ; to allow the prices to rise and fall just as they are in- 
 fluenced by the supply and demand. 
 
 Mr. Jones goes on to suy : — "The manufacturer, wliile his mer-
 
 19 
 
 chandise is lying idle waiting for a better price, lives on his accu- 
 mulated money capital. That capital is at his bankers. Tlie trades- 
 \inion is the bank of the working-man, and enables him to hoard his 
 idle labour even as the capitalist hoards his idle goods." The trvith of 
 this we must all admit. There is nothing wliatever to be said against 
 lhe workman hoarding his little savings ; on the contrary, it is highly 
 commendable; and if he cannot find a purchaser for his labour at 
 liis price, then he is quite entitled to live on his savings until he does. 
 Every workman is entitled to the privilege of going to this extent; 
 but here his privilege ends. He ought not then to resort to com- 
 bination, to picketing a master's premises, or intimidating hy threats 
 or violence otiiers who are willing to serve that m.aster at lower Avas;es. 
 This is at variance with all law, human and divine. When the olfer 
 of his labour is declined, then the next thing for him to do is to try 
 other buyers ; if accepted at his price, well and good ; if declined, 
 then he may shrewdly guess he is asking too much, and that it is better 
 to accept what the market can fairly give, and live in the h.ope of 
 things improving. And this is what the merchant does. He offers 
 his tea or cotton, or whatever the goods may be, at a certain price. If 
 the price is above what the buyer is willing to give, the goods are 
 declined. After that, what does he do? Does he follon- the advice of 
 Mr. Applegarth,* and picket the buyer's offices? Certainly not. He 
 then either determines to hold the goods or consider the advisability 
 of taking the price offered ; and, perhaps, while so considering, a 
 second seller will step in and, by lair competition, cut him out of the 
 sale by selling goods of the same, or similar, quality at the required 
 price. Yet all three parties are as good friends alter the transaction as 
 they were before it. And this is done not only once, but thousands 
 of times every day amongst the mercantile classes. Why, then, cannot 
 the buyers and sellers of labour act in the same free, friendlv, and 
 charitable spirit ? 
 
 Although, therefore, vve contend most strongly for freedom of trade 
 to tlie employer, we do not, therefore, advocate employers paying their 
 workpeople badly. AYe think the fact cannot be denied that there are 
 a.raongst employers manj' sellish men who have no sympathy with their 
 workmen, and whose duty goes no further than the letter of tlse civil 
 law dictates, forgetting that there is, above and beyond this, the 
 moral law, or law of the conscience. Such employers grind down 
 their workpeople to the lowest possible wages, in some cases scarcely 
 enough to keep soul and body together. They amass large fortunes ia 
 their lifetime ; and when they die, finding they cannot take their wealth 
 with them, they pay, as it were, to enter heaven by bequeathing their 
 money for the erection of churches, chapels, and hospitals, thus givinc- 
 to man proo's of their piety and charit}-, but whicli in the sight ot 
 "Him who looketh on the heart" are only enduring monuments of 
 their hj'pocrisy and meanness. In our opinion it would have been 
 
 * Not content with refusing the wages, the Union, like the dog in the 
 manger, -will not allow others to take them. Sir. Appiegarth says, as to picketing,. 
 Ques. 6736: " I say it is perfeclls' jnsiifiable for men to appoint other men 
 to wait at a shop door and say to those who come, ' The men were dissatisfied with 
 the terms upon which thej' were working at that place, and if you go in you will 
 undersell us. Now, v>-e beg that 3-ou will not do that ;' " and he further adds the 
 important information that if there were no picketings, strikes to a great extent 
 would be useless. Although Mr. Applegarth thinks it r'ght for the men to picket, 
 yet in Question 7337 he gives the Commissioners several instances of picketing on 
 the part of the masters, which he complains of as being very unjust. Cannot Mr. 
 Applegarth see that if it be wrong in the one case it must be equalh- wrong in the 
 other, and more especially when, as in the case of the men, the advice is accom- 
 panied by certain significant winks and gestures?
 
 20 
 
 mucli tnxr chaiit}' to have spent that money in the better payment of 
 their l;adly-paid workpeople. And one can readily believe that many 
 honest workmen, groaning under such oppression and disgusted with such 
 behaviour, have betaken themselves to the vmion, forgetting, in their 
 haste and indignation, that they were raising up a greater evil than that 
 the}' sought to destroy. We do not, therefore, defend conduct of this 
 kind ; on the contrary, we think it is for the advantage of the workman 
 to do his work well, and for tlie master to pay him liberally. Selfish- 
 ness on the part of an employer is, however, no valid argument 
 against freedom in labour and trade, any more than his hypocrisy is 
 against genuine charity and true religion. "We must not confound 
 the one with the other, but endeavour carefully to discriminate between 
 both, and see that all laws and rules laid down between employers 
 and employed, should be founded on truth and justice ; and more 
 especially should we do so, as there are hundreds and thousands of 
 employers in this country, animated by the best and kindest motives 
 towards their workmen. 
 
 With regard to the second evil, namely, the dictation and tyranny 
 of the men to the masters, it is greatly to be deplored ; but from the 
 evidence given there can be no doubt that it prevails to a large 
 extent. The unions dictate what work is to be done, and what men 
 are to do it. Now this is reversing the proper order of things ; for the 
 men stand in relation to the masters as the hand of the body does to 
 the head, and it is for the head to direct and the hand to obe^'. Besides, 
 if the master paj's for the work, it should be his business, and his 
 business only, to say who shall and who shall not do it ; and if he is 
 content with the manner in which it is done, Avhether by apprentices 
 or by non-union men — by labourer, bricklayer, or mason — whether by 
 hand or by machinery — why, in the name of common sense, should the 
 men find fault ■? It is the men's duty to do their work, and leave 
 the master to do his ; and if he does not do it properly, he, not they, will 
 be the loser, and he will soon find out his mistake if he has not 
 done it rightl}'. The men might with equal justice, after the master 
 had paid for his dinner, go and tell hira that a certain cook must cook it 
 for him ; or, after he has paid for his cloth, that a certain tailor must 
 make his coat. 
 
 The third evil referred to is the great injury the men do to them- 
 selves by these rules. They saj' that a man shall only learn one 
 branch of the trade : that if he is a labourer, he must not do a bit of 
 bricklaying or mason work; and that if he is a plasterer, he must not 
 turn his hand to painting or carpentering. Xow, M'hat is this but to 
 stunt the growth of the man's faculties, and to deprive him of the 
 means of earning his livelihood? It is to exchange the Divine law of liberty 
 for the Hindoo law of caste. For if trade is bad in one thing, he can, 
 if he knows more than one branch, turn his hand to another, and thus, 
 as one door shuts another door opens for him. But to this trades- 
 unions say, "No; he must be a bricklayer, a mason, a painter, or a 
 carpenter," and such he must continue. Again, how often do we 
 meet with in life instances of young men being apprenticed to trades 
 quite unsuitable for them ; or, as the late President Lincoln aptly called 
 it, where the square peg is put into the round hole, and the round peg 
 is put into the square hole ; where, for instance, a man Avhose taste 
 is for carpentering is put to making boots and shoes ; another, who 
 would make a very good shoemaker, finds, by mistake, he is on the 
 tailor's bench. Even these mistakes are not confined to the lower classes ; 
 they are to be found in the liigher. Let us suppose a case, and such 
 a case is not l)eyond the bounds of probability, of a J'oung man, pious, 
 amiable, and of a noble house, the son of one high in the Church and 
 State ; he tries the law, but finds he has not sufficient application to
 
 21 
 
 master its studies, or ability enough to hold a brief. The profession is 
 not to his taste, so he leaves it and enters the army. Here, in time 
 of peace, when the soldier's duty consists in acting the gentleman, he 
 gets on very well; but " wars and rumours of wars arise," and he is 
 ordered abroad. Alas ! it is found he cannot go. No one for a moment 
 doubts his courage, for he is as brave as a lion; but then his phj'sical 
 constitution is unable to endure the fatigues and hardships of cam- 
 paigning ; so he doffs the red coat and dons the black—he quits the 
 army and enters the Church. Here he continues, learning to labour 
 and to wait, until a merciful Providence, through parental solicitude, 
 kindly interferes and helps him into a bishopric ; so that he who 
 had made a bad lawyer, a feeble soldier, and only a moderate 
 preacher, at last makes a most amiable and excellent bishop. How 
 great, then, would have been the loss to his country had the 
 early prospects of this promising young man been blasted by 
 the arbitrary rules of an aristocratic trades-union! Like the bishop, 
 then, the middling labourer may be a very hand}^ and intelligent man, 
 and make, perhaps, a better bricklayer than the bricklayer he is under, 
 or the bricklayer may be better suited to the work of the mason than 
 the mason himself— and the same holds good with reference to plaster- 
 ers, painters, carpenters, joiners, and so on; but the working of these 
 arbitrary rules of trades-unions prevents a man from risiiig, by forcing 
 him to that for which he is naturally unsuited. This, then, is a great 
 mistake, and a serious injury done to the men themselves. And here 
 we wish especially to point out the beauty and excellence of the 
 divine laws in relation to this part of the subject. The law of heaven is 
 that each one follow the bent and inclination of his own peculiar 
 talent and genius, because in heaven restraints and restrictions are 
 unknown ; there the most perfect freedom reigns, and by this the 
 individuality of the angelic mind and character is most fully and beauti- 
 fully developed. Let us, then, try to make earth like unto heaven, 
 by sweeping away all monopolies and unnecessary restrictions, by 
 giving to everjrone — high and low, rich and poor, in every profession — 
 equal opportunity for the development and reward of his talents. As 
 the divine parable expresses it, let him that hath the ten talents be 
 made the ruler over the ten cities, and him that hath the five talents 
 the ruler over the five cities. 
 
 Let us now briefl}' consider the subject of the limitation of apprentices. 
 "We need not quote instances to prove that rules against apprentices 
 c-xist. They are acknowledged in- many if not by all the societies ; and the 
 reason given by Mr. Potter is, that Avhere there is no limitation of ap- 
 prentices, inferior articles are manufactured, work of every kind de- 
 teriorates, it drives skilled workmen out of Enijlandto foreign countries, 
 whei'e their superior work supplants our inferior labour to the injury of 
 our export trade ; and slop-work, the sweating system, and many other 
 so-called evils are the result. As regards the slop-work trades, we 
 would onlj' say in extenuation of them, that they, especially those of 
 the eastern districts of London, have, like that of the costermongers, 
 been called into existence to supply the want of a certain class of the 
 community; and if any one is to blame for the deterioration of the work 
 and wages, we think it is the public who have deteriorated the prices ; and 
 this sin, so terrible in the eyes of Mr. Potter, may readily be forgiven, 
 considering the poverty of those who have committed it. But, sup- 
 posing you apply ]\Ir. Potter's remedy by lessening the number of 
 apprentices, you would only aggravate the evil by making the goods 
 dearer, and therefore less accessible to the poorer classes ; and when 
 the price r'nea, the demand decreases, and the employment with it. 
 But in these trades, and in all other trades, we think the master
 
 22 
 
 should be at liberty to employ as many apprentices as bethinks proper. 
 If he is quite willing to purchase the inferior labour, why should 
 another step in and say he must not? On tlie same principle you 
 might reiiise to allow a man to purchase an inferior house or inferior 
 clothes. Many are able but not willing, and many are willing but not 
 able to purchase superior houses and clothes ; and whether 
 they are able or not, they ought to be the only parties to 
 decide whether or not they shall buy. And if you a^low 
 inferior bourses and clothes to be sold, on the same principle you 
 ought not to step in and say to the seller, "You must not employ 
 inferior labour to make them." The very reason of these things being 
 cheap is because the labour that produces them is cheap ; and if jom 
 take advantage of the cheapness of the article, by all means allow the 
 maker to have the advantage of the cheap labour. The employment of 
 apprentices, like all the other laws on this subject, should be quite open 
 and free ; and, when they are so, the matter will regulate itself. There 
 is no fear that the master will employ too many j^prentices ; for no 
 master can with advantage to himself or to the public he serves, employ 
 too many lads. If he does so he runs the risk of being cut out of the 
 trade by the inferior quality of his work. It is for his own interest, 
 then, to employ a limited number; and, as we give the public the liberty 
 of deciding what quantity of apprentice-mide work tliey will buy, so we 
 ought to give the employer the liberty of deciding his own quantity of 
 apprentice labour. If you curtail the liberty in the one case, be 
 consistent, and curtail it in the other. 
 
 This reason of the deterioration of the work is only the apparent 
 reason of trades-union opposition to apprentices ; it is not the real one. 
 The true reason is given in answer to question 1102. — And why do you 
 interfere with the master v>ho determines to use the Ir.bour of his 
 apprentice in preference to that of his journeyman? — Because it 
 generally leads to annihilation of a regular journeyman's usual labour. 
 
 Q. 1103. That is to say^ it diminishes the Avages of the journeyman? 
 — It does. 
 
 Q. 1104. Why should you interfere with me, when building a house, 
 so as to preven't my building it at a eheap rate ? — The question certainly 
 is rather a powerful one. I can only say that the custom is adopted 
 throughout the trade. 
 
 The secret of trades-union opposition to the employment of apprentices 
 is to be found in these words, " it diminishes the wages of the journey- 
 man ": that is where the shoe pinches. Had it not done this we should 
 never have heard a syllable about the deterioration of the work, or of 
 slopwork, or the sweating system, &c., &c. The men wish to keep out 
 apprentices in order to keep up their own wages. This again is another 
 instance of the spirit of selfishness running through all these trade rules. 
 The master should be allowed to buy apprentice-labour, and apprentices 
 should be allowed to sell it. And why ? Because the apprentices 
 have to live as well as the men. " Self-preservation is the first law of 
 nature;" and although an overabundance of labour may at times cause a 
 scarcity of work, it is rather too much to tell the apprentices to keep out 
 of employment and starve, so that the men may keep in emploj-ment 
 and live. 
 
 By limiting the mmiber of apprentices j'ou produce another 
 evil; and this was pointed out to Mr. Potter and his friends when 
 they waited on Mr. Gladstone. He said, " All attempts to limit the 
 labour of boys are attempts to limit the aggregate of the wages fund 
 of the country." The cry at present i?,^The working classes have 
 too little to live upon. The trades-unions, by their short-sighted 
 conduct, are making that little less. Now, what would you think of 
 the man who continually complained of illness from want of food, if
 
 23 
 
 you saw him try to euro his complaint by still more lessening his daily 
 nourishment? The working-man of England is such a man, aftllcted 
 with such a compliint, and, having called in the doctor in the shape of 
 the trades-union, he is having this extraordinary prescrii)tion admi- 
 nistered to him in the vain hope of making him strong. AVhat would 
 you think of such a man ? Would you not say the patient is a fool , and 
 his doctor a quack ? 
 
 We will now briefly consider another rule ot the union — that of 
 " chasing." Chasing means a workman working too fast, doing his 
 work too quicklj' ; in short, being active and expert in the execution of 
 his duties. Now, the unions have a strong objection to this ; and the 
 reason given against chasing is, that an active workman may put him- 
 self to inconvenience, and also to distress j^Quests. 1145-6), and he may 
 also distress his fellow-workmen by working too hard. Plow remark- 
 ably solicitous these rales are framed for the welfare of their members ! 
 One would hardly have tlioiight the union would have taken any notice of 
 a trivial matter of this kind. But it does; for the men being so remarkably 
 wiUing to work, and their constitutions so remarkably delicate, it is neces- 
 sary to prevent them from over-exerting themselves. We would beg to 
 suggest to the unions that they should have a rule laying down what 
 quantity their members should eat and drink. The unions have great 
 doubts as to one Avorkman being able to do more than another ; but 
 in the matter of eating and drinking we think they must admit the 
 men have different capacities ; so that a rule is more required to Tegu- 
 gulate their appetites than to regulate their work. For our own part, 
 we do not think a rule is required in either case. The man, in both 
 cases, is the best judge how much he is lit for; and it is a piece of pre- 
 sumption for the unions to meddle m such matters at all, The above is 
 the apparent reason for the rule against chasing ; but we will now give 
 you the real one, and we quote it from the fifth rule of the Bradford 
 Labourers' rules, which is in these words : — " You are strictly cautioned 
 not to overstep good rules by doing double the work you are requned 
 (bv' the society), and causing others to do the same in order to gain a 
 snsile from the master. Such foolhardy and deceitful actions leave a 
 great portion of good members out of employment the year round. 
 Certain individuals have been guilty, who will be expelled if they do not 
 refrain." (Ques. 3120) And the Leeds bricklayers have a rule in- 
 flicting a line of Is. on any memhei- carrying more than eight bricks 
 <3122). Here, again, you are let into the secret of the matter. The 
 union does not care a straw about its member's delicate constitution, or 
 his hurting himself by over-exertion , but when he does his work 
 quickly he lessens the labour, and therefore the amount of the 
 Avages, and it is here that the shoe pinches. Here, again, you 
 have the spirit of selhshness showing itself; the work is to 
 be spun out as much as possible, so that the master may be made 
 to pay to the very uttermost farthing.* His interest is not consulted, 
 
 * The following instar.ces will show how the work is spun out: — By the rules 
 of the Bricklayers' and Brickaiakers' Unions of Manchester, it is enacted "That 
 any man found runnini^ or woiking beyond a regular speed, or trying 'o run off 
 or take advantage of their fellaw-workra&n is to be lined the sum of 2s. Gd- for 
 the first offence: for the second offence, 5-.; and for the third offer.ce, 10;:,, and 
 if per6i^ted iu, to be dealt with as the committee thinks proper. Any man work- 
 ing sliort-handed, wiihout man for man, will be fined or punished as the com- 
 mitfee think proper." It is also enacted by this union, that the walking rate of 
 the men be three miles an hour, doii-g more entails a fine. Here is a case that 
 caused a strike. The master at Birmingham was doing some heavy work at the 
 waterworks on the canal side, he pat some planks across from the boat, and set 
 some labourers to wheel the bricks from the boat right down to the ph.ce where 
 they were to be used ; but the labourers struck against it, and said that they must 
 all be unloaded ia the ordinary way, and stacked on the canal side, and then 
 carried by hod down to the works. (Question 3i60.)
 
 5>-l 
 
 and the true interest of the men is overlooked ; both must give way to 
 the will ot this Prince of Selfishness. Now, what is this rule but an 
 artificial barrier, raised to prevent the workman actively and faithfully 
 doing his work ? And what is the tendency of all such rules but to make 
 the man an eye-servant by raising in his mind the idea that his interests 
 are opposed to his master's interests, and the less he atte-^ds to his 
 master's interests the more he attends to his own : Xothing can be 
 more inimical to both parties than teaching of this kind. An honest and 
 intelligent workman will endeavour to work cheerfully at his duties, 
 and attend to them as thoroughly as if he were himself the master ; and 
 a good employer will show his appreciation of such services bj' advanc- 
 ing and rewarding his servant. The interest and success, then, of both 
 parties are bound up together ; and anyone who steps in to separate the 
 two is an enemy to both. Ko doubt there are selHsh men among the 
 employers, who would not recognise faithful service from their man 
 beyond the mere payment of his M-eekly wages ; but even in such a case 
 the man's duty remains the same, and, whether it is recognised or not, 
 he is none the less bound faithfully to discharge it. Again, sometimes 
 the workman may have a doubt as to how far his duty goes ; such, for in- 
 stance, in what consists a fair day's work for a fair day's wage ; and perhaps 
 he cannot rely on his master's giving a just decision in the question. What, 
 then, is he to do under the circumstances? Is he to surrender his own 
 manly independence and freedom, and his own right of private judg.nent 
 by appealing to the tribunal of a secret and irresponsible body V By no 
 means. Every honest and intelligent workman is to ask himself what is 
 right and necessary in such a case. lie is to be guided by the light that 
 is in him, and according to tliat he is faithfully to act. For a trades- 
 union, then, to step in and thrust its opinion and will on the w^orkman, 
 is to usurp the place of that conscience which God in his mercy and 
 wisdom has planted in his heart. 
 
 We now come to consider one of the greatest evils, we might 
 term it the greatest curse, arising from the action of these unions, and 
 that is the antagonism it has raised between the employer and his work- 
 men. It is indeed painful to read the evidence on this part of the sub- 
 ject. Formerly tlie man went direct to the master and arranged the 
 matter: if they did not come to terms, there was nothing more than a 
 simple refusal between the two. If they agreed and the man went to work, 
 the master naturally began to take an interest in his workman ; and the 
 longer he continued in his service the more that interest increased, the 
 master treating the man with greater kindness, and the workman re- 
 turning that kindness bj' respect to his employer and attention to his 
 interests. Now all this has been very gi-eatly changed. The 
 union has stepped in between them ; anJ, as the workman catmot 
 serve two masters, he has, in an evil hour, cast off allegiance to 
 his employer, preferring the allegiance of the union. Hear what 
 the employer says : 
 
 Q. 2901. As far as I and my partners are concerned, and I 
 believe the generality of the masters, we are very desirous to con- 
 sult the comfort and the advantage of our workmen. But that 
 feeling, unfortunately, has changed of late years. In my younger 
 days, there used to be some sort of attachment between master 
 and men, but that has entirely gone , and I say that it is the unions, and 
 nothing else, that have brought that result. In the strike of 1859, men 
 came to us who had worked at the place for thirty or forty years, and 
 said to us, " This is the saddest day that ever happened to us in our 
 lives, but we must go ; we are bound to go." 
 
 Q. 2905. You believe that the effect of these unions is to loosen the 
 tie between the workman and the employer? — That experience has most
 
 tleeidcdly been ours. AVlien we find that we ermnot come to these men 
 and talk to them as friends ; that, in fact, their individuality is lost be- 
 cause they are members of a union, it seems to me a most distressing 
 tiling. I have talked to them and argued with them ; but in two or 
 three days' time it is all obliterated by the influence of the union. 
 
 Q. 290C. In the absence of any operation of the unions when masters 
 are left to themselves, the tendency is for each master to keep his men 
 as long as he can, is it not? — Most decidedly. 
 
 Q. 2907. On the other hand, when the union tries to screw every 
 penny out of the master that it can, it destroys the very essence of the 
 relation which should subsist between them? — Yes. 
 
 Q. 2908. It is, then, natural for the master to say to the men, 
 " Having got out of me everytliing you can, you have no right to ask 
 me on social considerations for anything more?" — Yes. I have heard 
 many masters saj', "I used during the winter to keep on as many men 
 as I could, even at my own personal loss ; but now these men care 
 nothing for me." In fact, the effect of the unions is to induce them not 
 to do anything for my benefit, and, therefore, why should I put my 
 hand into my pocket for them? 
 
 Q. 2009. That feeling is general throughout the trade ? — I am afraid 
 it is. 
 
 Q. 2910^ And it is increasing, you fear? — Yes, every one notices 
 that there is a difference in the very behaviour of the men : some hardly 
 address you with ordinary civility. 
 
 Q. 2911. So that the effect ol these unions is to increase the anta- 
 gonism between the interest of the master and the interest of the work- 
 men ? — I think so. 
 
 This is the evidence of Mr. Trollope, and, if necessary, it can be cor- 
 roborated by other witnesses ; but this is unnecessary : it tells its own 
 tale, and is so simple and so painful, that no one can for a moment doubt 
 its truth. The employer and his workmen were intended to be some- 
 what in the same relation as husband and wife ; and when they had any 
 little differences, as no doubt they would — for "mistakes will occur in 
 the best regulated families" — they ought to have arranged them between 
 themselves ; but the wife in this case, in order to correct her husband, 
 has abandoned her legitimate protector and taken up with a stranger and 
 intruder, and since then there has been nothing else but rows in the 
 house. AVhatever, then, ma}' be the employers' faults, they do not justily 
 the course taken by the men ; and the first step towards restoring peace 
 and harmony to the house is to turn the intruder out. 
 
 Having said thus much on the rules of the unions, ^xe now proceed to 
 the subject of Strikes ; and as a fitting introduction to it we will give 
 you an idea of how the money of the workman is not merely spent, but 
 squandered. In question 1998-9 we are informed by the secretary, 
 lioulsey, that " a Delegate meeting, to revise the laws of the Operative 
 Bricklayers' Society, cost £1088. Each delegate was paid lis. Cd. per 
 da}', and their lodgings and railway fares, and 6d. each for refreshment, 
 and that meeting occupied a fortnight." Thus, reckoning seven days to 
 the week, each delegate received £-i per week, besides the expense of his 
 lodgings, railway fares, and refreshments. If the revising of the rules 
 cost £1088, what did the framing of them cost ? However badly the 
 men may be paid, the delegates, in this instance, have taken very good 
 care not to allow their services to go unrewarded. 
 
 In question 6522 we find that Mr. Applegarth's printing and 
 stationery account, for the year 18GG, amounted to £1052 17s. 8d., and 
 that the delegates were paid £567 16s. 2d. In explaining this item of 
 stationery, he says : — " Q. 727(5. It will be remembered that the item 
 of printing and stationery was pointed out as not economical. Kow, I 
 may state, in that very item which was selected, there were 20,000
 
 26 
 
 copies of rules, wliicli vi'ill produce a profit of at least one hundred pe?- cent., 
 when sold." This is a most extraordinary defence, and comes with a 
 very damaging eifect from a unionist like Mr. Applegarth. Ilis complaint 
 is that the masters' prolits are too large, and ll:e men's wages too low; 
 but when he becomes a sort of master printer and stationer, he sells his 
 goods at the very high profit of at least one huu'lred per cent., and this, 
 too, to his dear iriend and brother, the poor, badly-paid working man. 
 We very much fear ]Mr. Applegarth's love for the working man is, 
 after all, like a certain lady's ^' everlasting beauty" — only skin deep, 
 and rises in price in proportion as it decreases in usefulness. We would 
 ask you, then. Working Men. now that yon have got the Union, with all 
 its expensive machinery, don't you thiiik, like Dr. Franklin, you pay too 
 dear for your whistle? And do j^ou not also think that you could employ 
 your hard-earned wages to far greater advantage amongst your wives 
 and families, instead of wasting tliem in the purchase of Mr. Apple- 
 garth's high-priced stationery, or in providing food and refreshments foi' 
 Mr. Houlsey's hungry delegates ? 
 
 In question 984-971 evidence is given of a strike taking place because 
 the men had an objection to work with the foreman, although he had 
 only been a few hours in the shop. In question 9G1 we have the 
 opinion of one of the men as to the worth of strikes. Mr. William 
 Allan :— 
 
 Your experience then is that strikes have not benefited the men ? 
 They have in some instances. 
 
 Q. 96;2. As a rule not? — As a rule, thej' have been much the same 
 at the finish of the strike as they were Ijefore it commenced. 
 
 Q. 9G3. With all the misery of the strike meanwhile? — Yes. 
 
 Again, in questions 3595 to 3G00, AVe have evidence on what trivial 
 grounds they will sometimes take place, brought about, too, by the most 
 worthless class of the operatives. In this case, the men's time was divided 
 into thirds, and the imion determined to have it divided into fourths. 
 The result to a steady, industrious man would not have made 2s. GJ. or 
 5s. either the better or the worse ; yet on this trifling matter a strike took 
 place, lasting four months, and in the end the men had to yield. This 
 strike took place in the winter, and in the following spring trade had so 
 greatly improA'ed, that the men gained the advance they had before 
 struck for, thus showing the absurdity of strikes ; for it is trade, and 
 not strikes, that regulates wages. 
 
 In question 432G and following, we have the history of the great 
 strike in ?,Ianchester at the j^ew Gaol and Assize Courts. The men 
 determined to remove an obnoxious foreman ; the offence of this man 
 being his placing an efficient gang-leader in the place of an inefficient 
 one, Avhicli was simply doing his duty, and because of this the men 
 struck work. They continued on strike for many months, spent £2600, 
 besides losing all their wages, and after all they were most ignominiously 
 beaten. One of the men (O'lSTei!) was examined on the suhject of this 
 strike. lie was Secretary of the Manchester Lodge ; and, though oc- 
 cupying that important oflice, he had a memory like a sieve — it could 
 hold nothing ; and out of him the truth was as difficult to get as it was to 
 draw mercy from Shylock. After severe examination he admitted the 
 fact that £920 was given towards this strike by the executive of the 
 Union ivUhout even consulting the mcmliers^ and also that the London 
 Society sent their Secretary (Coulson) down to IManchester, who bribed 
 the men to leave their employment. This strike was characterised by 
 compulsion, picketing, intimidation, violence, bribery and corruption in 
 their v/orst features, and stands out in the history of trades-unions as 
 one of the most gigantic attempts at tyranny they ever made, as well as 
 one of their most complete failures. 
 
 From Question 615 we learn that it cost the Amalgamated Society
 
 27 
 
 of Engineers £40,000 the first six months ol the lock-out of 1852, besides 
 the loss of the men's wages, and thousands of pounds were lost both 
 to men and masters in the great building strike of 1859. Besides these, 
 ■we have on record the strilce iu the building trade in the Eastern Counties 
 in 1864 ; also the lock-out in the iron trade, arising out of the iNorth 
 Staffordshire strike. According to the 2Y/ne5 of March 22nd, 1865, out 
 of a population of 133,000 in the counties of Staffordshire and East 
 AVorcestershire, 33,730 workers were thrown out of emplojnuent : and 
 out of a population of 59,128 in the North of England, 14,782 ; tlius in 
 this strike alone nearly 50,000 of the working classes were deprived of 
 their livelihood. The coal strike and lock-out of 1858 is still remembei'ed 
 in West Yorkshire, and the Preston strike of 1853 in Lancashire; and, 
 lastly, the colliers of Lancashire have again been out for three months 
 this year ; and after much violence and rioting, to quell which the police 
 and military have been called in, as well as to protect non-union men, 
 the union men have been compelled to yield and agree to the masters' 
 terms. To carry on this strike it is reckoned, according to the Morning 
 Post, 8th May, 1868, that £15,000 to £20,000 have been drawn out of 
 the funds of the unions, or by levies on and contributions from the work- 
 ing classes, which suui has been uselessly spent ; and, reckoning £1 a week 
 as wages for each man out for the three months, this strike has caused 
 the loss of wages to the amount of £240,000, besides the loss to the 
 employers and those indirectly connected with the trade. But this is 
 not all. Some of the men engaged in the rioting have been convicted 
 and sentenced to five years penal servitude, and many of those remaining 
 have sullenly returned to work, exasperated and embittered against their 
 employers. These then are some of the deplorable and disastrous results 
 of this strike, and it is the unions, working on the ignorance of the men, 
 that are to be held responsible for them. 
 
 But, further, we learn from " Chambers' Information for the People," 
 " Popular Statistics," p. 553, how wages have been gradually rising by 
 the natural growth of trade and intelligence. 
 
 Before the early part of the reign of George III. the wages of English 
 workmen, as given by Yomig in 1763, were : — 
 
 Tei- ■week 
 
 Iron works at Eotherhanr .. .. .» .. 10s. Od. 
 
 Cutlery at Sheffield 13s. 6d. 
 
 Clothworkers at Wakefield 10s. Od. 
 
 Colliers Us. Od. 
 
 Colliers at Newcastle . . . . . . . . ISs. 6d. 
 
 Cotton workers at Carlisle . . . . . . . . 9s. Od. 
 
 Shoemakers and pinmakers at AYarringtoa . . 8s. 7d, 
 
 Fustian-workers, &c., at Manchester .. .. 7s. Id. 
 
 In the Potteries (men) 9s. 6d. 
 
 Agricultui'al labourers from us. lOd. to Ss. 
 
 By the gradual increase of trade up to 1839, Mr. Jollinger liymons gives the 
 wages of the same classes as follow : — 
 
 Per week. 
 
 Sheffield workmen . . . . from 2-5s. Od. to 40s. Od. 
 
 Manchester workmen .. .. from 13s. Od. to SOs. Od. 
 
 Colliers 21s. 
 
 Agricultural labourers 83. Cd. to 10s. 6d. 
 
 Flax- workers at Leeds I7s. Od. to 19s. Od» 
 
 Thus, by the gradual operation of trade and intelligence wages were doubled, 
 ana iu mauy cases trebled, in seventy years. The wages at the present time 
 are stiU higher all over England. 'Bread is about the same price, or rather 
 cheaper. Potatoes, much cheaper. Tea, coffee, and sugar are much reduced 
 in price ; and clothes are immensely cheaper and better. 
 
 All this by peaceable change ; and if the intelligence of the people had been 
 as further increased by education and thoughtiulness on their own parts, 
 these residts v.-ould have been more favourable stUI. 
 
 The contrary results ot strikes may be strikingly exhihitea hy the following 
 statements extracted fi-om a paper read by Dr. Watts before the Statistical
 
 23 
 
 Society at Manchester, September, 1861. l)r. Watts is one of tlie mo&tzealouj 
 and enlightened friends of the working classes : — 
 
 The great Preston strike lasted 38 weeks ; the one at Padiham, 29 weeks ; 
 Bolton, (5 weeks ; Ashton and district, 6 weeks ; Clithero, 6 weeks ; Blackburn, 
 ?, weeks ; the strike of the London builders, 26 weeks ; and the late Colne, 
 -30 weeks. 
 
 The amount in dispute in a strike is seldom more than 5 per cent., often not 
 so much. 
 
 Let us assume that the dispute is for 5 per cent, and that it succeeds. We 
 shall even then see that he who wins loses. The following table shows the 
 length of time it would take to make up for the loss of time in a strike : — 
 The loss of 1 month requires If- years. 
 „ 2 months „ 3j „ 
 
 „ 3 „ 
 
 ■1 „ 
 12 
 
 12^ 
 
 9 
 19 
 20 
 
 But if the strike does not succeed, the bitterness and loss are sustained with 
 no compensation ; and here is a list of unsnccessful strikes and their results, 
 which occurred within 2^ years, with the exception only of Preston, which we 
 include on accoimt of its striking character : — 
 
 Preston.. 
 
 Padiham 
 
 Clitheroe 
 
 Blackburn.... 
 
 Ashton 
 
 Colne 
 
 Bolton 
 
 London } 
 Building ) "' 
 
 Kumbor 
 
 of 
 Persons. 
 
 15,0C0 
 800 
 
 3,000 
 40,000 
 22,000 
 
 1,500 
 12,000 
 
 10,000 
 
 Weeks 
 
 of 
 Strike. 
 
 £427,500 
 17,400 
 13,500 
 90,000 
 99,000 
 56,250 
 54,000 
 
 325,000 
 
 1.082,650 
 
 12ipcrCcut. 
 
 Loss 
 on Capital. 
 
 £92,625 
 3,770 
 2,925 
 19,500 
 21,450 
 12,187 
 11,700 
 
 53,125 
 
 217,282 
 
 Subscriptions 
 
 to 
 
 Support. 
 
 ;i06,875 
 4,350 
 3,375 
 22.500 
 24,750 
 14,062 
 13,500 
 
 81,250 
 
 270,66'J 
 
 Total 
 Loss. 
 
 £027.000 
 25,520 
 19,800 
 132,000 
 145,200 
 82,499 
 79,200 
 
 459,375 
 1,570,594 
 
 This is the money loss. Then the loss in morality by the men getting into 
 loose, bad habits, and the loss in good will between men and masters are 
 beyond all price. 
 
 David Chadwick, Esq., then Treasurer of the borough of Salford, says in a 
 paper read before the Statistical Society, December, 1859, " On the rate of 
 Wages in the Manufacturing Districts, 1839 to 1859 :"— 
 
 " The wages of all classes of factory operatives appear to have increased from 
 10 to 25 per cent, during the last 20 years. This is mainly owing to the im- 
 provements in the construction of the machinery, and the increased speed at 
 which it is worked." 
 
 Mr. Henry Ashworth, of Bolton, has estimated that before 1842 the net 
 earnings of the operative spinner amounted to 20s. per week; in 1859 to 
 30s. idd., with some slight help by a boy, although the price for working 20lb. 
 of yarn is reduced from 4s. 7d. to 3s. U^d. 
 
 Contrast these statements, all founded on exact figures. By peaceable means 
 there had been a gradual constant rise of 2s. or 3s. in the 20s. By violent 
 means there was wasted in unsuccessful strikes in two years and a half a mil- 
 lion of money by the working men. 
 
 Take anoiher illustration. 
 
 The Staffordshire colliers turned out in 1864 against a reduction of 3d. a 
 day arising from the state of trade. They remained out four months, and then 
 went in at the masters' terms. This strike cost as follows : — 
 
 6932 men at 22s. per week for ten weeks . . . . £76,252 
 
 3068 youths at 9s. 13,806 
 
 Employers' loss £100 per man at 15 per cent. . . . . 23,076 
 
 Shopkeepers' loss on wages and profits at 15 per cent. 16,104 
 
 £129,2SJ
 
 2D 
 
 without reckoning subscriptions to tlie men, or loss to the public in extia price 
 of coals. 
 
 This iiTational and suicidal conduct on the part of the men has been 
 committed under the influence of the trades-unions ; and we can only tind 
 a fitting parallel to such infatuation in the annals of Eastern Paganism. 
 It is like the conduct of the poor deluded fanatic, who, under the Influ- 
 ence and at the instigation of his priest?, insanely throws himself before 
 the wheels of the car of Juggernaut. Beware, then, Working Men, 
 when certain Professors of Political Economy, whose zeal in your cause 
 surpasses their wisdom, tell you that you have the riglit to strike. You 
 have the right to strike, just as you have the right, or rather the power, 
 to commit self-destruction ; but only madmen would exercise such a 
 right. 
 
 And what does all this painful evidence prove ? Does it not show on 
 the very face of it that strikes will do more to impoverish the men than ar.y 
 lowering of wages the masters may attempt '? The Piccordcr of the 
 Wigan Borough Sessions, in addressing the jury on the subject of the 
 above riots, saj's : — " I believe there never has been a strike, certainly 
 !;ot one of long continuance even when successful, which has not 
 resulted in more poverty, privation, and suffering among the men and 
 their wives and families, than if the turn-outs had continued to work at 
 even far less wages than they had rejected." And with such facts before 
 them, any one open to conviction must come to the same conclusion. 
 In many instances strikes have occurred for the sake of 23. or os. a week ; 
 and, io gain this paltry sum, the men have thrown away their weekly 
 wages for months together ; and, after all, they have not got what they 
 struck for ; and even in those cases where they have got it, don't you 
 think they have reversed the good old proverb by giving the herring to 
 catch the sprat? In retarn, then, for the immense expenditure of 
 strikes, the men gain nothing. Looking at the subject merely as 
 a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence, the folly of the thing is 
 self-evident ; and there is not only the loss of the money to be con- 
 sidered, but there is something far worse in the misery and desolation 
 caused to their poor wives and families and homes during its continuance. 
 Trades-unions will answer to all this, that if we put the gain on the one 
 side, and the loss on the other and strike the balance, the difference 
 will be found to be in their favour. Now, admitting this for argument 
 sake, although we have proved exactly the reverse to be the truth, we 
 ask. has that balance been honestly come by '? The mere success of a 
 thing is no justification of the means employed for its accomplislunent. 
 A man, for instance, may have made a good round sum at smuggling or 
 burglary; but his success is no defence of the profession by whicli he 
 has amassed his ill-gotten gain; and it is far better for him to rem.ain a 
 poor but honest man, than to become a rich and successful rogue. We 
 must, before considering the success of the thing, consider the legality 
 of the means employed ; and we think it has been clearly shown that a 
 workman is not justified in resorting to combination, with or without 
 violence, to raise the price of labour, any more than the merchant is to 
 raise the price of tea or cotton. Then again, admitting that the means 
 employed are fair and honourable, the next question is, have they 
 received a fair return for all the money expended, and misery endured 
 in the strife ? When a merchant engages in a speculation, he always 
 looks for a fair profit on the amount risked ; and viewing strikes in tljis 
 light, the results from them are by no means worth what is ventured 
 for them. Again, supposing when trade is good, a strike takes place 
 and a rise is obtained, trade afterwards may become bad, and that rise is 
 again lost, so that the union cannot hold the gain they seek. The union, 
 in this respect, is like Sisyphus. He, according to classical fable, was, by tie 
 gods, as a pimishment for his crimes, condemned to continually roll an
 
 30 
 
 immense stone up a steep hill, and just as lie was on the pomt of reach- 
 ing the summit, and hoped his labour Avas finished, the stone would 
 elude his grasp, and roll down again. Like him, the union is con- 
 demned — we will not say for its crimes, but most certainly for its folly 
 — to be continually rolling up the wages, and just as the modern Sisy- 
 phus gains the summit the wages roll back again. The unions may do 
 all they possibly can to keep up the price of labour ; but when trade 
 becomes slack they cannot maintain it ; and the reason of this is evident, 
 when we bear in mind the important fact that the unions cannot create 
 trade, any more tlian the Bank of England can create commerce ; and it 
 is for them to follow the wise example of the Bank, and allow the 
 wages, like the gold, to rise and fall according to the supply and demand. 
 It is possible they may not by this method gain so quick and so high a 
 rise as in some cases they gain bj^ means of a strike ; but the rise is more 
 certain and permanent, because the cause is more natural, and the men 
 are in pocket all the money they might foolishly spend on the strike, 
 and save themselves and their families all its miseries, besides having 
 the pleasure, which every honest vi-orkman must desire, of knowing and 
 feeling that he has acted honourably. Another very important con- 
 sideration to bear in mind is this — that strikes unsettle and disturb 
 the financial arrangements of the employers. The great railway an;l 
 building operations of the country are carried out by advances from 
 bankers and linancial agents. There is no body of commercial men who 
 are so willing to employ capital at a m.oderate rate as bankers. They are 
 far more content v.ith a small profit and safe and sure investment than 
 a large profit and hazardous trade. At the same time, no commercial 
 men are so sensitive to risk and danger ; and if they have the slinhtest 
 suspicion that there is anything wrong, or that the work is liable to be 
 stopped at any moment, then they do not care about advancing m.oney 
 to carry it out, so that when the capital is stopped, employment is 
 stopped and Avages also. Mr. Rupert Kettle, in his evidence (Question 
 7385), saj-s : " But there is another person who is disturbed, and whose 
 influence on the trade is paramount, and that is the banker, who finds 
 the money for the builder. I am confident that when the trade is so 
 disturbed tiiat a banker cannot be quite certain whether a strike will 
 not interpose to prevent the builder having the architect's certificate, 
 showing that he is able to meet the state of his banker's account 
 periodically, he v/ould hesitate to advance money to carry on the busi- 
 ness. In all things in fact, security increases confidence, and so pro- 
 motes investment; and if you do anything to disturb security and bring 
 about such a state of things as exists in the building trade, you disturb 
 the confidence of people in it, and divert the investment of capital." 
 Here, then, is another very powerful reason proving that the interests 
 cf labour and capital are identical, and that both should work har- 
 moniouslv together. The more capital there is invested in a trade, the 
 more will the operations of that trade extend, the greater will be the 
 demand for labour, and the higher the wages ; but strikes, by driving 
 capital from the trade, bi'ing loss on the employers and poverty on the 
 men. And, lastly, strikes ough.t to be condemned because they are in 
 their very nature a species of social civil v/ar. War, whether of a 
 national or social kind, can very rarely be justified, more especially 
 when waged between citizens, and workmen and employers. Yvliat- 
 ever difierences arise, they can be arranged by arbitration. The spirit 
 of our age is to settle disputes, not by blovvs, but by argument ; not by 
 physical or social violence, but by dispassionate and enlightened reason. 
 This is one of the most pleasing signs of our times ; for it shows a free 
 people, the makers and supporters of free laws ; and it is the duty of 
 every one to strengthen tins growing sentiment by discountenancing all 
 attempts of individuals resorting to physical or social violence to redress
 
 31 
 
 public or private grievances. We have a free press, public teachers, 
 and a Parliament that is becoming more and more the reflex of public 
 and national opinion, before whom we can place our disputes, and by 
 whom we can have them fairly discussed. Let us then appeal to them, 
 and calmly wait a righteous judgment. 
 
 "We have thus far endeavoured to show that the objects the unions 
 seek are manj^ of them not lawful, and, where lawful, the means em- 
 ployed are not legal or right. We have seen that picketing, intimidation, 
 violence, and strikes, are contrar\^ to law- and order ; that the minimum 
 rate of wages, limitation of apprentices, and the rules relating to 
 labourers, bricklayers, masons, painters, &c., also as to chasing, are all 
 artificial restraints, tending to stunt the growth of the men's laculties, 
 to retard their advancement, and lessen their employment and wages, 
 as well as to injure trade, and defraud the emploj-ers and the public ; 
 and, lastl}^ they are at variance, both in the letter and the spirit, with 
 the Divine law of " doing unto others as ye would thej^ should do imto 
 } on'" — that law which ought to be the guide alike of individuals and 
 isations in all their dealings. Let not, then, trades-unions for one 
 moment suppose that their ideas are for society's good. What mankind 
 requires is more freedom in labour, comm.erce, and religion. The 
 world is moving onwards, not backwards ; and they might just as well 
 expect the strong man, proud in his strength, to return again to the 
 swaddling clothes of his babyhood, as to expect this country'- to adopt the 
 artiScial restraints and restrictions of the shortsighted, narrow-souled 
 system of trades-unionism. The question, then, arises, what good are 
 these unions? or are they a good at all? They were originally benefit 
 t^ocieties ; but, by having trade rules grafted on them, they have been 
 taken out of their proper place, and applied to purposes for which they 
 were never intended, and thus have become an evil. Tliere is no such 
 thing in existence as pure evil. All evils are simpl}- good things abused 
 or perverted. Fire and water, for instance, are very good things ia 
 their proper place, but very dangerous things out of their place ; and 
 trades-unions, as at present conducted, are a striking illustration of this 
 truth. They originated as benefit and friendly societies in the strict 
 sense of the term, and were designed to be the savings' bank of the 
 workman, to which he could apply for help when out of work, or in 
 times of sickness, or from accident, and, when lie died, where his family 
 could receive assistance. From these most useful and com.mendable 
 objects they have been turned, and applied to purposes altogether 
 beyond their proper sphere, and foreign to their true nature. Mr. 
 Ai'lan, of the Amalgamated Engineers, thus speaks on this point:— 
 
 Q. 7573. Trades-unions are not now the same as they were for- 
 merly. A simple trades-union tor the protection of trade, in my opinion, 
 is calculated to bring about a great deal of unpleasantness and ill-feeling 
 between employers" and workmen; but when we have a system of 
 benefits attached to it, it brings a better feeling to bear on many of the 
 members, and, in m.any instances, no doubt they adopt a v,iser course 
 than they would adopt if they were simply a trade society. 
 
 Mr. Allan by this fairly admits the evil of the trades-union; and what 
 does he do to cure it ? Does he do as every sensible and clear-headed 
 man would, eradicate the evil and leave the good ? No, he does not ; but 
 he mixes the good and the bad together, thus defiling and polluting the 
 good cf the friendly society with the evil of the trade rules. The evil 
 of the unions is admitted, and the cure is very simple, nanielj% by con- 
 fining them to their proper place, and so preventing their interfering 
 with'trade. So long as they are kept there we admire and commend 
 them, and heartily wish them and their members every success, and 
 that same feeling which prompts us to support them as a good prompts 
 us to expose them when an evil. As benefit societies they can be the
 
 means of irrcat use, and are therefore justly entitled to legal protec- 
 tion for tlieir funds against dishonest officers. The sympathies of 
 all true Ciiristian men are with the working classes. Their labour, 
 however humble, is honourable, and their poverty is no disgrace ; for 
 " The honest man, tlio' e'er ?o poor, 
 Is king o' men for a' that." 
 We wish to see their condition improved in every respect — better paid, 
 better clothed, better fed, and better educated, and the worthy amongst 
 them rise to positions in life corresponding to their merits and abilities. 
 All this and a great deal more we sincerely desire ; but we wish to see 
 it brought about by lawful, not unlawful, means. In conclusion, we 
 would beg to offer a suggestion, or rather to support a suggestion that 
 has already been made to the Legislature. In reading the evidence 
 laid before the Commission, one is appalled by the terrible revelations 
 made, especially in relation to the state of immorality of the lower 
 orders in Sheffield and the Manchester districts. They reveal 
 a state of society which neither the higher, the middle, nor the 
 respectable part of the working classes ever believed to exist. 
 However painful it is to make this discovery, it is far better that 
 ^ese terrible evils should be laid open, than allowed to lie hid 
 like a social ulcer, poisoning and corrupting the life's blood of society. 
 These men are controlled by no conscience, guidcv^ by no principle of 
 religion, honour, or duty, and are scarcely moved even by the stern, 
 iron red of the law. And what is the cause of such a state of things '? 
 They are for the greater part the sins of ignorance, and can in the 
 course of time be removed by education. Let, then, a system of 
 National Education — compulsory, if necessary — be provided, so that 
 every child may have the means of instruction placed within its reach, 
 an education that will teach him not only to read and write, but, what is 
 far more necessary for the duties and difficulties of life, to think, 
 understand, and act for himself as an intelligent, conscientious, manly, 
 and independent being. This duty has been too long delayed by our 
 Government, and we are being punished for its neglect by having the 
 children reared in the midst of all this vice and darkness, becoming 
 " rotten before they are ripe." Spread, then, the blessings of Educa- 
 tion far and wide amongst our labouring population ; and before its 
 heavenly light those black, thick clouds of ignorance, settled on the 
 minds of our people, and big with so many curses, will gradually roll 
 away, and a brighter and happier day dawn on our land. 
 
 PrvTNTi:B BY r.ANKEN AND CO., DItUB ? UOUSE, ST. MARY-LE STEAND, LONDOW