WORKMEN'S STRIKES.
IT is the case with most of those combinations among workmen called "strikes," for exacting certain conditions from their masters, that they are obscure in their history and nugatory in result. The late most famous of strikes, at the Houses of Parliament, is quite in point : the public, to whom both parties, directly or indirectly, appeal, know nothing of the merits of the case ; and the workmen, with grievous complaints of the oppression that they suffer at all hands, seem as likely as ever to be defeated. It may be worth while to examine the causes of this uniform failure. It has indeed been said that they lie in the unequal pecuniary resources of the two contending parties, the masters having the means of holding out longer. The contest has been compared to a competition be- tween an orange-merchant and a corn-dealer, in which each strove to withhold his goods from the market longer than the other ; the oranges rotting and wasting away, while the corn remained sound and marketable. But we suspect the causes are really much deeper.
it cannot be denied in reason, that any men have a right to combine for the promotion of common interests, and to agree among themselves as to the conditions upon which they shall bring their wares—goods or labour—into the market. Their means of enforcing those conditions, indeed, must be restricted to the with- holding of their wares, or to the mutual agreement among them- selves; that is, they may " stt ike," they may exclude others from their compact, and they may voluntarily observe the rules imposed upon themselves—in short, they may have a perfect command over their own actions, individually and collectively : but they cannot force others to join their compact, to observe their rules, or to act concurrently with their actions. The conditions upon which, in right, they may dispose of their labour, are perfectly arbitrary : any hundred or thousand or two of workmen may unite and arrange that they will only dispose of their labour on whatever terms they please—masons, for instance, at a guinea a day, only working two hours. But then, the masters have equally a right to fix their own conditions ; to refrain from bargaining with the high-priced, lazy, or dictatorial workman, and to choose the cheap, diligent, and servile—to choose by any caprice—by the colour of the men's hair, if it so please them. But this observance of literal rights will not suffice either to men's interest or safety : they must have the sanction and support of public opinion, or they will be deprived of all but their own naked resources, exiled from the benefits of society—punished for transgressing the rules of social decorum and " fairness," by odium, and most likely by loss. It becomes neces- sary, therefore, that the admitted freedom of action should be so modified that the conditions demanded on either side are fair in the received sense of the term. The master, who desires to stand fair with the world, and to enjoy that success in business which follows a good name, will always offer the full rate of wages, and supply his men with the customary perquisites and allowances, which are compulsory only by use and courtesy. The workmen will only exact the market-price for his labour—so much money for so much work, at the current rate ; and will reject all idea of controlling the contract between his employer and other work- men, as perfectly nugatory, so long as the master treats all fairly. Redress for a transgression of these established rules is to be sought in an appeal to public opinion : the master who is known to outrage the common sense of propriety by seeking to enforce ty- rannical exactions, will find the best workmen leave him, and his disgusted customers pass him by. The workman who similarly offends will be turned over without mercy, for redress or punish- ment, to the naked law.
But when any dispute of the kind arises, it becomes, like all disputes, a question of facts. In the late strike at the Houses of Parliament, it has become strictly a question of facts. The main charges brought on either side seem to be, that the masters em- ployed a foreman who oppressed the men with the most tyran- nical and unjustifiable conduct, and that the men really quarrelled with the foreman because he exacted fair and ordinary terms instead of a certain proportion of work and price fixed by the workmen. Each side is anxious to obtain the larger share of support from public opinion ; and the workmen loudly complain that their claims are intercepted and public opinion forestalled against them. It is necessary to see, therefore, what pains each side has taken to lay its case before the public. Much cannot be said for the diligence or skill of either party. The defence of the masters, extorted from them bit by bit, has been unconnected and imperfect. The case of the strikers, who stand in the light of plaintiffs, has been obfuscated by rhetorical flourishes and hyper- bole, and seems, so far as the public are concerned, to have grown by degrees, as if added to from time to time. The most temperate, rational, and distinct statement, is that last put forth by the accused foreman, Mr. ALLEN, in a letter comprising the main charges against himself, a direct contradiction to them, and the counter-charge against the men. Public opinion will inevitably be much biased by that letter, on account of its temperate and fair- showing terms. We have the testimony of Mr. WAKLEY, indeed, that the public has been misled by the statements which have been put forth ; and he advised the misrepresented masons to seek redress in the acquisition of political power : rather a long and cumbersome preliminary to a suit for redress in a special case I But he did not himself supply an amended statement, nor did he counsel his protegees to furnish one. But, until they do so, how are they to get at that public opinion which they claim, or indeed what right have they to it ? The transferring of their demands from ",justice" in the case to "political rights," enlarges them, makes them prospectively more formidable, but does not remove the.obstacle to attainment : on the contrary, that enlarges with the demands. If the strikers have a well-founded case, they have only distinctly to set it forth, and public opinion must follow it, not as a concession but as a consequence. If they keep the case to them- selves, or vitiate its enunciation with obscure and repulsive lan- guage, public opinion is denied, not to the justice but to the mis- statement of their case. Until any class can make itself understood, its wants cannot be supplied ; its errors even cannot receive the correction of truth ; and its demand for rights cannot obtain the concurrence which awaits a knowledge of what is right. Political as well as economical " rights " will be as long as possible with- held from any class in the community that cannot make its views intelligible, as from an alien race, whotieek power over other classes without making it clear how they germ to use it. What the strikers want, whether they seek betterternue 81. political franchise, is to state their own wants distinctly.
Previous page
