DEAR Mn.
The spectacle of the well-to-do in this country Preaching thrift to the working man is often rather a
• These letters, under the title of "The Problems and Perna of Socialism," will be published in book form early in May, price 6d., by Messrs. Macmillan and Co. ridiculous one, for unfortunately the well-to-do classes in England are by no means inclined to practise in the concrete what they admire in the abstract. Taken as a whole, I am afraid the well-to-do are, considering their opportunities, quite as great sinners in the matter of saving as those with lesser incomes. At the same time, it is undoubtedly a fact that nothing is of greater advantage to the working man than the practice of thrift. Thrift will give him a strength, an independence, and a power of bettering his condition which nothing else will. If, then, I advocate thrift for the working Man, it is not because I want him to ally himself with Capital,
or, as it were, to give hostages to the present economic system, but because I am convinced that through thrift and the possession of some measure of private property he will find one of the surest ways of bettering his condition. It is good to provide against sickness and old age by belonging to a benefit society, and I should be the last to deprecate this sort of thrift. It is, however, also an immense benefit to a man to have 220 or £30, or even £10, saved and in hand. I do not hesitate to say that no man is really a free man in the fullest sense unless he has a sum of money put by upon which he could live for a short time if things temporarily went wrong with him in his employment. If a man has no money saved, but only has that which he makes from week to week, he is bound to be to a great extent at the mercy of those who employ him. Under such conditions he may be obliged to take whatever wages are offered to him. If, however, he has enough put by to keep him at a pinch, say, for six months, he can pick and choose and can sell his labour to very much better advantage. If the employer knows that the man he employs has got enough to keep him from want for many months, the knowledge is certain, sooner or later, to affect the bargain. I am no enemy of Trade-Unions. On the contrary, I believe that they have done an immense deal of good to the working man, and if properly and justly worked are of great benefit to the State. But I feel sure that the possession of private savings by the individual members of a Trade. Union gives a double strength to the workman's position.
I shall he told, no doubt, that it is impossible for working men to save, and that in suggesting more thrift I am simply indulging in one of the delusions of the well-to-do as to the working classes. My answer is that I shall continue in my belief as long as so many millions a year are spent by working men in the consumption of beer and spirits, and still more in betting and other " unnecessary " amusements. I say this, not because I take the total abstainer's point of view, for I do not, nor because I think the working man should be without his pleasures and amusements. I believe that thrift is to a great extent a matter of habit and of the successful organisation of life, and that the ordinary working man might indulge reasonably in tobacco and beer, and at the same time put by a little each year. As a proof of my assertion that a man may acquire the thrift habit without an abstinence from the pleasures of life, which clearly it would be unfair to expect from him, I would point to the fact that those working-class families in whichsaving is the rule do not have such a very different standard of life and enjoyment from those in which no saving takes place. It is, as I have said, a matter of habit and method rather than any violent cutting off of all the amusements of life or the adoption of a cowardly niggardli- ness. Again, it is the experience of all those who know the working classes that families where thrift is practised are very often not the families into which large sums find their way in weekly wages. Strange as it may seem, the man with the thrift habit and 25s. a week will often he in a much better position as regards savings than the man without the thrift habit whose wages are £3 or Eit a week.
There is a story of a workman saying to his employer:—" I am a braver man than you. I dare spend my last shilling and you daren't." The story is picturesque, but I cannot help feeling that if the British working man had a little lest& courage in this respect it would be infinitely better for himself and for the country. Such courage may suit the worst kind of capitalist, because it puts the working man very much at his mercy. It is by no means to be commended by those who desire the real welfare of the workers.
I know well that you will agree with me in all this ; but you may perhaps be surprised that I have thought it necessary to bring in the question of thrift in dealing with the problems and perils of Socialism, I think, however, I can show you
that I am not writing away from my subject Some Socialists declare that thrift and saving on the part of the working man not only do no good, but are positive evils. For example, Mr. Quelch in his widely circulated lecture, "The Economics of Labour," takes up this position very strongly. "Labour," he declares, "becomes poorer the more it abstains and the more it saves. Temperance, thrift, and industry only serve to make labour an easier or more valuable prey to capital." Yet the man who writes this mischievous nonsense also declares that "the poverty of the workers is essential to Capitalism." Here, indeed, is an example of the perils of Socialism. I will never admit that the relations between Capital and Labour are those of war. Instead, they are those of co-operation and partnership. Unquestionably the absence of thrift—that is, the absence of property in the worker—does put him at a dis- advantage when Capital and Labour are bargaining as to the distribution of profits. Capital and Labour are partners, and have to settle between them how the joint profits of industry shall be distributed. Neither can get on without the other. But if one of them knows that the other dare not stand idle for more than a week at a time, the position of that other is very greatly weakened. That is why I want to see the worker possessed of a nest-egg.
Yours very sincerely, J. Sr. L. S.
Previous page
