MR. LLOYD GEORGE AND LABOUR.
Fro THE EDITOR OF THE " SPF.CTATOR."] SIR,—I am not disappointed in the anticipation I formed that my letter would result in further bitter invective against Trade Unionism and the Labour Party. The privileged classes and capitalists, in their last attempt to keep the workman in his Place, are not above launching misstatements of the facts and suppression of the truth. You, Sir, know this well enough from the attitude of the compositors on many of the big dailies in the last week of the railway strike. Everything is done deliberately to poison the minds of the middle class against the workmen. Take nationalisation. Their description of it coincides in no point with that defined by the workers themselves. The British workman knows what lie wants. He asks . for a sufficient wage to enable him to live in decency and bring up his family as it should be, and a little over to indulge in a few pleasures, and, by the shortening of the hours of labour, time for self-improvement and culture. To attain their desires they have formed Trade Unions and appointed their leaders, to whom they can point with pride for their freedom from corruption. Whether you agree or not with their politics, you cannot deny the ability and earnestness of such men as Clynes, Hodges, Brace, MacDonald, Snowden, Barnes, Roberts, Colonel John Ward, Bob Smillie, Robert Williams, Tom Mann, and Bevin, the dockers' K.C., and a host more. It would be easy to choose a dozen of the leaders who would put to shame half the members of the accu- mulated Cabinets of the past fifty years in knowledge and ability.
I have not "got the wind up," nor has Labour, but if you want to know who has, ask those in high places. Labour knows well it is coming into its own, and more rapidly than the classes imagine. Labour is not out for robbery, but is determined that nothing shall stand in the way of its just demands.
Mr. Barnes-Austin may allege his condemnation is directed against the Independent Labour Party, but the general tone of his two letters is distinctly antagonistic to the working man. I wish he would not import Bolshevism into the argument, for there are two opinions with regard to this, and no one can yet
decide which is the right. As war is the last argument of nations, so is direct action the last argument of Labour with Capitalism, and, when the class which brings about war—the workers have never done so—finally buries the hatchet and settles the world's disputes in open congress, governed by the sense of justice and right, its example will no doubt be followed by the workers. 'Tis sad that working men have been *ringing increase after increase of wages from their dis- tracted country, but the main fact remains that wages do not keep up with the rise in prices. Was it Mr. Boner Law who, a few months ago, said that the Trade Unionists were so patriotic that they made no demand for an increase in wages until the cost of living had risen by 75 per cent. ?
In reply to the many allegations in Mr. Barnes-Austin's third
paragraph, let me state that Labour demands reduction in the cost of living, and only when that is not granted asks for more wages. Increase in wages has not been the cause of the increase in prices, for the former has always followed the latter. It inveighs against the blockade of the German population from humanitarian principles and the knowledge that such action only results in cruelty, misery, and hatred, and is not in keep- ing with Christ's teaching to love one another. Its cry against secret diplomacy is sensible, vide the mess the Peace Conference is making of affairs; but, by the way, is Lloyd George at last being influenced by the warnings of Professor Keynes ? There was no lightning strike and no threat of one, so let us kill that lie once and for all. Lloyd George himself said he knew all about it and was preparing and arming for it in the beginning of last year.
Mr. John Murray, member of that long respected firm in
Albemarle Street, has quite unknowingly overlooked the great work achieved by John Burns at the Local Government Board. I think I am right in saying that his nine years' labours in reducing infant mortality, combating tuberculosis, promoting town planning and housing, and above all his rigid insistence on honest administration were a model for all Ministers in the spheres of economy, probity. and efficiency, to which the Spec- tator has often testified. What a misfortune it is that his Draconian methods are for the time being lost to his country; but not for long, let us hope, for such service to the State fills a larger measure than any of those mentioned by Mr. Murray. Yet John Burns was a working man and the first to enter it Cabinet, and, don't forget it, led the great dock strike, and won the docker his tanner which he has changed into n Perhaps Mr. Murray has a regard for Mr. H. G. Wells, who states that "teachers are treated meanly, overworked, under- paid, and insufficiently respected," and these are they who bring up our childre.n, but now they have adopted Trade Unionism.
To my mind this tirade against Trade Unionism is ridiculous, seeing that the oldest Trade Unions are those of medicine, law, and architecture. Are these entitled to a share of the vitupera- tion ? The Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Queensland State Government Insurance, and the Commonwealth Govern- ment line of steamers—vide the report of the meeting of the P. and 0. Steam Navigation Company on December 11th, 1919— are surely evidences of success in nationalization, and what must not be forgotten is the successful and profitable owner- ship by Municipalities, in the United Kingdom, of gas, electric light, and tramway undertakings.—I am, Sir, &c.,
W. A. DANIEL
10 Grove Mansions, Clapham Common, S.W. 4.
[Having given Mr. Daniel the opportunity to reply—and incidentally to meet some charges which, so far as we know, were 'never made against Labour—we cannot continue the discussion aroused by his letter.—Ea. Spectator.]
Previous page
