ENGLISH AND FOREIGN WORKING MEN.
IF any one desires to re-establish his faith in the English working man, he has only to watch him when he ("tomes into direct comparison with his Continental brethren. There has been an excellent opportunity for doing this during the past week. The International Miners' Confer- ence has been in session in Brussels, and during the de- bates, the English delegates have invariably shown how large a share of capacity and intelligence they possess when compared with the foreign miners. Whatever pro- posals have been reasonable and practical have come from the English miners ; whatever have been windy, absurd, and impossible, from their Continental colleagues,—with the exception of a resolution in favour of a universal strike, which was made by a Scotchman. Take, for example, the attitude of the English and foreign dele- gates respectively in regard to the arrest and expulsion of two French delegates on the charge of having excited French miners to acts of outrage against Belgian miners who went to work in France. The Conference was at first inclined to leave Brussels as an act of protest, but the English vote was cast dead against the proposal. The Englishmen argued that to do that would simply be to play into the hands of the Belgian Government. Besides, who could guarantee that if they adjourned to France the French Government would not also interfere with them P The English delegates were in favour, that is, of doing what they had assembled to do, not of making rhetorical protests that would lead to nothing. This same businesslike spirit was shown in the course of the discussions. Whether they argued for or against legislative interference with the hours of labour, the English delegates came to close quarters with the question, and argued it as practical men. The foreign delegates, however, for the most part dealt in abstractions and un- realities. They were far more eager to lash the capitalist classes and the Governments than to suggest means for 'meeting acknowledged inconveniences. The chief event of the Conference was the discussion of a resolution in favour of a legal eight-hours day from bank to bank, proposed by Mr. Baily, of Nottingham. Mr. Bally con- tended that it was a misrepresentation to say that the Trades-Unions could obtain an eight-hours day by volun- tary action, and congratulated the miners on the fact that Parliament had affirmed the principle of a legal eight-hours ,dav by 79 votes. Mr. Boyle, a Northumberland miner, inoved the following amendment :—" That this Congress, recognising the great diversity in the natural conditions existing in the several nations represented, is of opinion that it is undesirable to delegate to Parliament or Legisla- ture the power or right to fix the hours that adults shall labour in the mines, but would strongly urge on every nation and district to embrace every opportunity afforded them to reduce their working hours as far as may be practical without injuring themselves." Mr. Boyle argued the matter with great good sense. He pointed out first that Parliament ought not to be employed to do work which the labour organisations could quite well do for them- selves. "Their organisations," he said, "would soon fall to pieces if they got into the habit of looking to Parliament for the settlement of their grievances. Much depended fan local conditions, and they could not be equally favourable where coil was exceptionally difficult to get. Some hundred thousand English miners had signed them- selves out of the Employers' Liability Act, and factory inspectors found that youths were working beyond the hours fixed by law. Would it not be more logical to carry out in practice existing laws before asking for more laws ? If Parliament was to fix the hours of labour, why should it not also limit the rate of wages ?" The excellent sense contained in these remarks was, we trust, not altogether lost on the foreign delegates. The speeches made by their leaders showed, however, how strongly im- planted in the Continental mind is the belief in State action. There are, of course, plenty of thick-and-thin advocates of legal restrictions upon working-hours in England ; but they never take the position of abstract certainty occupied by the French delegate, M. Ba.sly. He declared that the supporters of the amendment by their opposition to legislation had shown themselves to be either "Anarchists or selfish individuals who, because they worked only seven hours, did not care if the Belgians con- tinued to work twelve hours." The charge of Anarchism is specially noteworthy. The man who could resent the notion of a law interfering with hours of labour was clearly against all law. It was the business of the law to regulate men's lives, and without such regulation the State would sink into a condition of anarchy. It was characteristic, too, that this plea for legislative tyranny should come from France,—the country which, in spite of Republican institu- tions, still tolerates more supervision and regulation than any other in the world. The Austrian demand for an eight hours day by law was not a little pathetic. Herr Binger argued that it was impossible for the Bohemian miners to get any relief from long hours except by legislation. Their organisations were far too poor and weak ; and if they tried to establish Trades-Unions, they were hunted down by the police. A Belgian Deputy showed that his desire for a legal eight-hours day came from a belief that such legis- lation would be the means of increasing wages. At present, the production of coal exceeded the demand. "The eight- hours day would reduce the production and cause a rise in wages." But even so patent a fallacy as this might have found favour with an English miner. It was the conclusion of M. Callewaert's speech that showed how wide was the gulf between the English and the foreign delegates. In order to secure an eight-hours day by law, said M. Ca,llewaert, the miners should prepare for a universal strike. That would force the hand of the Legislatures. That is a proposition which you would hardly get put seriously in England, though we regret to see that it found special favour with a Scotch delegate. Our working men have come to under- stand that they are themselves the greatest employers of labour, and that a universal strike would hurt the poor far more than it would the rich. The miners employ bakers, bootmakers, cowkeepers, carters, builders, dock labourers, and sailors to supply their daily wants ; and to induce these men to strike out of sympathy with the miners would be, indeed, to cut off one's nose to spite one's face. As long as the workman is an employer in fifty trades, and one of the employed only in one, so long will a universal strike be impossible, except as an act of suicide.
It is interesting to inquire why it is that English working men are so much more practical and reasonable, and show so much more statesmanship than those of the Continent. We believe that the answer is to be found in the fact that there has been hitherto so much less legislative interference with labour in England. English working men have enjoyed the right of combination, and have, by the exercise of that right, been able to educate themselves in the arts of stater. manship. Those on the Continent have been dependent upon Governmental action, and have therefore lost their self-reliance and their practical ability. The opinion we -have quoted from Mr. Boyle's speech is, we believe, per. fectly true. If the English workmen once take to relying upon official action, we shall see the Trades-Unions destroyed. But with the Unions will go much that is of the utmost value to the working men, and their destruc- tion will tend to make the English labourer sink, as regards political qualities, to the Continental level. The fact that the English miners at the Brussels Conference compare so favourably with the Frenchmen, Germans, and Belgians, affords yet another argument against State action. If legislative interference is going to make us exchange our Burts and Boyles for Baslys, Bingers, and Calle" aerts, we should resist to the utmost the proposal for an eight-hours day by Act of Parliament.
Previous page
