THE NEED FOR CHEAP MACHINERY.
AT the Paris Exhibition, among the triumphs of mechanical ingenuity which crowd the buildings one great and damaging defect is in evidence Almost without exception the, machines,. of all kinds, are too dear. The costliness of -what is now almost a necessary of life is in evidence everywhere, from autocars to the simplest imple-1 ments needed for modern agriculture. The makers assert, that Cheap machinery cannot be made. It is very doubtful,, if the_ truth .were known, whether the greater number of. masters or men interested in its production are really desirous of making it. In France, the masters prefer to sell a few machines dear rather than many at.a lower price. Trade-Union rules in England, such as those which restrict the number of hours -during which a man may work a "tool" for making machinery, or limit his output, show that something of the same spirit exists in many branches of the industry in this country. Add to this the dislike of the masters generally to turning out anything but the hest work—a highly creditable desire, but-one which often leads to the rejection of the very, notion of making a cheap article; which is good enough for its purpose, though not the- best which can be made—and we find the nucleus of a considerable body of opposition to one of the great and pressing needs of the day. The difficult); is, evidently beyond the financial capacity of modern mechanical manufacturers. The result has been that while material of most kinds remains cheap and becomes cheaper, the machinery to convert 'it to use remains dear, and lessens the benefit of cheap raw material. High wages are the cause urged: most often; among many others; for the prohibitive price of mechanical aPpliances. We believe this cannot be main- tained as the reason. Good workmen get high pay in other callings than that of the mechanic, and produce vast . quantities of excellent work at a low price. The Oldham cotton spinners are among the most flourishing -working men in England. Their wages are high, their houses good, their amusements *planned on a great and expensive scale. But though the 'Oldham spinners earn a high wage, is the article theymanufacttue other than,cheap ? It is well known that it is ao_inexpensive that. the poorest and most frugal nations on earth buy it. Recently the natives of parts of Central -Africa-where cotton is indigenous ceased to growit, or-to make the cloth. It was cheaper to buy what was made by the highly-paid operatives of Lancashire. Clearly, high wages do notnecessarily mean that-the article produced by the dear workman must itself be dear. On the contrary, his_value and his pay ought to depend largely upon his ability to ,produce good things which can be sold cheap.
As the cotton operative works by means of machinery, we must assume that these particular machines are cheap ; else that the organisation of the mills is very much better than the organisation of machine shops. The latter is highly probable. Cotton spinning is an older business than machine making, and has had more brains spent for a longer space of years on the business side of the work. A number of other trades might be cited to show that high wages do not neces- sarily mean a dear product. But the reason for the dearness of machinery clearly lies elsewhere. It is not because there is no demand for it. On the contrary, in the one or two instances in which a useful machine has been made cheaply it is nearly always in demand and brings profit to the able manufacturers, and often results not only in benefit to tens of thousands of purchasers, but in creating new centres of industry. Mowing machines and sewing machines, mainly for domestic use, might be quoted as instances,—though we are far from regarding either as coming up to the standard of really cheap machinery. There is, in fact, only one machine which is made really cheap and good,—the watch. But the watch is a highly valuable and instructive instance; so by all means let us make the most of it. All the arguments by which manufacturers say you cannot, will not, and shall not have a cheap self-binding reaper, or a cheap steam digger, or a fifty-guinea autocar, or engines for a launch that shall not cost more than if they were cast in silver, were used against the men who said they could make cheap watches. They knew better, organised their work, had cheap tools to make their watch machinery, and very soon turned out by the hundred thousand a most delicate machine, adjusted to fractions of a second, cheap, fairly durable, and good enough. Fifty years ago a keyless stop-watch in Which the parts of seconds could be measured, and the hands stopped quickly enough to time the flight of a bird, would have cost not less than 230. To-day one can be bought for El. It is true that the case is gun-metal. But the machine is good enough for use. And it costs one-thirtieth of what it did fifty years ago. That is the kind of thing we mean when we speak of cheap machinery. A case in which the same treatment might yield enormous results to-day is that of the self-binding reaper. The first reaping machine cost £70. The most modern self- binder now costs about £35. That is a reduction of one-half since the invention appeared. Practically every one who farms would buy a reaper, often many reapers, if they were cheap. But the price, considering all things, is simply extravagant. The raw material for them, as for most machinery, is very in- expensive. It is wood, iron, and steel. In the ingot and the plank probably the whole could be bought for a couple of sovereigns. With fifteen times the cost of the material added, can we can this a cheap machine? If it were it would cost about £8 or 210. Yet that would be only a reduction to about one- quarter of the present price. The "working" watch has been reduced to one-thirtieth. But supposing a reduction all round to one-quarter of the present price, let us say for farm- ing machinery, or for locomotives on roads, effected solely by brains and organisation, as was the reduction in the price of the watch. What a decrease in the labour bills and profit to the farmer would result! It might mean the re-establishment of English agriculture, and an era of prosperity like that introduced by steam and coal sixty years ago.
A contributing cause of the expense of making machinery is the costliness of "the machines which make machines." These are known as "tools," and the makers are "tool- makers." The implements are mainly different kinds of lathes, and implements for planing, boring, and cutting metal. Their general characteristic is to do accurate work very slowly, and to turn out very little of it. Their other feature is their price, which makes economical produc- tion by their means simply impossible. From 2200 to 21,000 is the range of prices for tools" on a list now lying before the writer. The work turned out is perfect. But there is a great tendency to extravagance of finish in non-essentials in the results. What is wanted is a tool which can cut steel like wood, and do it cheaply. It is said that at Paris one which fulfilled the first condition was ex- hArited. It is noted in nearly all machine-making that there is a luxury of finish, a downright wastefulness of strength, polish, and even of what the makers consider ornamental, which is not practical. Almost the earliest machine in which educated Englishmen took any interest was the sporting gun. It was long before any respectable gun.- maker would condescend to do what the Belgians of Liege, and later the manufacturers of Birmingham, contrived to do, to turn out a quite serviceable gun for £6 instead of 240. When a future Gladstone arises to revise our system of rating, to readjust burdens, and, where possible, to remove mis- chievous taxes, he may be trusted to give early attention to the impost, recent in date, but antiquated in spirit, which taxes the machinery which makes machines. The rating of machinery in general taxes it as if it were a house or a field. The owner pays a fixed assessment on his "plant," and pays again in the form of Income-tax on the profits he makes. In theory, he deducts the cost ef rates on his machinery from his profits, and so pays less Income-tax. But the payment of the rates comes before the return of profits, and whether he makes profits or not, this tax has to be paid, and the same happens whether he has work for the machinery or whether he can get no orders. A fair parallel would be a tax or rate levied on a writer's brains, payable before he made profits by them, and irrespective of whether he could find any one to publish his books. Leaving illustration and going to facts, the tax- ing of many forms of machinery is almost as mischievous to the agricultural community as a tax on corn or fruit trees. In Turkey no one will increase his flock of goats, or plant new walnut trees, or even start a bee-farm, because he knows that each cow, tree, or hive will instantly be rated and taxed. In England no farmer can buy a steel plough, or a chaff- cutter, or a self-binding reaping machine, much less a steam digger or a motor van, without paying the heavy indirect tax levied on the "tools "—lathes, planing machines, slot-cutters, drills, and all the rest—which made them. If he is progres- sive, and would like to fit up his dairy with steam gear to separate his milk and make butter, he is instantly met with a demand for direct taxation on fixed machinery. Like the Turkish peasant, the English machine-maker hesitates to buy a new "tool," because it involves the yearly rating expen- diture besides its own heavy cost. Whatever can be said for rating machinery which deals directly with raw material for manufacture into cotton, cloth, beer, or flour, the taxing of machinery meant to produce the instruments of production is almost equivalent to taxing the produce itself, and so dis- couraging industry. It matters little whether the cow is taxed which gives the milk, or the machine which makes the butter, -whether the impost is on corn in the sack, or on the manufacture of the steam plough which prepares the land. This particular check to the cheap production of agricultural machines is peculiarly objectionable from another point of view. The machines are mainly manufactured in towns. They are bought and paid for by dwellers in the country, who are practically paying the rate levied for the benefit of the town.
Previous page
