THE ETHICS OF THE LABOR PROBLEM.

Let not ambition mock their useful toil,Their homely joys, and destiny obscure;Nor granduer hear, with a disdainful smile,The short but simple annals of the poor. -- Gray.

It is absolutely impossible to turn back the tide now running in favor of a new order of things among the laboring masses in America. Wise men will not attempt it; for they know how futile such an undertaking would be. They may give it direction, and lead it through proper channels, if they will, but to turn it back they cannot. It has gained too much headway to be shut off by any human instrumentality whatever, and the only thing now left to be done is either to confine it within proper limits, or to furnish the necessary channels of outlet. But I doubt as to whether it can be confined at all, for it seems to permeate the whole earth like the leaven did the measure of meal into which the woman hid it. Hence, to furnish suitable outlets is apparently all that can be done under the circumstances. To this end we shall direct our efforts.

It hath been said of the people that they can feel, but cannot see, and are actuated by the power of the sensibility rather than by that of knowledge or foresight. Napoleon Bonaparte seems to have entertained this idea when he said "all revolutions have their origin in the belly." If it is true that the people walk by sensibility and not by sight, it is likewise true that they are governed by the heart and not by the head. How often do we hear persons say, when speaking of some particular action, I cannot explain why I should do it, but I feel that 00052it is right. Here the act is determined by the ethical conscience--the law of God written on the heart--rather than by the metaphysical consciousness--the power of the soul to know its own acts and states.

GENERAL GRANT'S OPINION OF THE COLOREDPEOPLE, RESPECTING PUBLIC MENAND MEASURES.To what extent great persons have relied upon the feelings as true indices to both knowledge and duty, may be inferred, in a degree, from a remark made by Gen. Grant when speaking of certain things characteristic of our race. He says, "The colored people are always safe guides in their feelings respecting public men and measures." When we remember that an error in knowledge may be excusable, but that an error in feeling is always reprehensible, we can the better appreciate the force of Gen. Grant's remark in the compliment intended us.

THE NECESSITY OF A FELLOW FEELING.In order to comprehend the true inwardness of a situation one must not see it, but he must feel it as well. The argumentum ad hominum is often resorted to with good effect to convince persons when all other methods of reasoning fail. The saying, "put yourself in his place" has had magical effect upon the minds of men which have remained perfectly obdurate to the most subtle train of argument. We see them the necessity of a fellow feeling in order to persuade convince, and lead men. If we would impress others with the truthfulnes of our statements, we must ourselves have convictions respecting them. No man can be a great leader unless he, in some way, shares the feelings of those whom he aspires to lead. The command do that, repels; the entreaty let us do this attracts. In order to lift men up you must first give them the assurance of your regard 00063for them. You must compel them to believe that you feel as they do about the matter, then will they listen to your arguments and lay hold upon your words.You cannot tame the eagle,You dare not harm the dove;Remember the heart that's closed to hateWill open wide to love

It is a superficial if not false system of education which trains the intellect at the expense of the sensibility for it tends to unbalance the man and render him incapable of correct judgments. In order to the development of a full, round man the whole soul should be educated conjointly. This neglected, we may have smart men, but never great ones in the full acceptation of that term.

That the heart should be the measure of the person is clearly evidenced by the Author of every good and perfect gift when He says: "Man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart." * No disparagement of a cultured intellect is here intended, but that it should be developed puri pissu with the sensibility and the will is a lesson which this paper would inculcate.

*Samuel, xvi: 7.

Thus far I have endeavored to indicate, as nearly as possible, the light in which this subject should be viewed in order to determine the grounds upon which it must be settled.

AN ETHICO-ECONOMIC SYSTEM NEEDED.I deem it not unreasonable to infer that the labor problem of the present day cannot be solved on the old basis of supply and demand, for that is not broad enough for the requirements of the case. We must look elsewhere to find means of extrication out of the difficulties of this intricate question. Politics may furnish immediate relief but it cannot vouchsafe a permanent remedy; because it is too temporizing. Nor are the doctrines 00074laid down by the old economists equal to the necessities of the situation, as is manifested by the fact that the people demand a new and better system.

That a man should be able to earn only a bare living, is incompatible with the genius of our times; that he ought to be able to earn a comfortable living is agreeable to both common sense and justice. That this cannot be accomplish through our present economic system is shown by the suffering of the millions; that it cannot be obtained through any system which is purely materialistic in its bearing will be admitted upon reflection. It becomes necessary then to inject a new element into the discussion of this problem; one not founded upon past experience; for that is impossible under the circumstances, as history furnishes no parallel example. It must be a prior; we must resort to reason and common sense to supply the deficiency and build up a system of our own upon the broad foundation of justice and benevolence. We call it the Ethico-Economic System because it is founded upon good conscience, and has for its purpose the accomplishment of those ends in the science of economics which are good, noble, wise and right because they are good. A system comprehensive enough to include all classes and conditions of men, in the multitudinous and varied and phases of life; and one that should be recognized by our statesmen in their attempt to deal with the rights of the laboring people.

That a man is entitled to the fruits of his labor is conceded without argument, that he ought to be secure in the enjoyment of them will be admitted as natural to the dictates of justice. And yet this is the very thing for which the laboring men are contending at the present day; and for which they have fought through many long and weary years.

00085

"See yonder poor o'er labored wight,So abject, mean, and vileWho begs a brother of the earthTo give him leave to toil;And see his lordly, fellow-wormThe poor petition spurn,Unmindful though a weeping wife,And helpless offspring mourn."

Not only does he beg leave to toil, but to toil that he may live. He offers himself for hire at living wages, but his "lordly fellow-worm" refuses him on the ground that he can hire men at a lower rate of compensation.

Thus the poor man is compelled to accept the terms of the capitalist, or to go hungry about our streets. This is but a practical application of the maxim that wages depend upon supply and demand. A system which tends to grind the workman down to the minimum of a bare living; for when there is an adequate supply of laborers, wages generally remain just above the starvation point. This, I believe, is a universal truth.

There are some who hold that wages are not regulated by supply and demand, notably among whom is Mr. W. T. Thornton, an English economist, who says: "The price of labor is determined, not by supply and demand, which never determined the price of anything; nor yet by competition, which generally determines the price of everything else, but by a combination among the masters."

The question naturally suggests itself what should be the criterion by which to determine what ought to be the amount of wages in any given case? I am of the opinion that the question has never before been presented in this shape, hence never answered. It has been customary to discuss wages from the selfish standpoint of material interest, without taking into account the idea of moral good. Interest has been substituted for right, and the 00096question has always been how much money will it bring me, instead of being how much good will it confer upon the community.

Until men attain to a higher plane of treating this subject they will never get rid of the phantoms of outraged justice, which their groveling natures make possible. These will ever present themselves as reminders of what ought to be done.

Whatsoever is right because it is good, should in my opinion form the basis for the measurement of wages in every given case. It should likewise be the criterion for the whole conduct of human affairs. Being capable of universal application its practicability is beyond question, and its failure of employment does not arise from any lack of utility, but from the low state into which society has fallen. The Ishmaelitish feeling of "every man for himself and devil take the hindermost" is driving the state to the verge of ruin!

At bottom of every strike, at bottom of every boycott, at bottom of every up-rising of the masses is the question of wages! And yet it is an open question, because men have not attempted to adjust it upon the broad basis of right and justice.

As long as the world shall last, "as long as life has woes;" economists will continue to bestow thought upon the subject of labor and capital; for these are permanent elements in the science of economy, and the sources from which comes the wage-fund. I am aware of the fact that there is a great difference of opinion among the writers on the subject of Political Economy respecting the wage-fund, so-called. Some seem to regard it as being derived from capital, while others consider it as flowing directly from labor. * Ordinarily speaking circumstances determine whether it is taken from the one or the other, but in the strict economic sense, it must necessarily come from labor, whether directly or 00107indirectly. When it is remembered that capital is but the produce of past labor saved which enters into new production, the truthfulness of this assertion ought to be apparent. But for fear of misapprehension on the part of some for whose benefit this paper is intended, we reduce our statement to the form of a syllogism, thus:Wages are derived from capital,Capital is derived from labor;therefore wages are derived from labor. Viewed in any light, the truth remains that wages are always derivable from labors. This is so whether we take it through the indirect channel of past labor saved, or directly from present labor.

*Progress and Poverty, by Henry George, p, 28.

The importance of treating labor and capital as allies' and not enemies is too frequently looked by partisans on both sides. They seem to forget that these are means which are good only as they are useful, and conduce to the end of human happiness. Being so considered, we shall treat them as so much material to be employed in making the earth a fit habitation for man.

Side by side with the idea of wonderful creature! should go the cognate idea of wonderful creator! And yet men are prone to regard with favor the thing created, without once thinking of the creator. This is precisely the case with respect to capital and labor: the former being the produce while the latter, the producer. We agree with Ferdinand Lassalle, the father of modern socialism in Germany, that it is an ill conceived notion of economy which allows capital to harness and drive capital. Nothing but the materialistic tendency of our times would permit such a condition to exist. High intellectuality may treat it with complacency, but good conscience would not tolerate it for a moment.

Again, labor is the inheritance of the masses, while capital is the possession of the few, and still through a false education of the people the few with capital control 00118the many without it. Is this not true when we contemplate the personnel of our National Congress, where it is difficult to find a solitary man who is dependent upon his own labor for subsistence? Does it not argue a low moral tone of society where the pre-requisite of a representative in Congress depends upon the size of his purse, instead of upon his patriotism, his brain and moral excellence? Were we to analyze the forces which operate to control legislation in America, I am satisfied we would find that they are not always prompted by the feeling of the greatest good for the greatest number, but by selfish and partisan interests. This condition of affairs is made possible only from the fact that our national representatives are answerable to the party, and not to the people. The truth is the people have no representatives in Congress. The Republican and Democratic parties have representatives there, but the people have none. It is impossible to get impartial legislation respecting the interests of the masses, although that is the ostensible purpose for which Congress exists.

I repeat that labor and capital should be treated as allies and not as enemies, but deprecate the tyrannical use of it.

THE CREDIT SYSTEM.There has grown up in the United States as insidious force of gigantic proportions, deluding the ignorant and ensnaring the unguarded. I refer to what is known in financial circles as the Credit System: the great instrumentality through which a small number of men in Wall Street are enabled to control the finances of America, and dictate the terms of compensation for all classes of labor. The existence of such a state of affairs can be accounted for on no other basis than the supposition that the people are indifferent as to the morals of pecuniary transactions. The society that regards 00129with favor high handed speculations, and encourages the watering of stock by courting the graces of persons engaged in such operations, is not a conservator of national integrity nor a safe guide to public conscience. While credit in its legitimate nature is essential to the facility of trade, it by no means follows that legitimate trade would suffer from the withdrawal of spurious credit, but on the contrary would reap the fruits now wasted in bizarre speculation. To much stress cannot be placed upon the admonition:"Ever thy credit keep, 'tis quickly gone--Being got by many actions, lost by one."

Again, the credit system fosters monopolies; for it affords the means whereby the wreath of the country may be concentrated into the hands of a few speculators and money sharks. These may build railroads, and stimulate navigation, but they give no adequate return to society for the loss of its control over institutions which should exist for the sole good of the people

There still remains another aspect of this question more pernicious in its effects than any I have mentioned. It is a species of slavery handed down from past generations, and a chain by which our present social condition is connected with a former state of chattel servitude. It begets hope which never ripens into fruition; it makes promises which are never redeemed. When squalid poverty stares us madly in the face, then abject despair lays hold upon our frame, and we are driven to desperation! If acts of violence are committed under such circumstances the law punishes the perpetrators of them, but allows the rascals who control the causes leading thereto to go "scott free." This shows the superficiality of our legislation respecting the cure of evil growing out of a false system of social economy. The remedy lies back of legal enactments. It rests in the consciousness of the existence of unnecessary suffering.

001310

THE TARIFF.A careful study of the causes affecting the labor problem reveals the fact that it is only necessary to mention the production of wealth, in order to discuss its distribution; for it is with the distribution of wealth we have to deal. We must also consider the circumstances most favorable to the accomplishment of our purpose. If we go back to first principles, we find everything in a state of nature free to the use of man. It is only through the advance of civilization that his natural rights give place to his social relations. The tax upon the distribution of commodities, known to political economy as tariff arises, (1.) from the congregation of persons into large cities, and the employment of artificial appliances in transmutation of the bounties of nature. (2.) for the purpose of increasing the revenue of the government. When it is intended to stimulate the home market by keeping on foreign competition we designate it as protective tariff. Some of our statesmen would make this a panacea for all our social woes. But when it is remembered that this positively hinders the distribution of wealth, by placing restrictions upon its circulation, laboring men should dismiss it as hostile to their cause.

The increase of wages to a certain class of workmen, made possible by a protective tariff, is more than countervailed by the fact that their cost of living, in consequence of which, is increased out of proportion to the ratio of their wages. They must either consume commodities of home production, made dear on account of restrictions placed upon importation they must consume articles of foreign production, paying in addition to the cost price the rate of transportation and duty. Twist itr as we may the truth remains that the burdens growing out of the inhibition upon a free distribution of wealth fall most heavily upon those who are compelled 001411to toil for daily bread. I know that there are many who will take issue with me on this statement: let me assure them that it is not made without a thorough examination of all the causes which contribute to the above mentioned effect.

Again, there are some who avow that they have no new nostrums to offer in the solution of the labor problem. I would suggest that they modestly refrain from discussing the subject, as they admit their inability to deal with it to advantage. The cry of protection will neither feed hungry babies, nor supply the wants of destitute communities; neither will these demands be satisfied by simply sounding the tocsin of free trade; something more substantial is required. It must come in the shape of a radical reform in the laws of distribution.

THE PROPER USE OF THE TERM, PROTECTION.We are accustomed to regard the term protection as being capable of no other application, than the one given to it by partisan politicians, when speaking of a discrimination in favor of home industries, made possible through the agency of restrictive tariffs. But when considered in a philosophical and statesmanlike sense, we find that the word is susceptile of a broader significance. If we consider men as being of more importance than goods, we must regard their safety as paramount to the security of the latter: hence, the immunity of American citizens from insult and injury, wherever placed by destiny, or called by duty, should occupy the first place under any system of protection.

THE LAND QUESTION: ITS TITLE AND USUFRUCT.Any discussion of the labor problem without considering the LAND QUESTION: ITS TITLE AND USUFRUCT would be incomplete and abortive. We have been so long accustomed to regard the title of land as vesting in the individual 001512instead of the state, that it is difficult to overcome the errors of our early training respecting this important subject, or to disabuse our minds of fallacies transmitted from generation to generation in regard to it. Were it possible to divest ourselves of all predispositions and prejudices on the subject, we would then be prepared to test the question through the philosophy of reasoning, and might arrive at a very different conclusion from the one which now obtains. While there is much fault finding with the confiscation therioes of Mr. Henry George, we have it upon the good authority of John Stuart Mill that no exclusive right of land should be permitted in any individual, which cannot be shown to be productive of good to the community.

"The principle of individual ownership in land is only a necessary evil; it becomes an injustice when carried to any point to which the compensating good does not follow." *

*Mill's Political Economy, p, 28.

There seems to little or no disposition, on this side of the waters, to combat the doctrines of Mill, because, I suppose, he did not attempt to put them into practice. But with the writings of Henry George the case is far different; every inch of the ground covered by him is hotly contested, and economists vie with each other in the endeavor to make him appear to disadvantage.

How well they have succeeded may be inferred from the eeormons sale, within the last six months, of his boot entitled Progress and Poverty

It is impossible to think of municipal government, without associating with it the idea of possession of land; for upon this depends its existence. This is not necessary, however, when contemplating the entity of man in society: he may or he may not hold land in his individual right, but the state is compelled to do so in order to maintain her sovereignty. A government without the power of eminent domain would be no government 001613at all, in any justifiable use of that term; for it would be lacking in a fundamental and necessary element of supremacy. Accepting the doctrine of eminent domain, it follows that the superior title of all landed property vests in the state, and in legal parlance, the state stands seised to the use of the individual: hence, we have the title in the government, but the usufruct in the people.

CONCLUSION.When we consider the purposes for which governments are instituted among men; when we remember the poverty and wretchedness of the millions; when we take a comprehensive review of the whole field of the science of social economics; when we consider that higher than party; higher than creed; higher than all other earthly concerns is the well being of man in society; when we behold the vast array of ten thousand men in more than a thousand cities of the republic, knocking at the portals of bloated corporations, demanding fair treatment under the pain of violence; when we remember that we are now sleeping, as it were, upon the crater of a social volcano, threatening to burst forth at any moment with consequences more direful than the horrors of the French Revolution, is it not high time that we were aroused to a true sense of the situation, and alive to the importance of furnishing a complete and satisfactory solution to the difficulties of the labor problem? This cannot be accomplished through the instrumentality of economics proper without being re-inforced by ethics.

Washington, D.C., March, 1, 1887.