294 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



children ; and is also tending in a marked degree to do away with the 

 heretofore general practice of suspending labor on Sundays.* 



To meet this condition or tendency of affairs, two lines of policy 

 have commended themselves to the governments of many countries — 

 especially in Continental Europe — as remedial and easy of execution, 

 namely ; to seek to diversify and increase the home demand for the 

 products of domestic industry on the one hand, and to obtain new and 

 larger markets in foreign countries for their surplus productions on the 

 other. And the^rs^ of these results it has been sought to accomplish 

 by restricting or prohibiting, through import (tarifiF) duties, the im- 

 portation and competitive sale in their respective markets of the sur- 

 plus products of other nations ; and the second, by offering bounties 

 on exports, or on the construction and multiplied use of vessels for 

 employment in foreign commerce. In the pressing necessity for find- 

 ing new and (if possible) exclusive markets for increasing machinery 

 jjroducts, and for commodities whose production has been artificially 

 stimulated, is undoubtedly also to be found the clue to the policy 

 which within recent years has mainly prompted Germany, France, 

 Belgium, Italy, and Spain to seek to obtain new territorial possessions 

 in Eastern and Central Africa, Southeastern Asia, and in New Guinea 

 and other islands of Polynesia. 



The commercial policy of Russia under such circumstances must, 



* The results of an extensive inquiry recently instituted by the British Government in 

 respect to Sunday labor in Germany (and comprising with the evidence taken three large 

 volumes) shows, that in Westphalia, Ehineland, Wurtcniberg, Baden, Alsace, and Bruns- 

 wick Sunday work is only enforced where necessary. Different reports come, however, 

 from Saxony, one stating that " Sunday labor has become usual in most factories and 

 workshops solely under the stress of competition, so that the hours of divine service are 

 now alone excluded, and these only from absolute necessity." Another report says, that 

 Sunday labor has become "a principle with many employers," while in a number of cases 

 the journeyman or operative seeking an engagement must bind himself to work on Sun- 

 day, and " if the workman refused to work on Sunday, reprisals on the part of the em- 

 ployer would be the inevitable result, and this is so, even in spite of the legal restriction 

 of work on Sundays and festivals." " On the whole," says the " London Economist," 

 " the evidence " (presented in the published report of the Government inquiry) " is un- 

 favorable to the principle of Sunday labor, though it is largely carried on — in all proba- 

 bility more so than is admitted, for in innumerable cases it is admitted that it is hard to 

 get at the real state of affairs. Nevertheless, there is general disinclination against put- 

 ting the principle of no Sunday work into practice where the objectionable system has 

 obtained a footing. On the part of large industrial concerns, it is said that want of con- 

 tinuity would often be a cause of serious loss, while without Sunday labor repairs could 

 never be carried out, even night-work being no adequate substitute. The number of 

 associations which recommend the absolute prohibition of Sunday labor is small in pro- 

 portion to those which advocate partial prohibition. The question of Sunday labor is one 

 of considerable interest for England, for it is unquestionable that, among the causes of 

 Germany's ability to compete with England as a mercantile and industrial country, the 

 fact that here more hours are worked for less money is not the least important. The 

 prohibition of Sunday labor would, of course, mean increased cost of production; and 

 every increase in the cost of production will render it more difficult for Germany to out- 

 rival older manufacturing countries in the markets of the world." 



