LABOUR 261 



which on occasions overshoots its mark, so reminding one of the 

 Irishman's saying, that " one man is as good as another — and a 

 great deal better, too." In passionate fighting it is not always easy 

 to stop at the right point. The whilom " bottom dog " is not 

 content with attaining equality. For a time, at any rate, he makes 

 it his ambition to be " top dog " in his turn. In the present case, 

 as observed, he has grievances— to a great extent, it is true, now 

 only remembered, but with the sting still left in the sore and 

 resented. 



There is, first, the grievance of " caste " rule, which is, naturally, 

 more in evidence in rural districts than in urban, because the popula- 

 tion is less dense, and different classes are there brought more 

 into contact with one another — which fact helps to accentuate the 

 sore. But it still shows itself, also, in industrial centres, suggesting 

 that, in the opinion of some people, human flesh was made of two 

 kinds of clay. ' What we dislike," so observed to me, some 

 twenty-five years ago or so — when I was among the most active of 

 inquirers into the industrial questions which led up to " Social " or 

 " Health Insurance " — one of our most leading representatives of 

 industrial labour, who has since earned the thanks of the coimtry 

 by his excellent services in high office, " is the ' six o'clock.' " 

 I think it was " six o'clock," but it may have been " seven." Evi- 

 dently what he meant was the difference made in the hour for 

 beginning the day's work, as between the manually working and 

 other classes, as if there were some indignity in it. Now I confess 

 that I can see no particular grievance in the early hour. In my 

 days of agricultural pupilage, I myself have had for about two 

 years to get up of a morning regularly at half-past three, and I 

 did not feel in the least degraded by it. It was the particular class 

 of work that I was engaged upon which demanded such early rising. 

 Later in my life, for a time, I had to turn night into day and retire 

 to rest at a later hour than that at which, as a farm pupil, I had been 

 in the habit of setting to work. I cannot say that I particularly 

 liked either extreme. But it never occurred to me that there might 

 be anything derogatory or degrading in it. But what, in the opinion 

 of my interlocutor, appeared to call for resentment was the marking 

 off of different hours, not for different occupations, but for different 

 classes. And it is the invidious distinction so made which not 

 unnaturally rankled in my interlocutor's mind, a distinction 

 branding an in itself honourable occupation as " service." Now 

 the idea of " service " in labour has long since been cast aside in 

 favour of that of free " contract," as between equal parties. In 



