560 INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTIONS. 



Of these the best known, of which some account was given 

 50 years ago in Mill s Political Economy r , is the &quot; Maison 

 Leclaire &quot; a house-painting and decorating establishment, 

 which commenced- the profit-sharing system in 1842 and 

 developed it in various directions. Since the founder s death 

 it has continued to prosper, even at an increasing rate; so 

 that its success of late years is described as &quot; little short of 

 marvellous. A workman s share of profit in 1880 was 18 

 per cent, on his year s wages, in addition to large advantages 

 from the associated Mutual Aid and Pension Society. 



But along with a hundred or more successful profit-shar 

 ing establishments on the Continent, there have to be placed 

 the many establishments of the kind which have failed ; and 

 failures have been especially common in England. 



Among defects of the system which Mr. Halsey, manager 

 of certain Mining Machinery Works in Canada, points out, 

 before describing a system of his own, are these: 1. Profit 

 in many cases results from inventions, improvements, econo 

 mies, with which the workman has nothing to do, and if he 

 is given a share of it, this, not being due in any way to his 

 labour, is a gift. 2. A share of the total profit, when divided 

 among all the workmen, gives to one more, and another less, 

 than he deserves; since in ability and diligence they are 

 unequal. 3. The reward for extra labour and care is dis 

 tant, even when the division is annually made, and still more 

 when the employes share is invested. 4. There cannot 

 rightly be profit-sharing unless there is also loss-sharing, 

 and any arrangement under which the worker had to sur 

 render back part of his wages would evidently never be tol 

 erated, even if practicable. 5. Inevitably there must be 

 more or less distrust on the part of the employes. Even were 

 they allowed to see the books they could not understand 

 them, and they must feel that they are in the hands of their 

 employers, who may so represent matters that they do not 

 get the promised shares: they may have been led to work 

 harder and then get no adequate returns. 



