TRADE-UNIONS 7 



are based on a misconception of our rules ; we do not discourage 

 excellence ; we do not oppose machinery ; we are not governed 

 by democrats ; we no more injure trade by refusing to work for 

 less than 36s. per week than a capitalist injures trade by refusing 

 to invest his money for less than 10 per cent. The unions are 

 popular even among non-members, and are recognised by the 

 whole working class of the country as acting in their interests, 

 and we so love our unions that we will emigrate or starve rather 

 than abandon them. We admit that the great power given by 

 unions has been abused by the ignorant in certain trades ; we 

 admit that even the best unions have from time to time made 

 mistakes, and that the worst have incited men to murder and 

 outrage ; we will second every endeavour to prevent the recur- 

 rence of such crimes, but we contend that such great power has 

 never yet been wielded by single men or by large bodies with 

 less abuse of that power ; we claim to have our rights recognised 

 by law ; we will cheerfully submit to those restrictions of our 

 power which are required for the general good, but if you 

 determine on abolition we will use our whole political power to 

 reverse your decision.' 



The answer reads tamely after the accusation. Here and 

 there it involves direct contradiction as to facts. It does not 

 meet the case as to limiting the number of competitors, and it 

 could only be honestly delivered by members of the best unions ; 

 but before examining any of the minor contradictions, we must 

 endeavour to settle the first question at issue, Can or cannot 

 unions raise wages ? This really is a fundamental question. If 

 unions cannot raise wages, it is futile to discuss whether they 

 should be permitted to try ; they certainly cause great annoy- 

 ance and loss by their endeavours, and also suffer much them- 

 selves ; if they cannot raise wages, neither can they obtain other 

 indirect benefits, such as shorter hours, equivalent to increased 

 pay. The one argument in favour of permitting combinations 

 of workmen to bargain with their employers is that these 

 combinations do enable men to make a more advantageous 

 bargain with the capitalist. If this be not true, the policy 

 of allowing an apparent but unreal privilege would be dis- 

 honest to the workman and unjust to the capitalist. It could 

 only be palliated on the ground that we dare not interfere with 



