Leading Articles in the Reviews. 



199 



THE LONDON PORT STRIKE. 



Mr. Harold Spender, in the Contemporary Review 

 ir August, discusses the London Port strike. He does 

 jt spare the masters. He says : — 



The fault of the East London employer has, froni the 

 rginning, belonged to the same class of error that beset the 

 ive-owner of the Southern States of America. He is non- 

 aping the inevitable harvest. The typical East London river- 

 Je employer — I exclude, of course, exceptional cases of 

 isdom and benevolence — has, for the last half-century, claimed 

 i have the use of labour without being responsible for it. His 

 etliud has been to draw from an indefinite reserve without 

 iher paying or feeding that reserve in limes of unemployment. 

 is habit has been to enjoy his profits in peace and security 

 ithout sharing in the distress and misery caused by his 

 responsibility. The typical East End riverside employer 

 aves his people to stew in their juice, and lives himself in 

 jalthicr and happier surroundings elsewhere. 

 .As a result, the wage of this casualised folk has to 

 e supplemented out of the rates. The high rates in 

 le East End show how heavy a toll society has to pay 

 )r the riverside employer attracting large masses of 

 norganised casual labour. In the month of June three 

 lillions sterling were lost in re-exports alone ; probably 

 nother million represents the loss of wages in the 

 ime month ; the real loss on trade was probably 

 tiother three millions. Thus even in this struggle 

 lone the Port of London has lost as much as it would 

 ave cost to have more than doubled the wages of its 

 mployees for a whole year. For the last twenty-five 

 earsj owing to the policy of the employers; there has 

 een want of harmony, and at the same time, com- 

 ared with the great ports of Hamburg and Amster- 

 am, the Port of London has failed to expand to meet 

 lodern needs. 



THE K.MI.IRE OF THE PORT ALTHORITV. 



The Port of London .Authority only granted an 

 icrease of one penny upon the docker's tanner of 

 88y in consec|uence of the strike in 191 1. Since then 

 ley have paid (200,000 more in wages. But — 

 le point on which the Tort of London Authority has signally 

 lilcd is in influencing the very large number of emplnyers 

 atsidc the Authority — the whailownets, shipowners, and coal- 

 ivnecs^to fall in with the Laljour policy ol the I'ort. Un the 

 iiwx.xty, the real fault and error of Lord Devunport during the 

 1st few months has been that, in:itead of attempting to bring 

 |j the numerous employers outside to the highest labour level 

 f the I'ori, he has actually taken the lead in the guise rather 

 r an employer than "f the chairman of a public body, in a 

 real struggle against the men's organisation. 'I'hat has been 

 IS vital failure of polity, and it raises >o fundamental a qilestion 

 ;, for instance, whcthi r the I'ort of London .Vutlioriiy has not 

 tactically proclaimed itself in default of its public duly. 



THE HEROISM OF THE STRIKERS. 



The oc( asion (jf the strike was petty enough. .Aris- 

 )tle said long ago that rebellions were produ<e(l by 

 Tiall incidents, but came from deep origins. .Mr. 

 pender says : — 



The world has wilni>>.cd with a mingling of horror ami 

 Imirnlion the amazing resolution of that poverty-stricken 

 Dpulalion in its light .against one of the strongest combinations 

 f employers that have ever entered into such a struggle, 

 lollies have been sold off their backs. The rooms have been 

 «ed of the treasured furniluic. .Xnd yet the light has gone 



on. The larder has been emptied, and the recurring nieal-timc 

 has shown nothing but an empty table. Vet there has been no 

 whisper of surrender. Even the very people who have hated 

 the cause most fiercely have stood in amazement at the spirit 

 evoked by this contest. The dockers of East London, poor and 

 ragged, overcrowded and underfed, have fought as good a fight 

 as the soldiers of Wellington or the sailors of Xclson. 



NEMESI.S. 



The mast-ers on their side would do nothing. Lord 

 Devonport refused absolutely to meet any third 

 parties. .\t the same time, says Mr. Spender : — 



The wharfingers and merchants of London are now moaning 

 and groaning over departed trade and closed factories. Those 

 are the direct fruits of their own unwisdom. It is essential for 

 them to understand that in this age consideration for workmen 

 is as necessary a part of business organisation as care of 

 m.ichinery. The manufacturer who took the line in regard 

 to his machinery that these men take in regard to labour would 

 soon ruin his affairs. For consider a moment. Suppose he 

 said, " I will work my machine when I like, and neglect it 

 when I like. I refuse all responsibility either for oiling it, or 

 tending it, or mending it. I do not care whether it rusts or 

 decays. The only thing 1 demand is that it should be ready 

 to work for me whenever I want it." Such a policy pursued 

 towards an inanimate machine would soon produce its reward, 

 either in an explosion or a stoppage. Why should men imagine 

 that it can be pursued with any less calamitous results towards 

 that not less complex machine, the human being? 



The Port of Liverpool learned its lesson last year. 

 Mr. Spender hopes that the Port of London will not 

 be less docile. He also feels that the statutory helpless- 

 ness of the Government must end. 



A MINIMUM WAGE FOR FARM 

 LABOURERS. 



Mr. C. Roden Buxton pleads in the Contemporary 

 Review for .August on behalf of minimum wages for 

 agricultural labourers. He maintains that agriculture 

 is a sweated industry. The average wage for the 

 country is 17s. 6d. a week ; for Oxfordshire, 14s. iid. ; 

 for Norfolk, 15s. 4d. These low wages mean bad 

 housing, and by .sending farm labourers to compete 

 with other workers lower the general standard of 

 industry throughout the country. Mr. Buxton believes 

 that agriculture could bear a higher wage, having 

 during the last ten years become very prosperous. 

 Most of the increased return from the land has gone 

 to the landlord, none of it to the labourer. Higher 

 wages make the labourers more efTicicnt. Yorkshire 

 labourers imported into Dorset were paid at the York- 

 shire rate of i8s. a week, and were much more efficient 

 than the Dorsetshire labourers, until the latter were 

 paid the same wage, and in six months rose to the 

 S'orkshire level. The agricultural labourer could be 

 paid a higher wage without injury, possibly with 

 aflvantage, to the tarmer. .Mr. Buxton would approve 

 a measure following the lines of the Coal Mines 

 (Minimum Wage) .Act in 1912, adopting different 

 standards for different counties, but ba.sed on the 

 minimum of food, house room, clothing, fuel and 

 lighting necessary for the healthy subsistence of a 

 man and wife and three children. 



