ON WAGES AND THE HOURS OF LABOUR. ATT 
In manufacturing and in mining industries rent may often be 
eliminated—as, for instance, where the land on which a factory is built 
belongs to the capitalist as part of his capital, or where a mine is leased 
for a definite time at a fixed rent. The question of the effects of a 
reduction of hours may in such cases come to be one between the 
capitalist (assuming him to be also the employer) and the labourers. 
Which will suffer ? 
We have seen that a reduction of hours in some trades will tend to 
affect all other trades, inasmuch as by the migration of capital and 
labour the reduction in the net produce may be spread over all industries. 
Whether the capitalist or the labourer will bear the loss will depend 
largely on two considerations, viz. (1) the extent to which labour or 
capital migrates to foreign countries, and (2) the effects of the reduction 
of hours on population and on capital. The effects on capital are so im- 
portant as to require separate consideration ; and since population will 
not be directly affected we have only to consider the possibility of capital 
and labour migrating to other countries. In this respect capital has the 
advantage. Owing to the growth of banking and financial houses, and 
the development of foreign trade, capital possesses an international 
organisation, and can be promptly and readily directed to the best 
openings. Labour, on the other hand, moves slowly; it deteriorates by 
non-use, and possesses no international organisation. It is therefore 
highly probable that a large share of the reduction in the net produce, 
due to shorter hours, will be thrown upon labour, 
It remains to consider how far the foregoing conclusions may be 
affected by (1) monopolies; (2) combination; (3) metkods of paying 
wages. 
(1) A monopolist, whether a private person, or a group of persons, or 
a municipality, or a state, will in some cases be able according to the 
intensity of the monopoly to throw the whole or part of the loss due to 
a reduction in the hours of labour in his industry upon those who use 
the article or the service subject to the monopoly. For example, a cor- 
poration that has the sole right of manufacturing and vending gas may 
by raising the price of gas reduce the hours of labour without affecting 
profits or wages. The power of raising the price will be limited by the 
advantages possessed by other luminants. The loss is thrown upon the 
community, including labourers if they use gas. The Post Office might 
reduce the hours of labour at the expense of the senders of telegrams, 
though not so easily at the expense of the senders of letters, owing to the 
fact that small variations in postage are not always practicable.! 
Even where the monopoly does not arise from law, but is due to 
limited resources being owned by one or by a few persons, any loss due to 
a reduction in the hours of labour will tend to fall on the consumer if the 
produce is of such a nature that the community, rather than be without it, 
will give an increased value for it. There might, however, be a rise in 
the values of monopolised articles without affecting real wages. The 
labourers usually confine their consumption to certain groups of articles; 
and in considering how they are affected as consumers, regard must 
always be had to the articles that form the chief part of their consumption.” 
? But small variations could be introduced in the price of post-cards. 
* For a detailed discussion of the causes that affect the price of different types of 
monopolies, see Marshall’s Principles af Economics, p. 457. 
