PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. 441 



merce give, at any rate, the germ of an organisation for attending to this great 

 need. We may ask whether this could be still further elaborated so as to give 

 the country what is wanted. Have our Chambers of Commerce sufficient standing 

 to make their association strong enough for the work ; or should we look to the 

 State to supply the keystone to the arch? The answer to this will depend on 

 the views of the individual attempting to give it. Perhaps the time has come 

 when a word of warning should be uttered. Are we not getting rather too 

 prone to fall back upon the State? We were, and perhaps still are, the most 

 self-dependent people in existence. Both the employer and the Trade Union 

 have in the past been but little inclined to turn to the State. Can the comple- 

 tion of our industrial and commercial organisation be adequately attained by 

 the interests concerned, or must we look to another State department or sub- 

 department to effect what is required ? Our past history seems to suggest that 

 before turning to the State we try the initiative of the interests at stake. This 

 brings us to a further section of the subject. 



Industrial Organisation. 



The organisation that has grown up with the development of our industries 

 includes two very important but unequally developed sets of organisation. The 

 Industrial Army of Labour force of this country includes all those who either 

 organise industry or take any part, however important or however humble, 

 in its working. From the captain of industry, or entrepreneur as our brave 

 allies call him, down to the humblest weekly wage-earner, we have a labour force 

 which ought to be looked upon as one and indivisible. In connection with this 

 force we now have two sets of organisations whose interests some people consider 

 to be antagonistic. I would emphasise the fact that these two are really one 

 force, their main interests are identical, and they can best serve those interests 

 by striving to minimise differences and by doing all that is possible to work in 

 harmony. 



Though theoretically one, the labour force has internally developed two 

 sets of organisations. Manual labour has its Trade Unions ; the organisers of 

 industry have their Associations ; British Trade Unions have a fairly long 

 history behind them, and may be said to be in advance of any similar unions 

 the world over. But the fact that of recent years there has been a tendency 

 for small unofficial sections of given unions to kick over the traces and dis- 

 regard the jiolicy and agreements of their leaders shows that perfection of 

 organisation has by no means been attained. 



Employers' Associations are of more recent formation, nor have they so far 

 attained to anything like the same completeness. Both organisations, especially 

 the employers', are in need of further development. It is hardly for the 

 economist to show how this can be effected. He can point to imperfections and 

 make suggestions — only those conversant with practical working facts can 

 formulate a practical policy. The most patent defects of these associations are 

 due to the very virtues of their members. The individual British business 

 man is unexcelled by the business man of any other country. In times of rapid 

 transition and crisis he has again and again shown his leadership. He knows 

 hie business thoroughly, and as a working unil Ee has taken a very high place. 

 But one of the most marked developments of modern trade is a growing inter- 

 dependence of industries. Hand in hand with this we have become familiar 

 with another phenomenon, the amalgamation of businesses of various dimensions 

 into one great company or corporation. This phenomenon is common to both 

 commercial and manufacturing interests. It ie as marked among banks as 

 among steel and iron companies. The comparatively small manufacturer or 

 business man is giving place to bigger and inclusive organisations. These two 

 and somewhat parallel developments are making a new demand on the individual. 

 He and his predecessors exemplified individualism ; the new stage upon which 

 we have entered demands a modification of the old policy. Business, like 

 everything else, is subject to evolution, and evolution on healthy lines can only 

 be obtained by grasping fundamental facts and applying experience in accord- 

 ance with economic laws. There need be nothing revolutionary about the 

 required changes in our business organisation. We merely have to note what 

 has already occurred, mark healthy tendencies, and clear away or prevent 

 obstructions to natural growth. Our past history amply justifies us in pursuing 



