PROCEEDINGS, SEPTEMBER. XXIX 



munity. A strike might be the means of successfully raising the status 

 °f some branches of labour that are comparatively underpaid or over- 

 worked ; it might raise the real wages of a particular country or locality 

 w Mch formerly laboured under the average remuneration of other coun- 

 tries; it might temporarily be the means of forcing the capitalist or 

 employer to give a fairer or larger share of the profits of capital and. 

 labour, i.e., machiner} 7 , plant, skill, and labom — but from the very 

 nature of the common source of all profit and wages, viz. — the current 

 products created by the combined services of capital (instruments) 

 and labour), strikes could not raise the real wages of all wage-earners. 

 Strikes could not increase the real wages or the purchasing power of a 

 day's labour of all wage-earners. In a word, they could not divide more 

 than what has actually been created or produced, although the nominal 

 rates of wages and nominal prices of commodities may both be raised to 

 any extent without real benefit to anyone. To secure a general nominal 

 rise of wages in all branches of labour would further have r,he imme- 

 diate effect of lowering once more the real wages of those who already 

 had effected for themselves an advantage by successful combination or 

 strikes. Strikes might possibly raise the nominal wages of workers all 

 round a hundred-fold, and yet result in the positive lowering of the real 

 Wages of all workmen who, by means of organisation, hitherto have suc- 

 ceeded in bettering their condition as compared with their less perfectly 

 organised fellow-wage-earners. It was the failure to recognise the 

 essential difference between real and nominal wages that rendered futile 

 the many schemes of sentimentalists, which have for their object the 

 laudable design to improve the condition of the people. In conclusion, 

 he thought it would be well for capitalists and wage-earners, employer 

 and employed — whose interests as producers and consumers are almost 

 identical— that when matters requiring adjustment are proposed, there 

 should be greater facilities afforded to the Councils of both interests 

 for securing a friendly settlement. To the absence of these facilities, 

 and the adoption of high-handed action, was mainly attributed the disas- 

 trous evils of strikes. 



Major-General Tottenham suggested, as a solution of the labour diffi- 

 culty, that wages should be fixed for a year, and a month's notice given 

 of any change. 



His Excellency thought it would be batter that the discussion be 

 confined as much as possible to the statistical and scientific effect of 

 strikes. (Hear, hear.) 



Mr. Mault said that if the discussion was to proceed on the lines 

 suggested, an opportunity should be afforded of considering the paper 

 read. He would move the adjournment of the debate. 



This was agreed to. 



THANKS. 



His Excellency moved a vote of thanks to the gentlemen who had 

 read papers, and a special vote of thanks to Dr. Agnew, who had 

 presented the Society with three volumes giving a report of the scientific 

 results of the exploring voyage of H.M.S. Challenger, 1873-76. The 

 volumes are beautifully illustrated. 



The votes of thanks were cordially passed, and the proceedings 

 terminated. 



