152 
PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS SECTION G. 
For instance, the Government of New South , Wales pavs a 
standard wage of 7s. a day to road-makers, when it could, perhaps", get 
labourers enough to do the work at 5s. a day. Who has to bear the 
extra cost ? 
A Government adopting this policy may meet the cost in either of 
two ways. First, it may leave its revenue unaltered, and abstain 
from some works which it would otherwise have funds to carry out. 
Or, secondly, the Government may increase its revenue by additional 
taxation. 
If it takes the first course, it is the general public that is the 
loser, being deprived of certain services which Government could 
otherwise render. A judicious Government will, in that case, cut off 
that part of its present expenditure which is least useful to the public; 
and it is for us as citizens to decide whether the gain is worth the cost. 
We are free to do what we like with our own revenue; we provide 
ourselves through our Governments with many things which are not 
absolute necessaries ; and if we think it worth while, we can do without 
some of these, in order to raise the wages of some Government 
employees which we may consider unduly low. Suppose, for instance, 
that the choice is between decorating a public office with statues of 
eminent statesmen on the one hand, and adding Is. a day to the wages 
of certain labourers in Government employment on the other band. If 
we choose the latter, we shall have fewer statues to feast our eyes on, 
and we shall have, as a set-off against this, the satisfaction of knowing 
that certain people employed in our service arc enabled to get better 
food and housing, and that those of them who spend their raised wages 
wisely are probably bringing up their children to be better workers 
and better citizens. Well 4 if the choice is between more stone images 
on the one hand, and more good workmen and good citizens on the 
other, there is nothing absurd in choosing the latter ; and there is 
certainly no “law of political economy” to prevent our taking that 
course if we prefer it. 
On the other hand, the Government may decide to do as much 
work for the public as before, and to raise the necessary fund by 
additional taxation. In that case, supposing that the taxation can be 
so adjusted as to fall on those best able to bear it, the result may be 
a better distribution of want- satisfaction ; the rich taxpayer will have 
to do without a few big dinners or other superfluities, while the 
Government labourer will be better provided with “the necessaries for 
efficiency and that again is a result which all concerned, the rich 
taxpayer included, may well consider satisfactory. 
But it is sometimes objected that to take this course would be to 
do an injury to other workers, whose needs may be equal or greater. 
The. argument of the objector, shortly stated, amounts to this: If 
the governing body spends part of its present revenue in raising the 
wages of some of its employees, it will have so much less to spend in 
employing others, and those others will suffer. If, on the other 
hand, it raises the money to pay the extra wages by taxation, the 
taxpayers in turn will have less to spend in employing workers, and 
those whom they would otherwise have employed will suffer. In 
either case alike, it is maintained, a diminution of employment will 
result. 
