THE FUTURE OF THE WORKING CLASS

(From the Spectator.)

THE Fortnightly ... most interesting paper is one by Professor Beesly on "The Future of the Working Class," which is curiously unlike the regular paper of that kind, and will give the professor himself a very different position in the eyes of capitalists. He announces his disbelief in Socialism, Communism, and Co-operation alike, holding that in their best form they demand virtues which average men do not possess and which those systems cannot of themselves develop. He finds that the army, the most direct and efficient organisation of all ages, has been efficient in proportion to the authority of its chief, and believes that this is the true model for industrial enterprise—the capitalist being general, the workman the organised army. He sneers at the notion of infusing stokers and platelayers into the direction of a railway, and predicts :—

"The separation, then, between employers and employed, between capitalist and labourer, is a natural and fundamental condition of society, characteristic of its normal state, no less than its preparatory stages. We may alter many things, but we shall not alter that. We may change our forms of government, our religions, our language, our fashions of dress, our cooking, but the relation of employer and employed is no more likely to be superseded in the future by Communism in any of its shapes, than is another institution much menaced at the present time—that of husband and wife. It suits human nature in a civilised state. Its aptitude to supply the wants of man is such that nothing can compete with it. There may be fifty ways of getting from Temple Bar to Charing Cross; but the natural route is by the Strand; and along the Strand the bulk of the traffic will always lie. And so, though we may have trifling exceptions, the great mass of workmen will always be employed by capitalists."

" The relation of employer and employed is permanent, and destined to survive all attacks," this is a world with hard work to be done in it, and the most the workmen have to hope for is a distinct improvement in their position as workmen. The fewer the employers and, as we understand Mr. Beesly's remark on peasant proprietors, the fewer the owners of land the better; but the men must be strictly combined, must insist, as Government does in its fighting services, on an average of wages for average men, must struggle for an eight-hour law, must obtain from the State free water, education, and sanitary arrangements, and must then remain civilised workmen:

"I think that a London workman in steady employment, earning such wages as he does now, working eight hours a day, living in his own house, and with such means of instruction and amusement as I have described gratuitously afforded him, would not have an intolerable lot. His position would, it is true, be less brilliant than that of his employer. But it does not follow that the lot of the latter would be so very much more desirable. His income, of course, will be lessened in proportion as his workmen receive a larger share of the profits of production. He will live in greater luxury and elegance than they do, but with in limits ; for public opinion, guided by religious discipline, will not tolerate the insolent display of magnificence which at present lends an additional bitterness to the misery of the poor. His chief pleasure will consist, like that of the statesman, in the noble satisfaction of administering the interests of the industrial group over which he presides. But the responsibilities of this position will be so heavy, the anxiety and the strain on the mind so severe, that incompetent men will generally be glad to take the advice that will be freely given them, namely, to retire from it to some humbler occupation. The workmen, on the other hand, will lead a tranquil life, exempt from all serious anxiety ; and although their position will be less splendid than that of the employers, it will not be less dignified. For in that future to which I look forward, the pressure of public opinion, directed, as I have several times said, by an organised religion, will not tolerate any idle class living by the sweat of others, and affecting to look down on all who have to gain their own bread. Every man, whether he is rich or poor, will be obliged to work regularly and steadily in some way or other as a duty to society ; and when all work, the false shame which the industrious now feel in the presence of the idle will disappear for ever." The entire article reads to us rather like the forecast of a philanthropic peer than of the apostle of labour Mr. Beesly is sometimes said to be, and predicts for Great Britain, if it is correct, a future of Saltaires. "We need not say we do not agree with it. We believe that the sense of property is one of the most beneficial as well as the strongest feelings ever developed in man ; that servitude in any form is injurious to one side of the human character, and that, consequently, the ideal relation of capital and labour is not one of command and obedience, but of copartnership, in which mutual help supplants the idea of mastery. Of course, there must be direction, and direction must be prompt, decided, and secure of obedience ; but there is no more reason why such director should be self-appointed than there is why he should be red-haired. The industrial State can obey an elected chief as well as the political State, even if it should be found that direction by an individual is always abler than direction by a Cabinet—a point on which experience is not clear. We incline to believe it, not only from the experience of armies, but from that of banks, railways, and other great industries; but the theory is certainly not borne out by the experience of agriculture. The temptation to luxurious refinement has there proved so strong that the capacity for business has declined, and the great landlords of the world, especially outside England, are among the very worst rulers of industrial armies.

smh 24/5/1869