TOPICS OF THE DAY.
INDUSTRIAL CIVIL WAR ?
AS we write, there seems to be no possibility of avoiding a continuance of the coal strike which began last Monday—a strike which is very likely to be imitated by other trades, voluntarily or involuntarily, and so to produce what it is no exaggeration to call Industrial Civil War. We are not going on the present occasion to re-discuss the merits of the quarrel. It is sufficient to say that we are convinced, after the most careful study, that the Government could not have yielded to the proposal which was, in effect, increased pay first and inquiry after- wards. "Give us the 10s. a week more, and then, if you like, see whether the payment is justified by the economic conditions." That would be a difficult position to maintain when principals were dealing with each other. It is a hopeless one when the terms are made with the leaders, but the pay goes to men who were only nominally parties to the bargain. They would naturally resent any decision of the Impartial Tribunal which was against the 2s. rise. Does any sane man suppose that an ordinary miner who had enjoyed the rise for a couple of months or so would forgo it without a struggle ? Clearly he would do nothing of the kind. If the miners, instead of asking for the rise first and the inquiry after- wards, had said : " Let the inquiry go on during the strike," there would at any rate have been reason, if of a rather grim kind, in the demand. As it was, Mr. Brace's proposal was no concession and no compromise, but merely a reiteration of the old claim in another form.
Unless, then, something happens between the printing of these words and their publication we must consider that the struggle has come, and must be fought to an issue. If anyone thinks that the so-called capitalist and opulent classes are glad that the struggle has come, he or she is very much mistaken. The struggle is bound to bring the very greatest of evils upon the whole country, and it is only because to yield to the miners' demanUs must bring still greater evils that the Government and its supporters refuse to abandon the position they assumed, and rightly assumed, from the beginning : More production, more pay.
Before contact actually takes place between the two opposing forces, we would ask both to remember certain essential things—things which will preserve us from the worst types of political and social disaster, and make the result of the struggle, whichever way it goes, at least an honourable one, and one which does not involve poisoned memories. The things that both sides must bear in mind are not many, but of vital import. They must resolve that there shall be as little bitterness as possible, as little imputing of evil motives, as little passion, as little cruelty and as little harshness. At the same time, there shall be as much goodwill as possible, and as much tolerance and under- standing, and, above all, as much forgiveness. Although both sides think, and must think, that their own side is in the right—they would not be on that side if they did not, for we are not a nation of hypocrites—they must not imagine that either side has what is a very different matter, a monopoly of righteousness. What is righteous- ness but doing the right thing in the right way ? To those like ourselves who are against yielding to the miners, and who honestly believe that the vast majority of the English people are of the same mind, we would say with all our strength : " Remember that, though it is perfectly true that the present strike is not what it pretends to be- i.e.; a strike for the bettering of the wages of an underpaid " and depressed portion of the industrial community—that truth is entirely hidden from the greater number of the ' miners." They, most naturally, like ourselves and the majority of mankind, would greatly like an increase of income. When, then, they are told that they can get it quite easily by asking firmly for it, that the increase will do no one any harm, and that the Government will pay the difference " out of other sources of wealth at their disposal," or that it can come `! quite well out of the profits of the industry," who can wonder that they are inclined to adopt the specious advice given them ? - Again,. we must- remember that though it is plain to 118- that foreign money- has been used to inspire the strike and to produce a revolutionary atmosphere; that is; an atmo- sphere in which people demand change tor_ change's sake, and will not listen to the voice of reason or even of necessity, the man with the pickaxe knows little or nothing of all this Even if he were told and forced by circumstances to believe in foreign Direct Action as he was in the case of the BolsheVik subsidies proffered to the Daily Herald in order to control it he would probably not think much of it Probably he would be quite satisfied with the statement that the Russians who so generously gave the money gave it out of pure goodwill. They were people who had sound ideas about labour and capital, and who were anxious to spread those ideas in England and to help their brothers to obtain the glorious victories for the proletariat which have been obtained in Russia: Why, then, should not the miners take the helping hand held out from Russia ? The miners under other circumstances would have been perfectly willing to extend similar help to the Russians.
That may be foolish, but it is a perfectly genuine condition of mind. It must be met not by angry accusations of want of patriotism, but by making men understand what is really happening in Russia. They must learn by reason, not by fierce denunciation, how mad it is to think that the people who destroyed the Trade "Unions in Russia, ruined the Co-operative Societies, and introduced the conscription of labour, can be safe guides, helpers and friends to the Trade Unions of Britain. When an analogous case occurred in 1688 and the Jesuit-led Government of James II. offered toleration and every sort of favour to the Dissenters, Lord Halifax in his famous pamphlet implored them to remember how dangerous it is " to build them upon a foundation of paradox. He asked them whether they really believed that the Vatican and the Roman Church could suddenly alter their whole nature, in order to support the ultra- Protestant bodies of England and Scotland, or, again, that a monarch dependent upon Louis XIV. like James was likely to prove a sure shield to the liberties of England ? Happily, the Nonconformists realized the truth, but they realized it much more quickly because Halifax persuaded instead of denouncing. So now we must make the miners realize by argument rather than by accusation the appalling dan- gers they are running by invoking the forces of revolution. We have got the best possible case not only in the abstract against Revolution, but in the particular economic case as regards the Mining Industry. Do not let us throw away this incomparable advantage by appearing hasty, angry, or unwilling to listen to the other side. The man with a bad case may be forced to hector and vituperate. He is hard up for argument and must find something to say. Those with a good case have no such need.
This does not, of course, mean that we are to be weak or show lack of firmness or refuse to hit back, or to hit hard. We must do all those things, but we must remember that our chief strength will always lie in quietness and confidence. Finally, we must remember that although we may be certain we are right in the main, it is quite possible, as Cromwell reminded the Scotch Ministers, " we may be sometimes mistaken." The better the case the more essential to support it only with the worthiest arguments. -Therefore let .us be sure that we support our present action with the good sense and good feeling which it so clearly deserves.
But while we ask these things of our own side—alas ! we have come to the point where we must talk about sides in the nation—we must ask our opponents also not to forget one or two plain things. To begin with, we must ask 'them to remember that, whether right or wrong, the bulk of those who are now opposing them are doing so honestly and in good faith, and because they believe from the bottom of their hearts that to yield would be the first step on the road to national ruin, to the diminishing of the production of the things we all need, and to a situation such as we see in Russia. There, every economic law, every form of liberty, every moral and religious law, has been violated in turn in order to secure the happiness of the proletariat. We see the result. But perhaps to talk like this will be declared to be begging the question. Yet our point is good, even assuming we are wrong in thinking that the man who wants to be free and well fed and to enjoy the fruits of his labour in peace and quiet cannot obtain these things . in Russia, but that, on the contrary, he has them all in profusion. All we ask the miners and their friends to do is to realize that we honestly believe that we are saving them, ourselves and the rest of the country from destruction by opposing the demands which violate what we deem the essential principle that an increased remuneration of labour can permanently come only from one thing—that is, from increased production. It may come for a moment, and in one or two trades, from mere shortage, but in the end you will never get plenty from restriction of output or abundance from artificial famine. You cannot surmount the stern law that labour can only get the remuneration which economic conditions . allow and. no more. Any-way, that is what we honestly believe—namely, that the miners are doing themselves and us and the nation as a whole no good by indulging in windy rhetoric about bloated capitalists and the like. They, like us, must remember to make reason, not violence or subtlety, their instruments.
If they hold us to be wrong in looking upon Russia as an example of the effects of the industrial revolution, they must teach us better, and make us realize the happiness which comes to a State in which production is neglected, and instead the happiness of the manual worker is sought to be secured by depressing all other classes. After all, we may not prove so unteachable as they think. At any rate, let them be assured that the vast mass of the so-called capitalist classes would rather have the world with a better distribution of wealth than one " in which the poor are always to be the poor and the rich always the rich." Let them only show us how production can be maintained without the stimulant of payment by results, and hoW there can be more to go round out of a small cake than a big one, and we shall gladly be converted. It is not to save our cargo, as they suppose, but to keep the ship off the rocks that we do not yield to fairy tales. God grant that our Civil War may be conducted, if it comes, on reasonable and unembittered lines We have great hopes it may. After all, the Rebellion and the Revolution of 1688 were conducted without breaking the essential ethos of the nation or leaving behind them the worst forms of bitterness. Both sides remembered to be loyal to their own cause without forgetting they were Englishmen. Let us accept the omen.
Previous page
