Amodern trades-union is a rather complex organization. Perhaps the best delluition of them is the one given by the social science "committee on trade societies," appointed at Bradford in 1859, and which published its report in 1860. The committee included Dr. Farr, prof. Fawcett, Mr. W. E. Foster, and many other well-known names, and its investigations were very searching and valuable. Indeed, its report is even yet by far the best repertory of facts on the subject. A trade society is therein defined as " a com bination of Nvorkm en to enable each to secure the conditions most favorable for labor." The capitalist's accumulations afford him an advantage which the laborer. without asso ciation. does not possess. The funds of the union are intended to supply this deficiency. As accessories, the unions collect funds for other purposes, such as benefit societies, insurance of tools, libraries, and reading-rooms; but their trade objects are those with which we are especially concerned. The following means of assisting and defending the trades associated are enumerated by the committee as now in general use-1. Publishing periodically the state of the trade in different parts of the country; 2. keeping registers of men unemployed and of masters wanting men; 3. men from town to town in search of employment, and occasionally to emigrate; 4. ;,cgulating the cat: c: of apprentices in the trade; 5. Maintaining men in resistance to employers; 6. Regulating number of working hours, and preparing trade rules; 7. Organizing strikes.
The advocates of the unions insist that they are the only means by which workmen out defend themselves against the aggression of employers. It is argued that the individaal laborer has no chance of resisting the capitalist on equal terms; that starvation treads too closely on his heels to permit his successfully opposing a reduction of his wages,how ever arbitrary or unjust. It is urged that associations of employers are practically universal, and that their object is mainly to secure for themselves the largest possible share of the profits which are the product of capital and labor united. It is further said that in the event of any depression of trade, the masters invariably attempt to reduce wages; and that when trade improves, they defer as long as possible the restoration of the former rate. Thus, workmen are the first to feel commercial disaster and the last to benefit by better times. Any attempt to remedy this state'of things by individual action would, it is conceived, be abortive. The capitalist might easily do without the services of any single laborer, while to the latter the loss of employment might be ruin. Associ ation ou the part of the employed class becomes, therefore, a necessity, and their organi zation puts them at once much more nearly on an equality with employers when negotiating either as to rates of wages or terms of labor. That in both these matters there is it constant gravitation against the workman seems to be admitted by most who have considered the subject, and there is difficulty in suggesting any effective resistance to the downward tendency, except that of combination. Unionists point to many regu lations in the interests of workmen which combination has enabled them to introduce, and while they freely admit that in numerous instances the contest between labor and capital has resulted in the apparent defeat of the former, yet they assert that, in the long run, most of the points contended for have been gained. They maintain that in very malty trades, they have succeeded in preventing abuses, and that the unions have con tributed, more than any other agency, to make "the workman's life regular, even, and safe." Further, it is contended that the necessity For strikes will become continually
less as organization becomes more perfect and uniform; the just limits of their action. will be more fully comprehended; the sufferings and losses of past strikes will act as a warning against too precipitate action in the future, either on the part of masters or men; and that, in the end, the main results of combination will be secured, without the necessity of having recourse to the arbitrament of force, either iu the shape of strikes or lock-outs—the latter of which, indeed, is only a strike of the employers against the employed.
Yet it cannot be concealed that against this catalogue of uses may be set many and serious evils. Some unions dislike the exertion of special or superior ability by any of their members, deeming it an injustice to the rest that one should gain higher pay or win a loftier position. In many cases, as a matter Of deliberate policy they set them selves against and discountenance any elevation of the standard of labor, and so act as an effectual bar to the industrial progress of their class. In other instances, strikes are determined upon by unions at times when the position of the market renders success resulting in severe and prolonged suffering; while in some "highly skilled and limited trades," a far higher rate of wages has been enforced for a time than the voila: of the labor performed would justify, in the end materially checking production, or transferring the industry itself to other countries. The same effect lies been produced. by the arbitrary enforcement, in some branches of manufacture, of obnoxious restric tions upon the hours and mode of working. Thus, Birmingham lost much of that portion of its hardware manufacture which is now carried on by machinery. in con sul:it:ace of the resistance offered by the Birmingham artisans to the introauction of machine-labor; and the steel manufacture threatened at one time to migrate from Sheffield, on account of trades union dictation. ' There is, moreover, another and serious class of objections. There can be no doubt that unions foster an unfortunate spirit of antagonism. Being constantly and consciously on the defensive, they come at last to suspect evil in every movement, and to put a sinister interpretation on every action of employers. The special interests of the trade affected are too often the only objects. cared for; and narrow, selfish, and unjust regulations are enacted for its supposed benefit. One trade is isolated from another; one class of laborers fences itself off against incursions upon its peculiar territory and tries, by the limitation of the number of apprentices, the enforcement of objectionable terms of service, and other coercive methods, to remain a cldse monopolist corporation. It is needless to point out how injuriously such a policy affects the working-classes generally, and what a complete subordination it implies of the general well-being to the desired prosperity of a small and selfish number. In some trades, the practice of coercion has grown into systematic terrorism and crime. The Sheffield grinders and the Lancashire briekmakers began with merely refusing to work with non-unionists; but their methods of procedure have ended in frequent brutal and murde, 711S outrage. The revelations of the special com missions of 1867 arc among the saddest contributions to English history.