'Cbc Conservative. 9
turn of labor organizations ; that
labor combination makes high wag
es possible ; and the economic
axiom , that labor is a commodity and
that the prices of commodities are de
termined by the relation of supply to
demand.
The economic law just mentioned , ad
mits of no exception. A rise or fall in
the price of labor can always be traced
to an influence which has been exerted
upon the general or particular demand
for labor or upon the supply of labor.
It is admitted that labor organiza
tions may concert [ their action and pro
duce an influence upon the supply of
labor , and it is equally true that em
ployers may exert a similar influence
upon its demand. Such influences , in
the' very nature of things , are tem
porary at the best , and can never attain
the consequence of a natural law or a
permanent cause or effect.
Therefore , it is unjust to claim that
labor combination is the permanent
cause of increased wages unless we
also grant that industrial combination
is the permanent cause of diminished
wages. This is also unjust because it
is untrue.
All men of judgment will undoubted
ly agree that it is the law of siipply and
demand which determines , absolutely ,
the price paid to every man for the labor
he performs.
Protection Against What ?
We are told , in the second place , that
labor unions afford protection to their
members. This is probably upon the
assumption that a danger or difficulty
is constantly impending. If so , what is
it ? Is the laborer protected from physi
cal violence ? Whence comes the violence
lence ? Is it a shield against the reduc
tion of wages or increase of hours. If
violence , let law , which is impartial ,
take its course. If it be a reduction of
pay , let economic law assert itself
normally , or it will triumph forcibly.
The sum and substance of this so-
called protection is a belief , on the part
of the proteetees , that the employer is
constantly seeking whereby he may in
jure the employee. It is an uncon
scious or ignorant tendency toward the
creed which preaches constant enmity ,
dissatisfaction and disruption between
the forces of employed labor and em
ployed capital.
There is no natural antagonism be
tween these two factors ; they are allies ,
s parts of one unit. A disturbance be
tween them is unnatural , and the spirit
and temper of trades-unionism , which
is at variance with capital , should be
deprecated by all intelligent and reasona
ble men.
The protective feature of combinations
of labor is unnecessary , inviting an op
portunity to quarrel without cause ; it
is unnatural , condemnable and rather
than being a benefit , it is a disaster.
Unionism Tends Towards Dependence.
It increases self-respect , they toll us.
A man's respect is increased by the
fact of his possession of a membership
card in a labor organization. Testi
mony from members , holding such cards
would probably substantiate the state
ment. A Baptist would contend fiercely
for immersion as the scriptural mode of
baptism. Interested witnesses do not
always produce unprejudiced decisions.
He who respects himself most highly
is he who relies most confidently upon
his own exertions. Independence is one
measure of self-respect. Absolute inde
pendence , intelligently appreciated , is
most inductive of the greatest degree of
self-respect.
In proportion as one allows his total
independence to separate into partial de
pendence , he looses his self-respect.
Surrender one right or privilege , inci
dent to self-maintenance , and self-res
pect suffers as severely as it benefits by
the assumption of a new responsibility.
What the laboring-man is unable to
secure for himself and by his own ef
forts , he transfers to his fellow-
worker and associates , thus los
ing what the mass acquires. He un
naturally gives up what the other
wrongfully assumes.
ft If self-respect were to depend for its
accretion upon the associative principle ,
why not surrender all individual effort
and work out all the problems of life
and its relations upon this basis. Self-
respect will thrive and augment upon
sole-endeavor and paternalistic ideas
will destroy it.
Individual Contract.
One of the most serious objections to
this method of attempting to compel
quickly , that which natural law decrees
shall develop slowly , is the beginning of
a tendency to annihilate the right of in
dividual contract.
The hours a man shall labor , the
wages he shall receive , the circumstances
which shall surround his employment ,
should be determined by an individual
agreement by and between two parties.
The employer should be the bettor
judge of the number of hours he de
sires to operate his establishment. He ,
knowing the cost of material , rental ,
taxes , the existing competition , the ca
pacity and-profit of his industry , should
be more capable of determining the
value of a man's services to himself ,
than any other person. He should stipu
late , as party of the first part , the pri
mary conditions of employment. As
party of the second part , the prospective
employee should agree , compromise or
disagree , thus effecting , modifying or
annulling the contract. This is ideal.
The real is vastly different.
The rule seems to have been reversed.
Today , an aggregation of disinterested
men determine , not only the conditions
which shall surround the employee , but
they , ignorant of the profit , loss , ca
pacity or any other condition of the em
ployer , stipulate thp value of the ser
vices to bo rendered whether competent
or incompetent , as well as the number
of hours in the day the establishment
shall continue in operation.
It is an artificial economic condition
which places a premium upon inferior
labor , and at the same time destroys or
limits the ambition and possibilities of
the energetic , competent and faithful
man.
man.With
With patience wo must await the out
come , which will appear only , when
human-kind attains the realization that
all human accomplishment is by labor.
Labor is not employed by some intan
gible despot called Capital. Both La
bor and Capital are impersonal con
ditions ; while all injustice is personal.
LEWIS M. HEAD.
Nebraska City , Neb. , June 20 , 1901.
A BANKRUPT PARTY AND A DE
STROYED CAREER.
EDITOK THE CONSERVATIVE :
Do you recall the private letter of con
gratulation .which I once addressed to
you upon your discovery of Hon. W. J.
Bryan as a new , young and brihiant
leader of the democratic party of the
state ? It was , I think , in 1890 that you
received , and answered , with sympa
thetic interest , that tribute to Mr.
Bryan as a coming leader of the grow
ing democratic paity in Nebraska. It
had elected the sterling and steady
James E. Boyd to the governorship and
Bryan to two terms in congress. It was
gaining strength on old and true demo
cratic lines , on the dangerous money
question and on all other current issues
which were the legacies of republican
usurpation and misgovernment , state
and national. This was especially
true of Douglas and other populous
counties in the state. Discontent with
republican domination was everywhere
apparent , particularly with the cor
ruption of the state government.
Young men of marked character and
talents , full of honorable ambition , en
ergy and zeal , were directing its poli
cies and nominating its candidates. Sa
gacious men foresaw with clearness ,
the coming opportunity to redeem and
hold the state. Some of us had overtly
assisted Mr. Bryan to celebrate his own
abilities and promise , and were relying
upon him to aid others and to gratify
his own ambitions in this work.
It is a sad story. The state conven
tion which nominated Holcomb for
governor and ordained fusion , which
always means dishonor and death to po
litical parties , has bankrupted the demo
cratic party , and , from the same deadly
influence , destroyed the once promising
public career of W. J. Bryan.
GEORGE. L. MILLER.
Omaha , Nebraska , June 20 , 1901.
