Page images
PDF
EPUB

from violation. Legislation is a more difficult science now than ever; but let us hope that a Reformed Parliament may be Conservative, and that the representatives of the people, chosen by the people, will consult, affectionately, firmly, and fearlessly, for the people's good. By many awful considerations are they called on so to do; for they have themselves-too many of them at least helped all they could-and that too in part from the most selfish motives the motives of a base ambition to exasperate in the breasts of the people that restless and turbulent discontent which, not occasionally, and during bad seasons, as it once was, but at all times, now rankles there, and within these few years, all too many, has been fed and inflamed by the promulgation of the most pernicious principles by lay-preachers, who, while they have said they abhorred anarchy or misrule, denounced the throne and the altar, and hope eventually to overthrow them in a still more radical revolution than the state has lately undergone, till not one stone is left on another, and the very names become obsolete in the English language of priest, noble, and king.

The time is not so far by-gone as that it may not be remembered by people not yet old, when the relation between master and servant was strengthened by feelings of mutual kindness and was in very truth literally an attachment. It was not so only in private households; but much of the same spirit belonged to the same relation throughout the whole system of affairs-making employers of labour labourers' friends-and preserving their common interests by mutual good-will and interchange of amicable affection. Then, that spirit, it was believed, so far from being injured by the care of law, was preserved by it not by fear, which is a bad guardian-but by submission, which is often the very best. Law undertook-as far as law ever can- to protect the rights of labour by preventing labour from committing wrongs; in the opinion of men not deficient in wisdom and generosity, a law against Combinations of workmen to interfere with wages, might so be constructed as not to be unjust;

and judging from experience, they believed it was salutary-from the gradually enlightening experience of a length of years. We know better than not to say that at the same time men of the highest wisdom and humanity looked with suspicion or disfavour on all such enactments

and among them the illustrious and immortal author of the Wealth of Nations. But that Adam Smith would have counselled their repeal at the crisis of affairs when their repeal was passed, we see no reason to believe; far less that, supposing he would have done so, he would have dreamt for a moment of recommending to be substituted in their place the wretchedly impotent law against assaults by workmen on one another so frequent in strikes, which the wisdom of the repealers foolishly supposed would suffice to curb the violence and keep the rage of the "multiform beast" within the bounds of justice. It is with respect to the spirit of the arguments by which the repeal of all combination laws was effected, that we desire now to make some observations; for we have every year seen stronger and stronger reasons for believing, that to those arguments, spread with the spirit in which they were conceived and uttered, over all the kingdom by a powerful press, must be mainly attributed the present state of the popular mind, allowed on all hands to be most formidable-full of peril, not to our national prosperity only, but our national existence, and therefore on all hands condemned as wicked, by all, at least, who are unwilling to believe the people-the whole labouring people of Britain-to be simply fools. Fools would they be who should call them so-but miserably misguided they must have been-and the question is, by whom? We answer,-leaving the base crew of their enemies out of sight,-by many who, we shall admit, were, after a fashion, their well-wishers; by not a few who, beguiled by their own enthusiasm into most dangerous doctrines, were nevertheless their honest, sincere, and ardent friends. Among the number of the former we mention, as one of the most eminent, Mr M'Culloch; and among the number of the latter, the most distinguished by far, Dr Chalmers-who

has ever zealously sought to promote the temporal and eternal interests of his fellow-men in all conditions, from the throne to the hovel. We cannot introduce our remarks better, than by a clear statement of their subject, from the admirable Charge lately delivered to the Grand Jury at Exeter on the case of the Unionists, whose trial, we observe, after the Grand Jury had found a true bill, was removed by a certiorari to the Court of King's Bench.

"From a very early period of history, as far back as the reign of Edward I, the laws against combination had commenced, and had continued down in nearly an unbroken series to the reign of Geo. IV. It appeared that from a very early period the law on these combinations was educed from the circumstances of the times. Our ancestors found it necessary to interfere-and interfere they did with a strong hand -to put down all combinations of citizens and handicraftsmen, who, so far back as the reign of that king, had been in the habit of combining to raise the rate of wages above the fair market value; to restrict the hours of labour, and to impose restrictions upon the masters who employed them. He was not competent, nor had he any wish, to enter into the political economy of the question. He would not enquire as to the policy or impolicy of the law. He thought that it was the business of those who filled either the judicial situation, or that of the Grand Jury, not to enter into considerations whether the law was wise or unwise, merciful or cruel-but to see what it really was, and then merely to consider themselves as the persons bound to administer it. Our Statute-book, as he had said, formerly contained a great number of laws on the subject of combination which came down to the reign of Geo. IV., when at length it was thought wise to reconsider the whole subject; and in the fifth year of that reign a statute passed of so comprehensive a nature, that it repealed nearly the whole of the laws on the subject of combination. They were repealed by a statute which was made on the ground that all interference was impolitic and mischievous; and in plain terms it was made no longer an of

fence for artisans or mechanics of any description to enter into any consultation for the obtaining of an advance of wages, for lessening or altering the duration of the time of working, decreasing the quantity of work to be done in a given time, inducing others to quit the work of their masters, or to return it to him, or to regulate the mode of carrying on any business or manufacture, so that persons entering into any combination of this sort were no longer held liable to any penalty whatever, either by the statute or common law of the land. This statute for repealing the whole of the previous acts, was made for the purpose of leaving the whole principle of contract between the master and workmen entirely free; it was passed in 1824. But the effects of it were found to be such that in the following year a state of things had occurred which, it was thought, made it imperative to reconsider the whole subject, and a very intelligent and influential member of parliament (Mr Huskisson), who had taken a very active part in effecting the repeal of the combination laws, once more introduced the subject to the legislature for their reconsideration. Accordingly, in the following year, the 6th George IV., a modified law, was passed, which repealed the statute of the preceding year, and laid down the law as it at present stands. This act, after imposing certain punishments on certain acts done by reason, or for the purpose, of interfering either with the rate of wages or the hours of labour, made this declaration on the subject:-that the act should not extend to subject any persons to punishment who should meet together for the sole purpose of determining the rate of wages or the hours of labour which they should work in any manufacture, trade, or business. This was the existing law upon the subject. principle upon which it was grounded was this, that there should be perfect freedom on both sides-on the part of the master as well as the workman-that as the master could employ any workman he pleased, so the latter should be at liberty to get the best price he could for his labour, just as he would if he had any other commodity to dispose of. It

The

went even farther than this, to shew that it would be lawful for two or more, or any number of persons, so to meet and consult together as to what price such persons so met together would sell their labour for, and what period of time they would work. This was the present law upon the subject, and the question was, whether what were called conspiracies, or combinations of a secret description, where the parties were bound together by oaths, meeting in private, and levying subscriptions, being bound by solemn and unauthorized engagements—whether under this law such meetings could be considered legal? If illegal, then such combination would assume the character of a conspiracy."

We shall not expose the miserable attempts at reasoning which may be found in the reports of the debates in Parliament on the motion for the repeal of the old Combination Laws-nor shew them up in the ludicrous light in which they reappeared, when the new enactments consequent on their repeal were themselves repealed within one year's experience of their utter impotence, and a second set enacted as worthy of all contempt. But, as we said, we shall confine ourselves to two publications, widely circulated in 1826, and highly applauded-Mr M'Culloch's "Essay on the Circumstances which determine the rate of Wages and the condition of the Labouring Classes," reprinted, with additions, from several of his other works, in which it had appeared in various shapes and sizes and prices -then sold for the first time at two shillings, or one-and circulated by the friends of the people widely over all the manufacturing districts, as an epitome of all that was "wisest, virtuousest, discreetest, best;" and two chapters on Combinations in the third volume of Dr Chalmers's Civic Economy-a volume which, by its bulk and weight, could not have had either a rapid or wide circulation, but which was almost reprinted, piecemeal, in hundreds of publica tions that went among the poor, and was likewise cried up to the skies as a revelation of saving truth on the secular concerns and temporal interests of the million.

The consequences of the Repeal of the Combination Laws, so far from having been such as the supporters of that measure anticipated, had within the year been diametrically the reverse; and to account for the flagrant enormities perpetrated by too many of the Combinations that sprung up on the repeal, they were forced to form a somewhat unsatisfactory theory, which would have done more credit to their wisdom and foresight, had they suggested it at the time of the repeal, or before it, in order to warn the nation of the first disastrous consequences likely to result from carrying the measure into effect. They endeavoured to attribute all those enormities to the sudden feeling of freedom from the tyranny of galling and unjust restraints. The Combination Laws had long been supposed by workmen to weigh heavily upon them-to subject them to the will of their masters-to keep down forcibly and unjustly the poor man's earnings throughout all trades

to make them, in short, slavesand their employers tyrants. On being-argued Dr Chalmers-suddenly emancipated from unjust control, giddy with the intoxication of freedom, and thereby prevented from calmly consulting their own judgment and experience, they not only grossly exaggerated to themselves the evils which the former state of things had so long inflicted on them, but as grossly mistook the means of curing the real evils they might have endured. And thence all the guilty excesses of which combined workmen were guilty all over the country on the repeal; excesses never again to be committed, after that great teacher of Political Economy, Time, shall have taught them the folly of attempting to alter by force or intimidation that order of things founded in the very constitution of society.

Now, whatever truth there may be in this-and there is truth-why, it may be asked, were such effects, lamentable and disastrous indeed, not foreseen and predicted by the advocates for the repeal? Not only were they not foreseen, and not predicted, by the advocates for the repeal, but all those persons who did foresee, and did predict them, ourselves among the number, and, on the certainty of

such effects flowing from a repeal of the existing laws, opposed that measure, were scouted as timid and prejudiced adherents to a system of slavery and restriction. Goodwill towards the masters, unanimity and moderation among the workmen themselves, order, regularity, and industry in all trades, and, above all, gratitude to their rulers and legislators, were the effects, and the sole effects, that any enlightened thinker was to expect from the repeal: Not a word of riots, and robberies, and assaults, and homicides, and murders. Every thing was to go smoothly, and all the different interests of capitalists, labourers, and consumers, to adjust themselves without any violent outbreakings, by means of a great law constantly operating for the good of the whole.

As far, therefore, as regarded the immediate consequences of the repeal of the Combination Laws, the supporters of the measure were in the wrong, and the opposers of the measure were in the right. Had the theory proposed to account for the evils that followed the repeal been proposed to prepare the public mind for them before the measure was past, more credit would certainly have been due to the sagacity of its propounders. Their blindness, therefore, or ignorance or error, ought greatly to have detracted from the weight of their authority on the whole question; and put us on our guard against yielding too entire and unqualified assent to any of their other reasonings built upon a reference to active principles in the human mind, which, in this case, they appear either not to have understood, or, from undue zeal in support of a favourite measure, to have given a very false account of its probable operation.

"The effervescence which has followed on that repeal," said Dr Chalmers, "is the natural, and, we believe, the temporary effect of the anterior state of things. There was nothing more likely than that the people, when put in possession of a power that they felt to be altogether new, would take a delight in the exercise of it, and break forth into misplaced and most extravagant manifestations. But if the conduct of one party have been extravagant, the alarm of the other party we conceive

to have been equally extravagant." Here we cannot help thinking, with all respect for Dr Chalmers, that he ought to have used more definite language in speaking of such a subject. Effervescence-is not exactly the word that may best express the desperate and murderous character of many of the proceedings of the combined workmen all over England

and many parts of Ireland. In another part of his disquisition, Dr Chalmers calls things by their right names-because it was necessary to do so to make good his masterly argument in favour of the enactment of the severest laws against actual outrages of the workmen against each other. But here he is anxious to account for the immediate effects of the repeal and therefore unconsciously has adopted such terms as may render his notion the more plausible. The same strong objection ought to be made to the expression, "if the conduct of the one party have been extravagant." Extravagance is a somewhat too mild word for days, weeks, and months, and years' continued and systematic outrage and violence, not unfrequently accompanied with bloodshed and murder. Nor can we think, however mistaken they might be in some things, "that the other party were equally extravagant," seeing that their extravagance consisted in an alarm for the safety, property, and person, excited by the crimes of combinations, that, whatever might be the causes of the delusion under which they committed them, proved by their words and their deeds that they were determined to respect neither property nor person, in their wanton and violent efforts to disturb the order and shake the structure of the commercial world.

Dr Chalmers makes use of a singularly unhappy illustration of the theory by which he would account for the "effervescence and extravagance" of the workmen in their com binations. "The repeal," says he, "of the Combination Laws in England, has been attended with consequences which strongly remind us of the consequences that ensued, after the Revolution, from the repeal of the game laws in France. The whole population, thrown agog by their new privilege, poured forth

upon the country, and variously accoutred, made war, in grotesque and unpractised style, upon the fowls of the air and the beasts of the field. In a few months, however, the extravagance subsided, and the people returned to their old quiescent habits and natural occupations. We feel assured, that, in like manner, this delirium of a newly awakened faculty among our British workmen will speedily pass away. They will at length become wise and temperate in the use of it." The two cases had no earthly connexion; and how has the Doctor's prophecy been verified by events? Circumspice!

Mr M'Culloch, in his Essay on Wages, says, that "Those who were fully aware of the practical operation and real effect of the late act, and of the feelings it had generated in the minds of the workmen, must have been prepared for most of what has lately occurred. The violence it did to the right feelings of the labouring classes, and the oppression to which it sometimes gave rise, led them to ascribe to it infinitely more powerful influence than it really possess ed." Here, too, we should have expected some more definite proof, that previously to the repeal of the Combination Laws, the workmen throughout Great Britain and Ireland groaned under them-either under real evils which the law produced, or imaginary evils which it was supposed by them to produce. It is perfectly true that the former law could not be popular among the workmen-but where is the proof that it was, and had long been so execrated by them-so utterly detested-and, that it had in many cases been made the instrument of great oppression? Nothing short of utter detestation of any law, founded on real and gross grievances, will serve the purposes of this apologetical hypothesis. Now, it is granted, not only in the above passage but throughout the Essay, that the power given by the Combination Law to masters to depress wages had always been a bugbear-although in the above passage it is also somewhat invidiously as well as inconsistently said, that sometimes that power had been most oppressive. It does not therefore seem, on the whole, satisfactorily made out, that the many

enormities perpetrated by the members of the various combinations were to be attributed entirely either to "effervescence or extravagance," or to delight in exercising a new faculty, or sudden escape from a degrading and galling thraldom. To ascribe such enormities, either wholly or in chief part, to such a cause, even if that cause had existed in all the force ascribed to it, would not have been philosophical; but still less so was it to ascribe them to a cause taken for granted-and taken for granted too, not only without evidence, but in the face of all evidence.

For while we are far from saying that the Combination Laws were not in some respects objectionable, and, like most other laws, occasionally mingling injury with benefit, this is certain, and allowed on all hands to be certain, that they had not operated to sink below the proper point the wages of the labourers. The history of the country, and the experience of every one, replied in the negative. In good times, many of the working men of manufacturing and trading places could earn as much in five of the working-days of the week, as would both support their families, and enable them to spend the sixth perhaps in idleness and dissipation, although we are far from saying that they generally did $0. If in bad times wages were too low, this was in general evidently owing to the inability of the masters to pay more, and not to the Combination Laws. Wages had, upon the whole, advanced, and the working classes at the time were enjoying a greater share of the necessaries and comforts of life than had been enjoyed by those of former generations. Now, although all this may not have prevented workmen from actually believing that they suffered some grievance from the Combination Laws, we think that, allowing them to have that degree of intelligence which is commonly and rightly attributed to them, they could not possibly have regarded those laws with such bitterness of hatred, and detestation, and anger, as to account for the crimes subsequent to the repeal, on the ground which Dr Chalmers, Mr M'Culloch, and many others then took. Injuries and grievances must be real, galling,

« PreviousContinue »