THE OPEN LETTER.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXI, Issue 44, 21 February 1900, Page 3

THE OPEN LETTER.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —I have read with keen interest the open letter to the Trades and Labour Council by Dr. Bakewell, and comments on the same by "Extremist," and I am of the opinion that both of your correspondents are extremists, at least in one respect, viz., by depicting1 the working man as One who ."gobs on the footpath," "lears at females," and uses sanguinary language. This picturing of the working men in an open letter to their Trades and Labour Councils I resent as downright unmerited insults. In all my experience with the workers of this country and America I never met a, body of workers who deserved such insults at the hands of tlieir enemies, much less at the hands of those who would become their advisers or wellwishers. : .;

The Dr. finds fault with the trades unions for (Ist) "Not having1 settled what is a living- wag-e," and then goes on to define that a living- wage ought to provide not only food, clothing, and shelter, but enough to provide some of the luxuries of life and enable him to guard against contingencies in the way of sickness and old age. Very good, my dear Doctor, but who do you refer to—the working* man single, or the working man with a wife and half-a-dozen children to support? You must admit that the latter kind of working man would require at least twice the living* wage as the former. No, doctor; I am afraid that your definition of a living wage is' just as useless as the one that the Labour Councils have never made. :

Then the Dr. goes on to show that some of the so-called skilled artizans do not deserve the wages they get in comparison with unskilled labour. I quite agree with' him in these remarks. I have often considered that there was too great a difference between the wages of the man who Avorks his long weary, eight hours with pick and shovel for seven or eight shillings, and the so-called professional .gentleman, who g6ts 6/8 for a word of advice, or the other professional gentleman, who charges 10/G or £ 1 1/ for a visit of ten W

fifteen^ minutes. , r t :/■ ' The next trouble with the DiVseems to be the fact that the trades .unions have not insisted on a tax being placed on labour-saving machinery. No,'the trades unions are better, students of, political economy than to do anything" like that. They realise that, labour-' saving machinery lessens the cost of production, or in other words, makes articles cheaper. This is a.benefiif-to the: whole community, and the ide.a of taxing a benefit is too absurd, and on the other hand besides these machines displacing a great deal of labour it employs a great deal of labour making these machines. And wouldn't our Government look pretty collecting taxation from labour-saving machines and doling it out to keep people in idleness for two and a-half years, who were thrown out of a billet. The Dr. seems to think that a man with good business capacity should receive a high remuneration. Now, I have no objection to any man making a fortune by his own individual exertion, but when he uses his business capacity to work his fellowman then I have other ideas regarding him. If you put this man of good business capacity on an island, isolated from his fellow-men, where he had to compete with the forces of Nature for his living, I venture 'to assert that any other man would earn as good a living, but introduce half-a-dozen working men there and the business capacity of our business man would soon enable Mm to walk about with ; his hands in his pockets while the others, did double duty. Business capacity is a grand thing where men are to be fleeced in a competitive world, and our worthy Dr., together with the members of the Trades and Labour Councils, is suffering1 from the effects of it under the curse of competition. . .■ ; If all the means of production and I distribution were owned and operated for the benefit of all the people, hours of labour could be reduced until all had an opportunity to work, and an equitable division of the products I would be the wages paid. Carroll D. Wright, U.S. Commissioner of Labour, says that if all the people in the United States able to work put in 2| hours for six days per week they could

pi'odnce ample to give every one iff the" country all the necessities and most of the' luxuries needed by this gOtht century civilisation. : This being the case, why is it thati those who do the heaviest work and; the longest hours receive the least' pay? It is because the captains o£ industry, or the men with good business capacity, are too fond of using! their abilities in dividing up the products of the working man's labour, and giving him the mere pittance they, call wages. Now, ladies and gentlemen (or fellow, workers, for we -are all more or. less working men and women), let me point out the remedy once more. It is all summed up in one word—• Socialism, for a Socialist, be lie Geiv man, Austrian, American, English, Italian, or ; Russian, is one who believes in the> brotherhood of man, and declares for. Government ownership of. the means Of production .and distribution for co-operation, against competition, andl against private, ownership of publia utilities. —I am, etc., .; A. Y. ROSS, li YTailii, February 14, 1900. 1!