THE REV. MR BAUMBER ON THE LABOR QUESTION.

Evening Star, Issue 8279, 26 July 1890, Page 2 (Supplement)

THE REV. MR BAUMBER ON THE LABOR QUESTION.

At Trinity Church last Sunday the Rev. Mr Baumber preached on the question of labor, taking for his text Matthew vii., v. 12, “ Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye oven so to them, for this is the law and the prophets.” In the course of his remarks Mr Baumber said:—

This is the great golden rule laid down by the greatest of all teachers for our guidance in our dealing with our tollows. It is farreaching in its application, and affects our conduct in all the affairs of life. We are related in a thousand ways to those who surround us, and so many are tho links which bind us one to another that our happiness very much depends on treatment we receive. The life of every man has two sides—a godward and a mauward side. The perfect life is that one in which neither aide is neglected—when a man loves God with all his heart, etc., and his neighbor as himself. Our Lord sums up the whole of his religion, so far as the manward side of our life is concerned, in this golden rule. It has been said sneeringiy by some that a similar rule of conduct is found in Greek and Roman, also in Jewish, writings which existed before the time of Christ, and that, therefore, these words are no proof of the superiority of Christian morality. Hillel says: “ Whatsoever thou wouldest that men should not do unto thee, that do not thou to them.” All our law is summed up in that. A like negative rule is quoted by Gibbon from Socrates. The nearest approach to our Lord’s rule is found in the saying ascribed to Aristotle, who, when asked how we should act towards our friends, replied : “As we would they should act to us.” All these, however, are wanting in the completeness of our Lord’s precept; and still more do they fall below in regard to the ground on which the precept rests, and the power given to perform it. Before considering the words themselves I want you to notice the startling connection. Our Lord has been speaking of God’s great willingness to give good things to them that ask him. He has said “ Ask and it shall be given you,” God will not mock, but will give, . . . if what men ask is for their good. It is man’s highest blessedness to be like God, and in this respect he must try to resemble Him. Therefore, because God is so willing to give, whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them. Our Lord has also given utterance to the truth of God’s fatherhood. It is the Father in Heaven who gives because He loves. So men are to love one another as brethren. The ground, then, on which this precept rests is a very high one. We are to do to others as we wish God to do to us, etc. And because we are brethren, the consciousness of equality and mutual need should prompt us to the practical love of our brethren. If men meet with misfortune, let us sympathise with them, as we would they should do unto us. If men are in need let us help them as wo would they should help us. If men transgress let us deal mercifully with them as wo would, etc. If men are away from Christ let us interest ourselves in their well-being as we would they, etc. Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you do ye even so to them. The rule rightly understood is of universal application, and touches every part of our life, our family life, our business life, and all oar connection in our fellows. If the rule were universally acted upon—nay, if those who call themselves Christians would live according to it—social life would be revolutionised, and the millennium would not be far off. But such is the natural selfishness of man that the golden rule of conduct laid down for us by our Lord is oftener broken than observed. In some cases tho violation is deliberate. There are men who exist by preying upon others. Their one business in life seems to bo to deceive and defraud. There are others who in their business transactions are not slow to take advantage of the ignorance of others, and to make gain out of their needs and diffionltics. Such is the commercial morality of the day that many transactions are looked npon as perfectly legitimate that are in direct opposition to the rule here laid down, and would not for a moment bear the light of Heaven, For instance, the selling of worthless shares, land above price. This rule is often violated thoughtlessly. There is no intention of doing an injury to anyone; but words are often spokeu and actions performed which result in injury both to the feelings and repute of others, and which never would have been spoken or done if we lived according to this principle. Selfishness is the root of all evil. Destroy it, and we get rid of the fruit. This rule strikes right at it, and, were it followed, the true brotherhood of man would be seen, and each one would find his own good in the good of others. But what is the bearing of this rule on the questions which aro before the public mind to-day ? Has it any bearing at all ? Certainly, inasmuch as it touches the whole of life. I need scarcely say that all the teaching of this text is not for tho employer. There are quite as many lessons to be learned by those employed. lam convinced that if questions which press for consideration were considered in the spirit of this rule, while there would in some instances be modified demands on the one side, on the other there would be that sense of justice which would speedily result in the amicable settlement of every difficulty. With regard to the question of early closing, that seems to me to be not so much a question between employer and omployd, but between both and the general public. I believe employers welcome it. The question would be settled w ithont difficulty if the public, instead of looking at it in the light of personal convenience, would consider it in the light of this rule. Could not something be done to shorten hours of labor on Saturday evening ? With regard to the larger question of hours and wages, I fear that any settlement effected through the influence of unions will ■be only temporary, because to an extent artificial. There is a danger of a body of menlooking at a question from their own standpoint, without sufficient consideration of others, so that the demand for justice may mean injustice to others. There can be no satisfactory settlement of any question without the fullest consideration having been given to the claims of all. In other words, let us do to others as we would they should do to us. In any settlement, however, there are certain principles that must be recognised : (1) The employed as well as employer is a man, and must be treated as such. (2) Every man has a right to a fair proportion of the product of his own labor. No man has a right to grow rich out of the strength and skill of men who do not receive a tithe of what they produce. (3) The example of Christ should ever be before ns, and we shoald learn that the truest life and noblest is not in selfish consideration of our own needs but In self-surrender of others’ good.