CO-PARTNERSHIP.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXXIII, Issue 15902, 13 April 1912, Page 8

CO-PARTNERSHIP.

WHAT IT IS.

THE MEANS OF INDUSTRIAL SAL-

NATION

EARL GREY AS A' PROPHET. [From Ocr Correspondent.] LONDON, Alaroh 1. Earl Grey, the Into Governor-Gene-ral of Canada, is a convert to the principle of industrial co-partnership. Tt surely is a sign of the times that a statesman of such high social position should declnro frankly that the present industrial system can no longer be made to serve Great Britain. “ After soven years’ absence,” said Earl Grey to Air \V. T. Stead the other day, “ I havo come back to my own country, and find myself in the midst of men hurrying down the broad road that leads to destruction. No One seems to trust anybody, and everyone seems to think it is tho chief end or man to do as little for anybody else as lie possibly can. That can only end in perdition. ” “ What is your remedy? asked Air Stead; . _ , ~ “Co-partnership,. said Lord Grey with conviction. “ Co-partnership will unlock the doors of our Doubting Castle, and, although in some of them, like the iron gate of Giant Despair, the lock may go ‘ damnable hard, there is not a lock that co-partnership will not open. And, so far as I can see, there is no other key.” ~ “ The Socialists have thoir specific, suggested tho journalist. “I say nothing against their specific as an ultimate solution. Co-partner-ship is a kind of Socialism—a Socialism applied piecemeal, a Socialism plus commonsenso and the Ten Commapd.ments. When we have brain enough and conscience enough we may be able to nationalise everything. But-for that the time is not ripe. Whereas co-part-nership can bo adopted to-morrow. Copartnership is no dream. It has passed out of the region of dreams, and has established itself amongst us as a hard indisputable economic- fact. > “ W. E. Forster once said in reply to J- M. Ludlow’; who challenged him to mention a single instance in which a strike had done any good to the working classes, ‘I know of no strike that has done good, but I know of many instances where the fear of a strike has done much good.’ I do not object to tho social unrest. On the contrary, it is a symptom of a divine discontent with the existing industrial order which is becoming intolerable. I look at this and all similar problems, in tlie light shed upon them by that great saying of Mazzini. Mankind,'lie said, progresses from the. slave to the serf, from the serf to the hireling, from the hireling to the partner, j , At each of these successive stages in the-von ward march of man, there must hate been great social unrAst. Altich to alarm the unthinking and short-sighted, but nevertheless it was full of promise for the future.” “ You remind, me,” said Air Stead, of Lowell’s ‘ Lines on tho PresentCrisis.’ ” 'At the birth of each r.cw Era, with'a recognising start Nation wildly looks at nation, standing with muto lips apart, And glad Truth’s ret mightier man-child leaps beneath the Future’s heart-.” “ Yes,” said Lord Grey, “ our troubles aro but. the labour pangs of a new birth. But when a woman lias brought forth, sho remembers no more the pangs of labour in her joy that a* man-child has been born into the world. So it shall be with us.” “ And his name shall be called Copartnership.” , “ ’Tis the only way,” said ’ .Lord Grey. “ I admit that it will bo-more difficult to apply to tho miner than to many other industries, because all mining is and always will be very much of a gamble. But by averages’ over a senes of years; an’ arrangement might be come to satisfactory to both sides.’” ftLord Gray proceeded to refer to the famous Livesev scheme of co-partner-ship. “ It is no more an experiment than tho railway, tho telegraph or the telephone are experiments,” ho said. “ It is a- tried, tested and certified success. The experiment began in 1889, when Sir George Livesey proposed to transform the employees of the South Alotropolitan Gas Company .into copartners. For a long timo tho other gas makers distrusted tho scheme. Three of them after watching the experiment for ten years decided to follow suit. But tho English aro a conservative .people;, It wrsvnot until eighteen years had passed and Sir George Livesey had gone to tho reward that awaits those who rise and savo their fellowmen that the conviction* i became general that co-partnership was a success. ' After 1908, gas companies all over tho kingdom came tumbling into the scheme. At present over thirty gas companies, representing nearly £50,000,000, or 50 per, cent of all the gas stock owned by gas companies, are working under tho co-part-norship plan laid down by Sir George Livesey.” 4 “ And what in brief is the essence of that plan?” i “ That the hireling must beeomo tho partner. That tho workman who Has no capital save his labour, shall be endowed with capital by giving him every year a share in the profit, which he will invest in the business. That ho will thus become Uiot merely a- profitsharer but a co-partner, with a stake in the concern which saddles him with some of tho responsibilities of management.” “ Sir George Livesey told me,” said Lord Grey, “ that there never was a. proudor moment in his life than when lie was able to stand up before bis shareholders and tell them that, as tho | result of co-partnership -and the spirit of brotherhood which it engendered, I t-lio company had been -able (1) to pay their employees higher wages than were paid to any other gas workers in the kingdom, (2) to pay the shareholders a higher dividend, and (3) to 6cll gas at a lower price.” “ T don’t call tho present wage system dishonest. I only say it is inefficient, unsatisfactory, and is hopelessly breaking down before our eyes. Co-partnership, on the other hand, is a system which works, and works well, which restores pence. establishes brntlinrliood, increases efficiency, and which has accumulated £600,000 capital*in tho hands of the gas workers of South London, not one penny of which would be standing to thoir credit if ■ Sir Georgo Livesey had not had the courage to' take the initiative.” “ Profit-sharing is nil very well when there is profit to share, hut how about sharing losses?” -, “The answer to that question was given by Sir G. Livesey to Sir Benjamin Browne, who objected that profitsharing made no provision .for the sharing of losses. Sir Georgo asked Sir Benjamin whether ho estimated tho difference to the employer of working tvitli a shop full of contented men and one full of* discontented men at 5 per cont. Not 5 per cent, said Sir Benjamin. but 25 per cent. There, retorted Sir George, von have your answer. In bad times the workmen arc giving 25 por cent better work and receiving no addition to. trade union rate of wages. That is the workman’s contribution to the reduction of the master’s losses.” “ I suppose you draw a- distinction between profit-sharing and co-partner-ship?” “ Only the distinction between tho root and the fruit. One springs out of the other. Alerc profit-sharing is not enough unless it leads to co-partner-ship. Nothing bii nn-jiartnorsliip can

ereato or restore the sense of community of interest between those engaged" in industrial enterprises.” ° “ What about nationalising the mines?”' asked Air Stead.

‘‘Nationalisation is- no security against strikes,” replied Lord Grey. ‘‘ Tho miners struck on the nationalised coal mines of New Zealand. There have been strikes in the post office. A State bureaucracy is apt to bo harder, and less elastic than a private employer.” ' “Could the. miners take _ over tho proper tv. and work the. mines themselves?” said Air Stead. “I was told the other day by an Australian that the offer was made to the miners in tho Now South Wales strike a few years a:o. They were asked only to pay 3$ per cent on the capital, hut- they refused thd offer.”

“I don't think this a question of p:rc?ntages so much as it is of mutual confidence,” said Lord Gray. “Tt is as true in business * as in religion. Bv laith are ye saved. Faith in each other’is essential if the best results are to be achieved. It is the old doctrine which our. friend Air Stanley Leo expressed with such force and truth when ho said, ‘ Tins men who can ho believed in most will get tho most business, and, what is more important, tho men who can make men believe in them most will he able to hire the employees who can ho believed in most, and will get a monopoly .of the efficiency of the world.’ ” “ Air T. Taylor, ALP., told me the other day,” added Air Stead, “that whils ho believed profit-sharing meant increased dividends, he would never recommend anyone to adopt it merely for the sake of increasing their dividends. It is a ease of ho who would save his - life shall lose it. When dividends aro made tho primary objective profit-sharing fails, like everything o’se.” “Yes,” said Lord Grey, “because it is t’-o spirit of mutual confidence, what Air Stanley Loo calls ‘ the evolution of the genius of 1 eing believed in.' which is tho secret of eo-nnrtnersbi'V li is r. practical and tangible sign that you do care for tho welfare of the worker. Without that you may try what dodges you like you will not succeed.”

“ Then on the whole you arc hopeful?”

‘■‘Yes.” said Lord Grey, “because I seo the way out. We may pass through a bad time, but there is light ahead, and the sign that leads us into safety is Cc-partnership.”