South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1889.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 4982, 15 April 1889, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1889.

Db Pabkeb, an eminent non-conformist minister in London, Las been inviting working men —in work and out of work —to meet Lira on week days during tLeir dinner Lour, for the purpose of Laving friendly “ talks ” about social matters. The men were requested to make themselves comfortable, to eat tLeir dinners, or smoke tLeir pipes if tLey cLose. Mot many men brougLt tLeir dinners, but a great many chose to smoke. This arrangement, of one man doing all the speaking, and the crowd all the listening, did not answer perfectly. It was not to be expected that it would, when both parties, the one and the many, each Lad some knowledge of the matters talked about, and very .different kinds of knowledge. Dr Parker next tried a sort of discussion, in which he took up, turn about, the unusual attitude for an educated man in quite good circumstances, that of a listener and a learner. We may be sure, without knowing a word that was said on either side, or what subjects were discussed, that the eminent preacher learned more of what was new than he taught. An instance will force this upon the slowest mind. At one of his meetingstbcy were discussing emigration

as a means of relieving distress, and Dr Parker asked a somewhat personal ( question which very nearly pub an end to his meeting altogether. “ Considering the amount of want and real distress you have among you, how is it that so many of you can afford to smoke ? ” I For fully five minutes a storm of howls and hisses raged round his devoted head, until at length it became doubtful if he would really be allowed to say another word. At length the well-known figure of John Burns, the Socialist, was seen far away in the smoke behind a pillar. Said the Socialist:—-“As a workman and a life-long abstainer from drink and tobacco, I find that men invariably smoke when they are out of work, to satisfy the craving of hunger.” “ Do you accept that as your answer?” thundered Dr Parker. The response of the crowd left no doubt that they did accept it, and Dr Parker admitted that after such emphatic testimony as they had given he was bound to accept it himself. That question seemed out of place and the meeting resented it as an impertinence ; but it was nevertheless a fortunate one. The learned doctor, and through him thousands of - others who knew nothing of it, learned something more about what they conside? one of the vices of the people.. Dr Parker’s proceedings are likely to be of some importance by calling attention in a new and effective way to the fact that the labour question presents a different side to the workingman than it presents to the-capitalist and the leisured classes. Dr Parker is evidently courageous enough to pursue the study of the question from that side, and he is too prominent a figure in London to be ignored by the Press, too zealous in his calling to hide any new light he may obtain under a bushel. One question thus discussed at one of these dinner hour meetings was “ What is the objection of the unemployed workmen to emigrate?” The workmen themselves, employed or unemployed, seemed to be unanimously opposed to emigration, for reasons many and various. “ They have not the means to go away,” cried one. They think it is unwise to leave friends at home simply to satisfy a class who do not care twopence for them,” remarked another, whose statement was greeted by loud approving cheers. One workman failed to see how emigration was going to improve the labour market. “This system of emigration,” he exclaimed amid a tempest of cheers, “ if it goes on for another 25 years will be one of the greatest causes of England’s downfall.” Another workman pointed out that there were complaints of want of employment in all parts of the world. Emigration would not help them. “ There is only one remedy, that is a compulsory shortening of the hours of labour.” This opinion was received by the crowd with a hearty cheer. This appears to be the drift of opinion among the working classes at Home, that the only salvation for them is a reduction of the hours of labor, or rather of the days of labor, from sis to five. Dr Parker has been asked to take up this question at one of his meetings One of his requisitionists cleverly appeals to the Doctor’s theology in support of this idea. To refrain from work on Saturday would be to return to the usage of the early Christian church, to keep the ancient Jewish sabbath, which is specially commanded, as well as the later Christian Lord’s day. The effect of the universal adoption of this plan would be, this person asserts, marvellous and far-reaching, it would recast all civilized society, by imparting an elevating tone to the whole of the middle and lower strata of the working population. He also cleverly appeals to the Doctor as a teacher of religion. Men and women,he pointed out, who have to toil from morning to night six days out of seven, are not likely to go to church on the seventh, when so many other dut'es in connection with the home and family are staring them in the face and calling for immediate attention. The question appears to narrow itself down to this. The working class seem to be willing to divide their means of livelihood the wages of labor—more evenly among all of their class, and propose to do it by reducing the working days to five per week : will capital agree to accept the corresponding reduction of its profits, so that the proposal may be carried out ?