The Unemployed Question.

Fair Play, Volume I, Issue 22, 1 June 1894, Page 9

The Unemployed Question.

[By Otto Kripman.]

.That the recent “unemployed agitation” differs both in character and magnitude from anything which New. Zealand has 'ever previously experienced is an undoubted fact. : It is •impossible to- deny that there are a large number, of honest, deserving, .and physically capable men who cannot find employ-ment,-and-though the loafer may be interspersed,- among them he certainly does not predominate. The situation becomes alarming when observation and enquiry give rise to a conviction that it is by no means transient, and has given strong indications of r having “ come to stay.” And because, it cannot fail to bo realized by any refleotive persons that the appearance of an unemployed class is, like the sore or ulcer, only a manifestation of disease within. Though the actual number of the unemployed, when considered in proportion to population, and compared with that existing in our sister colonies, does not riso to alarming dimensions, yet when we realize that their existence is ample proof that a far larger class are working either intormittantly’ or for a bare subsistence wage, we cannot feel surprise at the general complaint of dullness of trade, as it is undeniable that “ that section of society which forms the base and foundation of the social pyramid cannot be injured without the evil effects being felt “by the whole structure.” It is to be regretted that occasions of this sort arc too often used by party politicians to' make capital out of, and to cast obloquy on their opponents. This is indulged in to such an extent by the Press of this colony that through continued iteration they often succeed in impressing a portion of the public with the idea that the actions and policy otf such and such a Government were, economically, blunders; and the Ministry are responsible and accountable for conditions and effects, which have been produced by causes lying deeply-rooted in the fundamental principles upon which men’s conceptions of sociology have been founded. This is exactly the case with the unemployed question. The general prevalence it has, clearly absolves New Zealand from the imputation of having committed any error which has not been peculiar to almost every other civilized nation. Indeed that a surplus population is common at the present time to nearly every nation, irrespective of its form of Government, shows plainly to what a small extent Government prevails in directing or controlling the real’ welfare of a nation, and illustrates how far the political world lags behind the economic world. France, Russia, America, Germany, and England all languish under the same complaint; and all are giving most serious and earnest attention to the problem, fully recognizing it as the seed of an internal danger more fear- • ful and destructive to the life of a nation than the most calamitous war. Lord-Rosebery in speaking on the subject lately said: “ We ask you to rob no class, to rob no man, but we do say that unless effective means are taken to deal with this enormous, this incalculable population which is growing up around us, half unnoticed and half ignored, there is a danger for England, such as war has never brought, and from which it is the prayer of this Government that she may escape.” As the disease which often proves fatal to the strong man, passes lightly over the child, so a young and thinly populated country may pass through critical times and practically solve social problems, without much risk or trouble, which, in old and densely populated countries, hide-bound in old traditions, customs and ideas, are, if not quite insoluble, at least attended with infinite class friction, delay and danger. We New Zealanders can congratulate ourselves on having passed almost unscathed through our little troubles: the commercial depression consequent on our little land boom in the eighties, our labour troubles, and the great' strike of ninety one. We have even seen the “ women’s franchise,” and the new licensing elections practically operating, without as much as a broken head or a row. But success and happy escape in the past must not blind us to danger in, the future; and the existence and steady increase of a surplus' population constitutes a very grave danger, especially when we consider that a vast amount of political power has

passed into tlio hands of thoso people. ITotuy Qoorgo *says “ ir ° r rotten democracy may not in itself bo worso than rotten autocracy, its effect on national character will bo worse. To give the suffrage to tramps, to paupers, to men who must beg, or steal or starve, is to invoice destruction.” With regard to the suffrage, we have no choice. The barriers are down; our only safety lies in the possibility of our being able to prevent tho growth of such a class. Wo must determine «to placo our country in such a position that noablo-bodied, honest num willing to work shall bo unable to obtain it. Wo must devise and “ establish u means by which tho poverty which is the result of economic action,” cun bo discriminated “from that arising from drink, laziness, and'other inherent vices.” The life, the future, and the material well-being of every inhabitant in this hitherto happy and prosperous young country tie* pend upon tho solution of this problem.

With an unemployed class steadily on tho increase* thero •can bo little doubt that Nqw Zealand will suffer in many yvays, financially and morally. Without going deeply into tho abstruse and much abused “ dismal science,” and-, while fully admitting that tho lumiau affections, or humanity, does operate in our political economy, and provents wages going below the level of a “ bare subsistence,” yet it is impossible to deny that the continued and severe competition for employment among tho workers, which is necessitated by the very existence of this \mfortunate clufs, must, in spite of all the trade unions can do, steadily rcduco tho normal standard of living, ami through tho consequent lessening of demand for commodities, acting against the abnormal increase of productive power, offeot tho most (lisastrous results on trade and commereo, resulting in a series of industrial depressions never before witnessed in “ God’s own country.”

With regard to tho moral interests that are at stake, let us take a single illustration. As Democrats, and us Now Zculandors, wo aro justly proud of our national system of education. The children of all classes and denominations mingle hero and acquire that spirit of religious toleration, and gain that absence of class prejudice which has been one of tho happiest characteristics of this country. Now this very institution will, if wo permit tho unemployed class to incroaso, bo tho moans of poisoning national lifo and degrading our man and womanhood at the very source from which it should obtain support and strength. If our children have to mingle with tho children of persons whoso misery, want, and despair havo forced upon them tho necessity of living by immorality, frauds, and othor questionable methods, or has compelled them to livo in a state of unhealthy, vicious, and indecent surroundings, what must bo tho inevitable result ?

Clearly, the growth of this class must bo prevented. But how ? Carlyle, will! his caustic satiro, says Tho old Spartans had a wiser method, and wont out and huntod down their helots, and speared and spitted them, when they grow too numerous. With our improved fashions of hunting, Herr Hofrath, now after tho invention of fire-arms and standing armies, how much eusier were such a hunt! Perhaps in tho most thickly populated country, some three dayp annually might suffice to shoot all tho able-bodied paupers that had accumulated within the year. Let Governments think ofthis,” The existence of this evil and the dangers liablo to emanate from it, arotraiversally agreed on, but on the question of remedy ©very one seeing divided. Between philanthropists and reformers, and again.botween the various schools of reformers, the strongest feelings and the most strained relations exist, which naturally inortfose tho difficulty of applying any solution—but that which lies in tho power of the class it w desire! to assist, namely, that of appealing to the State. Which to their credit they do notoxorcise generally till “ self help” has failed. Or rather, 1 should my until private enterprise cannot employ them. In any case it is certain tlmt while people hold political power, by possessing a vote, they will not starve quietly. u In respect to the merits of tho various panaceas offered As palliatives, and.of the -theories which are held to be the economic eause of such unwholespmo social conditions, weldo not, feel culled upon to pass an opinion as it is a matter- which Now

Zealanders must decide for themselves, but it is evident that the social structure is not properly based. Even could we support the theory .of the Single Tax, Land Nationalization, Bi-metalhm, a State Bank, or State Socialism, it is evident that until the Democracy thoroughly understand the nature of these remedies, it is impossible to carry them into effect. It therefore behoves all intelligent persons to “ get outside themselves,’’ that is, to divest themselves of all class prejudice, and give their attention to the earnest study of all questions involving the welfare of their fellow creatures, remembering that, “it is not Kings, nor aristocracies, nor land-owners, nor capitalists that anywhere really enslave the people. It is their own ignorance. Most clear is this where Governments rest on universal suffrage.” Of one thing, however, we may be quite certain, that whatever may be the truth of the Malthusian theory in its application to the animal kingdom, or whatever probability there is of this suppositious law operating in the dim future, it cannot be said to have any bearing on the question of poverty in New Zealand. This 'country cannot be said to be over-populated in a Malthusian sense. Therefore to assert “ that population is increasing faster than the earth’s power of production,” and that our povertj' and our unemployed class are caused by a dearth of food or wealth, is to utter a lie, which the most casual observer can easily refute. The Malthusian theory has for some time been losing its hold on men's minds, partly by the attacks and practical disproof made by Henry George, Tolstoi, and other writers, and partly from the fact that the main cause of poverty in the present age is undoubtedly over-production and consequent lowness of prices. The advanced school of social economists have totally abandoned it, and it only rests as an obstructing encumbrance in the minds of a few fossilized thinkers. With this foul and unnatural theory cleared away, it becomes apparent that the only other cause can be unequal distribution of the reward of labour, and the only ob 'acle to greater harmony and human well-being lies in man him elf. Let us 3’ellect.