.n . I' I I 
 
 In. Ill if. IV '1 """-l liiilir.lM.ll i|ll 
 
 mp4 no? 6'../' ?3i 
 
Hi 
 f1 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL 
 
 OF 
 
 INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR 
 
 RELATIONS 
 
 AT 
 
 CORNELL UNIVERSITY 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY AND 
 
 It would be interesting to know 
 whether the late Lord Leverhulme ever 
 became fully aware of the fallacy in his 
 attitude toward his laborers. " Work six 
 " hours a day at your maximum capac- 
 " ity of production," he would say, 
 " then study and improve yourselves for 
 " two hours, and I can afford to pay you 
 " for eight hours." The catch is in the 
 perpendicular pronoun. He, William 
 Hasketh Lever, could afford it. Fur- 
 thermore, he could afford to build Port 
 Sunlight, with its Old English houses, 
 its red roofs of tile, its dooryards abloom 
 with flovers and its densely shaded 
 streets; and he could afford to rent 
 those houses at $2 a month. It was a 
 beautiful and stirring tribute to the dig- 
 nity of labor, to the great spirit of broth- 
 erhood which should always, though it 
 seldom does, animate industrial relation- 
 ships. Having himself risen from the 
 soap cutter's bench, he revered the child 
 who was his father. But in order to 
 do it he worked not six but sixteen 
 hours a day. 
 
 It is doubtless not true, as cynical folk 
 have suggested, that the dreamland, gar- 
 den village, and the fervid talk of six 
 hours and self-improvement, were in 
 reality nothing but an advertisement for 
 Sunlight Soap. Though a ruthless or- 
 ganizer and exacting taskmaster, Lord 
 Leverhulme was genuinely kind and 
 gentle. The pertinent fact is that the 
 employers who can afford such conspicii- , 
 ous benefactions are few. Of all busi- 
 ness enterprises attempted, over 90 per 
 cent, end in failure; and of the success-^ 
 ful a very small proportion make possi- 
 ble a liberality so great. In the guise 
 of creating a new industrial order, Lord 
 Leverhulme exemplified only a fortu- 
 nate working of the old. The progres-' 
 of industry has come mainly from such 
 
 men. They have a mental force, an in- 
 cessant activity in creation, that will not 
 permit them to be idle or to sleep. 
 ' The fact that Lord Leverhulme saw 
 in the six-hour day a boon to his work- 
 men implied, in the plainest possible 
 terms, his sense of their inferiority. Nor 
 was he an authority on culture if he 
 thought it could be achieved and sus- 
 tained on two hours a day. He made 
 manifest his own attainments when ha 
 cut out the head and shoulders of a por- 
 trait which a famous artist had painted 
 of him, in order to protect it from dam- 
 age in his safe. As an individual bene- 
 factor, a personal adventure in well- 
 doing, what he did was a shinirig exam- 
 ple. As a social and economic innova- 
 tion it was not very significant. 
 
 Such endeavors, of which the world; 
 has seen not a few, pose a problem no 
 less important than the one they solve.' i 
 Even the eight-hour day, as the Carnegie 
 Corporation pointed out of late, leaves 
 the workman with more time on his 
 hands than- he often employs to his 
 profit. Having restricted labor, the lib-,! 
 eral minded are now busy on the proh- , 
 lem of utilising leisure. Going and com- 
 ing, the workman is subject to solicitude. 
 Whatever the material result of the Car- > 
 negie researches, they will throw a much | 
 needed light on the popular capacity for ■ 
 improvement. But the! fact will remain; 
 that men of creative capacity do not; 
 limit themselves to hours. i 
 
The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/cletails/cu31924002657231 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 AND OTHER INDUS- 
 TRIAL QUESTIONS 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 & OTHER INDUS- 
 TRIAL QUESTIONS 
 
 BY 
 
 LORD LEVERHULME 
 
 WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY 
 VISCOUNT HALDANE OF CLOAN 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 STANLEY UNWIN 
 
 PROPERT^ffiTiXlBRARY 
 
 IfJDJJSTU^L m !,K;?i RELATIONS 
 
 CORNELL UNIVERSITY 
 
 NEW YORK 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 1919 
 
(All righls reserved] 
 
EDITOR'S FOREWORD 
 
 When Lord Leverhulme gave me permission to reprint in 
 book form a collection of his Addresses, I had no conception 
 of the mass of material from which I should be called upon 
 to make a selection. The wide range of the subjects and the 
 diversity of the audiences are aUke remarkable. Whether 
 he is addressing a learned society, a meeting of business men, 
 a boys' or girls' school, a men's brotherhood, or a gathering 
 of his own employees, his gifts of lucid exposition, concrete 
 and often homely illustration and apt anecdote never fail 
 him. One thing he has never learnt — ^how to be dull. It 
 was, indeed, surprising to find that one so immersed in business 
 and occupied with enterprises in all parts of the world had 
 found time for so much activity of this character. But the 
 ' explanation was simple ; Lord Leverhulme prescribes a Six 
 hour Day, but he manages to work sixteen. 
 
 In the following selection I have confined myself largely 
 to addresses deahng with Industrial questions, and in particular 
 to those which treat of the two subjects which lie nearest to 
 rj his heart and upon which he has had most to say — Co-partner- 
 ^ ship and the Six-hour Day. But space has been found under 
 ^ the heading " Education and Business " for some characteristic 
 3 speeches of a lighter order. 
 
 ^ For the most part no changes have been made in the 
 
 original text, but to avoid undue repetition, references to the 
 
 4 
 > 
 
vi EDITOR'S FOREWORD 
 
 Six-hour Day and Co-partnership have been omitted from 
 addresses concerned principally with other subjects. 
 
 The two opening essays on the " Six-hour Day " have 
 been specially written for the volunae and embody Lord 
 Leverhulme's considered views on this all-important subject. 
 They demonstrate that in the opinion of one of the most 
 enlightened capitalists and foremost business administrators 
 in this country a Six-hour Day is no mere chimera but 
 a practical and necessary step in the Reconstruction after 
 the War. If this volume serves to focus attention upon this 
 one attainable ideal, its most important purpose will have 
 been achieved. 
 
 STANLEY UNWIN. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 EDITOR'S FOREWORD v 
 
 INTRODUCTION BY VISCOUNT HALDANE . ix 
 
 THE SIX-HOUR DAY— 
 
 I. INTRODUCTORY. THE INDUSTRIAL SITUA- 
 TION 3 
 
 II. THE SIX-HOUR DAY . . . .14 
 
 III. TOOLS TO THE MEN WHO CAN USE THEM 36 
 
 IV. NATIONAL POSSIBILITIES . . 50 
 
 CO-PARTNERSHIP— 
 
 I. CO-PARTNERSHIP .... 59 
 
 II. CO-PARTNERSHIP AND BUSINESS MANAGE 
 MENT 
 
 III. RIGHT CONSTITUTION OF CO-PARTNER 
 
 SHIP 
 
 IV. ESSENTIALS OF CO-PARTNERSHIP . 
 V. CO-PARTNERSHIP AND EFFICIENCY . 
 
 VI. CO-PARTNERSHIP AND HIGH WAGES 
 VII. HARMONIZING CAPITAL AND LABOUR 
 VIII. TRADERS' PARTNERS 
 APPENDIX— 
 
 73 
 
 90 
 
 95 
 
 97 
 
 107 
 
 112 
 
 123 
 
 The Co-Partnership Trust ix Lever 
 Brothers Limited .... 135 
 
viii CONTENTS 
 
 PAS I 
 
 HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE— 
 
 I. UNDERCURRENTS OF HOUSING, CAPITAL, 
 
 AND LABOUR 141 
 
 II. LAND FOR HOUSES . . . .155 
 
 III. VISIT OF INTERNATIONAL HOUSING CON- 
 
 FERENCE . . . . . .170 
 
 IV. STANDARDIZING WELFARE ... 183 
 
 EDUCATION AND BUSINESS— 
 
 I. YOURSELF IS MASTER . 
 II. FAST ASLEEP ON A GOLD MINE 
 
 III. VICTIMS OF EDUCATION . 
 
 IV. GIRLS AND BOYS . 
 
 V. OUTPUT AND INTAKE *' . 
 
 • 199 
 . 210 
 . 221 
 . 231 
 ■ 236 
 
 SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS— 
 
 L INDUSTRIAL ADMINISTRATION . . ■ .247 
 IL COMBINES .260 
 
 III. AT PROBLEMS 274 
 
 IV. ZERO YIELDS OF CAPITAL AND LABOUR . 290 
 V. DAY-WORK OR PIECE-WORK— WHICH ? . 309 
 
 VI. SOCIALISM, OR EQUALITY AND EQUITY . 329 
 INDEX . . . . . 342 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 By viscount HALDANE 
 
 Truth does not stand still. What is enough for one genera- 
 tion may prove inadequate when that generation has done 
 its work and a new one has arrived. He would be bold who 
 ventured to say that any plan for settling the relations between 
 labour and capital coiild be reckoned on to prove' sufficient 
 in times ahead, merely because it would improve the state 
 of things to-day. 
 
 None the less it is an event of importance when a captain 
 of industry on a colossal scale has planned out a means 
 towards the end of making things work in his own time, and 
 has so far put Cof Partnership into successful operation. 
 The pages of this book set forth not only the broad conclu- 
 sions to which Lord Leverhulme has come about reform in 
 the relations of capital to labour in great productive under- 
 takings, but the book describes the fashion in which he has 
 actually sought to apply these conclusions in his own very 
 large works. It is this feature in the exposition that gives 
 it much more than an academic importance. There will 
 doubtless be many questions raised, and many who will assert 
 that the point which he has reached falls short by much 
 of the end of a joiurney the whole of which they wish to 
 accomplish. But it cannot but be to the good to have before 
 us the record which the book contains of a great attempt 
 at progress. Lord Leverhulme's endeavour has been to 
 
X INTRODUCTION 
 
 interest labour in the results which modern direction of labour 
 and of the capital employed is accomplishing. His principle 
 is progressive profit-sharing on the part of labour. He 
 describes the system under which the worker is given a share 
 in profits without being subjected to the temptations and 
 uncertainties of the common type of shareholder. He says 
 frankly that his motive has been no merely, sentimental one, 
 but the desire to do what is at once best for his business and 
 at the same time beneficial and just to those employed in it. 
 It is plain that the conception which underlies Lord 
 Leverhulme's conclusions about productive imdertakings is 
 very different from that put forward more than half a century 
 ago by Karl Marx. The sociaUsts of those days taught 
 that labour was the real source of wealth, and that the com- 
 petition for employment brought about by increase of popula- 
 tion enabled the monopolist who chanced to own capital 
 to dictate rates of wages tending towards the minimum that 
 would avert bare starvation. For them the obvious and only 
 remedy was the abolition of private ownership of capital, 
 including land. But the advent on a large scale of the 
 > modern banking system, and particularly of the joint-stock 
 company, has to some extent changed the premises of the 
 syllogism. Capital is now no monopoly. It is a widely 
 diffused commodity which can be hired in the open market 
 at a moderate interest by any one who can command pubUc 
 confidence. The particular form of capital which is called 
 land is not in reality in a different position. We are rapidly 
 tending to the general opinion that it must not be withheld 
 where it is required, and that all the owner is entitled to is 
 its market value. Capital, including land, is therefore to- 
 day becoming an instrument of which he who can really 
 wield it can get the use freely. It does not create wealth. 
 That is created by the unlocking of the potential energy 
 
INTRODUCTION xi 
 
 stored up in the world beneath, around, and above us, and 
 by the conversion of this potential into kinetic energy in 
 its appropriate form. Coal, for instance, enables men to 
 produce heat and steam, and the energy of steam is turned 
 into electricity. But labour is for this purpose only an 
 instrument, no more adequate by itself to the task than is 
 capital. What impels both is participation in thought-out 
 and complete operation, and what is the fountain and origin 
 of the activities of both is mind. The initiation and direc- 
 tion cannot be given either by the mere capitalist or the 
 mere labourer. As progress takes place, as increase of out- 
 put becomes more and more essential, as competition sets 
 in, only to be met by fresh invention, it becomes plain that 
 no industry can stand still. If it is to succeed it must be 
 constantly adapted, and to this end not only mind but 
 trained mind, and the increasing command of scientific 
 knowledge and invention, are essential. The director who 
 has genius will accordingly always possess something of 
 the power of a monopolist. 
 
 fc. Now, how is this new form of peril to be met ? To begin 
 with, it cannot be wholly met. Nature will always produce 
 men and women of quite unequal capacity for direction, 
 and a few with talent for it which will give them colossal 
 advantages in the competition for the foremost place. In 
 the second place, I do not think that we need worry ourselves 
 over the fact that we cannot prevent nature from denying 
 us equality in this particular form of talent. As civiUzation 
 progresses, if the minimum standards are raised as regards 
 the home and the means of living, if knowledge is more widely 
 diffused and higher ideals prevail, inequahty in wealth will 
 count for less than it does to-day. What are called " values " 
 will change ; I mean those ends which people judge as con- 
 clusively best in themselves, and to be chosen without question- 
 
xu INTRODUCTION 
 
 Men and women, relieved from the grinding pressure of 
 poverty, and having enough" to live on, may well prefer, as 
 the main thing that counts in life, to know more rather than 
 to have more wealth. The possessions of the miUionaire 
 may, in days to come, coimt for less to the average man than 
 under existirig conditions. And here comes in the real point 
 of Lord Leverhulme's ideal of a six-hour day. The labour 
 of such a day must be concentrated if it is to bring a suffi- 
 ciency in wages. But if it does bring such a sufficiency it 
 leaves leisure for the things of the soul. 
 
 One of the nascent ideas which are taking root in this 
 country, an idea which is being fostered in particular by 
 the Workers' Educational Association, is adult education. 
 We have forgotten too often that a man's mind can be de- 
 veloped in a high degree comparatively late in life. Under 
 sufficient stimulus of ideas he can acquire a freedom of spirit 
 which is just as important to him as his bodily liberty. For 
 freedom is the essential characteristic of mind at its best, 
 the freedom which enables it to detach itself and to choose 
 freely ; to be the spectator of time and of eternity, and to 
 abstract, if need be, from its own pain and even from its own 
 death. We want to produce in this country a generation 
 of an outlook large enough to see things steadily and to see 
 them whole. If the doctrine which underlies Lord Lever- 
 hulme's conclusions is right, the production of such a genera- 
 tion is of high importance for industry itself as well as for 
 spiritual ends. Now the six-hour day is a means to the 
 attainment of this object. 
 
 But the conception of direction as the source of wealth has 
 another application. Probably it is best that in the supreme 
 command of every great industrial undertaking there should 
 be a single great inteUigence. Unity of conception and of 
 execution is not, in its highest form, easy to produce co- 
 
INTRODUCTION xiu 
 
 operatively. We have seen something of this truth in con- 
 nection with the armies in this war. But just as even in an 
 army devolution can be carried very far and with great ad- 
 vantage, if the level of general intelligence is high enough, 
 so it is in industry. The object ought always to be to get the 
 operations that are merely mechanical performed by machines 
 in relief of men, and to entrust to the men in charge of them 
 the duty of arriving at a result by their own intelligence and 
 initiative rather than by mere rule of thumb. So only are 
 initiative and invention to be stimulated. So only is labour 
 to be relieved of the monotony which always comes in when 
 the mind is not called on to play any real part. 
 
 In other words, the object should surely be to make the 
 workman in the future more of a director of instruments 
 than a labourer, and to unite hand and brain as of necessity 
 implying each other. Monotony will at least be diminished 
 when men feel that they have alwaj^ to be thinking when 
 they act, and that the occupation of the workman depends 
 on knowledge and skill, and belongs to what is truly a pro- 
 fession. It win require education and training to bring 
 this about, but if it can be done, even partially, it will 
 give more freedom of the spirit and it wiU ^ve some- 
 thing more besides. It will afford an opening for exceptional 
 talent, and for its development to the man who possesses 
 it. For the factory and the mine will tend to become places 
 where there is a gradation of direction, dependent on 
 capacity for directing. It will be open to every man to rise, 
 and it will be in the interest of the organization as a whole 
 that he should have the chance of rising,. and of so bringing 
 to bear his own special gift To thB end not only do Lord 
 Leverhulme's six-hour day but his profit-sharing arrange- 
 ment also seem to leCid means. And in the nation as a whole 
 the tendency will be to substitute for the existing aristocracy 
 
xiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 of wealth a new aristocracy, an 61ite of talent, the members 
 of which will always be changing, and which will be open to 
 the humblest if only he renders himself capable of entering it. 
 
 Such a reorganization of industry and of society can only 
 come gradually. But the gradual process of its evolution 
 may produce results more rapidly than people are apt to think. 
 It is not only the new earnestness of spirit about education 
 and the things of the soul that promises much. It is the 
 new and impressive demand to bring production up to the 
 level of the scientific standards which are now being reached. 
 As Lord Leverhulme says, our waste of energy by not de- 
 veloping electrical processes and machinery is a hindrance. 
 We seem, however, to be in sight of great reforms in this 
 connection which may enormously diminish the waste of coal 
 and water-power which has obtained hitherto. With a copiotis 
 and well-distributed national system of distribution of elec- 
 trical current from great central generating stations, instead 
 of its inadequate and costly supply from the multitude of 
 little generators which are strewed about the country to-day, 
 a vast improvement becomes conceivable. If this were 
 done, much reduction in standing charges would be possible, 
 together with greaitly increased production and much improved 
 wages. The energy furnished could be employed mainly 
 in the day for giving power, and at night largely for giving 
 light. But it would at least be easier to provide for the 
 continuous operation in different forms of a uniform elec- 
 trical current which would make practicable the provision 
 required for the introduction of a succession of short shifts 
 for those employed in production. 
 
 In these matters, which are of such tremendous impor- 
 tance for the future of our nation, the Government and the 
 great captains of industry, such as Lord Leverhulme, must 
 play their part. Much thought and much guarding against 
 
INTRODUCTION xv 
 
 inertness and the selfishness of the individual are required. 
 But, after all, what is most important is a high level of intelli- 
 gence and interest in our people. And it will not be enough 
 to confine this intelligence and this interest to things that 
 are only material, however important. Further ideals are 
 required — ideals of knowledge, ideals of beauty, and ideals of 
 conduct. The whole man must be kept in view throughout. 
 The spiritual leaders, in Churches and in Parliament and else- 
 where, must co-operate. For it is not by bread alone that 
 man can live. 
 
 But the soul cannot be saved unless the body is attended 
 to, and it is because I think that the result of Lord Lever- 
 hulme's striving will be, if he succeeds, to better the 
 condition of both soul and body that I have ventured 
 by his desire to write these introductory lines in his book, 
 and especially to that part of it which considers the 
 six-hour day. 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
INTRODUCTORY. THE INDUSTRIAL 
 SITUATION 
 
 When this world-war is over we shall be confronted with 
 problems which, whilst in no way new, will be presented in 
 new and acute forms. How shall we, as an empire, emerge 
 from this ordeal ? Are we to continue a progressive democ- 
 racy or sink into the slough of Socialism and Anarchy ? The 
 decision will rest not with the Socialists or Anarchists ; not 
 Mdth politicians or Governments, but with the business men 
 and working men of the Empire. Hitherto on both sides 
 there has been a disastrous exhibition of short-sightedness 
 and of greed, or lack of knowledge of those economic laws 
 on which all solid well-being must and can only rest. Every 
 increase in wages and shortening of hours has been resisted 
 by business men as a raid on their ability to meet competition 
 and make reasonable profits. And every attempt by business 
 men to increase output and reduce costs has been met by 
 the workers with sullen indifference or the active opposition 
 of " ca' caimy " methods. 
 
 Now we shall, after the war, be entering upon the most 
 fateful and critical stage of our Empire's career. This war 
 has thrown aU previous rules and practices into the melting- 
 pot. How wiU the Empire emerge ? Are we to attempt 
 after the war to restore old decayed, wrong, and ruinous prac- 
 tices, or is there to be a radical recasting of aU our business 
 and labour methods ? It has been truly said that " to govern 
 and in turn to be governed is the only form of true liberty." 
 In a true democracy and in this sense there is no governing 
 class and no class that is governed : all classes govern, and 
 all classes in turn serve alike and together. All classes serve 
 one master — ^the only master whose service all liberty-loving 
 
4 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 citizens can be proud to serve — ^and that is their country's 
 welfare. 
 
 Amidst all this confusion and clash of arms, this return 
 to conditions of savage barbarism, our great encouragement 
 and confidence are that the British Empire stands soUd and 
 united to face her foes, and loyal to our King as Sovereign 
 of the British race at home and in our Colonies as never before 
 in her history. Some timid people, suffering from an attack 
 of cold feet, nervously ask, " What about Labour ? " The 
 answer we can find most clearly written in our history is, 
 " Trust Labour wholeheartedly and wisely, and all will be 
 well." . A good and wise lover of the cause of Labour can 
 never be a bad or undesirable citizen of the British Empire. 
 And it win be our own fault if, by distrust and suspicions, 
 we make him so. Let us never forget that the British spirit 
 responds best when trusted, and can only become stupid, 
 morose, and bad when distrusted and viewed with suspicion. 
 This nation as a whole has never yet really trusted Labour. 
 We have always borne a mental attitude of suspicion and 
 distrust towards Labour. Well, this attitude won't help us, 
 and is doomed to most serious failure and may bring possible 
 disaster to the Empire. We have, with unbounded success, 
 trusted our Colonies and other sections of the community 
 that make up the British Empire, and, when we have done, 
 so, all has been well. We have even trusted the Boers in 
 South Africa, who were so recently at war against us ; and 
 now who amongst us dare to-day to come forward and say that 
 our trust has not been amply and fully repaid by the loyalty 
 and devotion to the British Empire of our South African 
 brothers, Boer or Briton ? Distrust and suspicion can only 
 breed distrust and suspicion, whilst confidence and trust 
 inspire confidence and trust. The sjmipathy of every right- 
 thinking man or woman is with those who toil ; with those 
 who produce the necessities and comforts of life ; with those 
 who bear the burden and heat of the day in whatever position 
 they may be working : employer-capitaUsts or employee- 
 workers. 
 
 Our national future stability has its sure foundation in 
 the fact that both employer-capitalist and employee-worker 
 are each becoming more and more inteUigent every year that 
 passes. The day is fast coming when both will be inteUigent 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 5 
 
 enough to recognize that their interests are identical and that 
 the prosperity of either depends on the prosperity of both. 
 
 Life is not merely a respite between the sentence of death 
 which is passed on all life at birth and the execution of that 
 sentence. Every healthy human being seeks for happiness, 
 and has to find happiness in suppl5dng the wants of the body 
 with food, clothing, and shelter. And equally happiness can 
 only be fotmd in feeding mind and soul with ideals of beauty, 
 art, and learning. Happiness of the lasting, permanent type, 
 without after shadows of regrets or ghosts of repentances, is 
 the only good, and everything that tends to produce such 
 happiness in men and women is good, and to do whatever 
 produces this state and condition is to achieve the highest 
 possible gain for the Empire and the whole of mankind. 
 
 Our industries progress, science progresses, but we have 
 little or no corresponding progress in conditions of comfort 
 of the workers. The employee-worker lags behind in that 
 culture, education, social and economic well-being which he 
 ought to enjoy under modem conditions of civilization. Our 
 manufacturing towns are squaUd and overcrowded, with 
 ugly dweUings, without gardens. They are unlovely conges- 
 tions, without beauty or possibility of refinement, and the 
 great btilk of the workers remain at a relatively low state of 
 betterment. The individual Home is the solid rock and basis 
 of every strong, intelligent race. The more homes there are 
 and the better these homes are, the more stable and strong 
 the nation becomes. Men and women who get up to go to 
 work before daylight and return from that work after dark, 
 cannot find hfe worth hving. They are simply working to 
 earn enough one day to prepare themselves to go to work 
 again the next day. Their whole life is one grey, dull, mono- 
 tonous grind, and soon their lives become of no more value 
 to themselves or the nation than that of mere machines. 
 
 Every year the workers become more inteUigent and more 
 acute reasoners. Think of the intelligence required in the 
 workers to produce a modern locomotive or a greyhound of 
 the Atlantic, or to work and operate the same, and to make 
 and operate all the thousands of different t5rpes of machines 
 now producing and working for the good of man. And each 
 succeeding year demands stiU higher inteUigence to produce 
 still higher, better, and more complex mechanical utiUties. 
 
6 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 The requirements of our ancestors were few^ but as civili- 
 zation advances, not only do the wants of the body for variety 
 in food, raiment, and shelter increase, but as the mind and 
 soul expand, the intellectual horizon widens and the higher 
 plane of Uving demands more and more leisure to feed its 
 hunger for better conditions of life. 
 
 In the dark ages that are past, man believed in the super- 
 natural as the direction in which he should search to satisfy 
 his super-wants. To meet disease and death, primitive man 
 believed in charms, magics, fetishes, and incantations. In 
 chemistry he sought for the transmutation of base metals into 
 gold, and his idea of mechanics was a search for perpetual 
 motion ; and as to Governments, he relied on the Divine Right 
 of Kings and InfalUbiUty of Popes. 
 
 Are we not equally ignorant and equally doomed to dis- 
 appointment if to-day the employer-capitaUst reUes on the 
 magic of the "perpetual motion" fetish of long hours of 
 toil, with low wages for employee-workers ; and are we not 
 also doomed to disappointment if to-day the employee- 
 workers rely on the " Philosopher's Stone " of " ca' canny " 
 and the " transmutation " of restriction of output into the 
 " Elixir of Life " ? 
 
 The struggle of science and right thinking against ignorance 
 and prejudice during the dark ages was long and bitter, but 
 to-day no chemist is seeking for the " Elixir of Life " or 
 tr5dng to discover the " Philosopher's Stone." And equally 
 our present-day ignorance of those economic laws that govern 
 costs of production will disappear, and we shall learn that 
 by development and encouragement of individual effort for 
 increased output in fewer hours with higher wages we can 
 best serve all mankind and best overcome all obstacles to 
 progress, and so, by taking advantage of discoveries of science 
 in invention and industrial development, supply all our wants 
 with less exertion and secure a greater reserve of leisure to 
 satisfy the hunger of mind and souL 
 
 We are all agreed that the industrial situation has become 
 the most pressing after-war problem to be solved, and that 
 the solution will not be easy, not because there is more poverty 
 in the United Kingdom to-day than ever — as a matter of 
 fact there is less poverty than ever before in our history — 
 but because there is a wholesome Labour unrest and national 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 7 
 
 craving for vastly better conditions of life. The poor are 
 not growing poorer, and the workman of to-day is better oii 
 than his employer was two centuries ago. But because — 
 and I rejoice that it is so — the workman is each day becoming 
 more ambitious, his mind and soul are expanding at a greater 
 rate than, imder existing conditions — even with higher wages 
 — ^his leisure time pemaits him to keep pace with. Each year 
 the workman is becoming a better educated man, with better 
 social outlook. Whilst his social outlook is expanding, the 
 workman in the twentieth century finds himself simply a 
 seller of service, and that he has gradually become a cipher 
 in a most complex industrial system, and has his Ufe absorbed 
 and controlled as a mere unit in a great factory or workshop 
 that leaves him no scope for the exercise of the higher intel- 
 lectual developments of modem Ufe. 
 
 Whilst science is making life more Uvable and lovable by 
 means of rapid transit and greater range of interests and 
 wider scope, the time of the worker is occupied almost entirely 
 in the provision of food, shelter, and clothing, with little or 
 no leisure time remaining, even if he had the means, to provide 
 for a higher level of Hving. He sees other sections of the 
 community dashing about in motor-cars and generally Uving 
 what appear to be, in contrast to his own life, lives of leisure 
 and comfort. So long as the workman's hfe is passed in 
 monotonous toil in factory and workshop from daybreak 
 to sunset, no wages, however high, can make up for this 
 separation from all that is highest and best in life : the 
 workman is not content to be exhausted in the task of pro- 
 viding food, shelter, and clothing for himself, wife, and 
 children, with practically no leisure for other pursuits. 
 
 This is perhaps a subconscious state, and is a condition 
 that the workman himself would probably be unable to put 
 into clear language, but that it exists is plainly shown by 
 the so-called " Labour Unrest," and by the readiness with 
 which a section of the Labour Party is prepared, Samson 
 like, to break the pillars and throw down the whole structure 
 of Society, rather than continue under the present conditions 
 of the workman's, life (which hateful conditions are far from 
 being merely and solely a question of wages) — ^he disregards 
 social usages, awards of umpires, his own Trade Union leaders, 
 and the legal rights of Society, and would seek industrial 
 
8 THE SIX-SOUR DAY 
 
 revolution in order to obtain redress from his present 
 industrial position, and often merely imaginary grievances. 
 
 All this " Labour Unrest " arises from the fact that his 
 life in factory and workshop has become one dull, monoto- 
 nous grind, from schoolage to dotage, and this state of mind 
 is as dangerous to the workman himself as it is to the nation 
 — dangerous to himself, because, while he smarts under the 
 oppression of his lot in life, he does not quite know how to 
 obtain that fuUness of life and happiness, comfort and well- 
 being, leisure and advancement for which he hungers. 
 
 It is a basic law of all healthy, permanent growth that 
 no one part of a whole can increase and' develop without 
 all other parts being synunetrically and proportionately 
 increased and developed. This is equally true of Society as 
 a whole or viewed in sections. No section of Society can 
 enjoy improved conditions without all other sections enjoying 
 improved conditions — otherwise there would be lack of sym- 
 metry in the whole and danger of the social tree toppling 
 over at the first gale that tested the strength of the hold of 
 its roots on the soUd groimd. The future security, or the 
 present danger that menaces the industrial world, will be exactly 
 in proportion to the symmetrical growth or lack thereof in 
 all its parts. We can have no so-called leisured class or 
 moneyed class unless all classes can enjoy the opportunity 
 in their lives of leisure and money in ssmimetrical proportion. 
 Not in equal proportions, because there is no such thing 
 as equality or uniformity in God's scheme of man or of nature. 
 But nature's and man's Creator never planned that one 
 section should be starved whilst another section be overfed 
 without decay and death resulting. Therefore our problem 
 can only be solved by increasing wealth and increasing leisure. 
 Then equal distribution would have no meaning, because the 
 mere fact of equal distribution would increase neither the 
 total wealth nor the total leisiu-e — ^in fact, equal distribution 
 would decrease both, by withdrawing the stimulus of reward 
 from those possessed of the power to create wealth and 
 leisure, and would encourage the " leaners " and " apathetics " 
 to cease from all efforts and to make no use of opportunity 
 as a means for development in skill and knowledge for pro- 
 duction of wealth. 
 The power to create wealth is not a power against the 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 9 
 
 public interest and well-being, any more than is bodily health 
 and strength or great intellectual power. A man is not an 
 enemy of the himian race because, by exercise of foresight, 
 thrift, and inteUigence, he has accumulated great wealth, any 
 more than is the man who, by temperate living and good 
 habits, accumulates a store of good health, and consequently 
 is fitted to Hve a long hfe. It would be as logical, as right, 
 and as reasonable for the consumptives, the weak, the feeble, 
 and the diseased to denounce the healthy and strong as it 
 is for those possessing httle or no wealth to denounce the 
 rich and wealthy. And it would be just as effective a cure 
 for consumption, weakness, feebleness, and disease to take 
 steps to reduce the healthy and strong to a state of weakness, 
 feebleness, and disease as it would be a cure for poverty to 
 attempt to conscript the riches of the wealthy. 
 
 Take, for instance, the crude Henry George theories that 
 to abolish all property in land by confiscating the rents re- 
 ceived from land, and the more recent suggestions of others, 
 that to aboUsh all ownership in capital by confiscating all 
 interest and profits on capital would abolish poverty, and 
 this wealth, when shared in by all equally, would bring about 
 the millennium. These proposals are shown up in all their 
 grotesque absurdity when we examine the figures, for we 
 then find that their product, on pre-war basis, would, if divided 
 equally, be under iid. per head per day for each man, woman, 
 and child in the United Kingdom. In this calculation we 
 take, of course, no count of salaries or wages, or of foreign 
 investments, but merely of profits, rents, and interest on 
 capital invested in the United Kingdom. 
 
 So that equaUty or uniformity of wealth is clearly no way 
 to ab(^sh poverty 
 
 A man is not a criminal merely because he is wealthy 
 nor is a man a criminal merely because he is weak, feeble, 
 or diseased. A man is not judged merely by his state of 
 health or disease, or his state of wealth or poverty, but by 
 his acts and how he lives, be he healthy or diseased, be he 
 wealthy or poor, and he is also rightly judged by how he 
 came by his health or disease and how he came by his wealth 
 or poverty. 
 
 Some men acquired their health and strength, their feeble- 
 ness, ill-health, or disease from their parents ; others gained 
 
10 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 their strength and health, or acquired their ill-health, feeble- 
 ness, or disease, by their own acts. Equally, some men inherit 
 their wealth or poverty from their parents, whilst others 
 have gained their wealth or become poor by their own acts. 
 A strong, healthy man can use his health and strength not 
 only for his own benefit and happiness, but also for the good 
 and happiness of others, and so become a gain to the whole 
 human race. Equally, a wealthy man can" use his wealth 
 and riches not only for his own benefit and happiness, but 
 also for the good. and happiness of others, and so become a 
 gain to the whole human race. The well-being and happiness 
 of the whole human race depend not on equality of health 
 or of wealth, but on each man and woman making the best 
 use of their health or wealth, be either or both little or great, 
 for the production of more health and more wealth. It is 
 only so that gradually all can become healthy and all wealthy. 
 Every advantage must be taken of every opportunity for 
 creation of conditions that make it easier for each man and 
 woman — ^if they so wiU — ^to become more and more healthy 
 and strong, more and more wealthy and happy. 
 
 The great end and aim of life is happiness. The happy 
 man or woman is the highest product the world can produce, 
 whatever their state of health or wealth, but health and 
 wealth are great removers of limitations. And that is all 
 that either health or wealth can do for any of us — ^just 
 remove our limitations and give us a wider scope for use- 
 fulness to our feUow-men. 
 
 We are forced, therefore, to direct our whole energies to 
 the production of more wealth, and in doing so we must con- 
 centrate on machine power and not on human energy. This 
 will enable us to increase wages by creating a larger fund 
 out of which to pay Labour — to increase leisure by reducing 
 costs, so that fewer hours of toil are required to produce more 
 goods, better goods, and cheaper goods by an ever-increasing 
 use of machine power, so that the worker becomes, as he was 
 intended to be, a director of machinery and not himself a 
 machine or part of a machine. The man must be master 
 and controller of the machine, and not the machine be master 
 and so swallow up the mind and personality of the man. 
 
 We find all over the world, in the semi-civilized countries 
 as well as in the most highly civilized, that wealth is the 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 11 
 
 greatest, wages are the highest, and hours of labour are 
 the shortest where capital invested in naachine power is the 
 greatest per head of the people. This outstanding fact has 
 yet to be learned by both employer-capitahst and employee- 
 worker. The employer-capitalist must get rid of his infatua- 
 tion for the error that low wages and long hours of toil for 
 the employee-worker mean cheaper production and conse- 
 quently higher profits. It is only by the extended use of 
 machine power and the prompt adoption of every labour- 
 saving device that cheaper production can be achieved by 
 obtaining a greater volume of products. And it is only by 
 the pa3iing of the highest possible rate of wages to the 
 employee-worker for the fewest possible nimiber of hours 
 that an adequate demand for this increased volume of products 
 can be found. Leisure increases wants, whilst over-fatigue 
 and long hours decrease wants. The British-employee-worker 
 will then recognize the fallacy of restriction of output as a 
 means to social betterment for the workers, and will for ever 
 discard this folly. 
 
 Mr. Gompers, the American Labour Leader, has told us that 
 the workman in the United States abandoned the fallacy of 
 restriction of output thirty years ago, which was, by a strange 
 coincidence, about the very period the British workman first 
 began to adopt extensively " ca' canny " and restriction of 
 ,output ; and since 1886 there has been a steady rise in the 
 production per head of the workers in the United States, 
 and an equally steady reduction in the production per head 
 of the workers in the United Kingdom, with the result, as 
 shown by the census of production issued recently, that of the 
 seven million workers in Great Britain, four million were 
 engaged in trades yielding a net annual increased value of 
 only £75 to £100 per head over the value of the material used. 
 In most of the principal industries in the United States the out- 
 put per worker averages from three to five times that amount. 
 
 We have to reconsider our methods and change all this. 
 The power and ahUity to produce by means of machinery 
 is from a hundred to a thousand times greater than the 
 power to produce by hand labour, and demands from the 
 man less fatigue. Notwithstanding the enormous increase 
 in machinery, and simultaneously in complexity and in- 
 tricacy of parts of machines, the workman always finds 
 
12 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 himself master of his machine — the machine cannot master 
 the workman. And further, the better our equipment of 
 machinery, the better and more intelligent our workman 
 becomes. This is shown by the fact that, however high the 
 type of machine may be, man can always improve on the 
 same, so that each year the new machine shows improvements 
 on the old machine. The man who can best effect this im- 
 provement is the man who works at the machine. He knows 
 the machine he works with as a rider knows his horse. He 
 understands its peculiarities and its weaknesses, and gradually 
 comes to view it almost as a living creature. Then why do 
 we not get more inventions and suggested improvements 
 from the man working the machine ? The reason is that 
 suggestions for improvement require thought, and thought 
 requires leisure, and the present industrial system gives no 
 leisure. To provide more leisure, it can be proved that men 
 properly trained to their task and to working together can 
 accomplish from 50 per cent, to 100 per cent, more work 
 than the same number of iU-selected, badly organized men. 
 Similarly the man working with machinery ; the trained, 
 skilled, unfatigued worker can produce a larger volume of 
 product than the fatigued workman. The mastery of the 
 machine can only be accompUshed by development of high 
 character as well as high skill in the employee-worker. The 
 obtaining of the most from machines requires the highest 
 intelligence along with highest character, and so we tend to 
 get further from the brutes and nearer to the angels. Without 
 machines, man required mere brute force and strength, with 
 relatively little skill and no special high character or moral 
 laws to guide him. The drunken or debauched workman 
 is incapable of nmning a modem complicated machine in 
 the factory or a modem high-speed locomotive. He is unable 
 to keep up with the strain that machine or locomotive makes 
 upon him, whilst the steady workman of character is com- 
 plete master of his job and his machine. The whole tendency 
 of modem machinery is to improve the workman whilst 
 increasing his wages and reducing his hours of labour. A 
 handloom weaver might be semi-drunk and take no harm 
 at his work beyond loss of output. A man driving a horse 
 and cart or carriage may be half drunk, and yet his horse 
 will find home in safety whilst the driver nods a drunken 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 13 
 
 half-sleep. But not so the modern workman, with many 
 and delicate intricaLte looms to watch and keep running, nor 
 the man on the footplate of the express mail-train locomotive. 
 The drunkard would be an impossibility for these modern 
 machines, and would lack that nerve and steadiness of eye 
 and hand essential to their operation. 
 
 The modern machine knows nothing of religion or moral 
 laws, yet it is one of the greatest reUgious and moral teachers 
 the world has produced in modern times. However far and 
 wide we extend mechanical utilities and machine power, we 
 come finally to the necessity of providing intelligent and 
 careful men for their control and running. Machines cannot 
 run alone, and workmen of skill, high character, and moral 
 conduct are essential to successful control. Man remains 
 man and machine remains machine. Therefore we may 
 look to the future with confidence. All the tendencies of the 
 greater use of machinery are in the direction of improving 
 man. Machinery properly used need not degrade man, but 
 is capable of raising him indefinitely. 
 
 Equally, modem industrial conditions improve the employer- 
 capitalist. Modem industrial conditions demand and neces- 
 sitate an employer of not only high ability, but also of high 
 character. 
 
 Can employer-capitalists and employee-workers so conduct 
 productive and distributive industries, so work together, so 
 adjust themselves to new ideals, so govern and serve the 
 Empire, so, in brief, review their own private, selfish ideas 
 on the lines of most enlightened self-interest that they may 
 both realize the truth that in best serving the Empire and 
 the public they will best serve themselves ? There never 
 was a greater need for employer-capitalist and employee- 
 worker to exercise the wisest and most enhghtened self- 
 interest. There never was such an opportunity for the 
 immediate and prompt exercise of a far-sighted, wise, and 
 enlightened policy. Narrow, selfish greed and cmming on 
 either side would bring this Empire and its peoples to ruin 
 and disaster. The future of civilization and of our*Empire, 
 and the future of our race, the happiness and prosperity of 
 our children and our children's children, will depend in no 
 small degree on the wisdom of our employer-capitalists and 
 employee-workers, in whose hands now and after the war 
 lie the guidance and control of our policy. 
 
II 
 
 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 There exists to-day profound and widespread anti-capitalist 
 and anti-Trade Union labour prejudice and distrust. " A 
 plague on both your houses " says the consumer, who feels 
 uneasy and vaguely suspicious that he is not well and truly, 
 served by either. And with this widespread unrest there 
 is the most profound ignorance of the very rudiments of 
 the economics of production, of profits, and of wages. 
 
 We may search, with painstaking care and attention, 
 through the present-day writings of those >vho attempt to 
 deal with industrial conditions and wages and hours of work, 
 whether the writers be SociaUsts or Trades Unionists, but 
 we shall search in vain for any recognition of the fact that 
 the economical cost of production and volume of product 
 are the all-important factors, or any reference to the fact 
 that over 90 per cent., and possibly even over 95 per cent., 
 of the products of labour are consumed by the employee- 
 workers themselves, and not by the employer-capitalists. 
 So that restriction of output, or the " ca' canny " policy, can 
 only, whatever might be the rate of wages, make wages 
 nominal by reducing their exchange value when measured 
 in terms of clothing, food, and shelter; 
 
 At this present moment there is in the mind of many writers 
 and speakers the most shallow and dangerously wrong views 
 as to the patriotism, during war-time, of so-called profits of 
 capital and the patriotism of demands for higher wages of 
 labour. It is not easy to get the pubUc or the employee- 
 worker to recognize that it would be the reverse of patriotic 
 — ^in fact, absolutely ruinous to the national weU-being — for 
 the employer-capitaUst to forgo profits during war-time. And 
 it is not easy to get the pubUc or the employer-capitaUst to 
 see that it would equally be the reverse of patriotic for the 
 
 14 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 15 
 
 employee-worker to waive demands for higher wages during 
 war-time. The economic truth is that unless the employer- 
 capitaUst be able to make reasonably higher profits during 
 war-time than during peace-time, and the employee-worker 
 to earn reasonably higher wages during war-time than during 
 peace-time — ^the profits to enable the employer-capitalist to 
 expand production to the utmost and to meet post-war con- 
 tractions and losses, and the wages to enable the employee- 
 worker to meet the higher cost of living, and also the 
 increased cost of higher Uving — ^it would be impossible 
 to maintain the industries of the country at concert pitch 
 during the war. 
 
 In short, reasonable and fair, full profits to the employer- 
 capitalist, and reasonable, generous, and full wages to the 
 employee-worker during war-time are essential to the main- 
 tenance of our Empire's stabiUty and to prevent widespread 
 national and business prostration. How to conduct our 
 industries, how to handle capital and labour, how to run 
 what we may call in brief the business of the Empire during 
 the war, is one of the problems of the war, as it wiU be our 
 prqblem after the war is over. 
 
 Can we bear our post-war loads and carry the Empire 
 after the war with its trade and commerce back into the calm 
 safety of prosperity ? We can only do so provided all classes 
 and both sexes, following the example set us by our King 
 and Queen, continue to make, after the war, the same sacrifices 
 of ease or comfort, and continue to work as hard and with 
 the same spirit of brotherhood as has been displayed by all 
 classes, without exception, during the war. This will be no 
 easy task ; but we can and must face it, and, facing it 
 promptly, it will be easier to accompHsh than if we hesitate 
 and procrastinate. Soimd principles of finance and our 
 national credit will necessitate our not only pajdng promptly 
 the interest on our War Loans, but also providing for the 
 repayment of the loans with all possible speed. 
 
 Our National Debt at the end of the present financial year, 
 1918-19, we are told by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, will 
 be about eight thousand millions sterling. Our crushing 
 burden of taxation during the current financial year is esti- 
 mated to 3^eld about nine hundred millions sterling. Hundreds 
 of thousands of the flower of our m^anhood will have been 
 
16 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 Idlled in battle or will have died of war diseases, or have been 
 permanently maimed or crippled. We have a house famine 
 actually with us, and are exerting every nerve and muscle 
 to prevent a food famine and to provide munitions of war 
 ships for commerce, and ships for war, submarines, aircraft 
 and all known weapons of war for the destruction of life and 
 property. Our programme of social reforms and betterment 
 and of extended education is a long and an overdue one. 
 
 And first of all we must learn the most serious importance 
 of the avoidance of waste — ^waste of child Ufe, waste of adult 
 hfe, waste of energy, waste of time, waste of opportunity, 
 and, greatest waste of all, the appalling waste caused by 
 over-fatigue of the workers, resulting in inefficiency, bad health, 
 lost time, and premature decay and death. 
 
 But we have learned much during the last three years on 
 the subject of fatigue, overwork, and excessively long working 
 hours. We have proved conclusively that prolonged hours 
 of toil, with resulting excessive fatigue, produce, after a 
 certain point, actually smaller results in quantity, quality, 
 and value than can be produced in fewer hours when there 
 is an entire absence of overstrain or fatigue. Fortunately, 
 however, this logical effect of over-long hours of continuous 
 work does not apply, except to a very limited extent, to the 
 case of machinery and mechanical utihties. True, even 
 machinery must have times of rest for cleaning, overhauling, 
 repairs, and lubrication ; but these stoppages are not serious, 
 and require only slight intervals that are easily arranged 
 for. Therefore, as we shall require an enormously increased 
 output of goods to replenish stocks that have been allowed 
 to run down, both for our home and export trade, and as 
 we have the machinery available, and which hitherto in 
 most industries has been run for only 48 hours per week, 
 a solution of this one of our difficulties can be best and most 
 readily''found by working our machinery for more hours and 
 our'men and women for fewer hours. 
 
 We must have a six-hour working day for men and women, 
 and by means of six-hour shifts for men and women we- 
 must work our machinery twelve, eighteen, or twenty-four 
 hours per day. 
 
 |We have in the United Kingdom the finest type of work 
 people in the human race — second to none in the whole worlds 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 17 
 
 If we are to make the most of this rare humanity, and have 
 more of the inventions to which I have alluded, there niust 
 be some change in our industrial system of hours of working. 
 We must remember the deadening effect of general factory 
 life. From fourteen years of age to seventy years of age 
 is a long Ufe-span, and if you consider the conditions of at- 
 tending, for eight hours a day, the same automatic machinery 
 and following the same routine, with its continual deadly, 
 monotonous round of toil, those of us whose emplos^ment is 
 varied vnh realize how this bites into the soul of a man or 
 woman and tends to corrode it. There is not that variety 
 which human Ufe thrives on. The horses of the coaches 
 which went out of London along the level Slough and Windsor 
 road were done up and had to be sold long before the horses 
 that went a similar distance through Highgate, where they 
 climbed the hiU to the summit and then trotted down into 
 the valleys with collars loose. And so also those who work 
 in factories with unbroken monotony till tired and weary, 
 only preparing by rest and sleep for the beginning of another 
 similar dull day, must inevitably wear out at a premature 
 age and become enfeebled under such conditions. 
 
 Of all welfare work in factories/ a proper apportionment 
 of the time is the one that will yield the best results, and is 
 the problem most pressing for solution. Let us take as an 
 illustration of our meaning the position with regard to London 
 and overcrowding. We know the slums of London and the 
 overcrowding of London ; but do we reahze that the Metro- 
 pohtan area, with its 7| millions of people, covers the exten- 
 sive area of 450,000 acres of ground. If, therefore, we had 
 planned for building under ideal conditions of some ten houses 
 to the acre over the whole of this MetropoUtan'area, instead 
 of having, as we have at present, badly packed slum districts in 
 some quarters and so on, and of badly housing only 7! millions 
 of people, we could in that area have provided for housing 
 22^ millions of people, three times the number, with ideal 
 surroundings for comfort and happiness. It is merely a 
 case of bad packing. Now, I beUeve this is not an unfair 
 parallel for me to take with regard to working hours. We 
 can get into a working day of six hours all the work we 
 are capable of when that work is monotonous — attending 
 machinery and general work in a factory. To get the work 
 
 3 
 
18 THE SIX-HOUR DAY ' 
 
 condensed into six hours would enable us to produce not only 
 everjrthing that we require, but to produce it without fatigue.. 
 Not only can we produce, when all ranks and all classes 
 of both sexes are workers for six hours each day for six days 
 each week, all the ships, machinery, factories, houses, and 
 goods we require both for home requirements and for exchange 
 for raw materials through our export markets, but the houses 
 can be built in beautiful garden suburbs ; we can provide 
 adequately for education, mental and physical, and military 
 training for national defence. In addition, all being workers, 
 our burden of taxation Will — ^being then wisely laid on the 
 wealth produced — be borne by all without impoverishment 
 or oppression of any. The only wise, sane basis of taxation 
 is to avoid all tariffs on goods except luxuries, and then 
 solely for revenue purposes, and to raise further revenue 
 mainly by graduated income tax and death duties. The 
 only possible way to produce wealth is by the labour of all 
 classes working shoulder to shoulder together in co-partner- 
 ship during reasonable hours and without individual over- 
 fatigue or overwork. There must be neither idle overfed 
 and underworked men or women nor overworked, underfed 
 men or women. It has been estimated that less than half 
 of our total poptilation are actual producers of wealth, but 
 if we are, as a nation, to make good the wastage of this war 
 and to maintain our position amongst the nations of the 
 world after we have won complete victory and the \mcondi- 
 tional surrender of our enemies, then it will require that all 
 able-bodied men and women from schoolage to dotage, of 
 all ranks and stations, shall be workers for six hours each 
 day for six days each wieek. There wiU be no place in the 
 whole British Empire for the idle rich or the idle or " ca'- 
 canny " poor. We cannot consent as a nation to there being 
 any loafers, nor can the British Empire, if it is to "Continue 
 to exist, become a loafer's paradise. 
 
 But the adoption simultaneously, in all industries of the 
 United Kingdom, of a six-hour working day is absolutely 
 impossible and impracticable. As with the acorn that 
 produces the British oak, the growth of the six-hour day 
 movement will be slow, but none the less sure. It can only, 
 be adopted in such industries as those in which it will, by 
 its appUcation, give lower costs of production by workingi. 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 19 
 
 machinery for longer hours and humanity, in two or more 
 shifts, for fewer hours. The six-hour day, for instance, is 
 not immediately appHcable to agriculture, because at present 
 there is little labour-saving machinery used in agriculture. 
 But already steam and petrol tractors for ploughing, culti- 
 vation, seed-sowing, harvesting, and haulage are each succeed- 
 ing year being more a,nd more used, and it is quite evident that 
 the time will come when a six-hour day and two shifts of 
 workmen will be the most profitable and most economical 
 emplo5anent for humanity in agriculture. 
 
 It is already applicable without loss to all those industries 
 in which the cost of production in overhead charges is equal 
 in amount to the cost of wages. But in most workshops and 
 factories the cost of production in the form of overhead 
 charges is double or more the cost of wages. In all these latter 
 the six-hour day can be applied forthwith with enormous gains 
 in cost of production, provided the supply of raw material 
 and of labour is available and the demand for products exists. 
 
 The six-hour day is already a most urgent and much-needed 
 condition of working hours in all industries where women 
 and girls are employed. It must be remembered that a 
 large proportion of women engaged in industries, whether 
 married or single, have, unlike their fathers and brothers, 
 some housework to do as well as their work in industrial 
 employment. And these hours of housework and the re- 
 sulting fatigue must be remembered when considering their 
 hours of work in the factory, workshop, or office. 
 
 In the textile industries and aU others where the cost of 
 overhead charges, such as interest on capital, salaries of 
 partners and managers, repairs and renewals, depreciation, 
 rates and taxes (omitting all taxes on income or profits) is 
 about equal to the cost for weekly wages, the change from 
 a 48-hour week to a 72-hour week of two shifts of 36 hours 
 each would affect the cost of production somewhat as follows : 
 
 Working a 48-hour week and assuming that the product 
 was 1,000 items per week at a cost of £1,000 per week for 
 overhead charges and of ;fi,ooo per week for wages, the 
 resulting total cost of production per item, exclusive of 
 raw material and such other proportionate costs as would 
 always be in exact relation to volume produced, would be 
 40s. per item. 
 
20 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 If such textile or other factories adopted the six-hour 
 working day system they would work 72 hours per week in 
 two shifts of 36 hours each shift per week, and assuming that 
 no increase of production per hour worked was achieved, 
 which need not necessarily be the case, and that the wages 
 paid for a 36-hour week were the same as for a 48-hour week, 
 which must always necessarily be the case, then the resulting 
 product would be 1,500 items. The cost of production for 
 overhead charges would not be seriously affected, as machinery 
 almost invariably becomes obsolete before it is worn out, 
 and fixed capital in plant, buildings, and machinery would 
 be the same, the cost of overhead charges would again be 
 £1,000, but the cost for wages would now be £2,000, or a 
 total of £3,000 for 1,500 items, or again a cost, exclusive of 
 raw materials, of 40s. per item. 
 
 But supposing, as one is justified in doing by past and 
 present experience, that the unfatigued worker could produce 
 as.much in six hours as formerly was produced in eight hours — 
 and we will examine into this later on — ^then the figures as 
 to cost of production would be somewhat the following, and 
 show a great gain in economical production : 2,000 items 
 would then be produced in a 72-hour week of two shifts of 
 36 hours each shift at a cost of £1,000 for overhead charges 
 and of £2,000 for wages, a total of £3,000, or of 30s. per item, 
 which would be a reduction of 25 per cent, on cost of produc- 
 tion compared with cost when working a 48-hour week. This 
 economy might wisely be used, partly in increased pa37ment 
 to the workers by means of a bonus on production in addi- 
 tion to wages, which wages would be the same for 36 hours 
 as formerly for 48 hours, and the balance to the consvuner 
 in reduced selling price of the product — so that practically 
 the whole of the benefits of economy of production would 
 go to the workers first directly in shorter hours of labour 
 with higher total earnings as wages and bonus, and afterwards 
 as consumers in lower cost of living. 
 
 The employer-capitaUst would not need to share in this 
 economy of production, because his share would come to 
 him on his increased production and quicker turnover of 
 capital, with resulting increase in dividend-earning capacity. 
 
 It is clear from this rough and ready calculation that in 
 all industries where overhead charges exceed the portion of 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 21 
 
 cost of production paid as wages to the worker, the advan- 
 tages would be greater in, proportion to the ratio of increase 
 in cost of overhead charges. And equally it is clear that 
 where the cost of overhead charges is less than the portion 
 of the cost of production paid as wages, there would be a 
 resulting increase in cost of production in proportion to the 
 ratio that the lesser cost of overhead charges bore to the 
 cost paid as wages, and that a point would be reached at 
 which the immediate adoption of a 72-hour working week 
 in two shifts of 36 hours each would be impossible and 
 impracticable. 
 
 And now as to the possibility of the unfatigued worker 
 producing as much in a 36-hour week as in a 48-hour week, 
 let us refer to the experience of our forefathers as recorded 
 in the debates in Parliameiit during the passing of the Ten 
 Hours and other Bills, and let us remember also that nowa- 
 days, with more or less automatic machinery, increased 
 production per hour by the workers can be effected in two 
 ways : firstly, by the unfatigued workers' increased efficiency, 
 and secondly, by the unfatigued and alert workers being able 
 to attend to a greater number of machines. 
 
 At this stage some may be asking themselves. Why not 
 work a g6-hour week in two .shifts of 48 hours each ? and in 
 answer to this we can apply the experience of Russia cited 
 by Mr. Romaine Callender in a debate in the House of 
 Commons on the Factory Acts Amendment Bill in 1874. He 
 said : — 
 
 The hours worked in Russia were of extraordinary duration — 
 one case being cited when, by a double shift of workers, 132 hours 
 were made per week, yet in this case the production per spindle 
 was barely more than that of an English mill working 60 hours. 
 
 Mr. Baxter, in an adjourned debate on the same Bill, 
 also referring to the practice in Scotland at that time of work- 
 ing twelve hours, and when the trade was good some 
 fourteen or fifteen hours a day for a part of the week, 
 said : — 
 
 Now, I was so convinced that this could not be a good system, 
 that twelve years ago I issued a peremptory order that nb man 
 in my employ should under any pretext whatever be permitted 
 
22 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 to work in those premises for more than ten hours a day. And 
 what was the consequence ? The very first year — and it has 
 continued ever since — we turned out more bales in the ten hours 
 than ever we had done in twelve or fifteen hours. 
 
 In the same debate Mr. Hermon, who was, I believe. Member 
 for Preston, stated : — 
 
 There was a very strong opposition to the Sixty Hours Bill, but 
 it might now be safely said that there was no manufacturer who 
 wished to repeal it. He entirely disagreed with the Commissioners 
 when they said that by giving more time in the evening to the 
 operatives there would be an increase in debauchery. No such 
 effect had followed from the Ten Hours Bill, but, on the contrary, 
 as soon as it passed, the operatives had improved their position 
 sociaUy, mentally, and educationally, while it had advanced a 
 most important branch of national industry. 
 
 It is well known in the tradp that more bad work accumulated 
 during the last half-hour or hour than during the whole of the 
 day. During this time a drowsiness crept over the factory hands, 
 so that they became themselves Uke machines, and almost all 
 the disputes and unpleasantness that occurred during the day 
 had their source in the present prolonged hours of labour. 
 
 Mr. Mundella, speaking towards the end of the debate, 
 said : — 
 
 The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Fawcett) contended that if the working 
 hours were reduced 6 per cent, the outcome would hp reduced in 
 the same proportion unless the machinery or its rate of speed were 
 increased. That was, however, an argument which was answered 
 by Mr. Hugh Mason, who, after he had reduced the hours of labour 
 without adding a single revolution to the speed of his motive power, 
 declared that he had not turned out a breadth less in the year 
 after he had made the change as compared with that which 
 preceded it. 
 
 Miss Victorine Jeans, in her Cobden Club Prize Essay 
 entitled Factory Act Legislation : Its Industrial and 
 Commercial Effects, Actual and Prospective, states : — 
 
 If we had to sum up in a single sentence the general effect 
 of the Factory Acts on the textile manufactures, we should say 
 that the legislation tended to enforce everywhere the prin- 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 23 
 
 ciples of the selection of the fittest ; in other words, it helped 
 to bring about the fittest use of capital, of invention, and of 
 human skill and energy, and therefore it did not diminish pro- 
 duction or lower wages, neither probably did it lead to a fall in 
 profits nor a permanent loss of foreign trade. . . . 
 
 No nation can long maintain a commercial supremacy unless 
 its labouring class is strong and intelligent. 
 
 There are those who will assert to-day, as Mr. Webb does, that 
 the EngUsh cotton-spinner finds competition keenest, not where 
 the hours of work are longest, as in Russia and India, but where 
 they are shortest, as ii> Massachusetts. Certain it is that the 
 most perfect machinery, the largest system of production, the 
 lowest amount of waste time, are all features characteristic of 
 those industries aijd those countries where the shortest working 
 day obtains. 
 
 But our greatest encouragement and inspiraition come from 
 reading the various speeches of the late Lord Shaftesbury 
 (then Lord Ashley), when speaking in Parliament on the Ten 
 Hours Bill. The Government of the day resisted the 
 evidence he brought .forward to show that the hours of 
 labour could be reduced without economic loss. On May 
 10, 1844, he spoke to the House as follows : — 
 
 Here then springs up a curious and important problem for 
 solution by this House — ^no, not by this House, for they have 
 already resolved it — but for Her Majesty's Government, who 
 deny our conclusions and oppose themselves to the thrice-recorded 
 wishes of ihe British Empire, wiiich is the preferable condition 
 for the people — high wages with privation of social and domestic 
 enjoyment, without the means of knowledge or the opportunities 
 of virtue, acquiring wages which they waste through ignorance of 
 household economy, and placed in a state of moral and physical 
 deterioration; or lower earnings with increased advantages for 
 mental imprcvement and bodily health — for the imderstanding 
 and performaice of those duties which now they either know not 
 or neglect ; fa: obtaining the humble but necessary accomplish- 
 ments of domstic Ufe and cultivating its best affections ? Clouds 
 of witnesses attest these things — clergy, ministers of every per- 
 suasion, doctorSi master-manufacturers, and operatives have given, 
 and are ready ;o give again, the most conclusive evidence, but 
 Her Majesty's ffinisters refuse to listen, and will neither adopt 
 the remedy we are proposing nor assist us with one of their own. 
 
24 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Speaking sixteen years afterwards as Lord Shaftesbury in 
 the Town Hall, Manchester, on October 6, 1866, he referred 
 to the agitation for the Ten Hours Bill and to the success of 
 the workers in carr3dng their point, and the effects on the 
 workers themselves as well as on the nation resulting there- 
 from. He recalled the attitude the workers had taken up 
 during the agitation. They had said : — 
 
 " We are standing for the limitation of the hours of labour as 
 our great right, as the charter of our liberties ; give us but that 
 and you will never hear of sedition in Lancashire ; you will never 
 hear of discontent ; you will see that we are among the most loyal^ 
 of Her Majesty's subjects, and we shall be both able and willing 
 to discharge every duty that can become a citizen. No more 
 (they had said) shall you hear of disturbances in Lancashire if 
 once that right is conceded, if once our just demands are 
 acknowledged.'' 
 
 Speaking of the better times, Lord Shaftesbury continued : — 
 
 I caimot but congratulate you from the very botfcm of my 
 heart, and I know you will congratulate me that we are met under 
 such favourable auspices. \ye are collected together in this 
 room, not to talk of grievances, nor to devise methods for the 
 purpose of removing them — ^not to talk of what we shall do, nor 
 of what we fear ; but simply and solely to exchange congratulations 
 that we have, by the blessing of God, attained to the present 
 condition of things, and that the whole of this great country is 
 working in perfect harmony, men with masters ani masters 
 with men. / 
 
 There is no sour feeling, no angry heart, no difficulty existing 
 among them. / h 
 
 And how was this achieved ? Recollect this wis achieved 
 without violence, without menace, without strikes, \(^hout resort 
 to any extraordinary or illicit means. / 
 
 God's blessing rested upon so peaceful a cours^; and when 
 you obtained your triumph, when you gained yottr end, i tell 
 you I think in no one part of your career, in all thWlong agitation 
 we had, did you exhibit a more generous spirit, i truer policy, 
 a more thorough development of that which is the greatest blessing 
 man can have — common sense, than the way in ^hich you took 
 your victory, and the way in which you ackiowledged your 
 triumph. There was no boasting, there was no pean, no crowing 
 Qf cocks, no cry of victory, no desire tp exult, ^d no sa5dng tp 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 25 
 
 the masters : " We have carried the victory and will make you feel 
 you are under our feet." On the. contrary, you said: "We 
 have been enemies, but let us now be friends. We have 
 come now to the grand point; you may fancy you may lose, 
 but only give us a fair chance, only meet us with an open heart 
 and generous treatment, and you will find that when worked out 
 the issue will be quite as beneficial to yourselves as it is to the 
 operatives." 
 
 You have that statement from the Chairman, who from his 
 own experience says that the measure has been beneficial aUke 
 to master and man, to employers and employed ; and so it is, and 
 in aU great works of this kind, in which the real rights of mankind 
 are concerned, in which the physical and moral interests of the 
 human race are in jeopardy, in all matters of the kind, depend 
 upon it, the truer economy is justice and humanity, and when you 
 have achieved the triumph the truer wisdom is to say, " We 
 forget the past ; we have been enemies, but for God's sake let us 
 be friends ; we have in time to prepare ourselves for eternity : 
 let us have no feuds, no differences, but let us join hands and 
 go forward, and God will bless the issue." 
 
 And coming dowr to modem times, experience still demon- 
 strates that working shorter hours with lessened fatigue does 
 not reduce output, but generally, and with very few exceptions, 
 tends to increase output. 
 
 The Report of Dr. Vernon on the Health of Munition 
 Workers gives facts which will remove any doubt existing 
 in the mind of any one as to the six-hour working day. In 
 that Report he states that from experiments spread over 
 thirteen and a half months upon the output of workers making 
 fuses, a reduction of working hours was associated with an in- 
 crease of production, both relative and absolute. Hours of work 
 were changed first from a twelve-hour day to a ten-hour day, 
 and Sunday work abolished. A group of women making 
 aluminium fuse bodies provided the following results : A 
 twelve-hour nominal day, after deducting lost time, making 
 eleven hours net, yielded lOO articles, say, per hour, and 
 100 totals, say, per week. A ten-hour nominal day, after 
 deducting lost time, making nine hours net, yielded 134 
 articles per hour and iii totals per week. A nominal eight and 
 a half-hour day, after deducting lost time, making a seven 
 and a half-hour day net, yielded 158 articles per hour and 109 
 totals per week, thus proving that an eigjit and a half-hour 
 
26 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 working day, or 52-hour week, yielded more in products, both 
 per hour and per week, than a twelve-hour day or 72-hour 
 week, calculated either per hour or per week. 
 
 From other reports also that have been issued since the 
 war began on fatigue of munition workers, we find this aston- 
 ishing fact — that a larger output, not only per hour but per 
 week, has been made when fewer hours have been worked. 
 Recently an employer stated that in the early days of the 
 war the nominal hours in his factory ^yere 53 for the women ; 
 and he was staggered to find that the women were losing an 
 average of 14 hours each per week. Fourteen hours a week 
 was the average lost time for each woman, bringing the 
 actual average time worked by each down to 39 hours, and 
 he said : " Oh, this won't do ; we will let the women come 
 an hoiu: later in the mornings, and we will let them go an 
 hour earlier in the evenings," making twelve hours a week 
 reduction. So he made the hours 41 a week, and then he 
 found that the lost time averaged one hour per woman per 
 week ; therefore, they were making 40 hours instead of 39 
 as previously. But he found, in addition, that in the 40 
 hours that they now worked — this was after deducting lost 
 time — ^he had an increase in the output in the week of 44 
 per cent. 
 
 Government reports repeat over and over again, from 
 definite experiments, that in a reasonable number of hours 
 the human being turns out its maximum output. Fatigue 
 the human being one day, let the man or woman come 
 fatigued to work the following day, and so on, and after two 
 or three days the output goes down, down, down, and is 
 continually falling. Let the human being work no harder 
 each day than the body can accomplish without , fatigue, 
 and he or she will come again fresh the next day ; and the 
 output will increase and increase. And it has been found 
 that the increased output by working a reasonable number 
 of hours varied, according to the industry, from 50 per cent, to 
 120 per cent., and the 50 per cent., it will be seen, agrees very 
 nearly with the figures given in the above record. Therefore, 
 it is not difficult to imagine that with two shifts working 
 six hours each shift, the output might go up 33I per cent, 
 per hour, and so give the same output in a 36-hour week as 
 previously in a 48-hour week. 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 27 
 
 Sir Robert Hadfield, of Sheffield, stated last year (1917), 
 in the course of an interview : — 
 
 At our plants we have reduced working hours with that largely 
 beneficial result which seems to be inevitable. It has become 
 clear that this procedure is even better business than it is 
 humanity. Shorter hours make good men better, and bring the 
 medium workman up to something higher than the old-time 
 average. The hostility of the men to various progressive things 
 was as unfailing as, for instance, their opposition to labour-saving 
 machinery. Now they have learned that the better the tools 
 the better the workman, and that the better the workman the 
 better his pay. 
 
 The fact that workmen are not themselves machines is not yet 
 appreciated in its fuU value. 
 
 Mr. Cecil Walton, of Glasgow, than whom there is no one 
 who has a wider experience or speaks with greater authority 
 on the subject of hours, fatigue, and output, has stated in 
 an address given in Glasgow as follows : — 
 
 There is only one way of reducing hours of a working day, and 
 that is by increased production. Any attempt to shorten the 
 working day without this must end in national failure. 
 
 He cites the following amongst many other proofs of the 
 possibility of greatly increasing output and greatly reducing 
 hours : — 
 
 A factory producing 15,000 items a week was divided into six units 
 of machinery, each unit producing 2,300 items per week. It was 
 decided during 1917 to transfer some of these units of machinery 
 to another factory in another part of the country, and to do this 
 in one complete unit of machinery at one time, and to introduce 
 a bonus on output arrangement with the operators. After removal 
 of the first imit it was found that the remaining five units stiU 
 produced 15,000 items a week. The second, third, and fourth 
 unit were similarly removed, leaving only two units of machinery, 
 and these again and alone produced 15,000 items per week. 
 
 And again Mr. Walton has stated : — 
 
 If we turn to the authorities on the subject and study the 
 figures as given us with regard to output per head of our indus- 
 trial armies, we are staggered to find that Germany and America 
 
28 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 produce per worker in the twenty-six principal industries something 
 like five times as much as we do. This sounds a terrible indictment, 
 and it is. But if we study the question closer still, we find it is 
 not a disaster we cannot overcome. Their industrial efficiency 
 is below what it ought to be, and although our own industrial 
 efficiency is lower, still we can so improve our efficiency as to bring 
 ourselves easily in advance of either the German or American 
 scale of industrial efficiency. 
 
 He then proceeds to refer to the economy and increased 
 efficiency to be achieved by one only of the many changes 
 possible in our industrial operations — that contemplated in 
 the "All Electric" Scheme,' by which it is shown that we 
 are at present paying wages to at least one-half our industrial 
 population for producing waste. It is claimed that by the 
 introduction of such a scheme and the transfer of these 
 producers of waste into the ranks of producers of essentials, 
 we can reduce the working hours of all workers by 50 per 
 cent, without reducing wages or increasing costs. So that 
 the 25 per cent, reduction of hours involved in the scheme 
 of a six-hour day can then become universal with increased 
 wages to the workers and reduced selling prices to the con- 
 sumer. He concludes with the deduction that this is a clean- 
 cut proposition for which the nation should strive, and that 
 he is quite convinced that by intensive production without 
 fatigue in fewer hours we can greatly increase our production. 
 
 But whilst under the scheme for a six-hour day the employee- 
 workers would be working only for six hours each day, the 
 machinery would be working for twelve, eighteen, or twenty- 
 four hours each day, with resulting enormous increase in 
 production at reduced cost. 
 
 We need not fear too slow an adoption of the principles 
 of economy of production — our fears are of too hasty adop- 
 tion before supplies of raw materials, supplies of workers 
 required for increased production are available, as well as 
 increased demand sufficient to absorb all increased production. 
 
 ' By the so-called " All Electric " Scheme it is proposed to bum 
 the coal at the pit mouth, thus saving transport on rails to house 
 or factory or locomotive, recovering the by-products for ferti- 
 lizers, aniline dyes, and coke, and using the gas in internal combus- 
 tion engines for generation of electricity, to be conveyed by 
 truck, cables, and wires to wherever required. 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 29 
 
 We are not likely in any case to move as slowly towards 
 adoption as was the movement towards the Ten Hours Bill, 
 which was first proposed in ParUament in 1802, and only 
 finally carried by Lord Ashley through Parliament in 1850. 
 
 It would be useless to increase the output of all the factories 
 in the United Kingdom if we had no purchasers who could 
 absorb the increased output. There are two great factors 
 in increasing demand — one is increased wages and the other 
 is reduced cost. Both these increase the purchasing power 
 of the home-market consumer and equip us the better to 
 compete with the foreigner abroad, by enabling us to supply 
 cheaper articles for export, so that, as a commercial propo- 
 sition, the six-hour day based on increased production would 
 be absolutely sound, and could be depended upon to result 
 in the increased demand for our products essential to its 
 success. It is stated that a Scotchman once wrongly attri- 
 buted a quotation from Shakespeare to Robert Bums. On 
 being corrected he replied, " Ah, weel, it was guid enough 
 for Rob tae ha'e written it." It is not known who first said 
 that if one makes but a mousetrap better and cheaper than 
 any one else the whole world will soon beat a path to one's 
 door, but these words are good enough to have been said by 
 the wisest business sage the world ever produced, and to 
 date back to the very first dawn of civilized dealings between 
 man and fellow-man. 
 
 In addition to the effect of a six-hour working day in 
 giving all that we require in production from our workers, 
 so that we can pay to the workers the same wages for the 
 reduced hours that they receive for the longer hours, it would 
 give us this great additional national advantage : it would 
 enable us the better to solve our after-war problem of employ- 
 ment for the men and women who will then be released from 
 actual war and war suppty work. 
 
 After the war we shall have a demand, which must be met, 
 for increased supplies of all kinds of products to replenish 
 exhausted stocks both at home and for export markets. This 
 will necessitate, for many years after the war, an increased 
 production, if Great Britain is to retain her home and export 
 trade, amounting to at least 50 per cent, over and above the 
 normal production required in pre-war times. In addition, 
 we shall require to build, it is estimated, at least one milUon 
 
30 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 homes to house the workers under proper reasonable condi- 
 tions. We shall also require to replenish our mercantile 
 marine by many millions of tons of new ships. 
 
 All these will make a demand upon our labour to such an 
 extent that it will not be possible immediately to build 
 additional factories and workshops, or to erect plant and 
 machinery for the same, in order to provide for the 50 per 
 cent, increased production demanded. We shall be short of 
 factories and workshops, but we shall not be short of labour, 
 for it is estimated that the termination of the war will release 
 at least iij miUions of men and women who are at present 
 engaged either in active work on the field of battle or in 
 workshops and factories and transport service necessitated 
 to supply the army in the field with material and supplies 
 required for the prosecuiion of the war. 
 
 The raw material we shall require is mainly produced 
 within the British Empire : therefore, so far as raw materials 
 are concerned, and so far as labour is concerned, we shall 
 not be in any serious difficulty, but we shall be in difficulties 
 with regard to providing the factories and workshops and 
 machinery required to work up raw materials into the finished 
 product. We shall have an overwhelming demand for goods : 
 we shall have the necessary raw material and men and women 
 required to make the goods, but we shall not have the equip- 
 ment to manufacture the goods to meet the demand for the 
 finished product, owing to the lack of workshops, factories, 
 plant, and machinery. 
 
 But even if we could immediately at the close of the war 
 erect new factories arid workshops, we must remember that 
 it is estimated the cost of building would then be 75 per cent, 
 more than pre-war rates ; and the cost of plant and machinery 
 would be anything from 100 to 200 per cent, above pre-war 
 rates. Therefore the erecting of new factories and equipping 
 with new plant and machinery would seriously handicap our 
 home manufactiurers in their competition with manufacturers 
 in Neutral and Allied countries, such as Holland and the 
 United States, in supplying economically the demand in 
 the Neutral markets of the world, which demand we had 
 previously very largely ourselves supplied. But by the 
 adoption of the six-hour working day we could automatically 
 and immediately increase our production by at least 50 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 31 
 
 pet cent., just as effectively as if we had been able to 
 build 50 per cent, additional factories, workshops, plant, and 
 machinery. And we could do this without making any call on 
 capital or any call on labour for the mere erection of these 
 mechanical utihties. 
 
 After the war, therefore, the times will be ripe for the 
 six-hour working day of two shifts. There will be the demand 
 and there will be the labour to meet the demand, and by 
 working double shift we shall have the machinery sufficient 
 to meet all our requirements. The iij miUion men and 
 women released when the war is over cannot be found 
 work on any permanent basis by means of philanthropic 
 effort or subscription Hsts or good intentions. They can 
 onlj' be provided permanently with employment on sound 
 economic lines of greater economy in production and of a 
 greatly increased demand for products resulting from that 
 economy in production. 
 
 The six-hour day would also solve the question of the 
 education of the boy and girl on their first leaving school : 
 it would also solve the question of their physical training ; 
 it would solve the question of military training, so that we 
 could have a trained citizen army ; and it would solve the 
 question of the outlook on life of our workers. Can we fancy 
 anything more sordid than the life of a boy (or girl) who goes 
 iiito the factory to-day under the stress of modem conditions ? 
 His grandfather probably went to work at eight years of age. 
 The present-day boy goes at fourteen years of age, and 
 from then to seventy years of age (if he survive) he sees 
 nothing but the factory, except for a few hoUdays, so few that 
 he scarcely knows how to systematize and make the most of 
 them, and his horizon, his whole outlook on life, is so stunted 
 that he cannot live the hfe he was intended to live. It was 
 never the Creator's intention to send us into this world as 
 so many "hands" — He sent us with imagination. He sent 
 us with the love of the country. He sent us with ideals and 
 outlook, and these are simply stifled under our present 
 industrial system. 
 
 How can we wonder at what is called " Labour Unrest " ? 
 If men and women were satisfied to endure quietly such 
 conditions, then we might indeed despair of their future and 
 the future of the British race. 
 
32 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Let us make the most of our English-speaking race, the 
 finest race, in our opinion— -of course, we may riot be impartial 
 judges as to that — on the face of the globe. Let us face 
 the problem of the boy and girl of fourteen — ^it is a pressing 
 one. What to do with boys from fourteen to sixteen is a 
 most important problem. We know how, at that age, boys 
 delight in getting into all sorts of scrapes and mischief. The 
 training of boys in Boys' Brigades and the Boy Scout move- 
 ment, for which we are indebted to General Sir Robert Baden- 
 Powell, has proved a great remedy for that state of affairs. 
 But if we could take the boy and girl at the age of fourteen 
 and give them, say, two hours' schooling in the morning or 
 afternoon, and continue this right on until the age of thirty, 
 what could we not make of them ? Evening classes, we 
 know, are a failure. The boy or girl attending these classes 
 after a hard day's work is not in a receptive state of mind 
 for instruction — ^both mind and body are weary, and therefore 
 the evening classes are not a means to an end — they are a 
 substitute and not a success. Education cannot be com- 
 pleted at fourteen for the very simple reason that the necessary 
 number of hours have not been devoted to it, and the number 
 of subjects have not been covered that ought to be covered. 
 But under the six-hour day scheme these two hours of instruc- 
 tion on alternate mornings and afternoons could be continued 
 from fourteen to eighteen, and from eighteen to twenty-four 
 years of age, during which period the scholars woidd be 
 receiving instruction of a still higher character, with physical 
 training, and would be learning how to improve in their work. 
 * The very fact that during their working hours they are 
 working with their hands would help their brain education, 
 and eventually make them infinitely superior citizens. 
 
 These two hours for education and training each day, from 
 fourteen to thirty years of age, must be made absolutely 
 compulsory, must be what we may call " conscripted " for the 
 benefit of the whole nation. From fourteen to eighteen years of 
 age, let it be extended education of what we may call the High 
 School character, together with physical training; from 
 eighteen to twenty four years of age, education of what we 
 may call the Technical and University character, with ex- 
 tended physical training ; from twenty-four to thirty years 
 of age, training for military service, for national service, for 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 33 
 
 the duties of citizenship, preparing for membership of Village 
 and Town Councils, and so on, and general study of all that 
 goes to make for government, of ourselves, for ourselves, 
 by ourselves, which ideal is very often merely a catch phrase. 
 Then each of us after reaching thirty years of age will be 
 a unit in a nation of educated, trained men and women, 
 and within the hmits of the law we can be trusted then to 
 make the best use, for whatever appears good to us, of the 
 twa hours a day, for we do not think a conscription of time 
 after thirty years of age would serve any useful purpose. 
 The organizing of our time in this way would give us a fully 
 educated nation, a nation capable of assuming responsibility, 
 and with initiative. We should all be the better for it— we 
 should have better bodies and better minds ; not even Univer- 
 sity education covild compare with the education which would 
 be obtained under the above conditions simultaneously 
 through hand and eye and brain. The man in the University 
 gets his brain developed, but if he had simultaneously the 
 training of hand which manual industries impose upon those 
 who work in factories, his brain would be better for that disci- 
 pline and for that training of hand and eye. We should 
 produce under these conditions a population in the United 
 Kingdom more highly trained, more hard-headed, and more 
 practical than ever we can produce with a Public School 
 education followed by that of a Uiuversity. We believe 
 most thoroughly in the combination of the training of hand 
 and brain and eye simultaneously,' and we believe most sin- 
 cerely that a six-hour working day would solve that modem 
 problem experienced in all our industries of the, scarcity of 
 men and women to fill the positions of foremen, managers, 
 and directors. All through our industrial system this 
 scarcity is so great, that unless the nation takes in hand the 
 proper and efficient education of her people; with definite 
 courses of study for definite careers, agriculture will suffer, 
 manufactures wiU suffer, shipping will suffer, business will 
 staffer, and the progress of the whole Empire will be retarded 
 in competition with other nations. 
 
 There is a great desire, and not an unreasonable desire, 
 and certainly a healthy desire, on the part of the woricman 
 to take some share in the control of the factory he works 
 in, and it is a desire that should be encouraged ; but we 
 
 4 
 
34 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 cannot take a rank-and-file worker out of the factory to-day ' 
 and put him on the Board of Directors and expect that he 
 will be able to give valuable help and assistance. He must 
 be trained ; we have aU had to be trained. There must be 
 healthy growth and development towards this end, for there 
 can be no sound business without previous training. The 
 desire to have a seat on Boards of Directors and a share in 
 the control of the industries is a healthy sign ; but it would 
 be madness and ruin to the industries of this country if our 
 Boards of Directors were not composed of trained men, and 
 only by better education shall we be able to satisfy that 
 reasonable ambition of the employee-workers. 
 
 We should also have, under such a system, a huge trained 
 citizen army, without any of the waste that attaches to the 
 barracks system and ordinary militarism. Let us remember 
 that a standing army is always an incentive to war, whilst 
 equally unpreparedness induces an attack. Into the members 
 of this citizen aitny would be instilled that love of country 
 and of home that would make them feel that both were worth 
 fighting for, because their conditions of life would be such 
 that they could take pride and pleasure in them. 
 
 The girls, too, would be trained in domestic economy and 
 in all that they must know to fit them for their part in life 
 in the highest, fullest, and happiest sense. 
 
 Now, human beings who have received all these advantages, 
 at the age of thirty can be trusted to make the best use of 
 their spare time. They will usually have a hobby. The 
 man at thirty will perhaps keep a garden, and he will take 
 a special pride in growing his own vegetables; and if you 
 consider the millions of cultivators who, if we had some such 
 system, might be raising food-stuffs to-day in this way, what 
 a relief such assistance would prove in the feeding of the 
 people of, the British Isles! 
 
 We should gain vastly in all directions by the introduction 
 of the six-hour day; the worker would have opportmiities 
 for recreation, for education, and for the achievement of a 
 higher social standing. The term ." factory hand"— that 
 most hateful of terms, as if the " hand " possessed no soul, 
 no intellect, and no ambition in life at all— that term would 
 go. The factory employee, no longer a " hand," would go 
 for six hours a day to the factory in the true spirit of service; 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 35 
 
 He or she would receive for that six hours at least the same 
 pay that he or she now receives for eight hours. Those 
 now receiving one shiUing an hour and working eight hours a 
 day would, in future, receive is. 4d. per hour and work six 
 hours, and would be able to produce as much in the six 
 hours as is now produce4 in the eight, while the machinery, 
 running in two six-hour shifts, would produce a vastly 
 increased output. 
 
 This is the very rough and crude outUne of what we suggest 
 should be done in order to meet industrial conditions after the 
 war. With all modesty and sincerity, the six-hour working 
 day proposal is submitted to careful consideration and vigorous 
 criticism. Out of all this wreckage of war must ultimately 
 come better and more ideal conditions of Hving for all classes, 
 and under better conditions we can raise from our British 
 stock the finest race the world has hitherto seen, and build 
 up an empire founded on principles of health, happiness, 
 justice, and equal rights for all — an empire that will be the 
 friend of all nations and the enemy of none. Then this war 
 will not have been fought in vain, and fathers, brothers, and 
 sons will not in vain have surrendered their Uves ; mothers, 
 wives, and sisters will not in vain have mourned the sacrifice 
 of their dear ones, and Peace, never again to be broken, will 
 smile once more, and kindly Nature will reward our labour 
 with enough and to spare, and with lengthening life, 
 deepening joy, and happiness for all. 
 
Ill 
 
 TOOLS TO THE MEN WHO CAN 
 USE THEM 
 
 HuDDERSFiELD, January 19, 1918. 
 
 [Addressing a meeting at Huddersfield, Lord Leverhulme ex- 
 pressed the fullest confidence in the leaders of Labour and 
 the representatives of Labour associations, who, in this crisis 
 of the nation's history, would help to bring the war to a 
 successful issue in " a clean peace." He proceeded :] 
 
 We are a democracy, and a democratic country would not 
 be worthy of its name if it could only think of war and the 
 winning of wars. We have got to think also of peace, of 
 what will come to this country when the war is over ; but 
 surely if we can aU trust the cause of Labour and Labour 
 leaders to-day, we can equally trust Labour and those who 
 lead Labour to do their duty when the war is over. And I 
 am convinced we can equally trust the employers and all 
 sections of the community. There is some sort of nervous 
 dread about, that when the war is over there will be a cutting 
 down of wages ; that there will be, as is thought — I do not 
 agree in it — ^more workmen than jobs ; and on the other 
 hand, that there is going to be some attempt to take the tools 
 from the hands of nden that are now using them, and who 
 are experienced in the use of them, and hand the tools over 
 to men who are inexperienced in the use of them. I am sure 
 we would agree that either the cutting down of wages or in 
 any way the worsening of the present conditions with respect 
 to earnings would be disastrous to this country ; and it would 
 be equally disastrous to have our industries taken out of 
 the hands of those who have conducted them successfully 
 and handed over to those who are inexperienced because 
 untrained. 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 37 
 
 It is a curious fact that this talk of the reorganization of 
 the control of industry should come forward at the time when 
 the great nation, our kindred across the Atlantic, is giving 
 greater consideration to efficiency, and a larger output, and 
 a cheaper cost of production, with higher wages and shorter 
 hours. Now, any mistake on our part in the peaceful lines 
 of commerce when this war is over would be only second as 
 a disaster to a mistake on the field of battle. Either would 
 be irredeemable. If a nation once loses its position in com- 
 merce, it requires a matter of centuries to recover it. We 
 have seen commerce. in the Mediterranean pass from the 
 Venetians to the Spaniards. Why? Because the Venetians 
 got an idea that they were strong and powerful and could 
 dictate terms to the world. They thought they could make 
 their own rules — selfish rules, entirely for the benefit of the 
 Venetians. The trade passed to Spain, and Spain was in her 
 glory at the time when she began to consider that she had 
 arrived at the point when she could ignore the basis upon 
 which her trade had been built up, and became more narrow 
 and selfish, less considerate of the interests of others. Then 
 the trade passed from Spain to Holland, and Holland, in 
 turn, got to the pinnacle that we enjoy to-day, because 
 although we are only 45 millions of people in this country, 
 we can say with truth that we stand in advance in manu- 
 factures, in trade and commerce, of any other nation in the 
 world, whatever its population may be. 
 
 Holland, in her turn, lost the trade to England, and we 
 are now at the cross-roads, and have to consider carefuUy 
 what way we take, or the pre-eminent position of British 
 manufacturers, and the pre-eminent position of the workers, 
 and of interest in them, may pass from our hands to those 
 of other and more alert nations. You remember we are told 
 that above all things we are to desire wisdom. And I do 
 believe myself that what we in Lancashire call '' nous," 
 wisdom, is one of those rare faculties which, possessed in 
 full, can take us through life to a realization of our wildest 
 dreams and ambitions. But if we neglect wisdom, and rush 
 to make changes without due consideration — very much like 
 the proverbial bull in the china shop — then we only court 
 wreckage and ruin and disaster. 
 
 Now, what are our ambitions ? What are the ambitions 
 
38 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 of any true democratic people ? Surely our ambitions are a 
 better life for each of us, more ecjual distribution of wealth, 
 higher wages in order to attain to a better living, more plen- 
 tiful supply of all that we require in the way of boots, shoes, 
 and clothing, better homes — ^homes with gardens, homes that 
 are reaUy places in which a soul can Uve and expand, and 
 not caves in which we can crouch out of the Ught. Well, 
 these things will not drop down from the skies for us. They 
 are not very much good until we can get them on the earth 
 on which we hve our narrow span of Ufe. There is no other 
 way. Some people see the curse of Adam in work. I believe 
 it was the greatest blessing that ever came to us. Of all 
 people, those without work are the most miserable. That is 
 no reason why " A " should be worn down and fatigued, 
 whilst " B ," without much work, apparently gets more than 
 his fair share of the good things of this world. 
 
 There is no logic in that, and I am bound to say I feel it 
 very intensely that it has to be recorded at the beginning of 
 the twentieth century that nine-tenths of the wealth of the 
 United Kingdom — and I beUeve the same equally apphes to 
 most other countries — should be possessed by less than one- 
 tenth of the people, and that nine-tenths of the people should 
 possess only one-tenth of the wealth. That is a system that 
 cannot be defended for one single moment. But you must 
 remember this, that through- all the centuries we have had 
 such a system of taxation in this country that the taxes have 
 not been laid on the backs best able to bear them, but have 
 been laid on the worker. I remember very well years 
 ago, when I was a Liberal candidate, pointing out that, 
 including the rates on the house, and if the man happened 
 to be a moderate drinker and a moderate smoker, and his 
 wife enjoyed her cup of tea, and so on, the rates and 
 taxes collected from the workman were from 4s. to ss. in the 
 pound of his income ; whilst the contributions of the 
 wealthy man at that time could not be totalled up to any 
 more than is. in the pound. The income tax at that time 
 was about 6d. or 8d. in the poimd, there was no super-tax, 
 no graduated death duties, and no excess profits tax. 
 But j now how do we stand ? If a man is wealthy, he 
 has 5s. in the pound to pay in income tax, 3s. 6d. in the 
 pound super-tax ; if he possesses a fortune of a million, it 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 39 
 
 will have to pay 20 per cent, in death duties. Take the 
 death duties as payable on an insurance basis (that is the 
 easiest way to reckon it), and you will find that it will bring 
 his total taxation to-day (1917-18) up to 12s. 6d. in the pound. 
 We have only had this system a few years ; but I venture 
 to say — and this is apart from excess profits tax — that iinder 
 the present system of taxation it can no longer be said that 
 the wealthy are not bearing their fair share fii the burden 
 of the country. 
 
 I do not say they are bearing more than they ought to 
 bear ; but I feel proud of the fact that the opportunity is 
 now given to each man in the country, whatever his riches 
 may be, whether he is a weekly wage-earner or a wealthy 
 man, to bear his fair share of the burden of the country. The 
 wealthy are bearing it in the form of taxation, and in every 
 other form — by their sons fighting in the trenches, and in all 
 other ways. We never were a more imited nation, a more 
 equal nation on the basis of taxation ; and we ought to be 
 proud of it. But the echo of the former complaint still rever- 
 berates around the land, that the rich are not paying their 
 share. That has ceased to be the fact. And it is not really 
 the fact that land does not pay its fair proportion, that 
 property does not pay its fair share, that the incomes of the 
 wealthy do not pay their fair share. All this we have 
 altered very largely since 1896. The years 1909 and 1910 
 were the crucial years, when a big advance was made ; but 
 the biggest advance of all has been made since the war began. 
 I want us to bear that fact in mind, because, believe me, it 
 has accomphshed more to improve the conditions of the people 
 of this country, to raise their spirits, and to give them an 
 outlook on Ufe, than an37thing in the century preceding it. 
 I am confident and happy to acknowledge that that is so ; 
 but our hearts, having begun to show S5mipathy in one direction, 
 must show it in all. That is the rule of nature. You cannot 
 be warm-hearted and S37mpathetic in one direction only ; 
 you must be in aU. You cannot be cold and brutal on one 
 question ; you are cold and brutal on all. That is the law 
 of life. We have also seen the Health Insurance Acts, and 
 I had the' honour of carrying two bills preceding the 
 Government Acts — the Old Age Pensions Act and the 
 Payment of Members Act — ^which latter gives the means to 
 
40 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 any constituency to select its member without consideration 
 as to whether he ,can afford to pay his railway fares 
 to London and his lodgings when he is in London. Just 
 think what it has meant to give old age pensions, im- 
 proved, education, medical attendance on school children, 
 and health insurance. The total expenditure on these — 
 education, old age pensions, labour bureaux, and health 
 insurance— is 6i millions a year. That amount is taken out 
 of the taxes (mainly income tax) and distributed throughout 
 amongst the workers. 
 
 It is thought by some that democracy means absolute 
 uniformity, and you will notice one of the questions put by 
 the Prime Minister j^esterday, in reply to a questioner, about 
 the conscription of wealth and the acquisition of wealth, 
 was not answered by the questioner. The Prime Minister 
 had asked whether equality of wealth ideal was to apply all 
 round, whether we were to be bound by the ideal of the skilled 
 engineer receiving the same wages as the labourer.' He was 
 not answered ; but if equality all roUnd would achieve any- 
 thing to better the conditions of life, I am sure the skilled 
 engineer and all of us would agree that a system that made 
 for the greatest good of the greatest number would be a right 
 system in a democratic country. But, beUeve me, human 
 nature is foimded upon very distinct principles. First of 
 aU, we are social. We love to Uve in communities, in towns. 
 Very few of us love to live in scattered districts. The men 
 in the backwoods of Australia are always longing to go to 
 Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, or wherever their 
 big city may be. But whilst we are social in our habits and 
 love our fellow-men, we are individuahstic in that we love 
 our own homes. We do not want to have our homes in a 
 barracks, there to live a barracks life with others. Each one 
 of us feels that we have an individuality. We are not only 
 a body, but we have a soul, and our individuahty wants room 
 for expression. I always think the earning power of a man, 
 whether in the factory or in the office, whether he is or is not 
 the proprietor of the business, is in proportion to his mental 
 attributes. As the young tree sends its roots in every direc- 
 tion searching for nourishment and water, so does human 
 nature sgnd out its roots to feed its soul. If you were to say 
 that the man in the factory must not do some duty apart 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 41 
 
 from the workshop, and that the employer must not under- 
 take some task apart from his business, you would cramp 
 the aspirations and desires of eyery human being. We have 
 to attempt to satisfy our souls as well as our bodies by our 
 eiiort. Take inspiration for that effort away, and we should 
 just become automata. 
 
 But whilst we recognize these two attributes, there is a 
 great rule that has been laid down by the greatest Founder 
 of social institutions the world has ever seen. And He laid 
 it down two thousand years ago, " Thou shalt love thy neigh- 
 bour as thyself." If we desire that we would not be crippled 
 ourselves, then we ought not to cripple our neighbours. We 
 would like to have room to expand ourselves. So ought 
 our neighbours, and our neighbours are those we come in 
 daily contact with in works and in factories We are on a 
 level as citizens of this country. We are all producers, and 
 equally consumers, and it is only when we recognize this 
 that we can consider the idea that there should be some read- 
 justment of the productive work of the country. There are 
 those who affirm that industries should be put under Govern- 
 ment control. Now, I do not know whether Government 
 control is going to be called scientific management, whether 
 it is that this management by a Government would be more 
 scientific than management by an individual. The only 
 scientific management that I have any beUef in, and under 
 which as far as I see to-day everything could be successful, 
 is a knowledge of human nalture. You cannot force human 
 nature. If you set tasks for human nature, as seems to be 
 the basis of what is called scientific management, it will 
 surely break down. Human nature can respond enormously 
 to S5mipathy, to a kindly touch, to a participation in the 
 fruits of its industry, to a share of the profits it has helped 
 to create. The only scientific management there can be, in 
 my opinion, is that holding between employer and employed, 
 one to the other, and each for the other ; on those lines 
 only can we have scientific management. Now, is that really 
 to come about in other ways than we have developed ? Sup- 
 posing we were to take aU our industries and hand them over 
 to the Government. You could no more put in chains and 
 chain to the business the present proprietor than you could 
 the present operatives of the machines. Such a thing \yotald 
 
42 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 be slavery and unthinkable. Whilst you could take ovet 
 the machines, the mechanical apparatus, the soul of the 
 ovraer you could not chain and fasten to the industry. The 
 industry would pass into the hands of men who were not 
 used to the tool, and who had no experience as to how to use 
 it. And remember how narrow the margin is for economical 
 production. Do we ever think for one moment how narrow 
 it is? 
 
 Now, I think we were agreed that we want more of all 
 the good things of life if we can only produce them. Ninety 
 per cent, of the consumers of this country are the workmen 
 themselves. I am certain I have not over-stated that. There- 
 fore, under the present system the workman encourages his 
 own production where he lives. I knew a man whose father 
 put him as a draper in his own draper's shop. On the death 
 of the father — the man was then forty — ^he sold the shop and 
 went to study medicine, took his degree, and served in Edin- 
 burgh as a doctor for the remainder of his life. He is still 
 alive. That man followed not his father, who thought there 
 was nothing finer than the drapery business. If our businesses 
 are going to be nationalized^ are we going to be requisitioned 
 to work in our own factory ? Are we going to be told that 
 they want so many engineers, so many people in woollen 
 factories, and that they must have them ? If that system 
 is going to prevail, in any case, whatever the system may 
 be, it will be a limitation of individual Hberty ; it will not 
 produce higher wages ; it wiU not produce shorter hours ; 
 it will not produce as cheap commodities. Just to refresh 
 our memories ! The worker negotiates himself, or through his 
 union, for the highest rate of pay. And the employer knows 
 that the rate is one that he must pay, and produce goods on, 
 either at a profit or at a loss. He knows that if there is a 
 loss, no one wiU drop a tear over him ; he wiU sUde into the 
 Bankruptcy Court, and later on into some forgotten scrap- 
 heap of the world. But when the workman as producer 
 has received his pay, and handed that pay over to his wife, 
 he is now a consumer, and as a consumer, his wife, rightly 
 and properly, and he himself, rightly and properly, must 
 spend that money where he or she can get the best value in 
 quality and price. And, therefore, you have this position — 
 the producer of goods at the risk of the employer, who 
 
THIS SIX-HOUK DAY 43 
 
 takes all the risk ; you have the spending of the wages in the 
 cheapest market that the world can provide ; and between 
 these two comes the employer. 
 
 Could there be any better system devised by any man 
 placed in a Government office in one of those London hotels, 
 in a department run under a system that they call " minuting," 
 imder which a document is sent round, and to which each 
 official adds a little note, and about three months later it 
 comes back, and the whole thing is forgotten ? Under that 
 system, there would be nobody to stand the loss but the 
 consiuner. Under that system, if the goods were badly 
 bought, we should still have to pay. And assuming we make 
 this " advance," the outside world would not move at the 
 same speed. If the wages were put up, they would be added 
 to the cost to the consumer, and the consumer would have 
 to bear the cost of those goods, well or badly bought. The 
 success of the business would be no concern of the man 
 in the office : his salary would be assured, and if he was not 
 suitable, his sejvices would be dispensed with, and another 
 man, equally imsuitable, could be put in his place. Then, 
 how deep-rooted in our individual nature is the love of Hberty, 
 which gives us the right to expand. If we are chafing at 
 all to-da,y, it is that we feel we have not sufficient liberty ; 
 that we want more liberty, not less. And any error of wisdom, 
 any lack of " nous " that we might be carried to in a depar- 
 ture of such magnitude, would lead to untold unrest, and 
 our children's children would not call blessings down upon 
 us for it. 
 
 The individuaUstic system is the system we are on to-day. 
 We have the employer, whether he is a limited company or 
 an individual ; he stands between these two great forces — 
 the producer, the wage-earner and consumer — and he has 
 to have a very intense mind to enable him to make a 
 profit between the high rate of wages, ever increasing, the 
 shorter hours, ever reducing, both, I am happy to say, necessary 
 adjuncts to civilization. Between these, and the demand 
 from the consvmier for ever better and cheaper goods, he 
 may or may not make a profit. Well, as to the supposed 
 profit, if he does make a profit, I am sure in any case such 
 profit is grossly exaggerated, because our income tax returns 
 do not show (as is known to every one in the business world) 
 
44 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 the losses of the unsuccessful. If we had the returns side 
 by side, as we shotild have in an ordinary balance-sheet, if 
 the nation's balance-sheet not only showed the income of 
 the successful, but the losses of the unsuccessful, you would 
 be astonished to find that the average earnings of the employers 
 in this country, over and above the lowest minimum baSnk 
 rate of interest on their capital, are so small that you could 
 not replace them for the same money by salaried men, who 
 could be depended upon to look so closely after production, 
 keen buying, and strict economies. 
 
 I am convinced of that, and you would find that the profits 
 of trade and commerce are much less than are imagined.; 
 But suppose that was not the case. Here and there is a man 
 of extraordinary ability for making money. Generally that 
 abihty comes more from extraordinary ability for avoiding mis- 
 takes than from anything else. But there are such men. It is 
 a faculty that is very rare. I am convinced from my own 
 observation that there is less than one per loo people who 
 would be capable of running a business, however small, and 
 making a profit in it; that there is less than one in 100,000 
 who would be capable of running a large business. And you 
 know the number of men who have made those fortimes 
 which seem to be so great — the Fords, the Camegies, the 
 Rockefellers — they are very few, less than one per hundred 
 millions out of the 1,200 millions there are in the world. Not 
 only are they very few, but very largely their fortunes have 
 been realized through a combination of fortuitous circum- 
 stances. Invariably, without a single exception that I know 
 of, the men who have made these colossal fortunes have 
 actually made them by special service to the public, and by 
 producing a cheaper and ever cheaper article. Not one of 
 them has been able to make money by advancing prices, 
 The only time that money is made is when, by improved 
 processes of manufacture, prices can be lowered. You find 
 that without a single exception. Now, if we change all this, 
 and we are to have an idea that by putting our industries 
 on some other footing we should mend matters, I would like 
 us to consider exactly the basis that we are on before we make 
 the change. I would like to remind you of this, that we have 
 riot as manufacturers, we have, not in my opinion even as 
 Trade tlnions, considered sufficiently the human element in 
 
THE SIX-HOUK DAY 45 
 
 our industries. The manufacturer has devoted enormous 
 efforts by means of science towards cheaper and ever cheaper 
 production. Why, it is within the lifetime of most of us 
 in this room when electricity was not the useful and bene- 
 ficial servant of man that electricity is to-day. The power 
 of Niagara ran to waste, and also the power of the Victoria 
 Falls, and the waterways on the Continent and in America. 
 Now, by means of science, we know that that waste power 
 is equivalent to the efforts of millions of human beings, and 
 we have harnessed it and utilized it as our servant. 
 
 We have to-day, I believe, in the United Kingdom, by 
 means of steam-power and machinery, the productive capacity 
 of over 1,000 miUions of human beings working twenty-four 
 hours a day, and by means of that power we produce, by 
 possibly 14 or 15 milUons of human beings, all that could 
 be produced by the thousand million producers without 
 that power. But, as I say, there was in the past a great 
 power running to waste, and some of it is running to waste 
 yet (such as the ocean tides), in spite of us. I venture to say 
 there is not one of us in this room who without fatigue, in 
 terms of thought and organized inspiration and aspiration, 
 is not capable of infinitely more for the common good than 
 we are doing to-day ; but we have never been studied ; the 
 best has not been brought out of us. We have been made 
 into automata to go to our work at six or seven in the morning 
 and finish at five or six in the evening. And it has become 
 almost a fetish with some of us that the less they can do in 
 that period, not only the easier is it for themselves but the 
 better for their mates, because they wiU be leaving so much 
 more for their mates. And on the employers' side it has 
 been equally a fetish that the lower the wages paid, the longer 
 the hours worked, the cheaper the product would be. They 
 are both wrong, absolutely wrong. But is it to be wondered 
 at that under this system the idea should have leaped into the 
 minds of some trade unionists as to the restriction of output ? 
 I do not know whether you have read recently what has been 
 said by a great Trade Union leader in America. I want you 
 to consider this very carefully, because we are in competition 
 with America. Don't think for a moment that our AUies 
 in the trenches will be our aUies in commerce. It is in noble 
 devotion to the cause of democracy that the Americans are 
 
46 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 throwing themselves into the war. They have no territory 
 in dispute, no object to pursue in iJEuropean politics. They 
 are doing it from the highest ideals of democracy and to 
 free Europe from the hell of militarism. They are not children 
 who are doing this, and when this war is over, and we come 
 to consider the trade of the world, whatever ideals we have 
 in this country, we shall have to reckon with the ideals the 
 Americans have. 
 
 I will read to you what Mr. Gompers, the President of 
 the American Federation of Labour, representing many 
 millions of working men, said in a recent speech : " We are 
 not going to have the trouble here that Britain had through 
 restriction of production." He is speaking for Labour, not 
 for the masters ; but you might think he was speaking for 
 the masters. " There has not been any restriction of output 
 for over thirty years in America. We, in the United States, 
 have followed an entirely different policy." WeU, I can say 
 that I have been to America, and found a man in charge of 
 five lathes, automatic machines. I remember asking, when 
 I got back, why a man should not look after five lathes here, 
 and I was told the Union rules were against it. That is a 
 mistake. I do not want you to believe that I think the 
 Unions are not doing good work according to their lights. 
 I have never met a Trade Union official yet who has not im- 
 pressed me with his sincerity in desiring to do the best for 
 his members ; but it is a mistaken poUcy, that is all. It is 
 exactly the same as many mistakes on the side of the masters ; 
 but they are both wrong. " We say to the employers " — 
 there is^ no doubt about letting employers know — " bring in 
 all the improved machinery and new tools you can find. 
 We will "help you to improve them still more, and we will 
 g'et the utmost product out of them ; but what we insist on 
 is the limitation of hours of labour for the individual to eight." 
 This might be my speech if you take the eight and put it at 
 six. It is exactly what I am preaching. I beUeve in England 
 we are ripe for a six-hour day in many industries. I have 
 had experience of eight hours for twenty-five years. The 
 same type of people who say that six hours is impossible, 
 said eight hours was impossible, said that ten hours was im- 
 possible, and that twelve hours was impossible, and so on 
 at each stage of reduction from a fourteen-hour to the eight- 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 47 
 
 hour day, so that I am not made despondent by the fact that 
 I am told it is impossible. 
 
 " Work two shifts if you please, or work your machinery 
 all round the twenty-four hours if you like, with three shifts, 
 and we will agree, but we insist on the normal working day, 
 with full physical effort. We will not agree to that over- 
 work, producing the effect of over-fatigue; which destroys 
 the maximum of production, undermines the health of the 
 individual worker, and destroys his capacity for full indus- 
 trial effort." That is almost word for word what I have 
 said, except for the eight instead of six. We want higher 
 wages, shorter hours, a larger production of everything, so 
 that we. can get a cheaper cost. Without that cheaper cost 
 we have no funds to pay higher wages. Higher wages are 
 merely a shadow unless you have lower costs giving increased 
 purchasing power with the higher wages ; and I believe with 
 that and with shorter hours we can reaUze all that we are 
 striving for. I am told that at Ford's works they employ 
 40,000 persons. A boy worker can get £r per day, and all 
 employees are paid double Trade Union rates ; and there 
 I am told that it is the exception for the workman not to have 
 his own motor-car. Why should not the workmen have 
 their own motor-cars ? They will not get motor-cars under 
 a system of restricted output ; there won't be enough to go 
 round. Every time we increase the output and reduce the 
 cost we have a fund out of which we can increase the wages. 
 It jought to be possible for men to have more leisure than 
 they have to-day, when they commence work at six, or seven, 
 or eight in the morning and work on until five or five-thirty in 
 the evening. More leisure than that is an absolute essential if 
 we are to Uve a complete, full life of citizenship. I say without 
 hesitation, and I say it is within reach, now that we have 
 got the wages up, we can afford automatic machinery, and 
 so by means of automatic machinery we can produce more 
 goods. , 
 
 Everybody should be given an interest in the results of 
 their work, and then they can have more satisfaction in it. 
 And there could be more rehef for the employer, so that 
 employers also could devote themselves to a realization of 
 shorter hours, with harder work during the time they are at 
 work without fatigue, cheaper productioii and more leisure. 
 
48 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Well, now, that is what we want, but what are we driftiiig 
 to ? I will show you. Gompers said : " It is thirty years 
 since we had limitation of output," and so I will go back 
 thirty years, when they dropped it and we began it. It is 
 sometimes said that a dog returns to its own vomit. It seems 
 to me we were a dog that returned to another dog's vomit. 
 In 1886 the output of a certain class of worker in the United 
 Kingdom was 312 units ; in 1906 (twenty years after) this output 
 had been reduced to 275, and in 1912 (that is the last recorded 
 year before the war) it had dropped to 244 — from 312 to 244 
 in twenty-six years in the United Kingdom. In the United 
 States, whilst in 1886 the output per worker was at 400, 
 it went up to 596 in 1906, and in 1912 to 600, so that whilst 
 we went down the United States have gone up 50 per cent. 
 But we have EngUshmen in other parts of the world— -We 
 have them in Australia. Do you mean to teU me that the 
 Australians are not as strong trade unionists as any others ? 
 And the same applies to the New Zealander and the Canadian. 
 We all know they are strong trade unionists. In Australia 
 in 1886 the output per head was 333, in 1906 462, in 1912 
 542, more than double per man what the workers are pro- 
 ducing in the United Kingdom. Yes, but the wages are 
 double. I want to tell you as the output goes up the wages 
 go up ; as the output goes down, if the wages go up, the pur- 
 chasing power goes down: In New Zealand the output per 
 worker increased from 359 in 1886 to 470 in 1906, and 
 503 in 1912, and in Canada from 341 to 472. Of all 
 the English-speaking races all over the world, we, in the 
 United Kingdom, are the only ones who have fallen behind 
 in our production per head of the workers. And is our con- 
 dition improved under this policy? Are we satisfied and 
 happy with it ? 
 
 I think if any of you have gone, as I have, to Australiav 
 and seen the homes of the workers — seen them having their 
 summer holidays on their beaches with their wives and 
 families — ^you would see that their wages are not improperly 
 used. Well, but for it all, they would teU us that increased 
 output is the road to betterment and prosperity. Australia 
 settled with the I.W.W., put a number of them in gaol, and 
 this tmder a Labour Government. " Ca' canny " is a canker. 
 I want to say how sincerely and earnestly I am, and have 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 49 
 
 been all my life, with every master and worker in this room, 
 although I cannot say whether there are more masters or 
 more workers. I cannot say, but I do think this, that 
 Lancashire men and Yorkshire men have very similar views, 
 and very similar aspirations. 
 
 What I want is that we shall just inquire, if any change 
 is to be made, whether it is right, and the first step to lead 
 in the right direction. I do not want to claim that what 
 I have said this aftemoonrtrepresents the whole Alpha and 
 Omega of this great question. I have only touched the fringe 
 of it, but, believe me, the truth I started with is an absolute 
 truth — that we shall not get our clothes, and boots and shoes, 
 and houses dropping down from the sky, or jumping up from 
 the ground hke mushrooms. We will have to work for them, 
 and in working for them, it is our business to consider how 
 we can produce them with the least fatigue, the utmost 
 leisure, the greatest cheapness, with the largest volmne, so 
 that out of the things created in this way there shall be an 
 ever-increasing demand, so that however great this output, 
 it shall all be absorbed; a demand for all the necessaries, 
 comforts, and luxuries of life as much from the workers as 
 from those who are so-called masters, with such a fair and 
 right system of graduated taxation, that those who have 
 the ability to make money may utilize their creative powers 
 or their opportunities to bea'r a strong man's burden of 
 taxation, and so each in proportion to his strength will bear 
 the taxation of the country. Working on these hues, I see 
 an England where we can work a reasonable number of hours, 
 where our children shall receive the fullest and most complete 
 education — the children of the workman just as good an 
 education as the children of the employer — so that there 
 shall be every opportunity for all of us ; that there shall 
 be a ladder for every man, and he shall be left to climb it 
 if he wishes. 
 
 »P^O»eP?TY ,^. F LIBRARY 
 5 
 
 HEW IfU J^i^'TE S^'iOSL 
 
IV 
 NATIONAL POSSIBILITIES 
 
 London, July lo, 1917. 
 
 [As the guest of the Aldwych Club, Lord Leverhulme began a 
 speech on after-war problems by referring to his happy busi- 
 ness relations, extending over many years, with the Chairman, 
 Sir Thomas Dewar. He told a story of a Lancashire man 
 who, when dining at a restaurant, was served with a lobster 
 which had only one claw. The waiter's explaiiation was : 
 " Well, sir, lobsters are very pugnacious animals, sir, and 
 when they fight, sir, they sometimes lose a claw." " That's 
 all right," replied the customer; "take this chap away, and 
 bring me the' winner." Their Chairman was a winner. He 
 had nabbed the picture of " The Macnab " — ^painted by an 
 artist of whom the whole British race was proud — and had 
 thus prevented it going out of the country. Lord LeverhuliDje 
 went on to say :] 
 
 We have met here as business men, I take it, just to have 
 
 a short conversation upon the problems we shall have to 
 
 face when this war is over. And, perhaps, in or4er that we 
 
 may consider the problems the better,, it would not be amiss 
 
 to note what has been our attitude in the past towards the 
 
 race with, whom we are now at war, and whom, we know, 
 
 when this war of armaments is over, we shall have to meet 
 
 in a war of commerce. You know we are very easygoing 
 
 people. Any one who represents " John Bull " portrays 
 
 him as a very genial and jovial fellow ; but he always looks 
 
 prosperous. Our attitude has been to magnify and extol 
 
 the race with whom we are at war, and to consider them 
 
 patterns of industry and organization and of every commercial 
 
 virtue, and we have rather rim down ourselves. We have 
 
 thought little of ourselves, and a great deal of Germany. I 
 
 think this ought to be inquired into. The attributes of a 
 
 so 
 
THE SIX^HOUR DAY 51 
 
 nation will continue after the war is over, and when we come 
 into conflict on commerce, we shaU then be helped by our 
 natural attributes as they will be helped by their natural 
 attributes. 
 
 Now, in the past, certain inventions have been discovered, 
 and the whole of modem civiUzation is built up on those 
 inventions. How many of those inventions have the Germans 
 given to the world, and how many have the English-speaking 
 races on this side of the Atlantic and the other side of the 
 Atlantic given to the human race ? I am not sure whether 
 you would like me to give you a Ust, but I think it has a bearing, 
 from this point of view. We are going to carry our inventive- 
 ness into commerce after the war as we have done before the 
 war. If you conader the implements of warfare the Germans 
 are directing against us-^-the submarine, the aeroplane, the 
 torpedo, the machine gun, breech-loaders. Dreadnoughts, and 
 explosive mines — they are all the inventions of the English- 
 speaking race, either on this side or on the other side of the 
 Atlantic. The names of the inventors are British ; they have 
 no Germanic sound about them. 
 
 Apart from these, the world owes a great deal to the 
 EngUsh-speaking inventor in many other directions. In 
 the peaceful fields of industry the list is stiU longer. Not 
 only have we been inventing implements of destruction ; the 
 inventions by EngHsh-speaking races include such articles 
 of construction as the steam-engine, the locomotive, the air 
 brake, the steamship, cotton-spinning machines, telephones, 
 the telegraph, the sewing-machine, the typewriter, the phono- 
 graph, photographic films, motor-cars, pneumatic tyres, 
 bicycles, vulcanized rubber, modem dyes, electric lighting, 
 incandescent lamps, electric storage batteries, electric 
 tramcars, harvesting machinery, reapers and binders, disc 
 ploughs, threshing-machines, washing-machines, anaesthetics, 
 antiseptics, new kinds of steel, compressed-air tools, and a 
 further long list of improvements which, if I attempted to 
 go through, would wear out your patience. Even the 
 German so-called Kultur is the philosophy of Machiavelli, 
 an Italian of the fifteenth century. It is a philosophy long 
 ago discarded by all civihzed people. Far from being new, 
 it is more than four hundred years old, and Germany has 
 simply revived it. 
 
52 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 What has been the German method? Young Germans 
 have been sent here to leam our methods, accepting a low 
 salary, or no salary at all, to get into our offices and work*s, 
 spy out all they could, and then return to their own country, 
 arwied mentally with English methods, which they have 
 turned to account in their export and home trade, thus 
 reaping a rich harvest from the brains of the English- 
 speaking race. The Germans have never considered it a 
 crime to plunder the brains and steal the ideas of other 
 people ; but that form of stealing is as much a larceny as if 
 a person picked another person's pocket. We are a good- 
 tempered race, and the German laughed up his sleeve at our 
 over-trustfulness. When Bessemer, the EngUsh-bom son 
 of a Frenchman, invented his process of manufacturing 
 steel, inquiries were made from Germany and representatives 
 came over to inquire into the system. They returned with 
 drawings, but never paid one penny for a hcence to use them. 
 Recently I saw in the paper the case of a man who, long 
 before this war, invented a machine of great utility. He 
 received an inquiry from Germany, together with an offer 
 to become his agents. When he supplied them with drawings 
 and all the necessary information, they began straight away 
 to dispute his patents, and gave him the choice of either a 
 costly lawsuit or a free hand for them to benefit by the pro- 
 duct of his brains. This is a sample of their methods. 
 
 All the great inventions of the past are the children of 
 our brain, and these are only the elder brothers of the family 
 of similar inventions which wiU succeed them aft^r the war. 
 And all we ask from our Government is reasonable protection 
 for the brains of the countrj' — not protection in any other 
 sense. I am an ardent believer in Free Trade, but our brains 
 have not been protected. When we are taunted with the 
 story of aniline dyes and how the Germans exploited them, 
 the whole tale ought to be told. It was not the fault ^f 
 EngUsh manufacturers. It was the fault of the taxation 
 of spirits for industrial purposes, whjch made it impossible 
 for us to use those spirits in the production of anihne dyes. 
 The German Government gave their manufacturers cheap 
 spirits for industrial purposes, free of duty. The British 
 Government only within the last few years, whilst the 
 present Prime Minister was Chancellor of the Exchequer. 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 53 
 
 made it possible for British industries requiring industrial 
 alcohol to obtain the same free of duty. Such conditions 
 as that to which I have referred no British manufacturer 
 should be obliged to suffer under. 
 
 Again, foreigners have enjoyed exceptional terms from 
 our Government for foreign shipping, and even as late as 
 last July the British Chambers of Commerce had to pass 
 resolutions asking that British shipping should receive the 
 same privileges as foreign shipping. I am not going further 
 into that. " I only want to emphasize this fact, that we have 
 the right brains and the right intelligence, and desire only 
 ^the right opportunity, and, after all, this inventiveness owes 
 its origin to the principle of government by the people. 
 The liberty-loving English-speaking race, living under free 
 institutions and free government, by encouraging individu- 
 ahty produces inventive genius. We are not willing to be 
 dragooned and stifled. If we were to submit to that, our 
 inventiveness would leave us and we would sink to the level 
 of our enemies. 
 
 This is the position — ^how are we to make the best of this 
 fine material we have here ? Which way are we going to 
 make the best use of it on both sides of the Atlantic ? I 
 say emphatically that the present antagonism between 
 Capital and Labour ought not to exist. Labour and Capital 
 must be fused into one. If Capital and Labour are wise, 
 they will abolish all distrust and antagonism between each 
 other. Capital wants the largest possible return on capital, 
 and is not reluctant to receive it with the least possible 
 exertion. Workmen want the biggest wages and the shortest 
 homrs, and are not averse to these being realized with a 
 minimum of exertion. These twin brothers in wants have 
 got to recognize they cannot, either of them, achieve their 
 aims by the methods adopted in the past. The highest 
 return on capital cannot be obtained by means of the longest 
 hours and the lowest wages for labour, nor can the highest 
 wages and the best returns for labour be obtained by any 
 policy of " ca' canny." 
 
 The relations of Capital and Labour have been wrangled 
 over until all argimients are threadbare. Why should not 
 the worker be also a Capitalist in joint partnership with the 
 §o-called employer ? The - division of profits hetweeii the 
 
54 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 two in the past has not been on such a basis as could make 
 Labour feel that it genuinely shared in the undertaking. 
 We want to do away with that. Profit-sharing is Uable 
 to misconception. Co-Partnership is the one basis of com- 
 mercialism under which we can have that comradeship 
 between all classes in commerce that we have seen displayed 
 between all classes and all ranks in the trenches. That is 
 the spirit, and if that spirit could be evoked in fighting the 
 enemies of the Empire on the field of battle, surely it would 
 be equally forthcoming in fighting the enemies of trade and 
 commerce in this country-^men who tried to combat us in 
 trade and commerce by unfair means. It only wants us to 
 recognize the great fact that we are every one of us — so-caUed 
 employers and workmen — born with the same hopes and 
 ambitions and imbued with the same aspirations. Some of 
 us may have been stifled by wrong surroundings when we 
 were yoimg ; some may never have been given an opportimity 
 to grow ; but wherever there has been the opportunity of 
 growth and development amongst the English-speaking 
 races, whether at home or overseas, you find what has been 
 termed the building of castles in the air and the attempted 
 realization of ideals. 
 
 Modem industriaUsm is not very old — not two centuries 
 old, and that is a short time in the history of the world. 
 Prior to that man and master worked side by side. The 
 master knew his Jack and Tom and Joe, and Maggie and 
 Jane and Mary — in fact, every employee in his place. And 
 they all knew him ; they all came to him in their troubles. 
 He knew their domestic worries and anxieties, and he helped 
 and encouraged them. That worked well until, by the intro- 
 duction of machinery, the business became so great as to 
 render a continuance of the position impossible. The office 
 might be in London and the factory in the Midlands, or even 
 overseas. You could not to-day produce things in any other 
 way. With enormous factories and machinery came of 
 necessity a huge organization in which men working in the 
 factory hardly ever saw the so-called employer. 
 
 The only thing that can restore to any degree that con- 
 dition of two centuries ago is Co-Partnership. 
 
 [Here Lord Leverhuhne dealt with essential conditions of 
 G)-Partnership (see under that heading, p. 95) and with 
 
THE SIX-HOUR DAY 55 
 
 1|he Six-hour Day on lines similar to those of the article 
 under that heading, pp. 14 to 35. He concluded as follows :] 
 
 That is the outUne, the very feeble outline, of the vision 
 I have of meeting industrial conditions after the war. We 
 shall need to develop the inventiveness of our race. Do 
 you know how we got many of our great inventions ? From 
 the operatives themselves. The safety-valve on the boiler 
 was invented by a youth who was set to watch a gauge, and 
 whose instructions were that when the indicator rose to a 
 certain height he was to open the valve, let off the steam, 
 and so reduce the pressure. He got impatient — ^he wanted 
 to be doing something else besides just watching, and he 
 found that by the arrangement of certain weights in a certain 
 fashion the valve would automatically open itself at the 
 precise moment necessary, and he could go away and attend 
 to something else. He experimented until he had ascertained 
 the exact weight required to do this successfully, and from 
 that youth's idea was evolved the safety-valve as we know 
 it to-day. Many similar valuable inventions are continually 
 being madei by the men who can see and appreciate most 
 keenly the assistance they will give — the men who are con- 
 stantly in touch with the actual machinery. 
 
 Now, the greatest stimulus to the production of this in- 
 ventiveness we wish to develop is a share in the profits. 
 It would humanize our industries, it would make for 
 brotherhood, and, above all, it would make the working 
 man no longer antagonistic to Capital, because he would 
 be a capitalist himself. 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 
 
 Woolwich, November 30, 1909. 
 
 [" With regard to the greai question of Co-Partnership, it is 
 doubtful whether any one in the world, in this or any other 
 age, has done so much as Sir William Lever has in this direc- 
 tion." Such was the testimony of Sir John Cockbum, speaking 
 as Chairman at one of the addresses reproduced in the present 
 volume. That address will be found in its place immedi- 
 ately following the one here presented, which was delivered 
 to the Woolwich Chamber of Commerce at the New Town 
 HaU, Woolwich.] 
 
 The subject of " Co-Partnership or Profit-Sharing ? " is 
 one that has always had the greatest interest for myself. 
 Looking backward, I find it will be twenty-two years next 
 March since I first made public utterance on this subject ; 
 and therefore, before I come to describe the particular method 
 that has been adopted by myself, I would like, with your 
 permission, to take you over the ground that I travelled 
 during those twenty-two years before arriving at our present 
 basis, just as one wishing to travel to a far country would 
 desire first to spread out a map and see which routes were 
 possible, what rivers had to be crossed, mountains to be 
 scaled, torrents to be forded, and so on. So I will endeavour 
 to go with you to-night through some of the aspects of this 
 great question as they presented themselves to me ; for, 
 believe me, the margin of safety, viewing safety as the stability 
 of industries of this country and the weU-being of the workers 
 in them, is a very narrow one. Indeed, it would be very 
 easy to make the position of the workers infinitely worse 
 under Profit-Sharing or Partnership schemes than under 
 the present usual wages arrangement, if one did not exercise 
 the utmost care. 
 
 39 
 
60 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 At present. Labour is in the position of Debenture Holder 
 on all industries. Placed in that position by the law, if any 
 firm becomes bankrupt, even before the Debenture Holder 
 receives his money, wages must be paid in fuU, and, there- 
 fore. Labour stands in the position of Debenture Holder. 
 
 The three forces that go for production are : Capital, 
 Labour, and Management. I know sometimes liiese are 
 separated and made into two forces, called Labour and 
 Capital, but this is not a true division. There are really 
 three forces. Capital, Labour and Management, notwith- 
 standing the fact that very often Capital and Management 
 are comprised in the same person. 
 
 Now, the position is this, that Labour receives a fixed rate 
 of wages ; Capital receives its fixed rate of interest ; and the 
 product is a product of varying value, according to market 
 conditions, and affected by the harvests of raw materials all 
 over the world. Consequently, when you have two fixed 
 factors and a variable product, it is obvious that the reward 
 of Management, called profit, must be a variable quantity — 
 sometimes it may be great, sometimes it may be small, and 
 very often it must disappear entirely, only showing loss. 
 Now, that is the position to-day, and practically the position 
 of Labour is this — ^it comes to the employer and says, " I 
 can't store my labour ; my labour has to be sold each day, 
 and must be turned to account each day. If I do not make 
 use of to-day's labour to-day, I cannot do so to-morrow. I 
 cannot store it until a favourable opporttmity for selling it 
 occurs. I must sell each day's labour to-day — the day in 
 which I exist. Now, with Capital, and with commodities, 
 you may be able to stand the fluctuating markets ; I cannot 
 — ^my commodity won't keep. In addition to that, I have a 
 wife and family to keep, besides myself, and I must be assured 
 every week of my weekly wage. Whether the product I 
 produce for you reaUzes profit or loss for you, I have nothing 
 to do with that ; I cannot have an3rthing to do with it. I 
 must be assured of my weekly wage, and if there is a profit, 
 you are welcome to it. If there is a loss, I cannot help you 
 to share it." Now, this is the attitude Labour takes up, 
 and rightly takes up. It practically becomes a Debenture 
 Holder. Remember that is also the position of the Debenture 
 Holder. The Debenture Holder says, " J do not w^^t bi§ 
 
uu-rA«.TJMiiKcs±iir 61 
 
 profits; I want an assured rate of interest with absolute 
 security. I would rather have a siure 4 per cent, or 4J per 
 cent, on this business than I would have the Ordinary Shares, 
 with a possible 10 per cent, or a possible nothing ; there* 
 fore give me Debentures." Therefore Labour and the Deben- 
 ture Holder stand side by side. Labour and the Debenture 
 Holder, in asking for no share in losses, are placed in that 
 position, relinquishing voluntarily, or of necessity, in order 
 to maintain their security, any prospective share of profits. 
 Now if we, therefore, approach this subject, we might find — 
 if we approach it in the wrong way, we should certainly find 
 — all we had done was to change the position. On any attempt 
 to restrict Management from the receipt of profits, jointly 
 created. Management becoming a fixed charge. Capital 
 remaining a fixed charge, but with the produce still variable 
 in value, then Labour would have to be the one that had to 
 take the variable remainder. So that this is manifestly 
 one of those propositions which one has to handle with the 
 utmost care in order to be perfectly sure that in our intention 
 to benefit Labour we have not unintentionally made the 
 position worse. 
 
 And I would remind you that Trade Unions have, rightly, 
 set no value upon Profit-Sharing schemes. They have never 
 been interested in them at any time. They have never 
 seen in Profit-Sharing schemes anything worth exchanging 
 for the right to bargain for Labour at the highest market 
 price that Labour can obtain ; and I say they are right in 
 that, for through the influence of Trade Unions Labour has 
 been able to make better terms and better arrangements 
 financially, in the form of increased wages without risks of 
 loss, than could have been made under any system of Profit- 
 Sharing or Partnership. 
 
 Now, I will tell you how this operates. Industries are 
 started in this country, and in the early days of these in- 
 dustries there is practically very httle competition amongst 
 the holders of these industries, and profits are inflated, with 
 the result that a rush takes place of money into such industries, 
 and a rush of capital means that more men are employed 
 in them. The wages remain a fixed charge, and in consequence 
 of the inrush of capital and the greatly increased output, 
 the value of the product, represented by the price it will 
 
62 THE SIX-HOUR BAY 
 
 fetch on the market, has a serious fall ; but the result of that 
 new industry has been to employ more capital, and every 
 additional workman put on in that new industry has reheved 
 the labour market, and enabled Trade Unions the better 
 to bargain for an advance in wages for all labour in that in- 
 dustry and out of it. When you turn to the cotton industry 
 ' (I come from a cotton manufacturing county — Lancashire), 
 in my younger days a cotton-spinner was called a " cotton- 
 lord," and he was, relatively, getting^ a very much higher 
 return on his capital than could possibly be obtained tO-day. 
 I know of cases in those days when a man could build a new 
 mUl out of the profits of the old one in three years, and so 
 on ; but that has completely passed away with the organi- 
 zation of the industry, and with its bepoming more stable 
 and more settled. , Such a state of affairs as that could not 
 exist long. It was sure to attract fresh capital, and it was 
 sure to produce a cutting down of profits ; but the very con- 
 ditions that operated adversely for the Management, re- 
 ducing the profits, operated in the direction of raising the 
 wages of the workmen. If you take the cotton mills of 
 Oldham, the balance-sheets of which are piiblic property, 
 you will find this extraordinary result, that in the last thirty 
 years the pajmient of Management — ^because most of these 
 mills got the bulk of their capital in Preference Shares and 
 Debentures — ^the payment of Management represented by the 
 rate of dividends on Ordinary Shares has decreased hy 50 
 per cent., and wages to Labour, as shown by the Trade Union 
 rate of wages, has during the same period increased by- 40 
 per cent. Now, that is without any Profit-Sharing at all. 
 That is the ordinary economic working of supply and demand, 
 what is called the competitive forces that go on in all our 
 industries ; and therefore we have got to be extremely careful 
 in approaching this subject, because I am convinced of this, 
 that anything which tends to complicate the basis on which 
 Labour is paid makes it more difficult for Labour to obtain 
 the highest price for itself, and everything which tends to 
 simplify the arrangement enables Labour to obtain the 
 highest possible price; and if we introduce a complication of 
 any kind, we might, so far fronv producing any benefits to 
 those we desire to benefit, produce exactly the opposite 
 result. 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 63 
 
 Now, when we come to examine Profit-Sharing schemes, 
 I want to point out this ominous fact. They have been com- 
 menced in the commercial world and have l)een in active 
 operation for over seyenty years, yet the Board of Trade 
 Return issued on this very subject shows that the average 
 life of Profit-Sharing schemes with firms is only five years ; 
 that whilst there may be some that have existed for twenty 
 years or longer, the average duration is only five years ; and 
 the last return of all, issued in February of this year, shows 
 that at the present moment only forty-nine firms in the United 
 Kingdom, employing some 64,000 workpeople — only 64,000 
 out of millions' of workpeople represented by the Trade Unions 
 — only forty-nine firms were dividing profits with their work- 
 men. Now, that is a fact that you have got to bear in mind. 
 And another point I want to mention (and it has been the 
 cause of the break-up of. many Profit-Sharing arrangements) 
 is, that Profit-Sharing does not prevent strikes. I know 
 it was hoped that under a Profit-Sharing arrangement strikes 
 would cease, but how could it have that effect ? If a work- 
 man hears that in an adjoining colliery, as has often been the 
 case with a Profit-Sharing colliery, a rise in wages has taken 
 place, while he in the colliery where he shares the profits 
 gets no such advance in wages, surely he js bound to resent 
 what must appear to him nothing other than some arrangement 
 under which he is asked to take less wages than he is entitled 
 to, and must resort to strikes, which he consequently does. 
 It is absolutely certain that no one will accept a Profit-Sharing 
 arrangement in exchange for some abatement from the highest 
 rate of wages he is entitled to receive. Well, now, there is 
 another advantage in having wages fixed by Trade Unions. 
 It is that in competition amongst masters it is of great im- 
 portance, in my opinion, that masters amongst each other 
 should not have the opportunity of competing in the rate of 
 wages ; that the wage fund should be fixed, and that any man 
 giving a tender in competition with another tender should 
 not have any advantage out of a lower wage fund. The 
 only effect that could have would be gradually to bear down 
 the wage fund. " A " takes a contract to-day because he 
 can get labour for less than "B." "B," not content with 
 that, makes a corresponding arrangement and takes something 
 next time out of the wages fimd. There would be no end to 
 
64 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 it. Therefore, there is a great advantage in the wages being 
 fixed. Any Profit-Sharing arrangement, therefore, that was 
 based upon what you might call pooling the profits, Labour 
 getting an uncertain share, would be sure to be disastrous 
 in every way. 
 
 Well, now, I want to point out that sometimes employers 
 are treated in the Press to a very great deal of what I may 
 call " cheap morality." Hard employers are railed against, 
 employers that are working on uncertain conditions are held 
 up to public odium. Now, I say this without hesitation, and I 
 think I can afford to say it because you know what I believe. 
 There could be no worse friend to Labour than the benevolent, 
 philanthropic employer who carries his business on in a loose, 
 lax manner, showing " kindness " to his employees ; because, 
 as certain as that man exists, because of his looseness and 
 laxness, and because of his so-called kindness, benevolence, 
 and lack of business principles, sooner or later he will be 
 compelled to close. On the other hand, although it sounds 
 hard, that man who adheres strictly to business principles, 
 who pays, of course, the highest rate of wages, because to-day 
 it is not possible to pay less, and carries on his business on 
 so-called " hard " lines, will not be the worst friend of Labour 
 at aU. This man who is employing labour on strictly business 
 principles is not the least respected by Labour in any way, and 
 ought not to be. 
 
 To take another point, the incapable employer does not 
 make profits, the capable eniployer does make profits ; so 
 therefore we find in different businesses not only the profits 
 vary, but in the same business you have varpng profits 
 because of the varying capacity of the employer. Now, 
 the incapable employer making small profits may, not excite 
 the envy, criticism, and remarks that are hiurled at the man 
 of more capacity who earns larger profits, but he is doing 
 his workmen a great injiiry. Supposing he has lOO workmen 
 and fails to make profits. He gradually ceases to be able 
 to employ loo ; he cannot keep up renewals of machinery 
 and upkeep out of the profits, so in time he has to discharge 
 50 of his men. He is now employing 50. It is true that the 
 loss falls on him, but it equally falls on the 100. It is true 
 it only appears to fall on 50 out of the 100, because only 50 
 were discharged, but that 50 discharged have to the extent 
 
UU-li'AKTJNEKSllll:' 65 
 
 of 50 depressed the labour market, and lowered the demand 
 for labour by competing with men in occupation for labour. 
 On the other hand, the more capable employer, employing 
 100, makes profits, and because he is making profits desires 
 to increase his business. He doubles his plant, puts more 
 money into the business, and employs 200 men, and is still 
 making money. That man is not only benefiting himself 
 and the 200 men he employs, but the whole body of workmen, 
 by his taking 100 workmen off the market and finding them 
 occupation, so benefiting the whole of them. 
 
 Now, I do not want you to think that in any case labour 
 can be paid out of capital. It is not, and we find this curious 
 fact, which has to be explained by those who rail against 
 the position of Capital, that wages are always highest in those 
 countries where not only is capital most plentiful and where 
 capital earns the highest rate of dividends, but wages are 
 always lowest in those countries where there is the least 
 capital employed, and where capital earns the lowest return. 
 In England, wages are high and the return on capital is high. 
 If you go to Spain, there is less capital employed than in 
 England, and the return on capital is lower and the wages 
 to labourers are lower. If you go across to India, you will 
 find there is less money again available in industries, and there 
 is less return on money in industries, and you find labour pay 
 at the lowest ebb of all, a fact which you can prove for yourself. 
 In all countries where capital is plentiful and receives the 
 highest return, there wages are highest. Therefore, we come 
 to see clearly that it is intelligence and wealth that raise 
 profits and wages, and ignorance and poverty that lower 
 profits and wages. Therefore there can be no antagonism 
 between Capital and Labour, and if we want to raise the 
 position of the workers we cannot do that by lessening the 
 wealth of any other class. Now, there are laws in the business 
 world just as rigid and just as inviolable as laws in the physical 
 world, and therefore we come to this axiom, that the only 
 way in which wages can be increased is to increase the efficiency 
 of Labour, and therefore the quality and quantity of the 
 product. Wages can only be paid out of the fund that is 
 created by Labour, and therefore, if we adopted Profit-Sharing 
 under the idea that we should get a short-cut that would 
 clear us of all our troubles — if Profit-Sharing meant inducing 
 
 6 
 
66 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 a number of men to lean on each other, and to lean on the 
 man at the top, and to think that he by his magic wand 
 called Profit-Sharing could distribute a share of profits every 
 year to improve their position — ^this would be an enormous 
 mistake: it could not last long. Therefore we find the 
 average duration of life of Profit-Sharing schemes is only 
 five years, and we find that those men who try to mix philan- 
 thropy and benevolence with business find it a mixture 
 that is no more possible than oil and water— that you cannot 
 mix them. The business has to be conducted on sound 
 business principles, just as mills and factories must be 
 equipped with the most modern machinery. 
 
 Yes, but then, when you have got all your business methods 
 and all your modem machinery and modern science, there 
 still does enter into the calculation the human factor; and 
 I say that the employer who merely guards machinery so 
 as to prevent accidents in his factory that he would have 
 to pay for, has entirely mistaken the true position. 
 The true position is this, that if the hazardous nature of 
 any occupation is reduced, if businesses that are unhealthy 
 are made healthy, they become attractive to a greater body 
 of workmen, a more inteUigent class of workmen, and that 
 industry carried on by a more inteUigent class of workmen 
 is much more likely to succeed than if carried on by a class 
 that is less intelligent and less businesslike, so that the Com- 
 pensation Act has another side to it than the payment under 
 the Act. Well, now, I would say, referring to that illustration, 
 that there is the human factor in every works, and for the 
 employer to merely consider the driving of the hardest bargain 
 with his labour, and to get his labour at the lowest price, 
 and to endeavour to force out of his labour the maximum 
 amount of work that he can, is not to proceed in a manner 
 which will favour his own ends. He will not do it, he cannot 
 do it ; and I say this to the workmen : that the workmen 
 Who think that by reducing the output — ^what is called in 
 the North the " ca' canny " policy — ^they will increase 
 wages to Labour, and do well to make a job for two men 
 spin out for three, are equally mistaken, and that they will 
 not improve Labour by that method. The only way these 
 two. Management and Labour, can create a fund to increase 
 profits — out of which wages and profits are paid, out of which 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 67 
 
 it is possible to pay the highest rate of dividends and wages — 
 is to increase the quality of the product and increase the 
 quantity of the product ; that can only be done by becoming 
 more efficient. It cannot be done by working a greater 
 or less number of hours ; it can only be done by making men 
 in every way more efficient. 
 
 We find, then, that all the forces of production — Capital, 
 Labour, and Management — ^must work together ; must work 
 to one common end, must work on lines of enlightened self- 
 interest, and not on the Mnes of narrow personal selfishness, if 
 any good is to be done. Now, what feasible method have 
 we of drawing those forces together ? Well, let us carry 
 our minds back to examine the stages the industry of this 
 country has passed through, and see whether we have any 
 greater step to make to-day than our forefathers had at various 
 periods. In the first period of all, we were savages, we were 
 controlled by a chief, and if we met any other group of men 
 who did not belong to our section or tribe, we promptly killed 
 them if we could. And it was considered a businesslike arrange- 
 ment, I have no doubt, in those days, for the very simple 
 reason that if we did not succeed in killing them they would 
 have kiUed us, and that was the whole basis of the state of 
 savagery. No working together was possible. The most 
 you could say was that the members of one tribe or httle 
 settlement would work together, but the next tribe or settle- 
 ment would be their deadly enemies, and we have that, of 
 course, existing in every unciviUzed part of the world to tliis 
 day. After the state of savagery we developed into a state 
 of slavery ; that was the next step forward ; and there is no 
 doubt that under slavery life was protected, which was one 
 great gain, and consequently more effective work was done 
 for the community under a state of slavery than was possible 
 under a state of savagery. I have not the shghtest doubt 
 that slave owners of those days considered it was perfectly 
 businessUke to drive their slaves to work with the lash and the 
 whip, and they would have thought kindness and considera- 
 tion perfectly unbusinesslike and impossible to carry on; 
 in fact, if in bujdng and selling their slaves they had con- 
 sidered them any other than cattle, if they had hesitated 
 for a moment to drag them to where they could get a |ood 
 price, it would have been considered totally unbusinessUke 
 
68 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 and maudlin sentiment. In the present days of wages i 
 is very nearly considered imbusinesslike and bordering oi 
 philanthropy to do anything more for workmen than is abso 
 lutely necessary, and strict business to get out of the work 
 men the largest amount of work by driving and bj 
 forcing methods rather than reasonable and proper methods 
 Well, I say this : we living to-day have not to make anything 
 like so great a stride to take the workman from the wage- 
 drawer — I use the word " drawer " because you cannoi 
 say under the wage system that it is always earned : a great 
 section of men earn more than they draw, and the othei 
 section earn less than they draw — I say it is nothing like as 
 big a jump from the position of wage-drawer to that of co- 
 partner as there was from savagery to slavery and from 
 slavery to wage payment. But, whilst it may be difficuH 
 to do so, and whilst, in addition, I may make a great many 
 mistakes — for, as I said at the beginning, the margin of safety 
 is extremely small — still, during the last twenty years I have 
 tried first one method and then another working in that 
 direction. I have always preferred to call my previous methods 
 Prosperity-Sharing, and not Profit-Sharing, because I feel 
 that Prosperity-Sharing best describes my ideals. I feel 
 that when a business prospers it means that all the factors 
 have entered into that success. It is perfectly certain that 
 no one man could be responsible for all the success, and there- 
 fore, if the business prospers, I like to take the illustration 
 of the family. If a father prospers in life he moves into a 
 better house, his children get a better education, get better 
 clothes, more holidays in summer, and so on ; that is, with- 
 out touching his profits at all. If that father said to his 
 children, " I have made so much more this year, and will 
 divide so much more with you," in my opinion the effect of 
 that on the children would be that the next year, when the 
 father had reverses in business and had losses, the children 
 would begin to criticize him and say, " How is it that father 
 is so much more a fool this year than last — why did he open 
 that new office in London and lose his money ? "• On the 
 other hand, if he does not say anything about his income, 
 but gradually betters his family, he can tide over those bad 
 years and carry on without them knowing anydihing about it, 
 Therefore, I commenced building houses, gradually improving 
 
CO-PARTNEESHIP 69 
 
 the conditions without touching profits, which I did not wish 
 to do, I felt I might make a vety serious mistake, because 
 steps taken in that way could not be retraced. 
 
 Now, another point comes up for our consideration when 
 we go beyond Prosperity-Sharing, namely, the control of 
 the business. Who is going to have control in a universal 
 partnership ? Now, here we come, in my. opinion, to what 
 may form a way out of the difficulty. Just as taxation and 
 representation must go together, so it seems to me loss- 
 bearing and control must go together. The man or body 
 of men who say they will bear all the losses have the right, 
 because they say they are going to bear the losses, to say 
 they will have the control, and it is for them to say to what 
 extent they would hke to have the assistance in the control 
 of those associated with them; and just as Labour cannot 
 say that it will take any losses, so Labour, wanting to be in 
 the position of Debenture Holder, has no right to say, " I 
 will fix the poUcy of this business." If Labour claims it is 
 right for Labour to fix the policy, it is quite obvious that 
 such policy might residt in losses, and as Labour could not 
 bear such losses, it is clear that Management, forced to adopt 
 a pohcy fixed by Labour, would have to bear the losses alone, 
 whereas if there were profits they would have to share them. 
 It would be a perfectly unfair arrangement that would not 
 be right. To merely give out profits as sort of doles, in my 
 opinion, would be equally wrong. We must cultivate the 
 self respect of everybody we work with. There is not a man 
 but must be able to look you in the face and say he owes 
 you nothing, that he does not want cheques if he does not earn 
 them ; if he does not earn them as much as you have earned 
 them, he does not want them. Therefore, we now come to 
 consider on what possible basis we can work in Profit-Sharing. 
 
 In my opinion, ordinary Profit-Sharing has been proved and 
 found wanting. Prosperity-Sharing is very good, but does 
 not go far enough. Now, then, we come to a possible adoption 
 of Co-Partnership, Now, in this Co-Partnership arrangement 
 it must be fixed, as I have said, that those who alone bear 
 the losses must take the control. For those who do not bear 
 losses, whilst their help in Management would be welcomed, 
 control is not a right that they can demand until they share 
 •in the losses. Not until Labour can share in losses as well as 
 
70 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 in profits can Labour assume control. It is quite clear that 
 in all well-organized industries some must work with their 
 heads and others with their hands. If food, clothing, and 
 homes are to be won for the whole body of workers, there 
 must be a head prepared to control. I firmly beheve that 
 the more we recognize each other as brothers, within the proper 
 limits of control, the more we shall raise ourselves as well 
 as those who work with us. The whole body, employers 
 and employees, will be raised together. Now, the employer 
 has, by force of circumstances, learned his lesson already 
 He has been taught that the best way for him to conduct 
 his business is to improve the quality and, as far as possible, 
 reduce the cost of his output, and that that is the only way in 
 which he can extend his business and increase his profits. 
 The workman has not learned that lesson because he has 
 never had a chance of learning it ; he has never been able 
 to have such a connection with the business as would bring 
 that lesson home to him, and therefore it is by admission to 
 Go-Partnership that he wiU learn it, and being in Co-Partner- 
 ship he will see that it is only out of the fund created in the 
 business itself that any improvement or advancement is to 
 be made in the position of Labour. Certainly, Co-Partner- 
 ship, if not viewed in this light, if it has not the effect of 
 increasing products in value and quantity, cannot result in 
 increasing the wages, and cannot lead to any betterment to 
 the workers. Co-Partnership, therefore, must first ask — 
 I am not giving these points in order of priority and not in 
 order of importance, as they are practically all equal — ^how 
 can we increase the output, improve the quality, reduce 
 cost, lead to greater care of tools and machinery, greater 
 economy of materials, and greatly reduce what is at present 
 an inseparable burden on all industries, the cost of super- 
 vision ? I know supervision is at present, and always will 
 be to a certain extent, an absolute necessity, but I often think 
 if we could be Co-Partners we should greatly reduce that cost, 
 and we should have gone a long way in reducing the cost 
 of production. Just as a slave worked better than a man- 
 eating savage, and a wage-drawer worked better than a slave, 
 I am convinced that a Co-Partner wiU do better work and more 
 of it, with less personal fatigue, under better social conditions 
 for himself, wife, and family, because his efficiency will 
 
CO-PARTNEESHIP 71 
 
 be increased, than the wage-drawer ; and it is only in that 
 direction that we can uphold and maintain our system of 
 Co-Partnership as better infinitely than any system of Profit- 
 Sharing. 
 
 Now, what I want to say to the employer is : " Here is 
 our system.' It means well, and we are going to give it a 
 fair trial. I beheve it promises well because it gives to the 
 employee freer scope for the exercise of his abilities, it raises 
 him and makes him a better man. This it is bound to do. 
 The tendency is that the worry and cares of Management 
 ought to be reheved by it. Working with a body of Partners 
 must be infinitely better than working with a body of wage- 
 drawers, and assuredly I believe, as certain as we are here, 
 the wage fund and profit fund will not be reduced if we all 
 understand it and work together ; but even supposing the 
 profit were reduced, but that those at the head of the firm, 
 the Managers, have lost the worry and the anxious time, 
 even then I say that it is worth more than any amount of 
 money." 
 
 To the employee I would say : " You are now offered 
 an opportunity of sharing profits with Capital and Manage- 
 ment, and have now the opportunity to show the kind of 
 man you are ; join hands with your Co-Partners in a manly 
 agreement to do your part in the Co-Partnership. You will 
 continue to receive the highest rate of wages and will work 
 the regulation hours, with all overtime rates that are pro- 
 vided on the fullest scale that has ever been paid or arranged. 
 Join hands with me to make the profits of this business sure 
 and increasing. Let it not be a one-sided Co-Partnership. 
 There must be a fund created out of which you can benefit. 
 There cannot be any one-sided arrangement that can be of 
 benefit to either of us. Live up to our motto, ' Waste not, 
 want not. ' Fill your business hours with work for the business, 
 increasing the quantity of the product, increasing the quaUty 
 of the product. Take care of the machinery and tools, help 
 me to weed out the chronic idlers and grumblers from this 
 business. If we come on to years when dividends cannot 
 be paid you will suffer, but you wiU not be the only sufferer. 
 Your Co-Partners will suffer, and I will suffer with you, and 
 you will have learned what business means and what the 
 ' See Appendix, p. 135. 
 
72 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 risks of business are, a lesson that you ought to learn j 
 as much as myself. Here is the Co-Partnership. I find 3 
 a ladder to raise yourself to the heights out of your pres 
 troubles and difficulties. I place it against the wall for y 
 but it is out of my power, or the power of any man, to pi 
 another man up the ladder-— man and ladder both fall, 
 offer you the Co-Partnership : it is for you to make it 
 success/' 
 
it 
 
 CO-PARTNERSHIP AND BUSINESS 
 
 MANAGEMENT 
 
 London, June 17, 1913. 
 
 [Lord Leverhulme (then Sir William Lever, Bart.) addressed the 
 Institute of Directors at its premises in Gracechurch Street. 
 The Hon. Sir John A. Cockbum, K.C.M.G., M.D., F.LD.. 
 who presided, spoke of the successful establishment of Co- 
 partnership at Port Sunlight. He envied the members of 
 the staff and employees whom he had met ; they seemed to 
 have everything that wealth could bring — aU the advantages 
 of social life and the benefits of travel — and they seemed to 
 be a most happy family. He thought the secret of success 
 in business was that, where service was rendered willingly 
 and with a certain amount of jby in the work, it was always 
 much more efficient. Lord Leverhulme said :] 
 
 It was with very great pleasure that I accepted your invitation 
 to be here this afternoon, because of all subjects, the one of the 
 greatest interest to myself, arid the one to which I have pro- 
 bably given the closest study outside my own business, is 
 that of Co-Partnership. I believe that all manufacturers 
 to-day are exposed to more criticism than probably any other 
 9lass of the community. We are expected to adopt every 
 method of every faddist in connection with our industry, 
 while each one of us knows that if a manufacturer adopts 
 any method that does not tend to produce more goods of a 
 superior quality in less time, and at the same time pay labour 
 higher wages, and give labour shorter hours, and simultane- 
 ously give goods to the consumer at a reduced cost, that 
 manufacturer is led away from the ordinary commercial 
 channels into by-paths of dalliance that can lead nowhere, 
 and he is bound to come to ruin. 
 
 Well, the ordinary commercial relationship between each 
 
 73 
 
74 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 of us, employer and employee, and one that has stood the test 
 of time, is that of the pa3mient of wages, and it is being found 
 to-day that that bargain has a good deal of justice to recom- 
 mend it. It is just this : a man says to the employer,* " I 
 will let you have my labour -for a certain sum ; if you make 
 money out of it, it shall be yours ; if you make a loss out of 
 it, you shall bear it ; guarantee me my wages, and make 
 your own arrangements after that." That man is practically 
 a debenture holder in the industry, and it is a perfectly 
 practical and sensible basis to work upon. But it is not 
 found, as time goes on, to go quite far enough, because we 
 want more than the mere desultory performance of duty; 
 we want the whole-hearted interest of the man, and the 
 keener competition becomes, the more necessary it is that 
 we should have, throughout our whole staff, a personal interest 
 in the whole of the undertaking, which personal interest can 
 never be suppUed by a mere wager-drawer. 
 
 Now we are in this difficulty. It is impossible to mix 
 different things with each other. It is impossible to mix 
 debenture holder and shareholder, for instance. There is 
 a sphere for each, and you cannot mix those spheres in any 
 way. You cannot let a man be a debenture holder and at 
 the same time take a share in the final profits of the business. 
 You cannot easily have a man a wage-drawer and also inter- 
 ested in the final profits of the business. And we have got 
 this problem to solve. Every manufacturer has ideals for 
 himself, in which he sees that his mills and factories are of 
 the very finest description, equipped with the latest machinery, 
 and in which he adopts the most modem methods. And there 
 we stop. As soon as we come to consider the question of 
 extending further and more modern methods to the labour 
 we employ, we are in this difficulty of mixing, or of trying 
 to mix, things that differ from each other. It is said, you 
 know, that it takes two to make a bargain ; and I believe 
 it is equally true that only one gets it. 
 
 Now, in former times the whole history of the world has 
 been a history of conflict. Conflict has been the rule of life. 
 It has been the question that has settled the stability of 
 nations ; conquest by war, and one perpetual conflict. And we 
 see the modem survival of this idea of conflict in competition. 
 The very antipathy of the public to anything partaking of 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 75 
 
 the nature of monopoly shows that they believe that war, or 
 conipetition, is for the good of the public, and probably for 
 the good of mankind. And we do know this — that com- 
 petition does keep us alert, and does keep us strenuous in 
 our business. It is more important, however, that we give 
 good service to the pubHc than that we waste our energies 
 in competing 'strenuously with each other. Any method 
 that we can adopt in our business that wiU improve our effi- 
 ciency and the efficiency of those we employ, is a much more 
 important matter for the public than that we should be 
 engaged in keen competition with each other. And I say 
 also that, however much the faddist may like to see a manu- 
 facturer who is also called a philanthropist, it is even more 
 important for the workman that his employer should be a 
 strict business man than that he should be a philanthropist. 
 Capital is aU-powerful to-day, and I think that, carrying 
 our minds back to the time of confhct, it behoves Capital 
 to remember that any conflict that may come between 
 Capital and Labour is much better settled by an adjustment 
 of rights, and a recognition of the rights of each side, than 
 by a continuance of conflict. The recognition of rights does 
 not mean that the manufacturer can be a philanthropist, 
 because he cannot ; but each day Labour is demanding, and 
 rightly and properly demanding, a greater share in the profits 
 of industry — and to-morrow, in all probability, the positions 
 may be reversed, and as the demand for labour increases 
 and money becomes more plentiful. Capital may become the 
 suppUant for employment, and Labour may be all-powerful 
 and able to dictate the terms Ion which it is to be employed. 
 That is, of course, an exact reversal of the position which we 
 have to-day. Supposing even that that came about, the 
 employer could not even then be a philanthropist, and the 
 hardest employer who could possibly be imagined, who 
 succeeds in keeping his people in fuU work at full wages, 
 whatever that rate of wages may be, would be better, even 
 under those conditions, for the workman himself than a 
 so-called philanthropist. 
 
 Well, now, in Labour wars, of course, the weapon which 
 has been used, and effectively used — and I think rightly used 
 — ^has been that of strikes. But, like all methods of war — 
 like all weapons of war — ^it is costly and extravagant, and I 
 
76 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 believe it is equally true in industrial warfare as in WEuiare 
 between nations — and this has been proved by Mr. Norman 
 AngeU — that no practical profit has ever come out of war 
 unless it has been a fight for Hberty. And I believe that in 
 this question of the adjustment of wages there is no question 
 of liberty involved, and that all questions of this kind could 
 be infinitely better settled by mutual forbearance and con- 
 ciliation than by any question of strikes. In my opinion, 
 all these strilces, and all this unrest in the Labour world, are 
 a healthy sign. And it is stiU more healthy that no advantage 
 at the present moment has resulted, or can result, froiji this 
 warfare that wiU give either element a preponderance over 
 the other. The tendency will be, as I have said, as money 
 becomes more plentiful, for money to be the suppliant for 
 employment, and for Labour to be able to dictate more closely 
 its own terms. But even then, extravagant and costly pro- 
 duction would ruin industries, would ruin the cause of Labour, 
 and would bring Labour back to a situation of unemplos^ment. 
 For a number of years past we have seen various Acts of 
 ParUament passed to regulate the employment of labour. 
 Now, I am not one of those who think that this has come 
 about merely because the workman has the vote ; I rather think 
 it is because the community recognizes that the workman 
 has certain rights, and because the regulation of labour in 
 a proper manner has been recognized as being just and fair ; 
 and the very fact that it has resulted in giving advantage 
 to the employer as well as to the workman proves that it is 
 founded on sound lines. We have to be regulated. I know 
 there was an idea in the middle of the last century that each 
 of us had liberties which we could exercise at our own sweet 
 will. But it is found that organized society caimot live in 
 that way, and that we have to reco^ize the rights of others 
 as well as our own rights. .This is no new idea, I know, but 
 we are beginning to recognize more and more that in this 
 matter of the emplo5mient of labour it is right that the State 
 should make certain regulations, so that one manufacturer, 
 who is inclined to adopt proper safeguards of machinery and 
 proper regulations of labour, shall not be handicapped in 
 competition with another manufacturer who would prefer 
 to disregard such safeguards and regulations. We are aU of 
 us the better for regulation in this direction. 
 
tiU-fAJSiiMJJiXisnir- 77 
 
 But this again does not take us very far. It still leaves 
 us very nearly where we were with regard to the wage question, 
 and the situation is pretty much in this respect left as it was 
 at the beginning of last century. Well, now, the question 
 of capital comes in, and may I mention this, which I am 
 sure is apparent to every one of us — that the shareholder 
 in the large aggregations of capital that are known to-day, 
 is no longer a partner ; he is merely an investor — a money- 
 lender. Capital has become dependent on Management 
 and Labour, and this result has produced a condition where, 
 if you alienate the interest of Management and ahenate the 
 interest of Labour, so that the whole of the benefits resulting 
 from the whole-hearted service of Management and Labour 
 are merely to go to the financier, the money-lender, or the 
 investor, then you have produced circumstances in a very 
 large number of industries which did not exist a decade 
 ago — ^where you have divorced Management and Labour 
 from the fruits of the industry owned by these large aggrega- 
 tions of capital. That is going on slowly and gradually. 
 It may be possible in certain industries, but in other industries 
 such a condition of affairs is entirely opposed to their 
 success. Now the conflict that has resulted from this 
 changed position is rather considerable. The condition is 
 now one in which Management, as such, is on the side of, 
 or is in the same position as, Labour ; and in interesting both 
 Management and Labour in rendering efificient service, I 
 claim that the best interests of shareholders, who want a solid 
 investment with security,, and the best interests of the con- 
 sumers, who want articles of uniform good quality at the 
 lowest possible cost of production, would alike be realized. 
 It is not easy at any time to evolve a scheme that will realize 
 the po^ibility of interesting Management (which is not a share- 
 holder) and Labour (which is also not a shareholder) in the 
 products that they, jointly with Capital, create. The result 
 is that very often complicated positions occur, and systems 
 are evolved which are more or less temporary. The average 
 life of such schemes, as I say, is about five years. Now, there 
 must be a reason for this, and I cannot help thinking that the 
 reason is the one which I have already mentioned, namely, 
 the attempt to mix things that differ. As I stated before, 
 the employer who shares his profits with his workpeople is 
 
78 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 not entitled on that account to receive his workmen's labour 
 for less than the current rate. Some of the Profit-Sharing 
 schemes have fallen to the ground because, after sharing in 
 the profits for a number of years, the workmen have struck 
 against a reduction of wages when no profits were accruing, 
 or have struck for an advance of wages when an advance has 
 been given in other industries, with the result that the Manage- 
 ment has said, " Well, of course, if you won't take bad times 
 with good, if you are only going to take your share of the profits 
 when these accrue, and leave us to bear all the losses, we will 
 withdraw the Profit-Sharing arrangement altogether." Now, 
 it seems to me that that is an unreasonable position to place 
 Labour in. Labour must have its fixed rate of wages, which 
 in turn must be the Trade Union rate of wages, or the current 
 rate of wages in trades where there is no union. Labour must 
 have that rate of wages assured to it, and if the employer, 
 in prosperous years, shares profits with his workpeople, he 
 has a right to expect that whilst he is not interfering with 
 the rate of wages, he is, by adopting that system, increasing 
 the personal interest of his staff in their work, and that the 
 staff themselves will make the surplus profits which they 
 themselves are going to share. And on that basis, and only 
 on that basis, does it seem to me to be possible to introduce 
 a system of sharing profits with employees. Because, if it is 
 going to be a system merely of taking the profits made by the 
 employer and dividing a share of those among the employees, 
 then it is philanthropy, which is not required, and for which 
 there is no place in business ; and in a very small number of 
 years an employer adopting that course would inevitably find 
 himself handicapped by competitors who, instead of dealing 
 with surplus profits in that way, carried' them to a reserve 
 fund and left them to fructify in the business. And in that 
 way the profit-sharing philanthropist would find hiraseU 
 suffering a very serious handicap. If the workman, on the 
 other hand, felt that he was not assured of his full rate of 
 wages, the same as he would receive in any other workshop, 
 he would naturally feel aggrieved, because it is. a matter of 
 fife and death to him, with his family to maintain, that he 
 should have his full rate of wages, and he cannot do without 
 that full rate of wages. 
 Now I will tell you, if you will allow me, something-of my 
 
CO-PARTNEESHIP 79 
 
 own little personal experience. I have endeavoured to indicate 
 to you the difficulties of the case, which are very real, and now 
 I would like to tell you of the various means which I have 
 adopted, during the last five-and-twenty years, to produce 
 this personal interest of which I have been speaking, and of 
 what has brought me to my present system. 
 
 The first and obvious course for a man to take is to allow 
 those associated with him in his business to acquire some of 
 the ordinary capital. It has been done very largely in a great 
 many industries. Well, I tried that, and I invariably found 
 that as a result of that, the holding of these shares produced 
 a state of mind which was nervous, to say the least of it. So 
 that if a new development was contemplated — for instance, 
 the opening of works in Australia or in some other part of 
 the world — then the holders of a small number of the ordinary 
 shares were inclined to consider that the position of these 
 ordinary shares was going to be jeopardized, and that the 
 opening of those works was going to be risky, more or less, 
 and that the risk ought not to be taken. And in many cases 
 the argument was used, " We are doing well, and why should 
 not we be satisfied with going on as we are ? " Well, of 
 course, the number of ordinary shares held in this way, as 
 compared with those held by myself, was not of sufficient 
 moment to be powerful enough to alter the policy — ^if it had 
 been, I think it would have been iatal to our progress — and 
 the result that generally came about was that I had to buy 
 back myseK, at a premium, shares which I had either given 
 for no payment at all or had issued at par. I never got 
 them back at par in any single case ; I always had to buy 
 them back at a premium. Invariably, as I say, there was 
 a state of nervousness created in the minds of those who held 
 these shares. They might be worth £40,000, ;f 50,000, or £60,000 
 if realized at a particular time, and when there was any question 
 of a new departure, such as the establishment of a new under- 
 taking, the holders of these shares felt that they did not know 
 where they were going tO' be landed, or how their value was 
 going to be affected. This is the natural attitude of the small 
 shareholder, and I respect it. I do not think I have any right 
 to say that he ought not to take that view. A man who finds 
 that if he goes out of the business at a certain moment he will 
 go out without the necessity of any worry as regards the future 
 
80 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 will naturally hesitate to go into a new branch of the enter- 
 prise and fade unknown risks of which he does not, and in 
 the nature of things cannot, foresee the finality. Therefore, 
 as I say, the only result I got from letting these ordinary 
 shares go was that I had invariably to buy them back at a 
 premium, and generally before five years had passed. So 
 that, after having a strong desire to get rid of my ordinary 
 shares to those who worked with me, I ultimately found myself, 
 until two years ago, the holder of aU the ordinary shares. I 
 should mention that then I let my son have some of them, 
 but he, of course, is on a somewhat different footing, and I 
 suppose that in all human probabihty he will have the lot 
 at some time or other. But leaving his shares out of the 
 question, all the others came back to me in the way I have 
 described. 
 
 Now, I had to give that idea up. It was leading me 
 nowhere. It was costing me a great many hundreds of thou- 
 sands of pounds, so I had to give it up. Next I thought I 
 would try my hand at the creation of some preference shares, 
 the dividend on which would be restricted to 5 per cent. My 
 idea was to allow these to be applied for, and when the appli- 
 cants obtained them, they would receive the same rate of 
 dividend as the ordinary shares, the difference being ex gratia. 
 Now, I consulted our solicitor, and he pointed out to me that 
 that scheme had already been tried and had failed. So I 
 was saved from that particular pitfall. He said he knew 
 several firms who had tried the scheme, and that the result 
 had been that the employees had been able to borrow money, 
 say, at 5 per cent, on the security of the shares themselves, 
 and if they were paying say, 15 per cent., the borrower drew 
 10 per cent, and the lender took the other 5 per cent. So that 
 the employee could always get money on these shares, which 
 he looked upon as a mere monetary transaction, quite 
 apart from his own occupation. ThereJEore I never adopted 
 that plan. 
 
 Still I was not satisfied, because in a business such as ours, 
 with over fifty branches scattered all over the world, you 
 must have the personal interest of your staff. You cannot 
 ignore it. It is a thing which you must get. And then I 
 thought that perhaps hy issuir^ what I call certificates^ 
 certificates representing no money at all, and whidi could 
 
CO-PARTNEESHIP 81 
 
 not be negotiated — I might solve the problem. I thought 
 I would pay on these certificates the same rate of dividend 
 as on the ordinary shares, less, say, 5 per cent., which would 
 represent interest on the money if money had been paid for 
 them in the same way as in the ordirfary course it would be 
 paid for ordinary shares. So I started the system of issuing 
 these certificates, such certificates receiving 5 per cent, less 
 than the ordinary shares. As you know, there are many 
 profit-earning schemes (I do not need to mention names) 
 where the endeavour is made to guarantee the worlcman 
 4|, or 4, or 5 per cent, on whatever money he puts in, and 
 theUj after that, sharing the profits wilh him. Well, I saved 
 aU that guarantee by dispensing with his putting in any 
 money at all, and merely calling these things certificates, 
 representing, as I say, no money at all, though to the holder 
 they represent dividends of the same value as the ordinary 
 shares receive, minus 5 per cent. I created this scheme, 
 and finally, aftpr a great many years' work, got it into shape, 
 I think, some four years ago. We created at that time £500,000 
 nominal value of these certificates, and this year we propose 
 to create a further ;^5oo,ooo, raising the amount of these 
 certificates to ;f 1,000,000 nominal value. Then I began with 
 the rank and file. I gave these certificates to all what I may- 
 call rankrand-file workers, to the extent of 10 per cent, of their- 
 wages. If any report came in with regard to any man having 
 committed an act of insubordination, any neglect of duty, 
 or any of the minor offences, he forfeited any allotment he 
 would otherwise have received during that year. If, on the 
 other hand, an excellent report came in concerning any man, 
 he received more than 10 per cent. ; and if any man rendered 
 the Company exceptional service, he received still more, per- 
 haps many times 10 per cent. So that there was always 
 elasticity, and the whole scheme was founded perfectly legally 
 by the shareholders, the only shareholder who was required 
 to vote being the ordinary shareholder. The scheme is upon 
 the basis that the majority of the ordinary shareholders shall 
 have the right to decide how many of these certificates are 
 to be issued. So that the matter is entirely in the hands of 
 the majority of the ordinary shareholders for the time being. 
 Well, we worked on this footing and we created a savings 
 bank, and the dividends, as they accrued, were credited to ] 
 
 7 
 
82 THE SIX-:E0UR DAY 
 
 each man's account. If he chose, he could go to the savings 
 bank the same day that his account was credited and draw 
 the money then and there--the whole of it, if he pleased. If 
 he left the money in the bank for three months, he received 
 interest on it at the rate of, say, 3 per cent. ; if he left it six 
 months, he received interest at the rate of, say, 4 per cent. ; 
 and if he left it twelve months, he received interest at the rafe 
 of, say, 5 per cent. He could draw the money out at any time, 
 and the interest was made up in accordance with the time 
 the money had been deposited in the bank. So that if he 
 left his money in the savings bank twelve months or longer, 
 he got, say, 5 per cent. ; if less than twelve months and over 
 six months, say, 4 per cent. ; between three months and six 
 months, say, 3 per cent. ; and if drawn out under three months 
 there would be no interest. 
 
 Well, I found that a great many of the workmen drew their 
 money out to buy om: Preference shares. That was reported 
 to me, and I found that they had to buy our Preference shares 
 at a premium. Then I saw what seemed to me a solution 
 of one of the schemes which I had discussed with our solicitor, 
 namely, the creation of 5 per cent. Preferred Ordinary shares, 
 the acquisition of which should not entail or permit of the 
 men borrowing any money at all ; and I created these 5 per 
 cent. Preferred Ordinary shares, which rank immediately 
 before the ordinary shares, and after all other classes of shares. 
 If the man chooses to retain these shares, he does so. -If he 
 wishes to realize on them, he can walk into the savings bank 
 at any time, and there is a market for them at par. So that 
 although he draws what he may be entitled to in the shape 
 of shares, he can change them into money just as readily as 
 he could obtain the money originally when it was credited 
 in his bank-book ; while if he prefers to hold the shares, he 
 receives the same dividends as are paid on the ordinary shares. 
 Now, this has overcome the difficulty of the man applying 
 for shares out of aU proportion to his available money. Practi- 
 cally the money for these shares is found out of the dividends 
 he receives on his certificates, and the certificates, in turn, 
 represent no cash value at all. So that now I have a medium 
 through which the man can come into the ordinary share- 
 holder class by saving all his dividends on his certificates. I 
 have only had this in operation for twelve months, and it 
 
CO-PARTNEESHIP 83 
 
 is too early yet to say any more than that I have started it. 
 But you will see that my effort has been to interest a large 
 number of people, by a convenient method, in the profits 
 of the business, and to do it in such a way that a man could 
 have no fear about his capital. I have thus overcome that 
 original fear that a man had, that if we took over some fresh 
 undertaking his ordinary dividends wotild be at stake, because 
 these depend on the certificates, which certificates he has 
 not paid for, and which certificates, not having paid for, he 
 is very anxious should receive as high a rate of dividend as 
 possible, because this is their only value to him, and he not 
 having put any money in them, and the certificates repre- 
 senting, as they do, a perfectly unsaleable commodity, he 
 cannot sell them at a premium at all. He therefore takes a 
 different view with regard to the progress and development 
 of the Company ; he becomes anxious that the business 
 should progress and develop, because it is only by such pro- 
 gress and development that he is able to obtain dividends 
 on his certificates, which dividends, in their turn, he can 
 invest, if he likes, in Preferred Ordinary shares during his 
 employment in the business, and thereby receive, during 
 his active empl63mient in the business, the same dividends 
 as are paid on the ordinary shares. If a man dies, or if he 
 retires from the business, the shares then revert to merely 
 5 per cent. Preferred Ordinary shares, which is the only 
 right conferred on them by the Articles of Association. The 
 additional rights are equally binding so long as the holder 
 remains with our firm — ^we have altered the Articles of Associa- 
 tion accordingly — but what we have undertaken is merely 
 to pay him the same rate of dividend as is received by the 
 ordinary shares during the time he is actively engaged in the 
 business. And in this way we hope that we have solved the 
 problem of interesting our staff in the profits of the business 
 and in the losses of the business. 
 
 But I want to impress upon every one present that no Profit- 
 Sharing scheme will be of any use if the man is not made to 
 feel that he is interested in the losses just as much as in the 
 profits of the business. A Profit-Sharing scheme which merely 
 mentions profits, and takes no account of possible losses, 
 tells only half the commercial tale. We all of us here know 
 — it is unnecessary to mention it in such a gathering as this 
 
84 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 — that any business may have profits, and it may have losses 
 and every one of us who has put his money, time, and energy 
 into any business must necessarily be prepared to face either. 
 And it is the fact that we reaUze that there may be losses 
 which makes uSj in all probability, so alert in guarding our 
 interests, and safeguarding them, and endeavouring to ensure, 
 by the stabiUty of the business, that the capital embarked in 
 it shall be perfectly safe. ' 
 
 Now, therefore, by means of these certificates, a man may. 
 have accumulated, as several in fact have, some thousands 
 of pounds. If there is no dividend for the ordinary share- 
 holder, or if there is only 5 per cent, for the ordinary share- 
 holder, he knows that there is nothing for him, and he knows, 
 when he goes upstairs and looks into the drawer where he keeps 
 his certificates, that it is only during his lifetime, and during 
 the lifetime of the profit-earning capacity of the business, 
 that they are worth any more than the paper they are printed, 
 on ; and he knows that directly the business ceases to be pro- 
 fitable, the value of these certificates will have disappeared, 
 since they are only entitled to receive dividends when such 
 dividends have been earned. Now, I have endea.voured in, 
 this way to give him an interest without mixing things which 
 differ. I have recognized the fact that whether the man con- 
 cerned be the highest manager I have got; or whether he be 
 the youngest worker in the factory or office, his wages -must 
 be proportionate to his services ; that those wages must be 
 at the fullest rate which he could get in any other establish- 
 ment for those services ; and that anything done by him beyond 
 that must be done in the spirit of Co-Partnership, in which 
 spirit he himself, with me and with all the others engaged 
 in the business, endeavours to earn the profits which are to 
 be shared by all of us ; and if we cannot enter into the 
 spirit of Co-Partnership, if we feel that these profits will either 
 jump from the ground or fall from the heavens without any 
 exertion of ours, we know perfectly well we are all on one 
 platform — ^we are all in the same boat, if I may use the expres- 
 siqn— and that none of us will receive any dividends. I have 
 had to fink together similar conditions to what every investor 
 feels,, and every capitaUst feels, with regard to his investments 
 •— L have had to endeavour to Hnk those conditions together 
 in giving these certificates to our workpeople ; and I want 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 85 
 
 to tell you that as far as I know, the workman does realize ♦ 
 this. But there are critics of the scheme, opponents of the 
 scheme, who have the idea that the profits of a business are 
 made, in some way or other, by the workmen, and by the 
 workmen alone. I have had to meet that attitude, and if 
 I may digress for a few moments I will tell you how I met it. 
 The people who take that view have urged as a criticism of 
 my scheme that the workmen themselves have to make all 
 the profits of which they only take a share. On the other 
 hand, they don't want philanthrppy — ^in which I quite agree. 
 I would not do anything with regard to our workmen that 
 savoured of philanthropy in the slightest degree. But if 
 profits are to be made, I am not going to make surplus profits 
 for our staff to divide amongst themselves, and equally, I am 
 not going to ask them to make surplus profits for me. I say, 
 let us each in our own different positions jointly make the 
 profits, and after they have received their wages, and after 
 I have received 5 per cent. — which is the equivalent — then 
 for any services beyond that, if there is any surplus, let us share 
 it in a perfectly reasonable way. 
 
 Now I will make a digression, as I said, and try and tell 
 you how I have met these criticisms of those who have attacked 
 me, namely, Socialists, some of whom were my own workmen. 
 I thought the best way would be to give them a paper, so I 
 gave a paper at Port SunHght, which I called Day-Work or 
 Piece-Work — Which ? ' Well, it attracted a great audience, 
 because some of the men thought there was going to be a 
 system of piece-work all through the works. But I have 
 always looked upon day-work as representing Socialism and 
 upon piece-work as representing Individualism, and I have 
 never seen any other interpretation of the two things. Now, 
 this paper of mine created some little commotion, and my 
 audience did not feel quite ready to criticize it on the same 
 evening that it was presented to them. So I said, " All 
 right ; let us meet again and discuss this paper." Well, 
 first one man got up and said he did not see but what the work- 
 men made all the profits ; and another man made the same 
 claim, and said that if there was to be any Profit-Sharing 
 scheme which pretended to give the workman what he earned, 
 he ought to have it all. When I came to reply, I said, " I 
 
 • See p. 509. 
 
86 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 suppose I am talking to a number of sensible men, but according 
 to what you have said just now, you seem to me very foohsh 
 indeed. Because you are sa3dng that you make the profits 
 of this business. Now, you certainly know a great many 
 soap businesses which are not making any profits at all. Why 
 not go, as a body, to these men who are making no profits 
 on their soap, and say, ' Look here ; we work for that scallywag 
 Lever ; he pays us the full rate of wages, it is true, and he 
 gives us some share of the profits ; but he does not give us 
 enough. How much will you give us ? ' " And I told them, 
 " If you go in that way to these other people in the soap trade 
 who are not making dividends, the very first thing they will 
 say to you will be, ' What do you want ? ' Because whatever 
 they get out of you will be to the good, inasmuch as they are 
 making nothing now, and however little, or however much, 
 you let them have will be to the good. You may tell them 
 you want it all. Well, perhaps they will not Hsten to that. 
 Well, then you can say, ' We want nine-tenths, and you can 
 have one-tenth ' ; and, seeing that they are getting nothing 
 now, they will no doubt take it. And then you can all leave 
 me, giving me the usual week's notice, and go to the other man 
 in the same trade, and put the case to him : ' This scallywag 
 Lever only gives us a share ; you give us a bigger one.' Now 
 go and try it ! " Well, of course they were looking at each 
 other, and had no answer. They had never seen it in that 
 light before. I am perfectly certain these people are sincere 
 and I am perfectly certain their leaders are sincere. I have 
 never seen any reason to doubt their sincerity, and I have 
 come into very close and frequent personal contact with 
 them. But they have been so fed up on the idea that when 
 a man has done something with his hands he has produced 
 something that is of value, that they cannot see the other 
 side of the question. We, who have to sell that article, know 
 that although it may have been of value yesterday, and may 
 be of value to-day, yet next week, or at any particular moment, 
 the market conditions may be different, and it may not have 
 any value at all ; in fact, there may be a loss on its very pro- 
 duction. Now, the men I refer to cannot reaUze that. You 
 know the tale of the SociaUst who came into a village and 
 began to talk about the land question. He said the land 
 ought to be divided up, and nobody ought to pay for it. His 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 87 
 
 views were very popular among the villagers, and they aU 
 adjourned to the village " pub " to talk the matter over ; 
 and they began dividing up the land of the village an>ong 
 themselves. One man said he would have this field, another 
 that. And one man said he would have a certain field of the 
 squire's, " because it was best for growin' 'taties in." When 
 they had divided it all up, they had time to notice a qmet 
 old codger who had been sitting in a corner all the time, 
 smoking, and taking no part in the talk. So one of the other 
 men, the one who had chosen the potato field, said to him, 
 " Tom, why don't you speak up, lad ? Didn't tha' goa to t' 
 lecture ? '" " Ay." " An' dostna believe in't ? " " Oh yes, 
 A' b'Keve in't." " Then why dost tha' not speak oop for 
 thy share ? " " Oh," said the old fellow, " A'm not goin' 
 t' work ma Socialism that road." " How then ? " " Dick," 
 said he, " didstna say tha'd ha' that field o' t' squire's 'cos 
 it growed t' best 'taties ? " " Ah." " And didn't tha say 
 tha'd pay t' squire nowt fur it ? " " Ah." " Weel, I'll 
 come and gather t' 'taties and pay thee nowt for 'em." 
 
 There is a necessity upon each of us, in my opinion; to 
 recognize the changes of the times, the changes in the aspira- 
 tions of those who work for us. It is not only a question 
 to-day, believe me, gentlemen, of the increased cost of living, 
 although that is great, but it is the cost of higher Uving. 
 The workman wants to live better, and in order to live better 
 he wants to live in a better house, he wants his wife and 
 children to be better fed and clothed. And these are things 
 that he ought to have. So that there are two factors in 
 operation. The same living that a man was content with 
 ten years ago is dearer to-day. But he is not content with 
 having the same living as he had ten years ago ; he wants 
 better living, and rightly wants better living. And the 
 increased cost of the same hving, coupled with the desire for 
 better living, is producing an unrest which in my view is the 
 most healthy sign we have got. Now, it is a question whether 
 we can, in ordinary competition, go beyond a certain amount 
 with safety. In a business in which there are debentures, 
 we are all agreed that you can have debentures with perfect 
 safety up to a certain point. Beyond that point you must 
 have ordinary shareholders who have taken the risks of the 
 business. And is it nqt so in regard to labour— that we can 
 
88 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 advance wages up to a certain point in competition with the 
 whole world-^advance them to a point a Uttle higher than the 
 whole world ? Because I believe that we have the best 
 available raw material of labour in this country. I do not 
 believe that there is any labour material anjrwhere in the 
 world superior to what we have in England, Scotland, Ireland, 
 and Wales — ^in the United Kmgdom. But if we are to make 
 the enormous strides such as are demanded to-day, in my 
 opinion it can only be done by increasing the interest of the 
 workman in the article he is producing, and so making him 
 a more efficient instrument of production by a personal 
 element being introduced — ^that personal element which is 
 the great stimulus behind each of us in this room to-day. 
 We have got to share that stimulus with our workpeople, 
 and if we do this, I believe the profits to be divided will be 
 greater, and that everybody's share, including the workman's, 
 win be greater. And side by side with the sharing of these 
 greater profits, these increasing profits, there will go on at 
 the same time a reduction of anxiety to us as managers. The 
 anxiety of Management is greater with a number of wage- 
 drawers than it is with partners. Many of us in business 
 are working with partners, whom we have selected with care. 
 Sometimes we may have been unfortunate, but you will 
 recognize with me, I am sure, that ninety-nine times out of 
 every hundred the partners work together in harmony for the 
 good of the business in an entirely different way from what 
 they would if they were wage-drawers merely. We want 
 to produce that state of affairs right throughout oiur industries 
 in order to get the greatest eflftciency in our workmen, by giving 
 them a personal interest in the article which they are pro- 
 ducing. But in doing this — ^here I want to sound one warning 
 riote-^there is to be no delegation of supreme authority from 
 the Management ; and in my opinion all attempts that would 
 mean the introduction of working men upon Boards of Directors, 
 unless coupled with giving them a training in the higher 
 branches of work, will be futile. It is utterly impossible to 
 take an orcMnary rank-and-file worker and make a Director 
 out of him. It is not reasonable to expect to be able to do so. 
 He has to be trained, as all of us have had to be trained, for 
 the position ; and to expect that a man can be selected out 
 o| the works by his mates to sit stra^htway on a Board q| 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 89 
 
 Directors is, in my opinion, an utterly futile expectation. 
 It may be that one man can sit with six or seven other men, 
 and, not having the supreme power of voting, may be of 
 assistance to the Board of Directors (who have the supreme 
 management) from time to time. But the supreme manage- 
 ment must always be in the hands of trained men — ^men trained 
 for their posts ; and the training which I am suggesting 
 should go right through the staff is a training by means of 
 which we can gradually develop their powers, through com- 
 mittees, to qualify them ultimately for a seat on the Board 
 of Directors. 
 
 Now, having said this, I want to tell you that all our 
 Directors have graduated as Directors through the works, 
 the office, or the salesmen's department ; but in addition to 
 this I have always taken such a man through the connnittees 
 I have mentioned before finally making him a Director. As 
 I have already said, I consider that the idea of a workman 
 being appointed by his fellow-workmen to sit on a Board 
 of Directors is futile. I do not think I need labour the idea, 
 in such a company as the present, that real Co-Partnership 
 means not only sharing in the profits, but also sharing in 
 certain duties which a mere workman could not possibly 
 properly understand. I niight just as well say that I would 
 go over to the pan side, where I should no doubt only succeed 
 in making much worse soap than would be made by some of 
 my lowest-waged workmen. On the other hand, a workman 
 might come to the Board of Directors and might conceivably 
 make more mistakes than even I do. But because I say 
 that, it does not mean that we cannot work towards wider 
 and wider improvements in our service, with the goal always 
 before us that the profits to be divided will be divided equally 
 in proportion to the amount of interest we take in the business 
 and in proportion to the services we are capable of rendering. 
 
Ill 
 
 RIGHT CONSTITUTION OF 
 CO-PARTNERSHIP 
 
 [Extract from " Industrial Evolution and Co-Partnership," 
 Cambridge, August 6, 1914.] 
 
 There is one great principle governing the world, which 
 is that of self-interest. We find nowhere this principle more 
 strongly developed nor finding more general acceptance than 
 in business. It is the basis of the axiom, " To buy in the 
 cheapest market. and seU in the dearest." It shows itself 
 in competition, sometimes healthy, sometimes unhealthy ; 
 but there are two kinds of self-interest, one the narrow, selfish 
 self-interest, which is so short-sighted as to be bMndly selfish 
 to the exclusion of all other considerations ; and there is that 
 broad, intelligent, enlightened self-interest, which 'says that 
 it can only find its own best interests of self in regarding 
 the welfare and interests of others. By the practice of this 
 spirit of enhghtened self-interest in the struggle for supremacy, 
 and the practice of emulation and competition, mankind is 
 made more and more intelUgent, and is better able to obtain 
 an advanced position. When the spirit of enhghtened self- 
 interest ceases to exist, mankind must of necessity fade out 
 of existence also. This is just as certain as it is true that 
 the practice of the narrow, bhnd, selfish self-interest can 
 only result in the demoraUzation of society, and in constant 
 struggle and warfare and in the dechne of civiUzation. 
 
 The truest and best form of enhghtened self-interest i^ 
 when we pay the highest regard to those associated with us 
 in business, and whose improved efficiency we must seek to 
 obtain by binding them and making them, equally with 
 ourselves, interested in, and dependent upon, the success of 
 
 the business. If Capital desires Management and Labour to 
 
 90 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 91 
 
 be efficient, then Capital must be fair in its division of profits 
 with Management and Labour. If Capital wishes Manage- 
 ment and LaboTor to make profits, then Capital must share 
 profits with Management and Labour. If Capital thinks of 
 nothing but its own narrowest and most selfish self-interest, 
 without a single thought for Management and Labour, then 
 Capital will never succeed in getting the highest possible 
 amount of efficiency from Management and Labour. In 
 fact, if Capital is justified in taking the most narrow and 
 selfish view, then equally Management and Labour must be 
 considered as entitled to consider how to obtain the highest 
 possible salaries and wages for the least equivalent in skill, 
 efficiency, and labour. And, equally, if Management and 
 Labour consider nothing but their own narrowest and most 
 selfish self-interest, if their thought is solely how to render 
 the smallest possible amount of work — ^inefficient and, there- 
 fore, profitless — in the shortest possible number of hours 
 and for the highest possible salary or wages, then Manage- 
 ment and Labour vgll of necessity retrograde and suffer ; 
 but if Management and Labour adopt a system of enHghtened 
 self-interest, and Capital does the same, and each recognize 
 the principle that by looking after the interests of all they 
 are taking the surest way of achieving their own individual 
 self-interest, then the undertaking must be healthier, profits 
 are bound to be greater, the resulting happiness will be 
 more complete, and the prosperity and advancement of 
 civilization the world over will be assured. 
 
 It is claimed for Co-Partnership that by adopting Co- 
 partnership a recognition is made of this great fact, that 
 justice demands for each of us equal rights in the products 
 of our labour. This is the very basis of Co-Partnership, 
 and it is claimed for it that it stimulates efficiency and pro- 
 duces economy and avoidance of waste, and it is only by 
 so doing that Co-Partnership can increase well-being and 
 prosperity and justify its adoption. 
 
 Before we proceed further, it would probably be advan- 
 tageous to give a definition of what is meant by Profit- 
 Sharing and Co-Partnership. There are so many systems of 
 Profit-Sharing, some amounting to little other than gratuities 
 or Christmas-boxes, that this definition becomes all the 
 more imp9rtant and necessary. In the Board of Trade 
 
92 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Report dealing with Profit-Sharing and Co-Partnership, 
 Profit-Sharing was defined as " An agreement between an 
 employer and his workpeople that the latter shall receive in 
 addition to their ordinary wages a share fixed beforehand in 
 the profits of the undertaking." Under this definition all 
 bonus schemes are excluded.* The Board of Trade Report 
 stated that there must be a previous agreement, that the share 
 of the profits must be fixed beforehand, and Co-Partnership 
 was defined as an extension of Profit-Sharing whereby the 
 employee gained, in some degree, the rights and responsibili- 
 ties of the shareholder. 
 
 To enable us to judge the anticipated effects of the adoption 
 of Co-Partnership, it is not unreasonable that we draw a 
 parallel from what has been the effect of improving the con- 
 dition of the workers in those industries that have been able 
 to achieve this. It is a well-known fact that every reduction 
 in the hazardous natttre of an occupation has resulted in a 
 wider selection and better workmen being available in that 
 occupation. Businesses that were dangerous and hazardous, 
 and that have been made safe and free from risk, have become 
 attractive to a greater body of workmen, and, at the same time, 
 attractive to a more intelligent class of workmen. There is 
 the humanelement — the man behind the process and operation 
 — to be considered in every undertaking. The only way in 
 which to maintain an increased success in any industry is to 
 maintain an increased efficiency, and thus by increased effi- 
 ciency to increase the quantity and quality of the output, 
 and so augment the fund out of which the wages and profits 
 have to come. 
 
 I venture to state that our modern industrial system in 
 this great United Kingdom stands self-condemned, when 
 the income tax returns show that it rests on a basis whereby 
 one-ninth of the population enjoy one-half the total income, 
 and more than nine-tenths of the accTimulated wealth, whilst 
 the remaining eight-ninths of the population have only one- 
 half of the total income, and possess less than one-tenth of 
 the accumulated wealth. It is true that the one-ninth have 
 full legal claim to half the total income, and the nine-tenths 
 of the total wealth. Not one word can be raised against 
 the legal right upon which this rests, but notwithstanding 
 these cjfcum^taflces let us ask ourselves, I5 this grea.t disprqs- 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 93 
 
 portion expedient and in the interests of the community 
 as a whole, and the nation and Empire of which we all profess 
 to be so proud ? 
 
 But hidd,en and buried amongst the above mass of figures 
 and income tax returns are also the unrecorded losses and 
 failures, the despair and madness of many a so-called capitahst 
 who has seen the ruin of his industry, sometimes from his own 
 errors and mistakes, but, it is equally true, often from changed 
 economic conditions which render his industry obsolete, and 
 have swept away his capital and profits ; so that before we 
 join in the general outcry of rights of Labour to share in, the 
 profits we must consider the proposition of Loss-Sharing as 
 weU as Profit-Sharing. Whole volumes have been written, 
 and eloquent speeches have been delivered, on the subject 
 of the rights of Labour to share in the profits. Men wax 
 eloquent on these rights, but not one single Une has been 
 written, so far as I have been able to discover, to point out 
 that if Management and Labour would share in the profits. 
 Management and Labour must equally share in the losses. 
 It has not even been claimed that Labour should share in the 
 losses in those quite numerous undertakings where the ruin 
 of the undertaking has been the direct result of the action 
 of Labour. Therefore, there is one essential element of 
 expediency and justice, when we are considering the applica- 
 tion of Profit-Sharing to modem industrial conditions, and 
 that is, that Loss- Sharing must of necessity go with Profit- 
 Sharing, and cannot possibly be detached from it. 
 
 This Loss-Sharing must be so arranged that the employee 
 is not under the necessity of sacrificing the security, of his 
 position with regard to salary or wages. Therefore, Profit- 
 Sharing must be in addition to, and not in substitution of, 
 the salary and wages system. Profit-Sharing must mean 
 the giving to the employee the opportunity each year by 
 increased efiiciency of acquiring an enlarging personal share 
 in the profits of the business. Therefore, Profit-Sharing 
 and Co-Partnership must result in increasing the volume 
 of profits. Salary and wages must first be paid under the old 
 system to Management and Labour, and a reasonable rate 
 of interest, say 5 or 6 per cent., must be paid to Capital as 
 the eqtiivalent of the salary and wages of Management and 
 Labour. The employee is at present placed in a position 
 
94 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 of personal indifference, so far as his own financial responsi- 
 bility is concerned, in the success or failure of the business. 
 The employee sharing in the profits of the business, in addi- 
 tion to receiving salary or wages, would ever have in his mind 
 that the failure of the business would sweep away his annually 
 increasing share in the profits of the tmdertaking, which share, 
 equally as is the case with the Capitalist, has taken him a 
 lifetime of unremitting application and patient effort to 
 acquire. Therefore, Co-Partnership, rightly constituted, must 
 of necessity bring the employee into close contact with Capital 
 in Loss-Sharing as well as in Profit-Sharing, which would lift 
 both Management and Labomr into the stimulating, developing, 
 and elevating heights of profit-earner and profit-sharer in 
 addition to that of the salary or wage-drawer. 
 
IV 
 ESSENTIALS OF CO-PARTNERSHIP 
 
 [Extract from address on " National Possibilities." See Section 
 IV., " The Six-hour Day." pp. 50-55.] 
 
 Do not let us think when we are considering Co-Partnership 
 that we can treat it other than on the strictest business 
 lines. I have just jotted down some nine headings tliat 
 always appear to me to be essential to the success of any 
 Co-Partnership scheme. 
 
 (i) Co-Partnership must not degenerate into charity or 
 philanthropy. It would be an insult to the workers 
 if it did. 
 
 (2) The object must be to increase efficiency, resulting 
 
 in increased prosperity for all — not for the man 
 on the top only, but for all. 
 
 (3) It must maintain the supremacy of Management. 
 
 Just as in the Army we must have corporals and 
 sergeants and so on up to generals, so in industrial 
 organization there must be various stages of 
 management arrangement to ensure efficiency, 
 and these must be maintained. 
 
 (4) Co-Partnership must not result in the weakening of 
 
 Management, but, on the other hand. Labour must 
 be free to work out its own ideals — free from the 
 t3n:annies of victimization if it expresses its views. 
 
 (5) There must be a greater stability in these arrangements 
 
 than a mere cash bonus. 
 
 (6) The benefits of Co-Partnership ^ must extend to the 
 
 wives and children. I attach the utmost impor- 
 tance to that. A man must know that his share 
 in Co-Partnership, at his death, will go to his widow 
 during her widowhood. 
 
 96 
 
96 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 (7) It must elevate Management and Labour equally in 
 
 the social scale. 
 
 (8) It must not be antagonistic to the legitimate rights 
 
 of the workers nor of the managers, and 
 
 (9) The control must rest with those who find the capital. 
 
 When we have Co-Partnership founded on these lines 
 there will still have to continue the underlsdng wages system, 
 and the wages system must be maintained on the highest 
 scale practicable in the particular industry. In other words, 
 those firms who adopt Co-Partnership must lead the way 
 in advances of wages as well as in the benefits of Co-Partner- 
 ship. I was pleased to note in the recent Board of Trade 
 Returns on Cb-Partnership that it is there stated that the 
 firms which have adopted this system were firms which had 
 given the greatest betterment conditions and the highest 
 wages — that is essential. If it were not essential there 
 would be no benefit in Co-Partnership ; it would be the mere 
 attachment of workmen to works for an elusive advantage. 
 The conditions must not only be better, but the wage itself 
 must be slightly higher than that paid in other, establishments. 
 It cannot be greatly higher, because the cost of production 
 is a factor that has to be taken into account. 
 
V \ 
 
 CO-PARTNERSHIP AND EFFICIENCY 
 
 Birmingham, November 8, igi2. 
 [A meeting was convened by the Consultative Council of the 
 Labour Co-Partnership Association to hear an address by 
 Sir William H. Lever, Bart. — as he then was — ^in the Mason 
 College of Birmingham University. The Pro Vice-Chancellor 
 (Mr.' Alderman F. C. Clayton, J.P.) presided. The address is 
 here subjoined :] 
 
 The question that we have to discuss to-night is " Co- 
 Partnership and Efficiency," with a great accent on the word 
 " Efficiency." In approaching the subject. What is the cause 
 of Labour Unrest ? there is a strong desire on the part of 
 every one to try to arrive at a basis which will be something 
 like finality. If there ever is, or ever has been, an age that 
 was or is worth living in, it is this present one. There is no 
 age where Progress has planted so strongly and firmly a deter- 
 mination to advance to higher ideals, and there is no country 
 in the whole world where the conditions are so favourable 
 to attain the highest possible well-being of the mass of the 
 country as Great Britain. 
 
 The nineteenth century saw the triumphant entry of 
 steam, electricity, machinery, transportation with economy 
 and efficiency in productive enterprise, and the creation of 
 enormous wealth.- More wealth was produced in the nine- 
 teenth century, in consequence of the introduction of the above 
 forces, than in all the centuries that have preceded it by man's 
 unaided handiwork alone. Manufactures and shipping were 
 almost in the same condition in the eighteenth century as 
 they were in the time of the Romans, and if Napoleon the 
 Great had attempted to invade this country, he would have 
 done so practically under the same conditions as Julius Caesar, 
 both being dependent on wind and tide. 
 
 8 
 
98 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 If the nineteenth century was responsible for the 
 triumphant introduction of new methods for the creation of 
 wealth, the twentieth century must see the triumph of the 
 introduction of new methods or the more equal distribution of 
 wealth. But in realizing, or attempting to realize, the better 
 distribution of wealth, we must not fall behind in our power 
 or efficiency to produce wealth. Therefore, modem develop- 
 ments must progress along the well-defined hnes of efficiency. 
 
 Now, in the production of wealth and the more equal dis- 
 tribution of it, I do claim that, however great the progress 
 already made has been, we have now arrived at a stage in the 
 development of social well-being when, owing to the changed 
 conditions of modern industrial activity — men and women 
 being employed in large masses in industrial concerns, result- 
 ing in the obhteration of the individual and the loss of 
 individual self-interest in industrial activity — we may fairly 
 inquire what has been the foundation of our progress. 
 Now, I claim that this has been the persistent, consistent, 
 and uninterrupted effort of every right-thinking man to better 
 his condition. This has laid the basis of all the progress we 
 have made. This principle is as unvars^ng as the law of 
 gravitation, and it is from the operation of this universal law 
 of self-interest of the individual that all progress has sprung 
 and is maintained. It js like the great principle of life, which 
 is ever operating to maintain healthy development ; and if 
 Co-Partnership does not improve the conditions under which 
 we are living, it will not appeal to us as other than a modem 
 craze which will have its day and die out. 
 
 We have to consider what can be done by a change in our 
 relationship with each other in productive enterprises. No 
 system can supply the place of individual effort, yet in modem 
 productive enterprise, collective action, as in a sound army, 
 is the greatest force. We have to consider whether the con- 
 nection between each of us shall be one of wages alone, or 
 wages plus shares in the profits of the products of our col- 
 lective labour. The wages system was a great advance on all 
 other previous systems. The first system was slavery, and 
 that was succeeded by serfdom, and then by the wages system, 
 the last-named having developed the principle of self-interest, 
 which is one of the greatest forces behind it By Co- 
 Partnership, we recognise the great fact that the Co- 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 99 
 
 Partnership system is foxinded on justice and on equal rights, 
 for each of us, to the products of our labour. Such is the 
 very basis of Co-Partnership, as distinguished from the wages 
 system alone, and it is bound to stimulate efficiency 
 and economy of products, for only by so doing can it increase 
 our well-being and prosperity. 
 
 If Co-Partnership fails to increase the quantity of the 
 products, or fails to improve the quahty, or fails to ensure 
 economy of material, tools, or implements, or fails in the 
 better organization of production, or fails to reduce the waste 
 consequent on strikes and lock-outs, then it is perfectly 
 obvious that Co-Partnership is an absolutely useless imple- 
 ment of production. Any short-cuts to progress will fail, and 
 any false methods will only mislead us. In the future, as in 
 the past, the prizes in commerce, as in all other human 
 activities, wUl always go to the strong, and we cannot alter 
 that law, but it is equally true that such prizes caimot he held 
 by the cunning. Only the strong can hold them, and the mere 
 conflict of private interests in producing wealth will not enable 
 us to hold the prize that has been won as a result of inde- 
 fatigable labour and struggle. Business productive enter- 
 prise, as in all other activities, must end where it begins, 
 namely, with the workers of all ranks and positions who are 
 producing wealth. The way we work together under the wage 
 system is, in my opinion, always against the modem spirit 
 of the times — selfish Capital and selfish Labour cannot live 
 together as efficient and economical producers of commodities. 
 The Golden Rule, brotherhood and confidence, so often 
 despised, must be introduced into business, as into all other 
 affairs of hfe. The business world is quivering with an im- 
 pulse at the present time, and with a strong desire, to get 
 ''workers into more intimate connection with each other and to 
 cease the continual warfare that exists. The elevation of the 
 workers to the front rank is an ideal worth Uving for, and, 
 in the end, there is very little else in business after the mere 
 productive enterprise has been developed — there is very little 
 else worth Uving for. 
 
 There can be no successful development of business that 
 does not carry the employees along with it. Consciously or 
 unconsciously, we must all aim at the conamon good of all 
 engaged in any productive enterprise, Well»t»©jng first of all, 
 
100 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 as I have already mentioned, consists in the increase of thi 
 powpr of production and the consequent increase of wages 
 and also a decrease in the hours of labour, without whici 
 there can be no increase in social well-being. Now, thi 
 increase can only be secured by increasing the producing 
 power of labour with less expenditure of vital force, and thii 
 will be followed by a reduction of the proportion of cost whicl 
 labour bears to the total cost of any product, and which, ii 
 turn, will lead to a reduction in the cost of the product, and 
 consequently, to its increased consumption, and this, in turn 
 will allow an increased margin in the wages to be paid tc 
 Labour, and a reduction in the hours of labour. In fact, the 
 whole progress of civilization in the last century under the 
 wages system has followed along those lines — there may have 
 been ebbs and flows in the tide, but the tide of social better- 
 ment has flowed along this channel. 
 
 Now, we have to consider, when we approach the subject ol 
 Co-Partnership, to what extent, and by what means, can the 
 productiveness of labour be improved and the expenditure of 
 the vital force of labour be lessened, and this has to be our 
 first step if we would make any advancement. If we consider 
 the question of farming, we find that, where the productive- 
 ness of labour on the larid results in the lowest return, wages 
 are the lowest. When, from eight bushels of wheat from the 
 acre, we have by better ctdtivation increased the jdeld to over 
 thirty bushels per acre — practically quadrupled the production 
 — ^we find that with the quadruphcation of the product the 
 wages are two-and-a-half times what they were, the hours of 
 labour are shorter, and that the product is consequently cheaper, 
 all because the production is four times greater. You will 
 find to-day in our own country, as in all other countries, that 
 where the quantity produced at any stage of manufacture is 
 greatest, with the lowest cost of labour in proportion to the 
 total cost of the product, then wages are the highest ; and 
 that where the total cost of labour is the highest in pro- 
 portion to the total cost of the product, wages are the lowest. 
 Now, with the lessened proportion of labour to the total cost, 
 there will have developed, to a very marked degree, the 
 cheapening of the product, and only on these weU-defined 
 and well-tested lines can there be an increase in the earning 
 power of labouh 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 101 
 
 There is one essential fact which is overlooked, by most 
 working-men when they approach this subject, namely, that, 
 simultaneously with the increase of average wages there has 
 been a correspondingly steady decrease in the average earnings 
 of capital invested in industrial enterprise. This is a solid 
 fact that ought not to be overlooked. Interest on capital 
 is highest in all countries where the productive power of 
 labour is the lowest, and also wages are the lowest ; and in 
 all countries where the productive power of labour is the 
 highest, there wages are also the highest, and interest on 
 capital the lowest. Of course, there may have been periods 
 when, the demand for Capital having exceeded the supply — 
 for short periods — Capital may have had an advantage ; but 
 we can trace without possibility of error that, to increase the 
 productive power of labour and the wages to Labour, has the 
 tendency to decrease the interest earned by Capital. 
 
 The reason for this is obvious. Capital invested in industry 
 has always to be engaged in seeking to meet its liabilities for 
 interest, and, therefore, must employ Labour, and when Capital 
 invested in industry ceases to employ Labour to meet its obU- 
 gations for interest — this great fact has to be borne in mind 
 —Capital then has ceased to exist. It is entirely apparent 
 that the larger the prospective return on Capital invested in 
 industries, and the more Capital competes to obtain Labour, 
 this must result ultimately in less interest being received by 
 Capital itself. Every period of extreme industrial activity 
 must, of course, see some sHght modification in this. Now, 
 whilst at the same time that Capital has been receiving less. 
 Labour of all kinds, including salary to Management, has 
 received more, not only have the nominal wages increased, 
 but the actual wages, calculated in the purchasing power, have 
 increased also. » 
 
 Now, we therefore see, in view of the progress we have 
 made in the nineteenth century, that the wages system and 
 the so-called capitahst system have no reason to be 
 apologetical for themselves, and it behoves any one who, Uke 
 myself, believes in Co-Partnership, to have full regard to this 
 soUd fact in considering new methods for betterment and 
 advancement of social well-being. The present wages 
 and so-called capitalist system is in operation all over the 
 world, and it has given us more and better food, more and 
 
102 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 better clothing, more and better houses, more and better 
 education, more and better wages, shorter hours, lower cost 
 of commodities, lower cost of traveUing, better health, more 
 rapid transit, and better means of recreation. But the so- 
 called capital and wages system has only succeeded to the 
 extent that it has moved along the lines of the principle of 
 enlightened self-interest. Now, I claim that stUl greater 
 development can be made in our system of emplosmient of 
 labour in industrial activities by directly increasing the 
 personal interest of labour engaged in industries, and, if this 
 is so, then Co-Partnership, as I understand it, must depend 
 for its power to increase our rate of progress on improving 
 the social conditions, and on increasing our economical pro- 
 ducing powers. Co-Partnership cannot reverse the law that 
 has operated during the last century in giving us more and 
 better food and clothing, higher wages, etc., by means of our 
 power to produce more of those products at a cheaper cost, in 
 fewer hours of labour. If Co-Partnership does not operate on 
 those lines that have been so well tested, and are the proved 
 basis of our success in the past, then it is a useless and 
 silly fad. 
 
 Co-Partnership must, as the very charter of its existence, 
 so operate that it can produce more and better food, clothing, 
 houses, and social requirements, in fewer hours and with less 
 unhealthy strain and stress, and with abihty to meet the 
 problem of increased demands in wages by giving Labour, in 
 addition to wages, a share in the profits of the enterprise. 
 How does Co-Partnership propose to achieve success ? Co- 
 Partnership does not propose to aboUsh the wages system,. 
 It does not propose to abolish payment of interest on Capital ; 
 but it does propose a modification of the wages system, and 
 a modification in the relation of that portion of Capital 
 engaged in industrial products which is at risk, which is 
 taking the risk of the enterprise, but no change in the relation 
 of that portion of Capital which seeks a more secure position 
 at a fixed rate of interest. Co-Partnership proposes to retain 
 Management in its present position, and it proposes to retain 
 the wages system and also interest on Capital, and to ask that 
 portion of Capital which is at risk to join in partnership 
 with Labour. 
 
 Now, there is one distinct fact in connection with modem 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 103 
 
 productive activity under the co-operative system. It has 
 been a wonder to many people why co-operative production 
 has not progressed at a greater rate. In my opinion, the 
 cause of this partial failure of co-operative production has 
 been that the co-operative system ignores Management, and 
 lowers Management into the position of a fixed wage-drawer ; 
 whereas, under the ordinary system of production, Manage- 
 ment, as owner, has had a direct interest in the profits of the 
 undertaking. The Co-Partnership system we advocate would 
 remove Labour from its present position of wage-drawer or 
 salary-drawer to the higher position of a partner in the success 
 or failure of the business, and, to that extent, it is an advance 
 which moves the whole of those engaged in industrial pro- 
 duction on to a higher platform, whilst the co-operative system 
 lowers those engaged in direct management to the ranks of 
 the wage or salary worker. 
 
 In agriculture, Co-Partnership, as you all know, is the 
 oldest system of any. In the fishing industry, Co-Partnership 
 is the practice, and always has been, from time immemorial. 
 The owner finds the ship and takes his share of the catch ; 
 the captain finds the skill and ability in navigation, and his 
 labour, and he takes his share of the catch ; and the crew, in 
 their turn, take their share of the catch. Now this is, I think, 
 the most concrete example of Co-Partnership we have, and we 
 may depend upon it that fishing on those lines wiU have the 
 effect on all in the fishing-boat that~ Co-Partnership will have, 
 namely, a direct interest in the profits of their joint combined 
 efforts, so that in alertness to discover the whereabouts of the 
 fish, and in lowering and hauling in the nets, every faculty 
 shall be exerted in order that the catch be as large as possible. 
 
 We are all servants of the public engaged in industrial 
 occupations, and there is no distinction between us, and that 
 is why I do not agree with the terms " master " and " servant," 
 as we are all servants of the public — the so-called master just 
 as much as the merest office-boy.. Neither so-called master 
 nor servant is satisfied with the present system ; the em- 
 ployer has to adopt many makeshifts, such as piece-work, 
 bonuses, and such-like, to increase the interest of Labour in 
 the product of Labour ; but, in my opinion, the only sohd 
 means of realizing such ideals is by giving the workman a 
 direct interest in the product of his own handiwork, and I 
 
104 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 claim that the only effective way in which that can be done 
 is by means of Co-Partnership. No one considers that the 
 wages system is ideal ; employers, by their actions, if not by 
 their words, admit that it is a wrong bagis, and the best we 
 can say of it is, that it is an advance on all previous, systems. 
 
 I claim that the next advance we have to make to a higher 
 level must be by means of Co-Partnership, and I will tell you, 
 apart from the points I have referred to, one great gain this 
 will be over the wages system, namely, the reducing of the 
 strain and responsibility thrown upon the employei* or pro- 
 prietor of the business. The man who draws wages cannot 
 reasonably be expected to worry about production and profits 
 when he goes home at nights, but the man whose capital and 
 whose very livelihood is involved is bound to worry about 
 these. When we are all Co-Partners, this worry, now pressing 
 with crushing force on the heads and backs of a few men, will 
 rest on the backs, the brains, and the heart of the whole body 
 of those who are engaged in the industry. Go-Partnership 
 will give equal interest, and is, therefore, bound to give equal 
 responsibility to each by substituting a partner for a wage- 
 drawer, whether the profits have increased or not. I do not 
 see any reason why profits should not be increased, but 
 whether profits are increased or not, the enjojTnents and the 
 pleasures in business, and the relief from worry and strain in 
 working with Co-Partners rather than with wage-drawers, will 
 more than compensate. 
 
 Modem industrialism has deprived us of the ability to pro- 
 duce goods individually. One man, for instance, has no power 
 to produce one hundred pins as a commercial proposition 
 successfully, but one hundred men, taking the various stages 
 of the production of pins, going hand-in-hand, can produce 
 himdreds of millions of pins as a successful comnieroial pro- 
 position. Now, there is only one elevation possible for the 
 worker, as for all others ; he must preserve his individuahstic 
 faculties, and must cultivate their extension and his higher 
 powers, and if our system of Co-Partnership does not inspire 
 a man with the idea of raising himself, then it is futile. You 
 cannot push a man up a ladder — ^there is no other means of 
 elevating a man than by letting him chmb up the ladder by 
 himself, and that is equally true of the master and of the man. 
 There are not two different ladders — and I want to emphasize 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 105 
 
 this — one for the master and one for the workman ; but they 
 have both to climb the same ladder, which ladder is — produc- 
 ing more goods with less labour in fewer hours, so as to allow 
 for larger wages and a bigger margin for profit. The idea that 
 the workman's interest is opposed to the master's is entirely 
 wrong, as they are both bound together, and it must not be 
 forgotten that the workman — the human machine — if he is 
 a " hand," is human. I always resent the phrase that we have, 
 when we speak of so many " hands," as if we were deaUng with 
 a mere hand without the brain or heart of a man. I beUeve 
 that, if we appeal to a man's sense* of justice and right, we 
 may take him into our confidence and elevate his character, 
 and, in that way, we shall have assistance in our business, 
 which will not only make our business run more smoothly, but 
 will also assist us from the point of view of cheaper methods 
 of production, by the high efficiency this will bring out. Just 
 as machinery, electricity, steam, and all other mechanical 
 appliances of productive power have enormously increased 
 wealth, so I believe that if we take the workman more into 
 our confidence, so as to develop his highest powers by making 
 him a Co-Partner, he will become a better producer of the 
 products he turns out, because we shall have fostered a spirit 
 of comradeship and brotherhood. 
 
 I always resent the maudlin sentiment that is often talked 
 in reference to Co-Partnership. Sometimes it is described as 
 extremely " generous," and the man at the bick of it is spoken 
 of as a " philanthropist " ; that is aU nonsense, and probably 
 this is the reason why Co-Partnership schemes in the past 
 have not lasted for more than five years on an average. If a 
 man thinks Co-Partnership is a system which is " generous " or 
 " philanthropic," he is approaching it on lines which will, 
 sooner or later, bring it to decay. We do not consider it 
 generous to buoy channels of rivers, nor do we consider it 
 philanthropic to put lighthouses round our coast to mark 
 sunken rocks, but we consider all that good, sound business ; 
 and I say that, to enable the individual to avoid shipwreck on 
 rocks of wrong methods, to enable us to raise our fellow- 
 workers to the height which inspires ourselves, is bound to 
 cheapen production. Then let us dismiss all vague, maudlin, 
 wrong ideas on the subject of Co-Partnership. Co-Partnership 
 can only be a means of better, fairer, and more just relation- 
 
106 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 ship of so-called employer and employee, resulting in better 
 productive activities. 
 
 With regard to the question of management, I want you to 
 understand that the progress of Co-Partnership must, essen- 
 tially, be one of education ; for instance, you could not take a 
 man from the ranks, as a navvy or labourer, and suddenly 
 make him a Director of a Company with ideals and standards 
 of high management ; it is not reasonable to expect it. 
 
 In conclusion, and with your permission, I would just like 
 to quote from Robert Browning a few Unes which, slightly 
 adapted, seem appropriate to such an occasion as this : — 
 
 The common problem, yours, mine, every one's. 
 Is — ^not to fancy what were fair in life 
 Provided it coidd be — ^but, finding first 
 What may be, then find how to make it fair 
 Up to our means : a very different thing 1 
 
 « * * * « 
 
 Our business is not to remake purselv^. 
 But make the absolute best of what God made. 
 
VI 
 CO-PARTNERSHIP AND HIGH WAGES 
 
 [From an Address by Lord Leverhulme to the Co-Partners' Club, 
 Port Sunlight, April 17, 1914.] 
 
 I BELIEVE that wages are going steadily to rise, and I believe 
 -that the firms who are giving Co-Partnership can always 
 rise with them and always continue to pay the highest rate 
 of wages. Of course, as I have always explained, we have 
 ourselves to make the profits, and I want to point out what is 
 the difference between an article priced by the manufacturer 
 on a high scale of wages, as in some countries I have visited, 
 and the benefit to the man who produces articles and receives 
 wages and also a share in the profits. The complaint in all 
 high-waged countries is the high cost of Hving. It does not 
 matter what country you go to, where the wages are high 
 the cost of hving is proportionately high, and when the 
 English Government made their Board of Trade Report, 
 they found that although the wages were lower in England, 
 the amount paid for house accommodation, the quantity of 
 clothing and food which could be purchased by those wages 
 was greater than the amount which could be purchased with 
 the higher wages in other countries. In other words, the 
 conditions of the workers in this country, taking the cost 
 of Hving, clothing, and food in proportion to their wages, 
 was better in the United Kingdom than in any other country 
 in the world. But I want this country to have the highest 
 wages possible without the cost of living being increased. 
 If the cost of living goes up here, as I have seen it go up in 
 other countries, a Board of Trade Report would come along 
 and say we are no better off in 1930 than in 1910. The wages 
 in 1930, 1 am sure, are going to be very much higher than now, 
 but in my opinion real betterment can only be obtained by 
 
 107 
 
108 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Co-Partnership. Now, this is a business proposition, and 1 
 notice Mr. Greenhalgh transfixing me with his accountancj 
 eye, and I hope he will tell me if I am wrong in my next remark, 
 If any statement of cost is prepared for me with regard to any 
 article we produce, Mr. Greenhalgh will put down in that state- 
 ment the wages of the men who are working in that depart- 
 ment. Whatever wages they receive will go as a charge 
 against that article. In addition, there will be the interest 
 and depreciation on the machine they are working. Then 
 there will be the cost of power, interest and depreciation on 
 buildings, which in turn will be made up on the basis of the 
 amount paid to the men who made the bricks and the mortar ; 
 the joiners who made the doors, windows, and flooring, and 
 so on. Mr. Greenhalgh never inserts in that statement any 
 provision for cost of Co-Partnership share of profits or any 
 dividends to Shareholders at all. We see that there is a 
 margin of profit which, in our opinion, will be possible of achieve- 
 ment. We might ask a profit which would result in not 
 being able to sell our article at the price, or which would result 
 in the article being sold at a loss. But the prime cost, whatever 
 it is, is made up of wages, inf erest and depreciation on build- 
 ings, plant, and machinery, and all fixed charges. You all 
 know that. If we work, therefore, on a Co-Partnership basis, 
 and divide the profits, the profits come without increasing the 
 prime cost of the product. I want you to see that. The 
 profits come without increasing the cost of the article pro- 
 duced. The employer always takes into account the cost of 
 materials, wages, etc., but he never takes into his cost the 
 profit he desires to make on the contract. He allows for a 
 profit, and therefore if we divide the profits with the workers, 
 we are sharing in the reservoir of profits, which have not 
 been added to the cost of the article, but have been produced 
 by the business ability, by the foresight, by the knowledge 
 of the markets, etc., of the employer. In hardly any industry 
 can you see a profit on an article if you eliminate foresight 
 in buying your suppMes, skill in managing your business, and 
 knowledge of trade conditions in selling your article. There 
 never is a profit if you are not possessed of these, and the reason 
 why some firms collapse, and why some men are never able to 
 carry on a business, is because they never see beyond the 
 end of their nose. They can only, think of the immediate 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 109 
 
 job in hand, and can only buy to-day if they can sell to-day. 
 They cannot see into the long and distant future. They 
 cannot think what the effect of this or that will be ten years 
 hence and so on. In our business we arei to-day only getting 
 profits, or at any rate only for the last few years, practically 
 to-day, from undertakings which we started in 1901, 1902 
 and 1903, and to-day we are spending money in many direc- 
 tions which cannot bring us profits until five years hence. 
 
 That is the way profits are made. In the open market of 
 competition between two firms there never will be a profit, 
 never could be a profit. It is only this business acumen 
 and foresight that will ever produce profits. Therefore 
 profits are not added to the cost, they are the reward of 
 efficiency of the staff, and the reward of efficiency of the 
 employer, and if we enter into a system of Co-Partnership 
 we can produce profits by our ability, " Waste not, want 
 not," and by our efficiency, without increasing the cost of 
 the goods. Therefore, the betterment of the workers in this 
 country will be increased in the same way as the betterment 
 of the masters has been — not by salaries. I can tell you 
 of private firms where partners may be drawing £10,000 
 a year in profits and only £500 a year as salary, the salary 
 being put down as all they would be worth as ordinary, managers 
 of the business. What the profits are after they have charged 
 that salary they take as partners. That is the common 
 rule under all partnership arrangements. That profit has 
 been made by their business acumen and foresight, but is 
 not added to the cost of the article. If it had been added 
 to the cost, the article, perhaps, could not have been sold. 
 They have been able to make a profit by their application 
 to business, by their keenness and alertness, and by their 
 acquaintance with the markets, and so we can, and why should 
 not that spirit permeate through all the staff and animate 
 every one if we are going to share in the profits ? If this 
 S5retem is right we can increase the well-being and betterment 
 of the members of the staff without increasing the cost of 
 living. There is no other system in the world by which this 
 may be done. 
 
 Wages Boards may sit and decide that the cost of Uving 
 has gone up and that another 2s. a week, or whatever it may 
 be, must be added to the wages of labour. The cost of the 
 
110 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 article is then increased, and this goes on all round till th 
 effect produced is that the cost of living has again gone U] 
 all round, and the labourer says, " I am no better off for th 
 2s." How can he be ? It is an impossibiUty. If you ar( 
 going to put 2s. more on, say, to the price of soap, soap wil 
 be dearer — ^there is no other way. But if we join in partner 
 ship and by business acumen and foresight can produce oui 
 goods with skill and ability, and market them with skill anc 
 ability, we can produce our profits without adding to the cosi 
 of the goods. We can divide these profits amongst us, in- 
 creasing the benefit to every one, actually, really, and tangibly 
 not artificially and nominally. In one of the countries 1 
 visited, I saw a house of the type in which you would care tc 
 live, and the rent was 22s. 6d. a week, and for very poor houses 
 the rent was 14s. a week. But there is no mystery about it. 
 The builder has to consider the cost of wages for the brick- 
 layers, etc., and the cost of materials. The house costs a 
 certain sum, and that fixes the rent, and if he cannot get 
 the rent he does not build the house. So, therefore, the supply 
 of houses is just in proportion to what people will pay, and 
 what the house costs. It cannot be any other way. The 
 same apphes to a tailor. He has to pay certain wages, and 
 the coat must cost so much. The point is, we are all con- 
 ■ sumers as well as producers. 
 
 I 'want wages to go up. They will go up, but I want better 
 conditions to go up in advance of wages. I do not want 
 the rise to be an artificial one, but a real one, so that as wages 
 go up, better conditions may go up with them. It is not a 
 real increase when a man receives more wages and has to pay 
 all the advance away in higher cost of Uving. 
 
 In one country a number of people called upon me and 
 asked me to help them with their passage home. I also 
 received a pathetic letter from one woman in which she told 
 me a tale of great hardship, of how her husband and herself 
 managed to live. It must be so in these countries. It could 
 be no other way, because we are all workers and all con- 
 sumers. It may be all right for persons who draw their money 
 from some other source, but the workers of a country are 
 the consumers of a country. When they draw higher wages 
 articles must be dearer, but if you work together as Co- 
 partners with fairness, and with detenaination to conduct 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 111 
 
 our business properly, the same will not occur. A man who 
 becomes a builder on his own account knows perfectly well 
 that his success or otherwise depends entirely on his skill. 
 It depends on that skill whether or not he makes a profit 
 on a contract. Are not we all Co-Partners and therefore can 
 all be profit earners ? I have tried to show you Co-Partnership 
 is real. I have tried to show you that those firms mentioned 
 in the official report of the French Government who have 
 Co-Partnership are paying the highest rate of wages, working 
 the shortest hours, have the best sick benefits and best 
 holiday arrangements. Therefore, those advantages are not 
 at the expense of the wages. Those benefits come out of 
 the increased efficiency of the employer and the increased 
 efficiency of the workers. 
 
VII 
 HARMONIZING CAPITAL AND LABOUR 
 
 Manchester, October zo, 1916. 
 
 [The difficult problem of the relationship between Co-Partnership 
 and Trade Unionism was faced by Lord Leverhulme in a 
 speech delivered at the Manchester Athenaeum. He said :] 
 
 I FIND from old records that it was nearly forty years ago — 
 in the year 1877 — that I began to experiment on lines which, 
 eleven years later, namely in 1888, led me to adopt a system 
 of what, for want of a better name, I called Prosperity- 
 Sharing. But it was not until twenty-one years after that, 
 namely in 1909, that I adopted Co-Partnership completely 
 and fully, as a practical business relationship between so- 
 called employer and employee — so you will see I have not 
 " rushed in where angels fear to tread," but gone cautiously, 
 and not too hurriedly, forward to full development, as becomes 
 a Lancashire man whose father was born in Bolton and whose 
 mother was bom in Manchester — and not even north of the 
 Tweed can more prudent, cautious forbears be found. If 
 you asked me where I first met with the idea of Co-Partner- 
 ship, I should have to ailswer with the Lancashire man who 
 was asked where he first met his wife, and who replied : "I 
 did not meet her, she overtook me." 
 
 Before laimching myself fully on the tempestuous ocean 
 of Capital and Labour, I' would like, with your permission, 
 to change the title, which was " Mutuality of Capital and 
 Labour," to " Harmonizing Capital and Labour." The 
 dictionary meaning of " harmonizing " is " adjusting in fit 
 proportion," and, really, this meaning seems to define my 
 address much more accurately than any other. 
 
 The very idea of an attempt at harmonizing may upset 
 
 many deep-rooted eighteenth- and nineteenth-century false 
 
 112 y 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 113 
 
 ideas, founded on " master and man " theories that Labour 
 is merely the paid tool of Capital. These false ideas have 
 got to go " bag and baggage," for the solution of our problem 
 can only be found by frankly admitting that no individual, 
 or body of individuals, representing either Capital or Labour, 
 can disregard the rights of others or their own duties. What 
 these rights and duties of each to the other are we must 
 endeavour to find out, but the solution can only be found 
 on sound economic lines. .Mere desire for harmony will not 
 suffice, however earnest and sincere it may be. Business is 
 not only the science of the production . and distribution of 
 goods, it is also a social science. But the human elements 
 combined in Capital and Labour are neither social scientists 
 nor poHtical economists nor philanthropists; yet to 1?e able 
 to meet the modem twentieth-century outlook they ought 
 to be acquainted with certain general basic principles. 
 
 We must admit that in spite oi better conditions of employ- 
 ment and higher wages the present position occupied by 
 Labour is not acceptable to the workers. 
 
 The so-called practical business- man, ostrich-hke, buries 
 his head in his ledger and ignores the writing on the wajl. 
 We must not let this attitude influence ourselves, for, after 
 aU, has it not been truly said that the so-called practical 
 business man is one who continues to practise the mistakes 
 of ihis predecessors ? Our dutj^ is to search out certain basic 
 principles that must serve Capital and Labour somewhat in 
 the samft way as the compass serves the. mariner in navigating 
 the trackless sea, or as the calculations of .the astronomer 
 make clear the mysteries of the starry heavens, or as the 
 investigations of the chemist have laid bare the secrets of 
 organic and inorganic matter. For in thisi relation between 
 Capital and Labour, which must be acknowledged to be the 
 greatest and most intricate problem of all, no attempt has 
 yet been made to get down to first principles. As regards 
 Capital alone, and solely as Capital, this remark does not 
 apply ; for in respect of the science of banking, compilation 
 of statistics on currency, bank reserves, rates of exchange, 
 and so on. ad infinitum, business men representative, of 
 Capital have taken care to be fully eqluipped for every emer- 
 gency. But no corresponding statistics dealing with th« 
 human element in Labour have been prepared. 
 
 9 
 
114 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Of course, I do not say that statistics of wages, hours ( 
 -emplo3mienti strikes, lock-outs, are not available, becaus 
 these can be obtained to the finest detail ; but Labour a 
 a human element in production and distribution has nc 
 been scientifically analysed as Capital has been for th 
 guidance of Capital. The workman called " Labour " is n 
 longer a " hand " ; Labour to-day is an educated man, an 
 his wants are growing and his outlook is extending. He i 
 to-day the hope of the optimist and the despair of the pessi 
 mist. Labour to-day is ambitious, and has created fo 
 himself and his wife and family new and better standard 
 of living than his father, and stiU more than his grandfather 
 ever dreamt of. 
 
 In our first consideration of the new conditions, let u 
 remember that in deaUng with them sound methods ari 
 more important than the attaniment of immediate results 
 unfortunately, as between Capital and Labour, it is too oftei 
 only the immediate spot-view that prevails. . Present relation 
 ships and present conditions are causing profound dissatisfac 
 tion to both Capital and Labour. This great war has forcec 
 upon us a ■ better and closer relationship between all classe 
 in the British Empire and has aroused our industrial con 
 science. < This war has revealed to us that, bedded in eacl 
 and every stratum of society, we can find the highest ideals 
 of truest patriotic service ; that for the cause oJE right, lift 
 itself is as freely given up by the lord as by the labourer 
 and that the British Empire possesses the finest «nateria 
 in men and women, bred both in mansion and cottage, thai 
 the world can produce. - 
 
 ' We only require to recognize the rights of others and oui 
 own duties by adapting our industrial system to these higli 
 ideals to do away for all time with the bogey of clash oi 
 interests between Capital and Labour. Cannot Capital and 
 Labour, after having fought and died side by side in the 
 trenches of Flanders and France, tegardless of wealth oi 
 station, be won over to fight for the success of our Empire 
 industrially after the final war victory on the sanguinarj 
 field of battle ? Too long has there existed a wide goM 
 between Capital and- Labour ; for too long have- suspicioE 
 and distrust produced active opposition : between these twin 
 brothers in productive enterprise. Not until Capital and 
 
00-PAETNERSHIP 115 
 
 Labour have solved their difficulties in working frankly and 
 whole-heartedly together can the Empire be as well equipped 
 for the coming war of commerce as she has been rapidly 
 and efficiently equipped for the war of armaments, or be 
 able to devote all her energies to expansion and betterment. 
 
 It is merely a question of harmonizing interests and forces. 
 It is not a question altogether of higher wages, shorter hours, 
 or better welfare conditions of employment. The profound 
 dissatisfaction with present conditions goes much deeper 
 than this. This dissatisfaction has its root and spring in 
 the fact that no attempt has been made by Capital to study 
 the hiunan element to be dealt with and handled. The 
 cause of disagreement between Capital and Labour is quite 
 as much psychological as it is material. Human nature 
 called Labour has two very strongly marked characteristics — 
 it is at one and the same time gregarious and individualistic. 
 To the Socialist, man is purely a gregarious being, and Social- 
 ists find that they preach in vain the doctrine that every 
 man ought to contribute to the Commonwealth according to 
 his abilities and to share out of the Commonwealth according 
 to his necessities. But apart from the impracticability of 
 this theory, in that it provides no solution as to who shall 
 be the fair just judge, possessed of superhuman insight, to 
 decide as to claims in contribution according to abilities 
 or to award benefits according to necessities, it has failed 
 hopelessly to interest Labour, because it has ignored the 
 other equally marked characteristic of our common humanity, 
 namely, that in addition to being gregarious, man is also 
 strongly and intensely individualistic. 
 
 These being two very strongly marked characteristics of 
 human nature, we are not surprised to find that, whilst the 
 greatly preponderating niajority of mankind prefer to live 
 in communities, such as cities and towns, rathfer than in 
 villages or on the scattered country-side, mankind demands, 
 and insists upon having, his own individual house and home ; 
 and that when housed in barracks of huge tenements piled 
 floor upon floor, one on top of another, with common stair- 
 cases, he rapidly degenerates. Give mankind homes free 
 from overcrowding, where each can enjoy his own individual- 
 istic garden in addition to the public park, then, with such 
 a combination of the communal life with individualistic 
 
116 THE SIX-HOUR DA.Y 
 
 environment, they improve in bodily health and in mental 
 and moral strength. Equally, mankind prefer to foUow 
 their daily occupation in groups and masses, as in workshop 
 and factory. But the individual still insists on retaining 
 his individualism, and looks for his own individuaUstic recog- 
 nition and reward for his labour. The joiner or mechanic 
 will not be willing, as the Socialist would wish, to contribute 
 according to his trained skill and abiUty and receive as reward 
 exactly the equal, provided his necessities were the same, 
 as the unskilled labourer. He would not do so whethei 
 working at the State Dockyard, or Woolwich Arsenal, or in 
 Government Postal Service, any more than for the capitalist. 
 And he is right, because the sociaUstic system would make 
 parasites and paupers of one-half the human race. 
 
 Now, this is the situation we have to face. Each of us 
 contains in his own mental outlook the elements df an oli- 
 garchy and of a democracy ; and as ovi present industrial 
 system is founded on these attributes, it is scarcely surprising 
 that it has been described, and correctly so, as an oligarchy 
 existing in a democratic country. This position of our 
 British industrial system is the result of the haphazard way 
 in which industries have grown up from the small workshop 
 of two or three centuries ago, when the capitaUst was also 
 a workman, and master and man met on terms of equality. 
 But modern industrial conditions, with thousands and tens 
 of thousands of workmen, and in at least one industry a 
 quarter of a million workmen, under one oligarchical rule, 
 are intensely anti-democratic, and as' such violate the gregari- 
 ous instincts of hmnanity. And just as it is true that the 
 position of British industries to-day is the result of yester- 
 day, so their position to-morrow will depend on our actions 
 of to-day. Capitalists have now the task set them to democ- 
 ratize their system, and to create conditions that will enable 
 Labour to take some democratic share in management, and 
 some responsibility for the success of the undertaking. Pro- 
 ductive and distributive business must in the future be 
 carried on imder less oUgarchic and imder more democratic 
 conditions. Labour will not be brought to work side by, side 
 with and to harmonize with Capital merely by ever higher 
 and higher wages, shorter and shorter hours, combined with 
 better and better welfare conditions. 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 117 
 
 The wages system has broken down as a sole and only 
 solution. As huge businesses have sprung into existence, 
 the difficulties of the wages system as such have increased. 
 It is impossibte under the wages system alone to make 
 Labour realize that the true interests of Labour and Capital 
 are identical. There is a story told of a Lancashire fanner 
 who, on his wedding-day, after the return from church, took 
 his wife into the orchard, where he had arranged a long rope 
 hanging over the fork of a big tree. He asked his wife to 
 get hold of one end of the rope, and he himself took hold 
 of the other. He then gave the signal for them both to pull 
 their strongest, and he soon convinced his wife that, pulling 
 against each other, neither could pull the rope over to his 
 or her side. Having taught this lesson, he asked that they 
 should both pull together at one and the same end, when, 
 of coiirse, the rope was pulled over almost without an effort. 
 Let us hope that pulling against each other during the cen- 
 turies past has taught this lesson to both Capital and Labour ; 
 that no progress can be made in that way, as compared with 
 the progress to be made by both puUing together. 
 
 Productive and distributive business must be so organ- 
 ized as to harmonize the relative positions of Capital and 
 Labour. The claim of Capital for as big an output as possible 
 at as low a cost as possible has hitherto had to pull against 
 the claims and aims of Labour for as high wages as possible 
 with as restricted an output as possible. The capitalist has 
 a deep-rooted behef in the fallacy that the lower the wages 
 and the longer the hours worked by Labour are, the Ibwer 
 the cost of production must be — the falsehood of which has 
 been proved, over and over again*, by the low wages and 
 long hours of Hindoos and Chinamen, as compared with the 
 lower cost obtained by the extremely high wages and shorter 
 hours of the United States. Labour has a deep-rooted belie 
 in the fallacy that there is only a certain Umited amount 
 of work to be divided amongst an ever-increasing number 
 of workmen, and that, consequently, restriction of output 
 is the most sure and certain way to provide work for all; 
 the falsehood of which has been proved by the fact that 
 restriction of output has been shown always to act as a 
 deterrent to consumption and to demand for labour, whilst 
 the increased output per man in the United States has 
 
118 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 stimulated and increased demand and resulting employment 
 md wages. The lesson of this- for the capitalist is that high 
 wages, short hours, and good healthy conditions, by increasing 
 intelhgence and efficiency, increase output and actually 
 reduce costs. And the lesson for Labour is that increased 
 jutput stimulates consumption, and, consequently, demand 
 For production and distributive labour, the fact being that 
 consumers of all classes supply themselves where they can 
 3e best and most economically served. 
 
 These are such well-ltnown and simple truths that it is 
 ilmost necessary to apologize for calling attention to them. 
 We thus see that Capital and Labour, by faith in these 
 allacies, are merely pulling against each other. How can 
 ve harmonize these conflicting elements ? Only by Capital 
 dentifjTing itself with Labour, and creating for Labour the 
 ame economic environment and conditions as Capital itself 
 mjoys. Only by entrance into Co-Partnership together can 
 'apital and Labour be brought to pull together, and only 
 )y Co-Partnership can they be harmonized. 
 
 We are agreed that the elements in production and dis- 
 ribution are Capital and Labour — I prefer myself to make 
 b a three-legged stool by including Management as apart 
 rom both Capital and Labour. But sometimes Manage- 
 ment is part of the activities of Capital, and at other times 
 lust be included with Labour. We British have always 
 leen well suppUed with all three. We acquired the capitsJ 
 lecause we had Management and Labour, and good Manage- 
 ment always accumiilates capital. The accumulation of 
 apital that we may look forward to during the twentieth 
 entury is bound to be greater than was the case during the 
 ineteenth century, and still more so than during preceding 
 enturies. But whilst we had no dif&culty under the 
 xisting system in the acquisition of capital, we have not 
 een equally successful in its distribution, and this is the 
 3ot and cause of all the antagonism between Capital and 
 .abour. This system, under which all the profits or losses 
 o to Capital, ignores entirely the psychology of the work- 
 lan. He is not a mere machine to be kept well oiled with 
 ood wages, well tended by not being worked for too long 
 ours, and kept in good going repair by welfare systems, 
 inteens, and good housing conditions. He is a complex 
 
CO-PARTNBKSUIP 119 
 
 human being, with all the ambitions, ideals, and mental out- 
 look possessed by the capitalist in an equal and sometimes 
 superior degree. 
 
 If high wages, short hours, good housing meant finality 
 to Labour Unrest, then Labour would not be a man but a 
 vegetable. Labour has economic interests . that also require 
 satisfying, and that press on Capital for their solution. We 
 have heard it said of our educational system, that to make 
 it complete a ladder must be provided by which a boy or 
 girl can climb from Board School to University ; so that an 
 apt pupil might have the opportunity of living its full life 
 without limitations from the environment in which it was 
 bom. To harmonize Capital and Labour similariy, a ladder 
 must be provided from the humblest position in industrial 
 organization to a seat on the Board of Directors. Capital 
 must provide a broader outlook for Labour. 
 
 Has not the poUtical orator speechified, has not the elo- 
 quent preacher sermonized, and the profound philosopher 
 theorized, on the necessity for harmonizing Capital and 
 Labour ? And yet it is all so very easy and simple. The 
 only possible way of harmonizing Capital and Labour is to 
 provide both with the same outlook by dividing the profits 
 their joint labour has created fairly and squarely between 
 them. On this system, each will also automatically share 
 and suffer from losses when they have to be faced. Step 
 by step the lesson is being taught and learned that the Co- 
 partnership system is the only possible system for harmoniz- 
 ing Capital and Labour ; and, fortunately, it is capaMei of 
 application in principle, by varying methods, to all but a 
 very Hmited few occupations ; and when appUed honestly 
 and faithfully, it has invariably produced improved relations, 
 with better commercial results. With Co-Partnership comes 
 less anj^iety and reduced responsibihty for Capital, for with 
 division of profits must also be included division of responsi- 
 bility and sharing of control. Co-Partners become more 
 and more interested in the policy of the business as a whole, 
 and associate themselves more and more with Management. 
 There is no conflict in these Co-Partnership results ; and 
 they satisfy the gregarious and democratic instincts of Labour 
 and the equally strong individua;listic instincts. Whilst Co- 
 Partnership satisfies the a^irations of the civic and demo- 
 
120 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 :ratic spirit of Labour, the wages system (varied as to rates 
 to meet varjdng skill, strength or ability, or combined with 
 3iece-work rates or bonus or premium scales) still continues 
 IS a necessary basis of remuneration to satisfy the aspirations 
 jf our individualistic instincts. 
 
 If Co-partnership resulted in exclusion of individual re- 
 ivard for individual effort, then Co-Partnership would be 
 foredoomed to failure in harmonizing Capital and Labour. 
 [^o-Partnership is required, and indeed is essential to success, 
 IS a means of equalization in the final division of profits, 
 ind as the preventer of the intrusion of a spirit of greed 
 between Capital and Labour. But theite is no reason why 
 [3o-Partnership, to meet the ' civic and democratic nature of 
 fiumaaiity, should not be combined with salaries or wages 
 k/^aried to fit abiUties ■ and effidenoy, and plus bonus, or 
 premium, or piece-work, to supply the need of the indi- 
 dduahstic spirit; And there is no reason why this combina- 
 tion, by meeting the civic and demoaratic wants of humanity 
 md satisfying individualistic aspirations, should not prove 
 as successful a harmonizer as is possible in the present stage 
 of advancement and development of industrial relationships- 
 
 But Co-Partnership must be more than a mere division 
 of profits. It must have its base resting firmly on the deep 
 solid rock of human nature. It must be the means of enabling 
 men under modern conditions,! wherein thousands of workmen 
 are operating together in factories, mines, and workshops, td 
 do so as real Co-Partners. Labour must be Co-Partner with 
 Capital in fact as well as in name. But this Co-Partnership 
 must not extinguish or crush the strong spirit of < individualism 
 which is such a pronounced element in human nature. It 
 must give to each: man the stimulus and security of the man 
 in business for himself.! The British workman has a profound 
 distrust! and dislike of paternalism. CorPartnership can only 
 fail when Capital or Labour expect too much as a result oi 
 it, and where Labour, after being taken into Co-Partnership, 
 is not treated as a partner. Capital must not expect that 
 Labour, after Co-Partnership, will cease to make demands 
 for. higher wages, or relinquish its right to combine in Trade 
 Unions, or will not show disaffection if other conditioils 
 irritate or create a feeling of oppression ; and, equally, Co- 
 Partnership must not be I shipwrecked by Labour expecting 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 121 
 
 that Capital shall cease to fill its function of control and to 
 maintain discipline. 
 
 At the same time. Trade Unionism ought not to be a 
 barrier. Trade Unions are as essential under Co-Partnership 
 as under the present existing system. Trade Unions are, 
 for both Capital and Labour, indispensable as a means of 
 collective bargaining. There is no reason why Trade Unions 
 should be either apathetic, or, as is most often the case, 
 openly hostile to Co-Partnership; Such hostihty on the 
 part of Trade Unions can only exist so long as they ignore 
 the obvious fact that to make Labour • Co-Partner with 
 Capital is a democratic step tending in the right direction, 
 by putting Labour on the road to share in Management 
 and to enjoy increased welfare. For by Co-Partnership the 
 total earnings will be increased by Profit-Sharing, and the 
 total earnings must always include the payment of full wages 
 on the Trade Union scale and for the Trade Union working 
 hours. And it is obvious that if the total earnings are larger 
 in Co-Partnership workshops, then this improvement is 
 bound to react on all other workshops, and so Co-Partner- 
 ship must inevitably tend to the improvement of backward 
 industries. An intelligent Co-Partner, working under the 
 above co'nditions, receiving full Trade Union wages and 
 working Trade Union hours (including, when such is the 
 rule, either bonus, premium, or piece-work additions), is 
 bound to reahze the value of his efforts to the business as 
 a whole, as well as to himself as an individual. And so the 
 outlook of the Co-Partner becomes broader and he becomes 
 keen to adopt new methods calculated to produce a larger 
 output with lessened cost of production, with the result of 
 adding to the profits in which he himself and all Co-Partners 
 share. High wages, bonuses, premiums, or piece-work, apart 
 from a system of Co-Partnership, can alone bring no solution 
 of Labour difficulties. Only the true spirit of Co-Partnership 
 can tend in this direction, and, by combining the democratic 
 with the individuaUstic attributes of human nature, will 
 result not only in higher total earnings, but greater efficiency, 
 happier Hfe, and improved mental condition. Therefore, 
 the opposition of Trade Unions can only be based on some 
 fundamental misconception which assumes that the interests 
 of Capital and Labour are diametrically opposed to each other. 
 
122 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Time, and the steady growth of the Co-Partnership movement, 
 alone can correct this. 
 
 Co-Partnership can do no more than produce the right 
 environment and create conditions for Capital and Labour 
 that are mutually healthy and stimulating. Thanks to our 
 various Education Acts, from 1870 up to the present time, 
 Labour to-day is alert and inteUigent, and has imbibed 
 ambitions and aspirations, and in addition Labour is 
 gaining experience every day by service on local government 
 bodies and on Trade Union committees, and is the better 
 prepared and equipped to take greater responsibilities, but 
 Labour must move gradually and somewhat slowly to the 
 higher sphere of Directorships. 
 
 But throughout it all, in seeking to harmonize Capital 
 and Labour we must never lose sight of the fact that what 
 is called the present Labour Unrest is healthy and encouraging, 
 for it discloses a psychological problem just as large as one 
 of wages and of hours of emplosmient. And in this aspect, 
 Co-Partnership means much more than sharing profits as an 
 addition to wages. It means the sjiirit of comradeship-^ 
 the spirit that recognizes equaUty and brotherhood ; and it 
 is working on these Unes that the harmonizing of Capital 
 and Labour best promises to dispel the present atmosphere 
 of suspicion and distrust. 
 
VIII 
 TRADERS' PARTNERS 
 
 Bolton, October ii, 1917. 
 
 [Addressing^ the Bolton Comjjined Traders' Association, Lord 
 Leverhulme referred to the early days of his business career, 
 when he was a grocer in Bolton and Wigan. His experiences 
 in that business, combined with what he had learnt from his 
 father, who wjis apprenticed to the same trade as long ago 
 as 1824, had left upon his mind certain impressions to which 
 he owed whatever success he had since attained. He thought 
 the grocery trade afforded the best education a business man 
 could possibly have. He said :] 
 
 There are many ways besides sharing profits in which you 
 can make those associated with you in business into partners. 
 I know many businesses where Profit-Sharing and Co-Partner- 
 ship in profits are quite impossible. Take the great business 
 of domestic service. There are no profits appearing in the 
 balance-sheet of servants of a household and the duties they 
 perform, and yet we all know that a kind and encouraging 
 word will do far more in making life comfortable to the 
 servant and happy for the mistress, and in making the home 
 bright and cheerful, than any mercenary bond there may be 
 between them. And so, also, the trader, however small his 
 staff may be, however impossible it may be to have a Profit- 
 Sharing scheme of an elaborate nature, can, by consideration 
 of his staff, make them just as enthusiastically his partners 
 as by any sharing of profits whatever. Why, every trader 
 must, if his business is to succeed, enthuse and put energy 
 into his staff, and, believe me, enthusiasm and energy are 
 synonymous terms. By consideration of their hours of 
 work, by cheerfulness towards them, by courtesy to them, 
 by the pasmient of the highest wage the business will afford. 
 
124 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 the employer may energize his staff, and stimulate them 
 in a way that would not be possible in a larger business, even 
 with the most complicated, elaborate, complete, and generous 
 scheme of Co-Partnership. There must be personal contact 
 on these lines. 
 
 You know, business is business ; and good business demands 
 enthusiastic workers ; and you can't get energetic, efficient 
 work without some bond of sympathy between employer 
 and employee. Sympathy with the staff — ^why, look how it 
 would clear away the cobwebs ! It would not only increase 
 a trader's business, but would decrease the loss and expense, 
 and it would not only increase his own happiness, but his 
 popularity with his customers as well as his own staff ; and, 
 further, it would enable a trader of mere mediocre ability 
 to accomplish more in his business than a trader of great 
 brilliance and genius could accorftplish without it. It will 
 bring up a mediocre man far in advance of thei talent of a 
 briUiant man. But I would like continually to repeat, in 
 whatever I have to say, that there is no philanthropy in 
 business, and a trader cannot, allow sympathy wi,th his staff 
 to fill his business with pensioners and inefficients. No 
 matter how much an employer may idealize as to running 
 his business for purposes other than mere money-making,, he 
 will find he must run his business for money-making if he 
 wishes to make a perfect and ideal organization for his 
 employees as well as for the customers he serves. He must 
 work on ideal conditions for all his employees and his customer? 
 if he wishes to safeguard the capital he has in the business — 
 to build up a solid, successful, money-making business. 
 
 The trader must so balance his ideals with practical business 
 as to neglect neither. At an Agricultural College a dis- 
 cussion was taking place as to what slopes of land were best 
 suited to give the biggest crops, and an old farmer, who knew 
 nothing probably about scientific me;thods of farming and 
 slopes of land, and so on, got up at the end of the discussion 
 and said that in his experience it did not matter so much 
 about the slope of the land as the slope of the man. And so 
 I would say of every one of us in business^ whatever systems 
 we adopt, and whether we are able or unable to adopt some 
 plan of Profit-Sharing or Co-Partnership, far more will depend 
 upon our own inclinations and leanings towards our ideals 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 125 
 
 than any particular method we may adopt. The slope of 
 a man can make success or failure, and it can make a mediocre 
 man into a superman. 
 
 Let us examine into the question of Co-Partnership on 
 ordinary hnes of Profit-Sharing in any business. There are 
 three active partners, generally speaking, in every business. 
 Whether we acknowledge Co-Partnership or not — ^whether 
 we do anything to recognize it or not, there are three partners 
 joined together — ^the employee, the pubHc, and the proprietor. 
 Each of these three partners has within himself three sleep- 
 ing partners. I will call the Employees, the Public, and the 
 Proprietors the active partners. The three sleeping partners 
 are Habit, Inertia, and Imitation. 
 
 One of the hard business facts of hfe that has an immense 
 power on success is habit. It is by habit that we think and 
 act most efficiently. We do very Uttle efficient thinking 
 until we do it by habit. If you watch the child first begin- 
 ning to toddle, its footsteps falter ; but when it has learned 
 to walk, and walks by habit, then it becomes a perfect walker. 
 Habit means that condition of body and mind, or both, 
 which has become ■ established by constant repetition. The 
 successful trader is the man who has acquired the best habits 
 for his own particular business, and that is all that success 
 means. Mediocrity, by constant repetition, can surpass 
 briUiancy that has not acquired habits by constant repetition. 
 We have had that experience, each' of us, in our schooldays. 
 We saw the less brilliant scholar, by constantly repeating 
 and learning his lesson, able to pass examinations and take 
 prizes that a more brilliant scholar, who would not go through 
 the drudgery of repetition, failed to secure. The best way 
 to acquire good habits is to make the mind lead off in the 
 right direction, and the best business habit to be acquired 
 first is system, a good system which leads to success. Success 
 does not depend on the head of the business, the captain 
 of the ship, being on the bridge all the time. With system, 
 a man could multiply his powers a hundred-fold. A man 
 with the aid of system can enable his shop assistants to get 
 through ten times the work that they are capable of without 
 system. Compare the Shop or any business where no system 
 prevails, where the master has no daily or hourly programme 
 and where all is confusion, with the shop where system and 
 
126 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 order prevail, and you will at once see the difference. 
 So that habit in business means, first of all, acquiring 
 system. 
 
 The second of these sleeping partners is Inertia. In ac- 
 quiring habits we have to overcome Inertia. You see it 
 when a horse is drawing a load. It takes many times the 
 strain to start the movement, to overcome Inertia, than it 
 does to maintain the movement ; and that is equally true 
 of the effort to stop the movement. You can't stop an ex- 
 press train in a moment any more than you can start it off 
 at full speed. This principle applies equally, or more, to 
 the beginning of new habits and to the stopping of old habits. 
 The strong, progressive habit cannot at once overcome the 
 Inertia of old habits. It is actually easier for some to do their 
 work in the hardest and most difficult way possible, when 
 that way is an acquired habit, than it is to change to new 
 and easier methods. Now, this Inertia of old habits is the 
 sole reason why young men get ahead of the older ones in 
 every and any business. This fact about Inertia teaches us, 
 as business men^ that improvement in our business involving 
 radical changes should not be made too suddenly, just as 
 you would not turn a comer at top speed in a motor-car. 
 Were we considering the introduction of Co-Partnership, the 
 greatest radical change we can make in our business, it 
 behoves us to beari in mind this principle of Inertia. 
 It is an element in the minds of our staff and in our 
 own minds. 
 
 In overcoming Inertia we have the help of our third sleep- 
 ing partner. Imitation. We all love to imitate what we see. 
 If we wish to adopt Co-Partnership, our incUnation is guided 
 by our love of imitation, which helps us to overcome Inertia. 
 A going concern has a goodwill. This goodwill is due to the 
 effect of the increase in the volume of profits, proving that 
 business is founded on right habits and on the firm basis 
 of repetition and on the overthrow of Inertia. Before I pass 
 to the active partners, let me just recapitulate these three 
 sleeping partners. Habits, rightly founded, make for progress 
 Inertia has to be overcome, but, at the same time, it does 
 lend itself to stabiUty. Imitation helps us to overcome 
 Inertia, and Inertia is a natural tendency to continue without 
 change. The only way to build a business and train a staff 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 127 
 
 is to bear in mind these three principles. If we overlooked 
 them we should get discouraged and give up our task, what- 
 ever we had set ourselves to do. 
 
 May I give you an instance of widespread Inertia we had 
 through the country a few years ago ? You remember when 
 Willett introduced his Daylight Saving Bill he was ridiculed 
 in the House of Commons, and at once came against that 
 huge mass of Inertia which could not be moved. But, in 
 a little while, we began to think about it, and, although 
 Willett did not live to see his plan adopted, the Inertia was 
 overcome, and who, to-day, would go back to the old-time 
 calendar in the summer months ? I mention that because 
 it is such a recent and such a good illustration of the point 
 I wish to bring out— that, in this huge problem of Co-Partner- 
 ship, we have the same difficulty to face, and we must bear 
 it in mind both for our own guidance and in the guidance 
 of our staff, and in regard to the pubhc we serve. 
 
 Now, let us consider the three active partners : the Em- 
 ployee, the Public, and the Proprietor. No proprietor, at 
 any time, was independent of those about him, and he is 
 more dependent upon them to-day than ever. He cannot 
 succeed alone. Employers and employees must work together 
 as partners with the public. Employers must recognize that 
 their employees are. an asset to the business. Hitherto, 
 employers have simply looked upon the assistant as a Uability 
 that had to be cleared every week at pay-day. An enthu- 
 siastic Co-Partnership employer, in a distributive business, 
 has stated that his employees, since they had been made 
 Co-Partners, have reduced his changes in his staff, increased 
 the permanency of his staff by 35 per cent., and their efficiency 
 by over 50 per cent. Every employer in a retail business 
 knows that his point of contact with his customers depends 
 on his staff. The nearer he can bring his staff to himself 
 in their interest in and enthusiasm for the business, the more 
 successful is his business likely to be. In fact, employers 
 and employed are like the strands in a rope. Spun into' a 
 cable, they can bear great strain, but unwound and unravelled 
 they can bear none. 
 
 Now, we are told that a house divided against itself cannot 
 stand, but modem business goes further than that. The 
 position to-day in business is that a house must have unity 
 
128 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 of aim and purpose, and enthusiasm and loyalty.; otherwise 
 it cannot stand. As an illustration of enormous power 
 running to waste, take the Falls of Niagara. There is a 
 similar enormous waste of energy when employees are outside 
 the reach of a Co-Partnership, either in profit-sharing or in 
 S3mipathy, in kind acts and consideration. Hundreds of 
 millions of horse-power are running to waste at Niagara. 
 A few of them have been chained up, and Hght up Buffalo 
 and other cities, and drive many industries. But only the 
 mere fringe of the power has been utiUzed, and I venture 
 to say that, in most businesses, from 50 per cent, upwards 
 of the ability of the staff is never developed at all. The 
 employer must make the employee feel that he is his best 
 friend, and that he is an inspiration to him ; that he is the 
 employees' instructor, adviser, and helper; All this means 
 confidence, trust, and leads up to Co-Partnership. 
 
 There is a subtle influence, an atmosphere that emanates 
 from the employer, and many a man in business has strangled 
 the spirit of his employees by his cold, fault-finding methods. 
 It is easy to judge the character and type of the employer 
 by studying the character and tjrpe of employee working 
 under him. If the employer is morose and gloomy, how can 
 you expect his employees to be bright and cheerful with 
 the customers in the shop ? Employers are learning more 
 and niore the value of creating a cheerful atmosphere in 
 their business, equally with a cheerful, bright, newly decorated 
 interior of their business premisesi. The two go together. 
 None of us, I venture to say, would to-day consider it business- 
 like to have the interior of our business premises slovenly, 
 neglected, dirty, and requiring beautifying. We must be 
 determined that the minds of our eihployees are just as free 
 from cobwebs, and as bright, cheerful, and happy, if. they are 
 to be attractive to the customers who come into our shop. 
 If one were to sow nettles and thistles, one would never expect 
 to find a harvest of perfumed roses, sweet and fragrant ; 
 and if we sow morose words amongst our staff, they will 
 reach, through our staff, to our customers, and drive them 
 away. We none of us can do our best work under any other 
 conditions than when we are at our happiest. It is, remember, 
 the warm sun that causes the buds to open and give forth 
 their perfume. ; You know what George Macdonald said ; 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 129 
 
 " If I can put gladness into the heart of any man or woman, 
 I shall feel I have worked with God." 
 
 If Co-Partnership were merely a matter of money- motive — 
 a money stimulus — without the putting of gladness and hap- 
 piness into the hearts of the staff, then, I say, Co-Partnership 
 would be a gloomy failure. The employee has a right to 
 happiness and freedom from anxiety. Remember, that what- 
 ever attitude is adopted towards the staff will react upon 
 the employer himself, as well as on his business. We must 
 begin to realize the fact that a large part of the employee's 
 ability is never awakened because it has never been energized 
 or utilized. We all of us know those who have been in 
 business with us at various times and whom we considered 
 of no special merit as long as they were our assistants, but 
 who have developed by leaps and bounds when they have 
 got into business for themselves. Why could not we develop 
 these latent powers ? 
 
 Now, let us consider the second partner in business — the 
 PubUc. Many think the only use of the pubUc is to make 
 profits out of them. You know the man who was boasting 
 of his profits during the war in the smoke-room of his club. 
 He said, " You know, I have made it all by sheer, downright 
 pluck — every penny of it." The worried listener : " And 
 whom did you pluck ? " Many a man of business thinks 
 price is the only element of success. There are dozens of 
 reasons for success besides prices. Customers will go past 
 one shop to another, because gracious courtesy, civiUty, 
 efforts to please, reliabiUty on recommendations of quality, 
 all count for far more than price cutting. Many customers 
 would rather trust the trader's recommendation than their 
 own power of selection. Remember, the satisfied customer 
 not only comes himself but sends others. The assistant 
 must be trained in habits of courtesy to the public. A 
 multiple shopman spent a great deal of money in sending 
 telegrams to every branch manager at each of his shops 
 throughout the United Kingdom : " Did you sa,y ' Thank 
 you,' to every customer you served to-day ? " He sent 
 those telegram? from time to time until he had burnt the 
 importance of this i^ct into their minds. He spent over 
 £i,ooo on those telegrams, merely asking that question. He 
 says it was the best £i,ooo investment he ever made in his Ufe. 
 
 10 
 
130 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 There are hundreds of men who would scorn to tell a lie 
 who would let their goods lie for them. They do not hesitate 
 to sell shoddy, second-rate goods. None of them would 
 dream of cheating or lying. They are conscientiously, and 
 not h37pocritically, above it. There is no hj^ocrisy ; but 
 in building up a business, if we are dealing in anything other 
 than the quality that customers have a right to expect from 
 the class of trade we do, then we are, in our business, living 
 a he. The grandest advertisement ever written is poor com- 
 pared with the reputation for keeping high-class goods and 
 giving a true description of them. 
 
 You know the story of the young ftian who started a fish 
 shop, and fitted it up with marble slabs, and tUes on the 
 wall ; then he wrote a sign and put it up. There was his 
 name on the sign, and then, " Fresh Fish Sold Here." A 
 friend came along and admired the shop, and, after looking 
 all round said, " Look at your sign." " What's the matter ? " 
 he asked. " Why do you say ' Fresh Fish Sold Here ? ' 
 You do not need to say ' here.' You are not selling them 
 across the way." So the young man painted the word 
 ■' Here " out, and the sign read " Fresh Fish Sold." Another 
 friend came and admired the marble slabs and the tiles. 
 When he had admired everything he said, " But look at 
 your sign. Everybody will know your fish is fresh." He got 
 his paint pot and painted out the word " Fresh." So now 
 the sign read, " Fish Sold." Another friend came, and when 
 he had admired the shop and the slabs* and tiles, he too, 
 said, " Look at your sign. Why say ' Spld ? ' Nobody 
 will think you are giving the fish away." So he took out 
 that word also, and now the sign simply read, " So-and-so, 
 Fish." Still another friend came, and when he had looked 
 all round he said, " Look at your sign." " What's the matter 
 with the sign yet ? " asked the young man. " Why say 
 ' Fish ? ' " was the reply ; "I could smell fish as soon as 
 I turned the corner." 
 
 There is a motto that runs, " The deceiver only deceives 
 himself." If any of us think that we can make a second-rate 
 quality of goods appear equal to the first-rate quality, we 
 are only deceiving ourselves. Deceit is a boomerang, and 
 if we put ourselves in our customers' place, we shall reaUze 
 the whole position. Nothing will so quickly forfeit confidence 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 131 
 
 as disappointment over quality. People do not like to deal 
 with traders they have always to be watching. Millions 
 upon millions of pounds sterling of turn-over are done entirely 
 and solely on the character and reputation of traders for 
 straightforwardness. 
 
 Well, now, what about the third partner, the Trader him- 
 self ? Many men in business are unable to trust those associated 
 with them with any power or authority whatever. These 
 men can only think in inches, and have only an eye to petty 
 cash items, and as long as they themselves can oversee 
 everything and attend to all the details themselves, they 
 get along all right, but the moment they have to delegate 
 to others, they go all to pieces. That is because they do not 
 know how to select their staff, and consequently can never 
 trust them. With thesd men, every employee who does not 
 exactly please them at the moment is cleared out. If the 
 employee were to express an opinion upon the business, or 
 make suggestions, he would be dismissed. With such an 
 employer, the employee must not move hand or foot without 
 the employer's approval. Such traders will not recognize 
 the fact that no man can attend to all the details of his own 
 business, and know every point about even his own one 
 business. 
 
 Now, the trader, to be successful, must begin right away 
 by trusting his staff, and until he can trust them — until he 
 has trained and educated them so that he knows, whether 
 he is there or not, that his business is going on as he would 
 wish it, and that his customers are being courteously attended 
 to, he is not ripe for the consideration of Co-Partnership, 
 the spirit of which comes a long way after that stage. If 
 we are suspicious and distrustful of our staff, then our staff 
 become suspicious and distrustful of us, for distrust and 
 suspicion breed distrust and suspicion. We have to encourage 
 our staff. No employee can be at his or her best if always 
 conscious that some one is watching in a fault-finding attitude 
 of mind. The interest of the employee must be awakened ; 
 it cannot be forced. 
 
 There is no doubt we all make errors in business : buy 
 at the wrong time, and fail to sell at the right time ; and I 
 always consider that the business man is more than a hero, 
 braver than any man in the trenches, who dare freely acknow- 
 
132 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 ledge ©penly before liis staff that he has made a mistake, 
 and applies the ink eraser to his own mistakes rather than 
 continue them. This is the state of mind we have got to 
 cultivate, and once it has been cultivated and become a 
 habit, there is nothing that will place an employer on a higher 
 pedestal with his employee. It sounds a paradox to say 
 our very mistakes and failings would raise us with our em- 
 ployees and, literally, it would not be so. The man who 
 made three mistakes in five actions would never win the 
 esteem and respect of his employee*; but, equally, the em- 
 ployer who claimed to be able to do right all five times, and 
 never acknowledged that now and then even he might make 
 a mistake, as well as his staff, would fail to win the esteem 
 and real support of his staff. 
 
 Now, the most dangerous period in the business career 
 of any tradesman is the time when he begins to feel sure of 
 his position. Over-confidence in any one of us is the first 
 sign of decay, and we all of us do our best work when we 
 are struggling for position. When a man says to himself, 
 " Now, I can take things easier ; I hold tl>e field ; I am 
 head and shoulders over all my competitors, and I can afford 
 to breathe more freely " — then he is in the greatest danger 
 of his life. It is dangerous to nm a business on its past 
 reputation, for there are too many others pushing forward 
 for supremacy all the time. It is astonishing how soon the 
 best business goes to pieces when the proprietor begins to 
 take it easy. Managing a business is like rolling a stone up 
 a hill ; take one's hands off, and down the stone rolls to the 
 bottom again. 
 
 Now, I want just to come to the point that this fact brings 
 u? up to. I am sure you will agree with what I have said 
 about the necessity of constant vigilance in business. If 
 this were the final word in business, the prospect for our old 
 age would be gloomy indeed. Business would mean hard 
 labour for life and the agony of seeing our business fade 
 away in our old age. But if we take time by the forelock, 
 if those bright young fellows who pass through our hands at 
 various stages of our career are attracted to us by sympathy, 
 are trained and developed in our business by our watchful 
 care, are made partners in our business at the particular 
 moment when they have proved themselves worthy of it and 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 133 
 
 of our confidence, then, as our own physical "powers grow 
 less their physical strength is growing greater, and the fair 
 and just treatment we have dealt out to them wins their 
 loyalty and support ; for all through their life they are able 
 to say they could never have done better under any circum- 
 stances whatever, for even if they went away from the 
 business in which they were trained and developed to start 
 a business of their own, the increased competition, the heavy 
 responsibiUties, the difficulties for capital, would not make 
 life so well worth living for them as a partnership in the 
 firm they were with, a share in the profits that were made, 
 and the opportunity to invest their money in the business 
 each succeeding year. On this system the employer, as I 
 have mentioned, need not be always at the helm. He can 
 take his reasonable relief as years get on, and when, finally, 
 it comes to the Indian summer of his life, as the sun is de- 
 clining, it will leave a golden glow through the skies ; he will 
 be surrounded by those whom he has trained and developed 
 to look upon him more as a father than an employer. 
 Whether they are single units, or tens, or hundreds, or thou- 
 sands, fiowever many they may be, their willing hands will 
 go forth to build up the business. The business will become 
 more than a mere machine to them. It will become a living 
 being to be cared for and tended and cultivated as lovingly 
 by them as ever by their master in his own young days. 
 And so we can see our business extend and grow, and if there 
 were nothing else in Co-Partnership than the relief it will 
 give to a man when his physical strength declines, I say 
 that argument alone — ^apart from, the increased prosperity 
 which Co-Partnership, in the experience of those who have 
 adopted it, brings ; apart from the fact that when you have 
 interested yt)ur staff with you in the profits you have appUed 
 the most just, fair, and powerful stimulus you can to their 
 efforts — apart altogether from all that, this one factor alone 
 ought to win it adherence. 
 
 Now, as to the particular form of Co-Partnership to be 
 adopted It is utterly impossible for any man to decide this 
 question other than the man who is going to apply it. As 
 I have said, it may not be possible to share profits at all, 
 Or to have a partner. There are many occupations, such as 
 domestic service, in which it is quite impossible ; but in one 
 
L34 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 :orm or another, either by kind actions and sympathy, con- 
 sideration in sickness, and the joy of happiness in health, 
 :he pa5mient of high wages, or the sharing of profits, a human 
 bond of Sympathy must go out from the head of the business, 
 from the proprietor, right down to the youngest office boy, 
 md, that, secured, I do not care whether you call it Co- 
 partnership, Profit-Sharing, or what you call it, you have 
 ntroduoed into business the human element, which will not 
 inly make the staff working for you happy, but will make 
 >^ourself happy. It is true that a business carried on for 
 Here money-grabbing objects, as I ventured to say at the 
 beginning, will, in my opmion, fail to reaUze even the narrow 
 ideal of making monej^ ; but carried on upon the broad lines 
 3f recognition of equal rights to a share of the fruits of the 
 industry of every one connected with the business, whoever 
 they may be, then the harvest is greater as it is shared with 
 Dthers. Then, as the sunset comes along in the skies, the 
 owner, instead of shutting down in dark weariness with the 
 knowledge that the business must pass into the hands of 
 strangers or be closed entirely, and that the physical strength 
 of the proprietor is unable to keep up with the energetic 
 action of younger men, will see it stronger than ever, and 
 have in it an ever-increasing pride. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 THE CO-PARTNERSHIP TRUST IN LEVER BROTHERS 
 
 LIMITED 
 
 Founder — Lord Leverhulme 
 
 Lev^r Brothers Limited began in 1909 to give workers a share 
 in the profits. 
 
 Power was at first taken to issue Partnership Certificates up to 
 £300,000 nominal value, and this was afterwards increased to 
 £1,000,000. 
 
 These Certificates are issued to employees in proportion to wages 
 or salary each year. The Management provisionally allot Cer- 
 tificates to the Staff, but Co-Partners have the right of appeal 
 to a Committee composed jointly of Staff and Managers. The 
 system of allotment is based on value of service. The very slacker 
 and ne'er-do-weel receives nil, the apathetic from 5 per cent, to 
 10 per cent., and the enthusiastic, appreciative, and responsive 
 above 10 per cent., with special allotment for special services and 
 helpful suggestions. 
 
 The final appeal can be made to the Chairman of the Company 
 should any Co-Partner or Employee feel that he has been over- 
 looked or unfairly dealt with. 
 
 For the purpose of the Certificate distribution the Staff is 
 divided into four classes — Directors, Managers and Foremen, Sales- 
 men, General Staff. 
 
 The Co-Partnership extends to both male and female. 
 
 The original minimum age-limit for Co-Partnership was twenty- 
 five years, but is now lowered to twenty-two years. 
 
 Originally the Co-Partnership Certificate was only given after 
 five years' service ; now it is given after four years* service. 
 
 The Staff sign an application form, containing a pledge in the 
 following terms : — 
 
 " To the Trustees of the Partnership Trust in Lever Brothers 
 Limited. 
 " Gentlemen, — I, the undersigned, request that a Part- 
 nership Certificate be issued to me under the above Trust, 
 
 135 
 
136 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 and I undertake that if the issue is made I will in all 
 respects abide by, and conform to, the provisions of the Trust 
 Deed and the Scheme scheduled to it, and will not waste time, 
 labour, materials, or money in the discharge of my duties, 
 but will loyally and faithfiilly further the interests of Lever 
 Brothers Limited, its Associated Companies, and my Co- 
 Partners, to the best of my skill and ability, and I hand you 
 herewith a statement in writing of the grounds upon which 
 I base this application." 
 
 Once admitted, and so long as their record is clean, Co-Partners 
 receive further Certificates each year on above basis in proportion 
 to wages or salary, until they have reached their maximum holding, 
 which ranges from £200 to £3,000, according to their annual 
 earnings. 
 
 They receive dividends on the amounts of their accimiulated 
 Certificates Uke Ordinary Shareholders, but as the Certificates 
 contribute no Capital to the business, they receive on that accoimt 
 5 per cent, less than is paid on Ordinary Shares. 
 
 The dividends are paid in 5 per cent. Cumulative " A " Preferred 
 Ordinary Shares, which the holder can sell at any time for cash 
 at par value if he so desires ; but so long as the shares are held 
 by the Co-Partner to whom they were originally allotted they also 
 participate further in profits to the extent that they yield to him 
 the same rate of interest as that enjoyed by the Ordinary Share- 
 holder. 
 
 These 5 per cent. Cumulative " A " Preferred Ordinary Shares 
 can only be allotted as dividends in lieu of cash. 
 
 Co-Partnership couples up Loss-Sharing with Profit-Sharing. 
 If a man has acquired Co-Partnership Certificates, and if profits 
 were to cease to be earned, he would suffer equally with Capital 
 in loss of dividends. 
 
 When an employee retires from active work in the service of 
 the firm, his Partnership Certificates are cancelled, but if his retire 
 ment is due to ill-health or old-age, or if his services are dispensed 
 with through no fault of his own, he receives in exchange Prefer- 
 ential Certificates which bear interest at 5 per cent, on their nominal 
 par value and are a charge on the profits ranking next after the 
 first 5 per cent, taken by the Ordinary Shareholders. 
 
 The nominal amount of a Preferential Certificate is either ten 
 times the average dividends paid in respect of the former Director's 
 or Employee's Partnership Certificates during the three preceding 
 years, or the same nominal amount as that of the Partnership 
 Certificate so exchanged, whichever shall be the lesser. 
 
 The granting of these Certificates does not in any way interfere 
 
CO-PARTNERSHIP 137 
 
 with the old age pensions under Lever Brothers' Employees 
 Benefit Fund. 
 
 So long as an employee is in the active service of the firm he 
 cannot (except for flagrant inefficiency or misconduct) be deprived 
 of the Partnership Certificates already issued to him, and the 
 annual interest which may be payable on those Certificates. The 
 conditions can only be varied by the consent of the holders of 
 not less than three-fourths of the total nominal amount of the 
 Certificates issued. 
 
 Both Partnership emd Preferential Certificates are cancelled by 
 the death of the owner unless a widow is left. But a widow receives 
 Preferential Certificates in exchange for her late husband's Partner- 
 ship Certificates, or if he had retired and was holding Preferential 
 Certificates, these are transferred to her, and she is entitled to 
 hold them, subject to the conditions of the Trust, while she remains 
 a widow. 
 
 On January i, 1918, the nominal value of the Partnership Cer- 
 tificates, Ordinary and Preferential, issued and outstanding, was 
 £751,536. 
 
 At the same date the number of Employee Partners, including 
 employees of Associated Companies admitted to Co-Partnership, 
 was 5,066. 
 
 In the nine completed years of the Co-Partnership there has 
 been distributed, for the benefit of the employees, in Co-Partnership 
 Dividends, and in Prosperity-Sharing generally, £487,353. 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 
 
UNDERCURRENTS OF HOUSING, 
 CAPITAL, AND LABOUR 
 
 Carlisle, November 5, 1917. 
 
 [In view of the important developments taking place at Carlisle 
 — ^its transition from an old-world cathedral city to a centre 
 of industrial progress, the establishment of mmiition works 
 expected to be the largest in the world, and the carrying-out 
 of a valuable experiment in the control of the liquor traffic 
 — Lord Leverhulme evidently felt that the topics ok which 
 he spoke at the invitation of the Carlisle Chamber of Commerce 
 were appropriate to the place and the time. He recollected 
 also that he was in the neighbourhood of Gretna — the scene 
 of so many romantic marriages — and, thus prompted, he 
 gave new expression to his hopes of social welfare : " What 
 better love-match could there be than one between producer 
 and consumer, both interdependent ? " He went on to say :] 
 
 Our first great task is to win this war. We are winning. 
 The final victory which is bound to come may be a little 
 delayed from the events of the past few months, but it can- 
 not be withheld. Victory is bound to come to the cause of 
 right against the brute force of mere might. 
 
 It would be a world scandal if a democratic people who 
 could organize to win victory on the battlefield found itself 
 unable to organize for better conditions of life as the fruits 
 of that complete victory. The great stumbling-block to our 
 progress is our tendency here to follow precedent. The 
 progress of the world has gone on in spite of our British 
 reluctance to take new departures. I am sure you will agree 
 with me that the progress in science and knowledge of the 
 secrets of nature that we have gained from the days of Sir 
 Isaac Newton to the present time is infinitely greater than 
 it was from the time of Adam to Sir Isaac Newton. 
 
 141 
 
142 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 So great and so rapid have been the changes in the last 
 fifty years, that we may say we have gained more in that 
 time than from the time of Adam to Sir Isaac Newton. All 
 the immense possibilities of this progress have been achieved 
 be persistent hard work on the lines of individualism, and 
 in spite of the opposition of Governments. In fact, during 
 the centuries we have spoken of. Governments have perse- 
 cuted the men of science — ^have burned them at the stake, 
 and appUed the thumb-screws of the torture chamber to 
 them ; but, in spite of the opposition of Government, science 
 has progressed. 
 
 The British Empire, as we know it now, has not been the 
 product of the British Government, but exists as the product 
 of individuals in spite of Govemment and Colonial and 
 Foreign Offices. We should never get much out of Parlia- 
 ment. The reason is clear. The province of Government 
 is not to do things for us, but to govern so as to ensure each 
 citizen equaUty of rights, equality of opportunities, and 
 equality of protection under the laws. Our limited monarchy 
 is the best form of government in the world, and, compared 
 with the United States or France or elsewhere, the best form 
 of democratic control in the world to-da}'. 
 
 My strong faith in democracy is founded on the fact that 
 the citizens will themselves feel the pinch when their own 
 errors produce ill effects. But we must take heed now of 
 undercurrents. Just as our airmen flying through the air 
 encounter currents of which we did not know — ^pockets, I 
 think, they call them, which they have to learn and study 
 before they can conquer the means of flying — so it is in our 
 ideals and dreams of betterment. When the Franchise Bill 
 of 1869 was passed we were told we must educate our masters, 
 and our education has resulted in teaching the people to 
 look to ParHament to give them anjrthing and everything— 
 to be to them a sort of Universal Provider. We have, 
 apparently, taught our citizens to expect to get from Parlia- 
 ment by vote what citizens ought to obtain for themselves 
 by work. Everything is to be -provided by Govemment 
 
 Now we come to touch the problem of the shortage — 
 the alarming shortage — of houses. We know that something 
 must be done, and it is natural that, by this process of educa- 
 tion, people should look to Parliament to give them free or 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 143 
 
 semi-free houses. Now, this is not the democratic control of 
 free men, but nursery rule. We must get rid of the idea 
 that we can get something for nothing. It is a delusion. 
 
 What are the reasons for the shortage of cottages ? There 
 must be some reason. Hitherto 98 per cent, of the cottages 
 provided have been buUt by private enterprise. The total 
 nimiber of cottages built by private enterprise in ten years,i 
 from 1900 to 1909, was 1,100,000. As long as Great Britain 
 has existed all cottage houses have been built by private 
 enterprise. The speculative builder may have his faults, but, 
 on the whole, he has cheaply and well provided, at his own 
 capital cost, for the housing of the people, the landlord 
 financing the builder who leased his land. 
 
 Why has this private enterprise come to an end ? What 
 is the cause of the present shortage of cottages ? The cause 
 is the shaking of confidence in the security of any invest- 
 ment in cottage building, and in this form of business enter- 
 prise. The talk of Government providing houses on some 
 basis of assistance out of the general taxes of the country 
 to provide what has hitherto been provided by private enter- 
 prise has shaken confidence. The depreciation in the selling 
 value of cottage property in the last eight years has approxi- 
 mated to an aggregate of ;f 200,000,000 sterling. 
 
 After shaking the confidence of those who previously 
 provided the building of cottages by raising the expectation 
 of Government help being given to others to build further 
 cottages, there came the war, the calling-up of all men of 
 military age and in fit condition to serve in the Army. Then, 
 after the outbreak of war, an Act was passed preventing 
 the owners of cottages from raising their rents and the owners 
 of mortgages from raising the interest on mortgages. We 
 all of us, myself included, allowed that this was the right 
 step to take. Then meetings were held in approval of the 
 Act, and it was endorsed unanimously by those who attended 
 the meetings. 
 
 But here, again, we have an undercurrent, because the 
 Act promptly stopped all building of further cottages and 
 the loan of money on cottage property. The builders could 
 not build because the rents of existing cottages were not 
 advanced to meet the increased cost of repairs and renewals. 
 Building of new houses could not proceed because it was not 
 
144 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 an attractive investment, apart from the difficulties of finance 
 caused by the calling in of mortgages, and the impossibility 
 of replacing them except on an increased margin. This has 
 brought in its train loss and ruin to owners, who have been 
 compelled to realize on forced sales at an enormous loss. , 
 Mortgages could not be raised on new cottage property, and 
 ^banking facihties are extremely limited. Capital was attracted 
 to other and more lucrative channels. This led to widespread 
 loss, and many owners of cottage property and builders could 
 not go on, and in a great many cases the owners of property 
 were ruined. Every owner of cottages, notwithstanding the 
 increased cost of building, is a keen seller at less than the 
 present cost of building. 
 
 I do not think we have a corresponding case in the whole 
 of the United Kingdom in any other form of investment. 
 These cottages could not be replaced at anything like their 
 pre-war value, and yet owners are keen sellers at less than 
 the cost. No such conditions exist in any other investments. 
 Small wonder that builders ceased to build cottages, or that 
 landowners have ceased to develop their estates. There is 
 less wonder that to-day we have a house famine. 
 
 The fact is that 80 per cent, of the houses in Great Britain 
 are let at rentals of from is. to 7s. gd. per week, including 
 rates and taxes, and on these rentals, obviously, there is no 
 margin for profitable investment. Long before the war the 
 house famine existed, and cottage building had practically 
 ceased. Taking the country as a whole, it is doubtful if 
 more than half the number of these cottages were being built 
 each year even before the war since 1909 as in or prior to 1909. 
 
 How has it been proposed to deal with this situation? 
 Meetings are being held at which resolutions are being passed 
 to the effect that " private enterprise cannot now be depended 
 upon " to make good the shortage. So that fact has been 
 grasped by all of us. Private enterprise can no longer be 
 depended upon to make good the shortage. 
 
 Resolutions foUow to the effect that " the local authority 
 shall recognize and fulfil the duty of providing decent housing 
 accommodation for those unable to pay an economic rent, 
 and that the Government shall provide the difference between 
 the rentals of such cottages and the rentals the proposed 
 tenants can afford to pay." 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 145 
 
 These resolutions are very vague as to how this is to be 
 carried out — ^whether a sum of money is to be paid to a 
 public body, or private builder, to make up the difference in 
 the rent proposed to be received and the rent which is actually 
 required to pay interest and repairs and sinking fund. AU 
 is left perfectly vague. The very comnfion form is to suggest 
 that the Government should grant money for the building 
 of cottages at the pre-war rate of 3 per cent., whilst it has 
 to borrow at the present rate of 5| per cent. 
 
 But what group of citizens would be induced to provide 
 the margin required to secure the Government advance, the 
 rents being arbitrarily fixed on some assumed basis of cost 
 that is certain to be exceeded ? The margin required Would 
 be at least 20 per cent., and that margin would disappear 
 with bad trade in the country and the falUng empty of the 
 cottages built in a time of commercial prosperity. Would 
 our Town Councils be justified in providing this margin and 
 leaving the ratepayers to stand the loss ? Would private 
 individuals be able to ask the banks to lend money on that 
 margin ; or would a man be entitled to take the savings of 
 his Ufetinae — ^what he intended to keep the hunger-wolf from 
 his widow and children — into that margin which would be 
 necessary to entitle him to the advance of the Government 
 even after receiving money at 3 per cent, which has cost 
 the Government 5^ per cent. ? 
 
 I do not think the scheme would be attractive to indi- 
 viduals or municipalities, and it certainly would not be 
 attractive to the Imperial taxpayer. I would suggest that 
 all these methods ought to receive fuller and more serious 
 consideration than they have received up to now. They 
 are imdercurrents, and one does not know whether they will 
 draw us closer to our ideals or whether they inay carry us 
 on to rocks or shoals. They might easily make the housing 
 conditions infinitely worse twenty years hence than they are 
 to-day. 
 
 I would like to suggest one or two alternative methods, 
 with your permission ; and, first of all, steps should be taken 
 to restore public confidence in the building of cottages and 
 in money invested in land and house property. Then let 
 the towns and cities purchase the land on the fringe of their 
 towns at agricultural value. They could do it wisely and 
 
 11 
 
146 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 judiciously, awaiting the r^ht opportunity when such land 
 comes into the market. This can be done if taken in time. 
 I have known land within seven miles of the Marble Arch, 
 in London, to sell for £50 per acre. When that land came 
 to be developed for building purposes, if the municipal 
 authorities of the group of boroughs in the City had purchased 
 that estate, they would have provided ample opportunity 
 for housing the people. 
 
 The towns should secure the land on the fringe of the 
 suburban area and prepare a comprehensive town-planning 
 scheme, embracing not only the suburbs but the centre of 
 the town, and so providing areas for industries, manu- 
 factories, garden villages for workmen, residential areas, and 
 central shopping districts. Then let the land be valued on 
 the basis of cost — the actual cost the municipality would 
 have to pay with the sinking fund to provide for time occupied 
 in development over a number of years — sixty or seventy 
 would not be an unreasonably long period. Then sell this 
 land on this basis of cost in various allotted areas, each area 
 valued on its own, a lower price for garden village sites, a 
 higher price for factory sites, and a higher price still for shop 
 sites. The garden village sites should be on a basis of not 
 more than eight to ten cottages per acre. 
 
 Having done that, the next step I want to suggest is much 
 sounder, and likely to prove more profitable to the country 
 as a permanent remedy for the shortage of houses than 
 assistance out of the Imperial Exchequer. The towns and 
 cities should, as I advocate, acquire the land on the fringe 
 of the suburbs, and then they should get rid of all rates and 
 taxes on improvements of land and cottage houses, and 
 substitute a local income tax. The difference between such 
 a tax and the incidence of taxation on improvements is this : 
 You practically say to the builder of a cottage, " Whether 
 it pays you or it does not pay you, we will take an annual 
 ^um from you in the form of rates and taxes." We agree, 
 do we not, that you cannot tax except on income ? However 
 you make an income tax or a super-tax, it is a tax on the 
 individual and his wealth in the shape of income. 
 
 If we substitute a local income tax and raise our revenue 
 clear of rates from cottages, then you stimulate the building 
 of more and better cottages. The man who builds the best 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 147 
 
 type of house to-day knows that he is going to be penalized 
 by being rated at a higher value. 
 
 I have an instance in my mind which occurred only a few 
 months ago. A farmer on some land I owned, when I went 
 to see him, wanted some improvement made. His water 
 supply was ah old well. I said to him that I was willing 
 to put all these matters right, to build additional shippons 
 for extra cows, and better accommodation for his horses, 
 and I suggested that I should bring a supply of the town's 
 water, which ran past on the main road, for use on the farm 
 instead of relying on the old well. Both he and his wife 
 talked it over. I told him it wovild mean an additional 
 rental charge of 4 per cent, on the cost of the work. They 
 thought they could well undertake and afford to give the 
 increased rent for the increased accommodation to be provided. 
 They were dehghted at the idea of having the water supply, 
 but within a week I got a letter in which the farmer wrote 
 that he had though^ over the matter, and had discovered 
 that his rates would be increased by so much, and so much 
 more for water, that he preferred to go on as he was 
 doing. 
 
 The whole stumbling-block to the improvement of property 
 has always been the rates. Even if you put up a little green- 
 house, properly built with brick foundations, it is a subject 
 for increased rates. 
 
 Abolish the rates and you would accomplish two objects. 
 You would restore confidence and attract capital for building, 
 provided there was cheap land. We do not want these 
 advantages to go to the owners of the land. The land on 
 the fringe of our towns should be purchased at agricultural 
 value for the community. ' 
 
 Having gone so far, there should be an alteration in the 
 building by-laws to cheapen the cost of road-making 
 Sufficient land should be reserved for wide roads, but the 
 actual roadway need not be so great until the building of 
 houses had developed. It only burdens those who have to 
 develop the land. Building by-laws require to be altered 
 so that we can build what I call machine-made houses — 
 machine-made cottages. 
 
 They can be made of reinforced concrete on many systems. 
 Edison suggested moulds into which the cement is poured, 
 
148 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 and when it hardens the moulds are removed. There is a 
 better system proposed to be adopted in many districts. 
 It is a much sounder system of making cottages, and is known 
 as the panel system. These panels can be prepared and 
 set in any central factory where gravel and sand are available, 
 and the panels can be transported, and can be assembled 
 and erected perfectly dry, and in a week or ten days the 
 cottage can be completed and ready for occupation. 
 
 The building by-laws are our obstacle — the greatest hin- 
 draiice in addition to those others I have mentioned. Under 
 existing by-laws the manufacture of madiine-made cottages 
 on the factory system is impossible. 
 
 These clothes I am wearing would, a few centuries ago, 
 have been made by hand. We marvel at the cheapness of 
 cloth and its varied patterns. Perhaps a whole factory may 
 be running all the time on one pattern, but go where you 
 will about the town, you never find dull repetition of the 
 same pattern. The patterns are infinitely varied. So there 
 can be in the building of cottages, on the panel system, an 
 infinite variety of design, and the work done oh the sites 
 can be reduced to a minimum. The cottages could be let 
 at very much lower rentals than at present without nursery 
 rule or help from Governments ; all of which would. I con- 
 tend, produce a state of affairs twenty years hence infinitely 
 more disastrous than what we are suffering from to-day. 
 
 There are other phases of this subject, but I would like, 
 with your permission, to pass from the question of housing 
 to the question of the relation between what is called Capital 
 and Labour, or the employer and the employee. 
 
 Let us consider this most carefully, as there are under- 
 currents in connection therewith. Just as we have seen that 
 the action of the Government in limiting rentals to be paid 
 for cottages may be perfectly right in time of war, but may 
 come back as a boomerang upon those who want cottages 
 to hve in, so let us be careful that we try to see, as far as 
 human foresight will avail us, the effect of any proposal in 
 reference to employer and employee. 
 
 A cjmic has said that the keynote of all dif&culties is im- 
 becility. The greatest of our industrial uhbecihties to-day 
 are suspicion and distrust. Employers and employees both 
 distrust each other. The trad[e upionist is suspicious and 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 149 
 
 distrustful of his union and his leaders. ParUament and 
 people distrust the Government, and so it goes on. 
 
 There are no fools in this world, beHeve me, like the shrewd 
 fools. This so-called shrewdness is merely another word for 
 suspicion and distrust. Suspicion and distrust bring the 
 worst, not the best, out of us. We have seen the effect of 
 the creation of a spirit of lack of confidence in producing 
 a shortage of houses, and the consequent sufferings of the 
 people. We are now on the brink of an equally serious 
 industrial situation. The present war taxation is heavy, but 
 war conditions justify it, and we are fortunate in being able 
 to put on the statute book the taxation we have in operation 
 to-day. 
 
 Napoleon said, when asked what was the greatest essential 
 for war, " Money " ; what was the next greatest essential ? 
 " More money " ; and what was the greatest essential of all ? 
 " Most money." 
 
 We are very fortunate in having available this system of 
 taxation, but when the war is over it is quite clear that much 
 of the present high taxation must continue. Don't let us 
 make an error and produce lack of confidence in putting 
 capital into industries, or harass industry and drive capital 
 away. We are tending rapidly in this direction by the excess- 
 profits tax, which is a tax, not on the individual, but on the 
 industry. It is thought to be a tax on the individual, but 
 it is not. It is a tax on industries. Obviously, in war-time 
 and for war necessities, we must have this whether it is a 
 curse or a blessing. We have no alternative. We are forced 
 to raise money to meet current expenses as far as we can 
 out of income. But we shall be wise if we consider the effect 
 of this so-called excess-profits tax in shaking the confidence 
 of capital in industries, and especially its effect on the wage- 
 earners. 
 
 Income tax and super-tax, however high they may be, 
 are on the individual — on the income of the individual ; and 
 so are the death duties, however high they may be graduated, 
 on the wealth of individuals. But the excess-profits tax is 
 not the same. The position is just as if the Government 
 were to say to any one embarking in an industry, " Heads 
 I win, tails you lose." It is true that in new industries the 
 Government say they will allow 6 per cent, on capital for 
 
150 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 profits before they calculate excess profits. What has induced 
 money to flow into new industries in the past has been the 
 knowledge that if the money was lost it was a fair loss, because 
 if money was made it went to the people who took the risk 
 and put their capital into the business, and stood to make 
 or lose money. It was a fair risk, whether it was in ship- 
 building, without certainty as to the conditions which would 
 prevail when the ships were launched, or in whatever form 
 of industry capital flowed to. 
 
 But in the excess-profits tax the Government says, "You 
 must take the risk. If you make a profit, we take 80 per cent, 
 of it, and you can have 20 per cent. If you make a loss, 
 you take the whole of the loss." 
 
 As soon as the war is over we shall require to have money 
 flowing into new industries to provide employment for the 
 men who return from the front, and to extend our export 
 trade, and generally to bring us victory in the field of 
 commerce, as we shall have won victory on the field of 
 battle. 
 
 Do any of us reahze how Uttle the profits of capital in 
 industry are, and how great is the gain to labour of attracting 
 ample capital to industries ? In countries such as the United 
 States, where capital is more free and plentiful, wages are 
 highest. Capital seeks investment in plant and machinery, 
 and because of that investment pays higher wages. Where 
 horse-power and machinery is the greatest, there wages are 
 the highest per head of the people. Each machine we possess 
 is a storage battery for brains and a producer of wealth. 
 The pre-war figule of productive capital in the United Kingdom 
 invested in plant and machinery was five times that of Italy 
 and Spain, twelve times that of China and Japan, and two 
 and a half times that of all Europe, including in that France, 
 Germany, Russia, and all other European countries. 
 
 In the United Kingdom, however, labour was only 4 per 
 cent, as compared with the productive power represented by 
 both labour and machinery. That is to say, labour was 
 4 per cent, and machinery 96 per cent. ; in Spain, labour 
 was 24 per cent, and machinery 76 per cent. ; in Italy, labour 
 34 per cent, and machinery 66 per cent., and in Portugal, 
 labour 42 per cent, and machinery 58 per cent. And the wages 
 paid the wage-earner were* proportionately highest in the 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 151 
 
 United Kingdom. All wage-earners, and those receiving small 
 salaries, are inclined to exaggerate the profits on capital. 
 
 Let us take the income tax retuirns for the last pre-war 
 year, 1913-14, or one that includes a few months of the war. 
 The returns for income tax show that the profits on business, 
 professions, and salaries of same were £504^ millions sterUng. 
 Now we can with confidence deduct, say, one-third from this 
 for professions and salaries, leaving, say, £330,000,000 as 
 profits of trade. We can be certain we have not over de- 
 ducted, because the return for the salaries of Government 
 and Corporation and other officials amounts to ^^76,250,000, 
 and we may reasonablj^ have confidence that salaries paid 
 in business and incomes of doctors, solicitors, architects, and 
 all professional men, added together cannot be less than 
 ;fi74,ooo,ooo. Now this £330,000,000 is equal to 4|d. per 
 head per day for every man, woman, and child in the United 
 Kingdom. The income derived from land and houses for 
 the years 1913-14 was £165,500,000, which is ajd. per head 
 per day. The excess profits were estimated to produce for 
 1916-17 about £75,000,000, but we will say £200,000,000, 
 which is again 3d. per head per day for each man, woman, 
 and child. The total is thus gfd. per head per day, and if 
 we add retained by capital, say, £165,000,000 for the fullest 
 excess-profit tax — the rate of taxation was 50, then 60, and 
 then 80 per cent. — so we may take it at £165,000,000, or 
 2jd. per head per day for every man, woman, and child in 
 the United Kingdom. That makes a grand total of is. per 
 head per day for every man, woman, and child in the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
 But, in calculating, one must remember that only three 
 out of every five are workers. Then, upon that calculation, 
 it comes to is. 8d. per head per ddy for each worker. 
 
 During that same period wages have advanced over 2s. 6d. 
 per worker per day on the average for the United Kingdom 
 since the war ; in many industries 5s., and in certain industries 
 by as much as los. per day. Profits, therefore, are not large 
 when considered from the point of view of what would be 
 available for distribution, if equal division were an ideal 
 that would help the cause of progress. 
 
 If any system of conscription or exactly equal division 
 would produce most goods, highest wages, and most houses, 
 
152 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 then I venture to think there is no right-thinking man in the 
 United Kingdom who would not be out to advocate what 
 would produce the greatest good to the greatest number. 
 
 Yes, btit it is said, " Let us conscript all wealth." 
 
 Now, it may be thought by some that this is an ideal that 
 would help. Let us see whose wealth we would conscript. 
 I was speaking to a Trade Unionist on this subject, and 
 he referred me td another man, with whom he had been 
 arguing this question. 
 
 " Tom," he said, " you have never saved anything. You 
 spend all you receive, and you have sdways made more thar 
 I have. Here, I have managed to save £500. You would 
 not save, and do you think it would be fair to take my ;£5oo 
 when you have no £500 to be taken ? " 
 
 The spendthrift workman and the prodigal son of the 
 merchant would have no wealth to conscript. Do we want 
 to penahze and discourage thrift, to encourage the spend- 
 thrift and wastrel, or to encourage the workman or the son 
 of the manufacturer who works hard to endeavour to^ main- 
 tain the position of his father's industry in the world of 
 commerce ? Some say that whilst it might be a mistake to 
 conscript all wealth, we could conscript incomes by making 
 the (income tax so high that it would come to the same 
 result. But if Ve conscript the total income, who will produce 
 any income ? Where wUl there be found any incomes to 
 conscript under such circumstances ? 
 
 I would point out that wages are highest and Uving most 
 full where the accumtilated wealth of the thrifty and the 
 careful is the greatest. Discourage the production of wealth 
 and you wUl make goods dearer, and wages lower, and employ- 
 ment scarce. And if you do discourage it, what about the 
 widow, the retired schoolmaster or tradesman ? BeHeve me, 
 any idea of increasing the welfare of the workers or of the 
 community in that direction is a delusion. You cannot 
 improve the condition of any people by any scheme of con- 
 fiscation of capital or income, or by any scheme of redistribu- 
 tion. You can only increase wealth by increasing production. 
 You can only increase wages by increased investment of capital 
 in machinery, resulting in increased production and reduced 
 cost. You can only increase production on the basis of 
 increased consumption, 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 153 
 
 There would not be in the Congo, where I travelled some 
 time ago, any increased production, because there is no in- 
 creased consumption. The way to make people increase 
 consumption is by increasing leisure. Increases of consump- 
 tion also depend on increases in wages and reduced costs, 
 so that wages are not only larger in coin, but in purchasing 
 power. All this means the raising of the standard of Uving 
 on sound and healthy Unes. Therefore our raising of the 
 standard of national life and of the whole British Empire 
 depends upon better organization of our industries, resulting 
 in the shortening of the hours of labour ; increased production 
 by the emplosnnent of more capital in machinery ; cheapen- 
 ing of the cost of product, increased leisure, and resulting 
 increased power of consimiption. Therefore, I advocate one 
 step in this direction — ^the Six-Hour Working Day. 
 
 The Six-Hour Working Day has an intimate bearing on 
 these ideals. It does not mean a loafer's paradise. Its effect 
 on the cost of continuous nmning of machinery is where 
 we shall gain. Our machinery wiU run an increasing number 
 of hours, even to the total of twenty-four hours, while the 
 human being attending the machine is not running more 
 than six-hour shifts. We shall largely increase our power 
 of production and of emplo5nnent. 
 
 And what must be our final aim to avoid all misunder- 
 standings and secure the greatest well-being of all ? Co- 
 partnership. The user of the tools must own the tools. 
 That must be our final ideal. We cannot take one spring 
 toward that ideal. We can only move cautiously and slowly. 
 You cannot take a man straight from the Liverpool Docks 
 and put him on the Board of Directors of the Cunard 
 Steamship Company ; but if we have the ideal, then in time, 
 with the operation of the Six-Hour Day, we shall produce 
 men and women in this country as a race who will not loQk 
 upon manual labour as we have in the past been too apt to 
 do, but will rather look down upon the man who does not 
 work to support himself and his family, though he is able to 
 live without working. The time will come when it will be 
 a disgrace to be a non-worker. 
 
 Under this system the workers in industries of all kinds 
 can take their proper and larger share in the business affairs 
 of the nation, in improving the conditions of employment, 
 
154 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 in meeting new developments, and so on. In the looms in 
 your chairman's factory you will see a number of coloured 
 threads. With skill and dexterity you will see all those 
 colours worked into the texture and united in a piece 
 of doth of beautiful pattern. If one single thread breaks, 
 the pattern is marred. We can organize for service in the 
 industrial hfe all elements in the United Kingdom — the 
 professional man down to the errand boy — ^by proper 
 apportionment of our time and proper education. And 
 by all citizens working on these lines we can produce a 
 pattern such as the world has never known. We can 
 produce an empire.which will endure for ever, and one that 
 will be the pride of, and work for the betterment of, the 
 whole civiUzed world. 
 
II 
 LAND FOR HOUSES 
 
 Birkenhead, October 4, i8g8, 
 
 [In the following address (delivered ;to the North End Liberal 
 Club), Mr. Lever, as he then was, advocated a policy of " Free 
 Ismd for housing," and defended it as neither unfair to any 
 one nor revolutionary.] 
 
 The subject "Land for Houses " is one the importance of 
 which requires no words of mine to commend itself to your 
 earnest consideration. The few thoughts I venture to plape 
 before you on this great subject are very crud^and incomplete, 
 and, consequently, are no doubt open to much adverse criti- 
 cism. But, happily, honest criticism can only lead in one 
 direction, that of further calling attention to the question 
 of housing the people, with a view to whatever may be the 
 best means of remedpng the defects of our present system ; 
 a system under which the housing of the people has become 
 a scandal and disgrace, as well as a danger to the physical 
 and moral well-being of the nation. It is impossible for us 
 to visit any of our thickly populated centres without feeling 
 that, however great strides we have made in political economy 
 during the present century, as far as housing of the people is 
 concenied we are probably in as bad a condition to-day as 
 at any period of our history ; and this notwithstanding the 
 faqt that as far back as 1851 two Acts for dealing with this 
 question were passed by Parliament, and also that since 
 then, at constantly recurring intervals, right down to the 
 Act of 1890, succeeding Parliaments have jepeatedly atteinpted 
 to deal with this subject. Except in the way of pohce control, 
 we are bound to admit that none of these Acts have really 
 been effective in deaUng with the evils they were intended 
 to remedy. 
 Before I proceed further, allow me to acknowledge the 
 
156 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 assistance I have had in preparing this paper from reading 
 the book by Mr. Bowmaker on Housing of the Working 
 Classes, also the works by Mr. Charles Booth on the Labour 
 and Life of the People, and various other writers. AU who 
 have carefully read the works of the leading writers on this 
 subject must be impressed with the extreme gravity of the 
 present situation, and the more one inquires into the question 
 of the housing of the people, the more one is impressed with 
 two things — the enormous amount of work required to be 
 done, and the great importance that it should be done with 
 as httle delay as possible. As to the amount of work to be 
 done, it is not only the grosser forms of overcrowding — ^the 
 slums and alleys — that require to be dealt v^th, but almost 
 of equal importance is the question of the crowding of houses 
 side by side with only iz feet or 15 feet frontage, small yards, 
 and 6 or 8 feet back roads. It is said that " God made 
 the country, and man ma;de the towns." But there can be 
 no reason why man should not make towns, Hvable and 
 healthy, and i^owns are made Hvable and healthy they will 
 be just as muJr subject to the beneficent influence of bright 
 sunshine, fresh air, flowers, and plants, as the country. But 
 just as surely as the country is made by God, so surely is^it 
 that man is made also by the same Creator — ^who constituted 
 him a social being, loving the fellowship of his fellow-man, 
 and therefore loving to Hve in towns and cities, where he 
 finds the greatest scope for his social instincts, and where his 
 genius and abilities have the fullest opportunities for develop- 
 ment. Therefore, it is an estabUshed fact, and one that all 
 past history of the human race confirms, that men prefer 
 city Hf e to country Ufe ; hence the great importance to the 
 well-being of the race that city hfe be carried on under proper 
 conditions as to housing, with a view to securing surroundings 
 the most favourable to health. It is for the citizens them- 
 selves as a body to control this matter through their municipal 
 organizations. It must not be left to individuals, as in the past. 
 We are too apt in this country to leave good work for 
 the benefit of one's fellow-men to the care of philanthropists, 
 but in this instance, owing to the very stupendous character 
 of the question of housing of the people, philanthropists have 
 practically been unable to effect anything, notwithstanding 
 the large sum of money devoted by men of the stamp of 
 
HOUSIlJfG AND SOCIAL WELFARE 157 
 
 Mr. Peabody, and others too numerous to mention. I venture 
 to submit that it is not a matter to be dealt with by philan- 
 thropists at all. Philanthropy is only another name for 
 charity, and charity can only mean pauperism. The housing 
 of the people is not in any way connected with pauperism nor 
 charity, and does not come within the scope of philanthropists. 
 We have experienced during the last forty or fifty years 
 that mere Acts of Parliament can effect very little. In 
 what direction, then, must we look for help to come ? 
 Before we can answer this question, it would be, perhaps, 
 of advantage for us to inquire into the extent to which the 
 grosser forms of overcrowding exist, and what are the effects 
 on health and character of overcrowding. As to the extent 
 of overcrowding, many who have not thought deeply on the 
 subject would be surprised to hear that it exists to just as 
 great an extent in villages as in large towns, and in the very 
 smallest hamlets, proportionately, to as large an extent as 
 in London ; that it exists in new towns and cities hke Birken- 
 head, as well as in the oldest city in the United Kingdom. 
 We find by the last census returns that throughout the whole 
 of England and Wales, of the number of rooms composing 
 tenement houses, 52 per cent, of the separate tenements 
 included four rooms or less, of which about 5 per cent, were 
 of one room only, 11 per cent, of two rooms, 12 per cent, of 
 three rooms, and 24 per cent, of four rooms. Taking London 
 separately, we find that, instead of 52 per cent, as in the case 
 of England and Wales, tenements of four rooms and under 
 are 67 per cent., and that the single-room tenements in London 
 amount to 18 per cent., as compared with the 5 per cent, 
 for the whole country. Now, if we consider for one moment 
 the life a family must lead who have only one room in which 
 to eat, to sleep, and to live, we cannot wonder at the social 
 degradation produced in those who live under these con- 
 ditions ; and yet, the rents paid for these single rooms are 
 sufficient to pay a reasonable return on the capital required, 
 if properly expended, to provide suitable accommodation. In 
 the worst parts of Liverpool at the present day 1,000 people 
 are huddled on the space of one acre. At an inquest in 
 Spitalfields, London, concerning the death of a child four 
 months old, the evidence showed that the child, with six 
 other children and its parents, had lived in a room 12 feet 
 
168 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 by 12 feet, for which 4s. 6d. a week rent was paid. Just 
 fancy nine human beings living junder such conditions as 
 these ! All such places must prove very hotbeds of vice 
 and misery. I could give thousands of other examples taken 
 from both town, city, and country, but I will give one instance 
 more only to prove that overcrowding is just as prevalent 
 in country districts as in towns. In a village, not many miles 
 from here, I was asked by a widow, shortly after the property 
 came into my possession, to provide another bedroom to her 
 cottage. On my asking why, she replied because her son 
 was growing up, and there was only one room for herself 
 and him to sleep in. I imagined, of course, that he would 
 be a little boy, say eight or nine years of age. I asked his 
 age, and found it was nearly twenty. This caused me to 
 make further inquiries, which revealed the fact that this was 
 only a specimen of the conditions under which many.of the 
 inhabitants of that village were Uving. We drive or walk 
 past ivy-clad cottages in the country, admire their beauty, 
 and the thought that there can be fully-grown men and women, 
 not always even brothers and sisters, forced to occupy the 
 same bedroom from the lack of proper housing accommodation 
 never presents itself to us. The words used by the late Lord 
 Shaftesbury before the Royal Commission appointed to inquire 
 into the subject of overcrowding are just as true to-day as 
 they were at the time they were uttered. Lord Shaftesbury 
 then declared that, however great had been the improvement 
 in the condition of the poor in other respects, overcrowding 
 had become more serious than ever it was before. Evidence 
 produced before various Royal Commissions who have ex- 
 amined witnesses on the subject all proves that an enormous 
 proportion of our village populations know no other home 
 than such as provide one room for the whole family to live 
 in, and another room for the whole family to sleep in. 
 
 It is not necessary for me to occupy your time in prov- 
 ing further that overcrowding does exist. You know it 
 exists. I know it exists, we all know it exists, apart 
 from Government returns and population statistics or 
 Blue-books. We know it because we see it, and read 
 about it in the pohce reports every day of our lives. Such, 
 then, being admitted to be the state of affairs, let us next 
 inquire what are the results which overcrowding produces^ 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 169 
 
 There is one result which it certainly ought not to produce 
 in ourselves, and that is indifference on our part to the nameless 
 misery and brutalization which overcrowding generates in the 
 poor. And sometimes one is inclined to think that, whilst 
 on all hands we have evident signs that the condition of the 
 poor calls forth greater sjmipathy to-day than ever, and 
 whilst we know that in the providing of hospitals and in- 
 firmaries, in temperance work, religious and social work, we 
 have not been unmindful of our duty, yet in the very question 
 which lies at the root of the uplifting of the people, and the 
 elevation of them to a full enjo3mient of all the possibifities 
 of hfe, we have grossly neglected our duty. In dealing with 
 the moral effect of overcrowding, it is not an easy task to 
 collect statistics. We know that overcrowding and degrada- 
 tion go together, but we do not clearly see whether it is the 
 degraded who prefer to herd together, or it is the overcrowd- 
 ing that produces the degradation ; but whatever our indi- 
 vidual views may be on this point, we shall all agree on one 
 point, namely, that as to the degradation of the children 
 there cannot be the slightest difference of opinion. Lord 
 Shaftesbury, speaking of the effect of overcrowding on children, 
 describes it as " totally destructive of all benefits from educa- 
 tion " ; and who can wonder that this is the effect produced ? 
 A child that knows nothing of God's earth, of green fields, 
 or sparkling brooks, of breezy hill and springy heather, and 
 whose mind is stored with none of the beauties of nature, 
 but knows only the drunkenness prevalent in the hideous 
 slum it is forced to live in, and whose walks abroad have 
 never extended beyond the corner public-house and the 
 pawnshop, cannot be benefited by education. Such children 
 grow up depraved, and become a danger and terror to the 
 State ; wealth-destroyers instead of wealth-producers, com- 
 pared to whom the South Sea Islander, the Maori, or Zulu 
 is ail educated, intelligent citizen. 
 
 That overcrowding produces drunkenness, vice, misery, 
 and wretchedness, we know, notwithstanding we cannot 
 easily collect statistics showing the exact extent to which 
 the moral nature is affected by overcrowding. But if we 
 cannot get statistics with regard to the effect of over- 
 crowding on the moral nature, we can with regard to 
 the effect of overcrowding on health; and in considering 
 
160 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 this side of the question, let us not lose sight of the truth 
 that a nation's health is a nation's wealth. The population 
 of England and Wales at the last census was — for the 
 towns, about twenty-one millions ; for the rural districts, 
 about eight miUions. Calculating the death-rates in the 
 towns for corresponding age and sex, and comparing them 
 with the same for the rural districts, we find that whereas the 
 death-rate for the town is 23-32 per thousand, the death-fate 
 in the country is only 17-62 per thousand. In other words, 
 that whereas in the towns death on an average would occur 
 at the age of about forty-five, in the country it wo\ild occur 
 at the age of about sixty. But if we look further into 
 these figures, and subdivide the towns, we find that in the 
 congested parts of cities the death-rates are double those 
 of the suburbs. In London the death-rate of the outer, or 
 suburban, districts is only 15-4 per thousand, as compared 
 with between 30 and 40 per thousand in the- most crowded 
 parts. That is to say, that whilst a man in the crowded dis- 
 tricts would, on an average, only live to be say about thirty, 
 in the suburbs he would hve to be about seventy. In Liver- 
 pool, also, the death-rate is double that of the rural districts 
 surrounding. 
 
 But this bare statement of figures gives us but a' very 
 poor idea of the loss to the nation from overcrowding. 
 We have to consider, in addition to the early death of the 
 victims, the years of sickness, poverty, misery, and suffering 
 that ill-health entails on them and their families, and the 
 consequent loss of their ability to earn sufficient money to 
 keep themselves, thus lasdng a heavy burden on ithe rates, 
 and upon those relations who, whilst assisting them, are 
 already heavily overburdened to maintain themselves. It 
 is estimated that in bvercrowded districts every workman 
 loses, on an average, twenty days each year through ill-health, 
 say, on an average of 4s. per day, equal to £4. This is not 
 only a loss to the workman and his family, but to the whole 
 nation. This loss to the workman is not represented by the 
 £4 he has failed to earn ; he has lost something that he can 
 never recover. For a rich man to be a few days away from 
 business from ill-health may, perhaps, not be a serious con- 
 sideration. His business in all probabiUty will not suffer. 
 It would be conducted by his staff, or by his partners, without 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 161 
 
 interruption ; but not so the work of a poor man. Therefore, 
 the question of good health, or ill-health, is of all questions 
 the most important one to the workers of this country. Why 
 overcrowding should have such serious effects on health, and 
 increase so enormously the mortality returns, is a matter 
 more for a doctor to deal with than myself, but when one 
 considers the all-importance of ventilation and free circulation 
 of air — ^which conditions can never be obtained where there 
 is overcrowding — one sees one possible explanation, and that 
 probably not the least. The importance of fresh air and ven- 
 tilation upon health is shown when we examine the effect 
 of overcrowding in large cities as compared with overcrowd- 
 ing in villages, and the statistics I have just given you, showing 
 the death-rates of the two, prove that, as far as the effects 
 on heedth are concerned, overcrowding in rural districts is 
 nothing Mke so pernicious as overcrowding in cities. 
 
 We have now inquired into the extent of overcrowding and 
 its effects. Let us now see if we can obtain any information 
 as to the cause and remedy. I venture to submit to you 
 that it is not sufficient to say that the cause Ues with the growth 
 of population. It may be claimed that the rapid growth 
 of the population of this country has produced overcrowding ; 
 but when we see that overcrowding exists just as much in 
 the rural districts of England, where the population is de- 
 creasing, as in towns and cities where population is increasing, 
 we are bound to look deeper for the real cause, and this we 
 find in the difficulty — either from one reason or another — 
 in obtaining land upon which to erect houses for accom- 
 modating the peop^. We find that as land becomes more 
 valuable, houses formerly occupied by one family have been 
 arranged so that each room in that house should accom- 
 modate a family, and in many cases even more than one 
 family in each room. As land becomes still more valuable, 
 what were formerly the gardens of these houses have been 
 built upon, thus producing slums, courts, and rookeries. 
 Every public improvement, such as the demoUtion of old 
 property, widening of streets, etc, has increased the over- 
 crowding. I venture, therefore, to submit to you that one 
 of the principal causes, if not the Sole cause, of overcrowding 
 i^ the difficulty in obtaining land at such a price that houses 
 for the accommodation of the working classes can be erected 
 
 12 
 
162 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 thereon, and the remedy must, therefore, be to provide land 
 on such a basis that houses for the accommodation of the 
 people can be built thereon, to let at rentals within the means 
 of those they are intended for. 
 
 This point of view opens up a very grave subject for our 
 consideration. It is not my province to-night, however, to 
 go into any consideration of land reform. The question I wish 
 to go into is solely that of the providing of land for the erection 
 of houses ; and, in doing so, I venture to submit to you that 
 our municipaUties have ample powers in the existing law to 
 enable them — ^if they are so minded — ^to ef&ciently deal with 
 this question. The overcrowding, as we have seen, is at the 
 centre. The remedy for this must be in relieving the pressure 
 that exists and which forces the people to live near the centre. 
 Dispersion must be the remedy, but not forcible dispersion. 
 Our past experience has proved that we have only aggravated 
 the evU, when our ideas of dispersion have .proceeded no 
 further than the destruction of slirnis and rookeries. We 
 must make it possible for the working classes to Hve at a 
 distance from the centre, otherwise all our efforts will be 
 in vain. Our efforts, therefore, must be directed to gradual 
 dispersion from the centre to the suburban districts, so that, 
 by reUeving the pressure at the centre, we may lead not only 
 to the result of the total aboHtion of overcrowding, but to 
 the lowering of the rents to such an extent at the centre 
 that those who are forced to remain there, near their occupa- 
 tion, will at least have the benefit of proper accommodation 
 for themselves and famiUes. 
 
 In making it possible for the working classes, to live 
 away from the centre, we must consider two matters — 
 that of rent and that of transport. Already, overcrowded 
 as they are, we find that 88 per cent, of the working 
 classes pay more than one-fifth of their income in rent; 
 of these, 42 per cent, pay about one-quarter of their income, 
 and 46 per cent, about one-third of their income. We 
 shall all agree that rents should not bear a greater pro- 
 portion to income than one-sixth to one-eighth. Therefore, 
 it is manifest that present rents cannot be increased, they 
 must be reduced. And, also, that if the working classes are 
 to be drawn from the centre to the suburbs, the total cost 
 of rent and transport at the suburbs must not exceed the 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 163 
 
 cost of rent alone at the centre. I will go further than this, 
 and say that the cost of rent and transport must be less at 
 the suburbs than the cost of rent alone at the centre, if a 
 tangible inducement is to be offered for removal. To produce 
 these conditions, we must look to our municipalities to provide 
 the land. It is impossible for working men to become owners 
 — ^to any great extent — of their own houses, and, in my opinion, 
 it would not be a good investment of their earnings for them 
 to own their own houses. The shifting nature of their employ- 
 ment, and the uncertainty of the exact locaMty where it may 
 be necessary for them to live from year to year, both render 
 it practically impossible for them to become their own land- 
 lords. If it were not for this, then it is manifest that the 
 working man could make no better investment of his savings 
 than in purchasing his own house, and so becoming his own 
 landlord ; for apart from the honourable ambition of every 
 man to dwell under his own roof, there is the freedom this 
 would secure him from arbitrary interference. 
 
 It being doubtful whether schemes for enabling working 
 men to acquire their own houses are a remedy for the evils 
 attending the present system of the housing of the people, 
 mimicipalities must face the task of offering facilities for the 
 erection of better houses in the suburban districts, the rents 
 of which, together with the cost of transport of the occupiers 
 to and from their daily work, should be less than the rental 
 demanded for inferior houses in the congested districts. I 
 know of no better way in which this can be done than by the 
 mimicipaUty acquiring suburban land in large quantities, at 
 reasonable prices, and offering this land absolutely free for 
 the immediate erection thereon of cottages, in conformity 
 with building by-laws specially drawn up for deahng with 
 the same. I am aware that this will sound at first a very 
 revolutionary proposal, and further, that it will appear to 
 many as absolutely unfair to the remaining portion of the 
 population. In reality it is neither. It is not revolutionary 
 because we have ample precedent for the course proposed. 
 Have we not fuUy admitted the nation's responsibility for 
 the education of the nation's children, and have we not 
 recognized that the only way in which we can ensure that 
 all children shall be educated is to make education free ? 
 We have seen that the milUons we spend annually on educa- 
 
164 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 tion are to a certain extent wasted, owing to the improper 
 housing of the poor. Therefore, to give free land to ensure 
 the proper housing of the people is only an extension of a 
 principle we have already accepted. As to the objection 
 that it may be unjust to the remaining portion of the popula- 
 tion, my endeavour must be to prove that the property built 
 on this free land will not only pay for the land which is being 
 given, but, in addition, result in a profit to the municipality 
 adopting this policy. Therefore, the proposal is neither 
 revolutionary nor unjust. 
 
 But, it may be asked. Is it absolutely necessary to provide 
 free land ? Cannot we leave this question of free land 
 alone, and proceed in some other way ? There is no other 
 way than first deaUng with the question of land for houses. 
 All other methods are simply tinkering with the evil we 
 would remedy. Corporations, and notably Liverpool, have 
 built blocks of workmen's dwellings — so-called — and anything 
 more hideous, more undesirable for the^rearing of a family, 
 or more wasteful of the pubUc money it would be impossible 
 to find. The most you can say of them is that they are 
 better than the slums and rookeries they have replaced. 
 Whenever I see these blocks of buildings in London and 
 elsewhere, I ask myself what our nation will become after 
 a few generations have been reared imder such conditions, 
 and the children's children of those bred and reared in these 
 barracks have to take their place as the backbone of this 
 country. No ! this system will never do, apart altogether 
 from consideration of its costUness and extravagance. But 
 I can imagine some one asking, How will free land assist us 
 in dealing with this question? I answer — in many ways; 
 and, amongst others, by preventing speculation in land for 
 houses. Now, I do not for one moment wish it to be thought 
 that this in itself is an evil, although in many cases it is a 
 very serious evil. To-day, land can be bought within reason- 
 able reach of the centre of Birkenhead, ' and other towns, 
 at from £ioo to £200 per acre. Within the last three years, 
 a plot of 300 acres on the Edgware Road, London, within 
 seven miles of the Marble Arch, sold at £50 per acre. But, 
 by the time the spread of population reaches such land, and 
 it is coming into demand for cottages, the price will probably 
 be 4s. to 5s. per yard, with the result that it can only be used 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 165 
 
 for the erection of cottages by scheming and planning how 
 many cottages can be squeezed on to as few yards of land 
 as possible. Instead of which, if the municipaUty steps to 
 our aid, and selects land with reasonable business forethought 
 and acumen, they can secure the land at a less price than any 
 private individual, and can afford to restrict the ntimber of 
 cottages to not exceeding twelve per acre. 
 
 With regard to the price of land, there should be no 
 difficulty in buying such land as I have indicated at 
 from £ioo to £200 per acre, freehold. This is the price 
 that land can be bought for in most districts before specu- 
 lation in land has set in. It is many times above the 
 agricultural value of the land, and on this basis, the -pro- 
 ceeds of the sale, when invested, would produce many times 
 the income previously being derived from the land. It is 
 a fair price, and one that most landowners would be very 
 glad to receive. At the same time, I do not suggest for 
 one moment that an arbitrary fixed value should be 
 put on the land to be acquired. The value in all cases 
 would be in relation to the market value of the land 
 in the district, and could, of course, be easily settled 
 by arbitration. I merely take the figure of £100 to £200 
 per acre as the price at which in many localities such land 
 could be bought, when purchased in large quantities and 
 free from speculation. I have already stated that on this 
 land not more than twelve houses per acre should be built. 
 This would give each house about 400 square yards, including 
 roads and streets. This will be foimd to allow ample space 
 for the free circulation of air, and for a small garden both 
 at the front and back of the house. 
 
 I will now endeavour to prove that the giving of free 
 land for houses is no injustice to existing ratepayers, 
 but that in fact the scheme is self-supporting. Taking 
 the acre of ground at the cost of £200, the interest 
 on this, at say 2| to 3 per cent., would be £6 per 
 annum. The rateable value of the twelve houses we will 
 take at only £10 per house, total ^^120. In most towns the 
 total amount of the rates is rather over than under 5s. in the 
 pound ; thus the rates on this property would amount to £30 
 per annum, showing 1 surplus of £24 on the rates, after 
 allowing for interest. Of course, I do not mean to say that 
 
166 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 the whole of the £24 would be profit. A very large sum out 
 of it would necessarily represent the increased expenditure of 
 the municipality incurred in consequence of the erection of 
 this property. It is clear, however, that there is considerable 
 income at once to be derived from the property, and I claim 
 that out of this income the loss of interest, together with 
 sinking fund for extinction of principal, could be met. No 
 city could possibly be ruined by the adoption of this policy. 
 The mimicipaHty, that is, the ratepayers, or citizens as a 
 body, are the real owners of all property within the city 
 boundaries. The so-called owner has in reality only a life 
 interest in the property. The demand ^or payment of rates 
 comes first of all, and must be satisfied before mortgagors 
 or owners receive their interest or rents. This being so, it 
 is clear that the adoption of this poUcy is nothing more than 
 appl3dng the ordinary rules of business to the management 
 of municipahties. What business man is there in Birkenhead 
 who would not willingly expend £200 on his property in order 
 to enable some one else to expend £2,400 in further improving 
 it ? Or, who would not willingly face an increase in his working 
 expenses of £6 in order to increase his gross profits by £30 ? 
 
 But some may urge that they fail to see how the value 
 of the city is to be afEected, or the city itself be made more 
 prosperous, merely by attracting people from the centre to 
 the outskirts. To this I would reply, that drawing the people 
 from the centre to the suburbs would not be the only efiect 
 of the adoption of the pohcy I have outHned. Such an en- 
 Ughtened policy, offering such facilities, would attract new- 
 comers to reside in our midst. But even if it were true that 
 the only effect were to draw from the centre to the suburbs, 
 I say that this would not in any way affect the truth of 
 the claim I have made as to the advantages this system offers. 
 It is a well-known fact that overcrowded and wretched 
 property, from which it is desirable to withdraw occupiers, 
 does not yield anything like its fair share to the rates, and that 
 such property is not rated on anjTthing like the basis of the 
 rents being paid by the occupiers. A family may pay 4s. 6d. 
 a week for the occupation of a single room in a tenement house, 
 but it would be extremely difiicult to assess such a house on 
 that basis, owing to the fluctuations of the occupancy. The 
 house in most cases is rented as a whole to one man, who 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WBLFAEE 167 
 
 farms it out to the various sub-tenants. The rates are fixed 
 upon the rental as a whole. 
 
 But there are other considerations than the mere balance 
 of revenue actually in sight. The whole trade of the borough 
 would be improved by the erection of these houses. Brick- 
 layers, stone-masons, joiners, plumbers, plasterers, painters, 
 etc., would find employment. And when the houses were 
 completed the whole of the shopkeepers of the city would 
 be benefited by the necessary expenditure for the main- 
 tenance of the occupiers. The amount of money required 
 to be invested in land would relatively be small, com- 
 pared to the benefits to be derived by the whole district. 
 The cost of the land should not exceed one-tenth of the 
 cost of the property erected upon it ; thus there would be 
 ample margin for security. The cost of making the roads on 
 the land would, as at present, be chargeable on the property 
 they served. But it mayjae urged that the mere giving of 
 the land would effect no reduction in rents, and that the 
 cottages built on free land would not necessarily be let at 
 such rentals as would be any inducement in attracting from 
 the centre to the suburbs. This is not so. Dear land is 
 the chief cause of high rents for cottage houses. The cheapen- 
 ing of the land will be the most powerful factor in reducing 
 cottage rentals. Let municipalities use reasonable care and 
 judgment in securing suitable positions for the erection of 
 working men's houses, and builders will not be slow to avail 
 themselves of the advantages offered. Competition will 
 prevent any excess in rents being demanded. The law of 
 supply and demand will govern the number of houses, and the 
 whole tendency wiU be in the right direction. Therefore, 
 seeing that although the land were given free, those who 
 received the land would have sunk on twelve houses at least 
 £2,400 per acre in building, and that this would improve 
 the whole trade of the borough, we may safely claim that 
 owners of the existing property would be more than com- 
 pensated by these advantages, and by the stimulus the adop- 
 tion of such a poUcy would give in drawing to the city an 
 increased population. 
 
 What is it that is making Birkenhead prosperous at 
 the present time ? We shall possibly be told that it is 
 the magnificent docks she possesses, or the manufactories 
 
168 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 that have been established in her midst ; but I venture 
 to assert that her real prosperity has spnmg from her 
 increase in population. It is true this population has been 
 attracted to Birkenhead by the emplos^nent to be obtained 
 at the docks, the manufactories, the shops, and elsewhere, 
 but this does hot affect the question that it is to the increase 
 in population that Birkenhead owes her prosperity ; therefore, 
 the adoption by Birkenhead of a poUcy which would still 
 further increase her population must still further increase 
 her prosperity. I know of no city in the United Kingdom 
 that has such opportunities as Birkenhead for the adoption 
 of such an enlightened policy as the one I have outlined. 
 The real wealth of Birkenhead is her inhabitants, and the 
 prosperity and capital which have been attracted to her. 
 Stimulate the increase of population. Offer inducements for 
 more capital to be spent in the erection of houses in the 
 borough, and you apply the soundest and most powerful 
 stimulus you could possibly apply for still increasing her 
 prosperity. In the case of Birkenhead, two special benefits 
 would accrue, namely, increased traffic on the ferries and 
 increased traffic on the electric trams yoii will soon have run- 
 ning. Of course, it would be wise, and necessary, to allow 
 on both of these special low rates for the convenience of 
 workers at certain hours of the day. But experience has 
 always shown that such low rates are reaUy more remunerative 
 than high ones. In addition, you have done a noble work 
 in lessening the overcrowding of the centre ; for as the better 
 class of workers are drawn away from the centre to the out- 
 side districts by the inducements you would be able to offer 
 in reduced rents, by facilities of transport by your electric 
 cars, so the overcrowding at the centre would cease. 
 
 I have occupied your time already too much on the 
 financial aspect of the question. I feel confident that you 
 will agree with me that if we were to confine ourselves solely 
 to the financial point of view, we should be taking a very 
 narrow one of our duty. Far greater than the financial 
 aspect is the improvement that such a poUcy would bring 
 about in the condition of the people. I gpeak from experience 
 when I say that nothing elevates and raises the man, his 
 vrife, and family, so much as placing them imder the most 
 favourable conditions with regard to their homes. This is 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 169 
 
 especially true with regard to the children who are growing 
 up. It is, in my opinion, simply ludicrous for us to spend 
 millions a year in educating the young, whilst at the same 
 time a very considerable proportion of them are compelled 
 to live in houses and under conditions which, as Lord Shaftes- 
 bury has pointed out, absolutely neutrahze all the benefits 
 to he derived from education. We hear it sometimes said 
 that the result of our free education is not everjrthing that 
 we expected, or that we were justified in looking for. May 
 not the cause be, not in our system of free education, not 
 in the people themselves, but the method in which the majority 
 of them are housed ? To raise the tone of the mind by edu- 
 cation, and to cultivate the intelligence by reading, then to 
 force both body and mind to live amidst squalor and under 
 the most wretched conditions, can only have one result — ^the 
 neutralizing of any good effects that would otherwise have 
 resulted from our well-intentioned but misdirected efforts. 
 Until we have dealt with this great question of the housing 
 of the people, evangelists, temperance reformers, social re- 
 formers may rest assured that they are simply attempting 
 to clean out an Augean stable, and that, despite all their 
 efforts, the state of those they are attempting to elevate 
 will not be better, but worse, as each year rolls on. 
 
 I must apologize for having occupied your attention for so 
 long a time, and taxed your patience in listening to this paper. 
 My excuse must be the importance of the subject. For, 
 beheve me, it Ues at the very root of the future prosperity 
 and happiness of our coimtry. Let us face this question 
 boldly. The money is a mere bagatelle, as compared with 
 the benefits that would accrue. We are the richest nation 
 in the world. We require fresh outlets for our capital. 
 Nothing that could possibly be suggested would give a 
 greater return to the nation than the one I have indicated. 
 
Ill 
 
 VISIT OF INTERNATIONAL HOUSING 
 CONFERENCE 
 
 Port Sunlight, August g, 1907. 
 [Lord Leverhulme welcomed the International Housing Con- 
 ference to Port Sunlight, gave the visitors every facility for 
 studying an object-lesson so valuable to them in their labours 
 for reform, and delivered the subjoined address.] 
 
 The cottage home is the unit of a nation, and therefore 
 the more we can raise the comfort and happiness of homC' 
 life, the more we shall raise the standard of efficiency for 
 the whole nation. In the earhest stages of man's civilization 
 and development, the struggle for supremacy was between 
 individuals, and the individual who excelled the most in the 
 possession of health and strength had the greatest probability 
 of long life and such happiness as the battle and the chase 
 gave to him. Next, the struggle for supremacy was between 
 towns, villages, and small communities ; but to-day the struggle 
 for supremacy is between nations, not so much on the battle- 
 field as in the field of manufactures and commerce. But 
 stiU to-day, as of old, that nation will be declared to be the 
 fittest to survive and enjoy the longest hfe and the utmost 
 possiWe happiness and comfort whose individual citizens 
 possess the greatest measure of health and physical fitness. 
 The strain of modem life is ever increasing, but this need 
 not necessarily tend to the deterioration of the race. Nay, 
 on the contrary, the very struggle for existence, as in the past, 
 will in the future, if proper attention be paid to healthy 
 home-life and environment, tend to produce the greater 
 efficiency of a healthier, stronger, and more virile race. Once 
 let a nation become careless and indifferent on the question 
 of the housing of her citizens, and the reasonable and proper 
 
 170 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 171 
 
 enjoyment by those citizens of healthy relaxation from toil 
 when strenuous work is done, and of the conditions favour- 
 able to healthy life, and that nation is bound to witness a 
 gradual deterioration of physique and vigour. All nations, 
 none more so than our own, have been far too long indifferent 
 to this great question of Housing Reform and all that it 
 means. Happily, all nations, and none more so than our 
 own, are now awakening to a due appreciation of the im- 
 portance of this matter. Proper housing conditions require 
 not only proper air space and good planning within the home, 
 but equally the provision of large open spaces and recreation 
 grounds outside the home. Statistics have proved, beyond 
 the shadow of doubt, that the more the homes of the people 
 are spread over the land in proportions not exceeding ten to 
 twelve houses to the acre, the lower the death-rate and the 
 higher the birth-rate become. Statistics equally prove that 
 where the homes of the people are packed like sardines in a 
 box, from fifty to eighty houses to the acre in the slum areas, 
 the death-rate is more than double the death-rate of those dis- 
 tricts where the houses only average ten to twelve to the acre. 
 Superior conditions for the cultivation of physical fitness have 
 been proved to affect young children most of all :' adults may 
 stand for a time conditions of overcrowding, but not so children. 
 Dr. Arkle, of Liverpool, read a most valuable paper at the 
 beginning of this year before the North of England Educa- 
 tional Conference held at Bradford. At the time of reading 
 this paper the Royal Commissions on National Degeneration 
 and the Underfeeding of School Children were holding their 
 sittings. Dr. Arkle, at the request of the Liverpool Educa- 
 tional Committee, had examined aU the children in various 
 grades of schools in Liverpool. The careful method he followed 
 ensured the absolute reliability of his information. Dr. Arkle 
 arrived at the following startling conclusions : — 
 
 (a) That the difference of physique between the children 
 in the Higher Grade Schools and the poorer Council 
 Schools has reached an alarming proportion. 
 
 (b) That the deterioration appears to grow greater as 
 Ufe progresses. 
 
 (c) That, medically, there is nothing to account for the 
 deterioration ; and 
 
172 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 (d) That the Industrial School figures show that by 
 care a^d attention this deterioration can be stopped, and 
 to some extent, at any rate, the leeway made good. 
 
 Dr. Arkle classified the schools into four classes — 
 
 Higher Grade Schools, where the sons of leading wealthy 
 citizens are educated. 
 
 Council Schools (a) : Type of the best Council School, 
 where the parents of the children are well-to-do and 
 the children have mostly comfortable homes. 
 
 Council Schools (b) : Type of school where the children are 
 mostly of the labouring classes. It was selected as a 
 type for the children of the labouring classes whose 
 parents have constant employment. 
 
 Council Schools (c), the last of the Council Schools, is a type 
 of the poorest class, where the parents of the children 
 belong almost entirely to the unemployed or casual 
 labour sections. 
 
 To this Hst we will add a fifth class, viz. — 
 
 Port Sunlight Schools, which may be taken as equal to 
 the type (b) of the Council Schools. The parents are mostly 
 of the labouring classes, in constant employment, but 
 with the difference that the houses in which the children 
 mostly live are built with ample air space, not more than 
 seven houses to the acre. 
 
 At seven years of age we find the average height and weight 
 of boys to be as follows : — 
 
 
 Height. 
 
 Weight 
 
 
 In. 
 
 Lb. 
 
 Higher Grade Schools . . 
 
 •• 47-4 
 
 49-3 
 
 Council Schools (a) 
 
 •• 45-3 
 
 44-1 
 
 (b) .. 
 
 .. 44-8 
 
 430 
 
 (c) .. 
 
 .. 44-0 
 
 43-0 
 
 Port Sunlight Schools. , 
 
 •• 457 
 
 .50-3 
 
 en years of age : — 
 
 
 
 Higher Grade Schools . . 
 
 •• 55-5 
 
 70-3 
 
 Coiuicil Schools («) . . 
 
 •• 53-1 
 
 6i'4 
 
 (b) .. 
 
 .. 51-8 
 
 59'o 
 
 (0) .. 
 
 .. 497 
 
 i55-5 
 
 Port Sunlight Schools . . 
 
 •• 52-4 
 
 L65-9 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 173 
 
 At fourteen years of age : — 
 
 Higher Grade Schools . . 
 Council Schools (a) 
 
 Height. 
 In. 
 
 .. 617 
 
 .. 58-2 
 
 Weight 
 In. 
 
 94-5 
 75-8 
 
 (6) .. 
 
 .. 56-2 
 
 75-9 
 
 {c) .. 
 Port Sunhght Schools . . 
 
 •• 55-2 
 . . 607 
 
 7I-I 
 1050 
 
 The measurements of Port Sunlight children were taken 
 by Dr. J. Mackenzie, M.B., Ch.B., Resident Medical Officer, 
 Port Sunlight, and he writes as follows : — 
 
 Messrs. Lever Brothers Limited. 
 
 I certify that I have taken the weight and height measure- 
 ments of all the children from five years of age and upwards 
 attending the Port Sunlight Schools. The results are given in 
 the accompanying tabulation (see Appendix, pp. 174 and 175). 
 
 The height measurements were taken with boots off, and the 
 weights in ordinary indoor clothing. 
 
 (Signed) J. Mackenzie, M.B., Ch.B. 
 
 Dr. Arkle comments, in comparing the boys in the Higher 
 Grade Schools and the type (c) Council Schools, that the 
 startling fact is disclosed that a boy of eleven in the Higher 
 Grade School is practically as tall and as heavy as a boy of 
 fourteen in th,e type (c) Council Schools. We may further 
 add to this that Garden City life at Port Sunlight discloses 
 the fact that the sons and daughters of our artisans and 
 labouring population of Port Sunlight attain superior height and 
 weight at equal ages than the statistics show in Council Schools 
 in Liverpool at which the children of parents in similar positions 
 are educated. I do not think we need be surprised at this — • 
 the development of the child must be affected by the food 
 it eats and by its environment. However that may be, the 
 figures relating to Port Simlight conclusively prove that, given 
 regularity and permanency of employment of the parents, 
 and consequently also of feeding and clothing of the children, 
 reasonable and proper housing conditions, plenty of surround- 
 ing land for healthy open-air recreation, provision of parks, 
 swimming baths, g37mnasia, football field, cricket field, clubs, 
 and all that makes for healthy outdoor life, and the children 
 of our artisans and labouring people become equal in physique 
 to those of the better classes. Unhappily, the statistics re- 
 lating to type (c) Council Schools equally clearly show that 
 
APPENDIX TO DR. 
 
 HEIGHT AND 
 
 School. 
 
 6 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 7i 
 years. 
 
 8 
 Years. 
 
 8} 
 Years. 
 
 9 
 Years. 
 
 Y^. 
 
 Elementary .. Port Sunlight 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 6-91 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 804 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 974 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 10-70 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 "'SI 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 050 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 i->9 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 2-67 
 
 Secondary . . Liverpool 
 
 ■ ■ 
 
 3 II'OO 
 
 3 ""40 
 
 4 1-83 
 
 4 2'6z 
 
 4 2-30 
 
 4 4-03 
 
 4 4-37 
 
 Council School " A " do. ♦ 
 
 .. 
 
 • ■ 
 
 3 9'33 
 
 3 10-70 
 
 3 tX-67 
 
 3 ir62 
 
 4 1-76 
 
 4 1-75 
 
 do. " B " do. 
 
 3 7'25 
 
 3 675 
 
 3 8'8o 
 
 3 8-r7 
 
 3 10-00 
 
 3 "•33 
 
 4 0-80 
 
 4 t-6l 
 
 do. " C " do. 
 
 .. 
 
 ■ ■ 
 
 3 8-00 
 
 3 xo-oo 
 
 3 8-37 
 
 3 9'20 
 
 3 ir-oo 
 
 4 o'oo 
 
 Industrial School do. 
 
 3 3'oo 
 
 
 3 9'25 
 
 •• 
 
 3 10-30 
 
 •• 
 
 3 10-80 
 
 
 Elementary . . Port Sunlight 
 
 Lb. 
 
 4+-l6 
 
 Lb. 
 
 46'54 
 
 Lb. 
 
 30-38 
 
 Lb. 
 51-24 
 
 Lb. 
 53-36 
 
 Lb. 
 54-86 
 
 Lb. 
 
 58-66 
 
 Lb. 
 56-61 
 
 Secondary . . Liverpool 
 
 .. 
 
 48-00 
 
 49'30 
 
 56-70 
 
 56-70 
 
 52-50 
 
 59-52 
 
 6r-40 
 
 Council School " A " do. 
 
 .. 
 
 • ■ 
 
 44'io 
 
 48-77 
 
 46-44 
 
 47-00 
 
 53-33 
 
 57-35 
 
 do. " B " do. 
 
 37'oo 
 
 36'50 
 
 43'oo 
 
 42'II . 
 
 45"64 
 
 47-20 
 
 50-85 
 
 53-16 
 
 do. " C " do. 
 
 .. 
 
 
 43-00 
 
 46-00 
 
 43-87 
 
 45-30 
 
 48-38 
 
 51-50 
 
 Industrial School do. 
 
 ,4i'oo 
 
 " 
 
 4«7S 
 
 •• 
 
 49"5o 
 
 •- 
 
 53-50 
 
 •• 
 
 HEIGHT AND 
 
 School. 
 
 6 
 Years. 
 
 6i 
 Years. 
 
 7 
 Years. 
 
 7} 
 Years. 
 
 8 
 Years. 
 
 8} 
 Years. 
 
 Y.^. 
 
 Y^. 
 
 Elementary . . Fort Sunlight 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 6-13 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 8-02 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 8-8r 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 9-6r 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 9"3i 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 0-09 
 
 Ft. In. 
 3 11-41 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 0-37 
 
 Council School " A " Liverpool 
 
 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 3 10-75 
 
 3 10-13 
 
 3 "-50 
 
 4 0-25 
 
 4 2-62 
 
 4 2-25 
 
 do. " B " do. . 
 
 .. 
 
 ,3 8-00 
 
 3 8-25 
 
 3 9-77 
 
 3 10-73 
 
 3 10-57 
 
 4 0-25 
 
 4 I'20 
 
 do. " C " do. 
 
 • • 
 
 
 3 9-12 
 
 3 8-75 
 
 3 8-87 
 
 3 9-50 
 
 3 rr-i6 
 
 4 0-00 
 
 Industrial School do. 
 
 •■ 
 
 
 3 7-70 
 
 
 3 6-23 
 
 
 3 8-25 
 
 " 
 
 Elementary . . Fort Sunlight 
 
 Lb. 
 44-88 
 
 Lb. 
 
 44-43 
 
 Lb. 
 47-36 
 
 Lb. 
 
 48-78 
 
 Lb. 
 
 49-98 
 
 Lb. 
 34-29 
 
 Lb. 
 56-01 
 
 Lb. 
 
 53-69 
 
 Council School " A " Liverpool 
 
 • • 
 
 • • 
 
 43-00 
 
 44-60 
 
 48-83 
 
 50-00 
 
 52-00 
 
 32-85 
 
 do. " B " do. 
 
 • • 
 
 45-30 
 
 41-10 
 
 43-00 
 
 45-90 
 
 47-30 
 
 49-90 
 
 52-50 
 
 do. "C" do. 
 
 •• 
 
 
 47-00 
 
 50-00 
 
 44-16 
 
 46-70 
 
 48-50 
 
 50-05 
 
 Industrial School do. 
 
 •• 
 
 
 40-00 
 
 
 38-30 
 
 •• 
 
 42-40 
 
 
MACKENZIE'S LETTER 
 WEIGHT OF BOYS. 
 
 10 
 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 11 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 12 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 yIIL. 
 
 14 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 15 
 
 Years. 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 s'4i 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 4 75 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 436 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 500 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 6'24 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 6-84 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 8-46 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 747 
 
 Ft. In. 
 5 075 
 
 Ft. In. 
 5 275 
 
 Ft. In. 
 5 2-50 
 
 4 6"4i 
 
 4 683 
 
 4 750 
 
 4 8-87 
 
 4 lO'OO 
 
 4 940 
 
 5 055 
 
 4 "-77 
 
 5 1-75 
 
 5 3-60 
 
 5 543 
 
 ♦ 330 
 
 4 370 
 
 4 Sii 
 
 4 6-25 
 
 4 690 
 
 4 750 
 
 4 9-05 
 
 4 8-62 
 
 4 zo-20 
 
 4 880 
 
 5 2-75 
 
 4 i7o 
 
 4 304 
 
 4 3'8o 
 
 4 453 
 
 4 5-60 
 
 4 6'34 
 
 4 5-90 
 
 4 7-23 
 
 4 8-25 
 
 
 4 ■72s 
 
 4 0-5° 
 
 4 075 
 
 4 175 
 
 4 2-30 
 
 4 3"6o 
 
 4 4-16 
 
 4 S-6o 
 
 4 6-55 
 
 4 7-25 
 
 
 
 4 I'lS 
 
 
 4 404 
 
 
 4 5-00 
 
 
 4 6-51 
 
 
 - ■• 
 
 
 
 Lb. 
 6226 
 
 Lb. 
 63'0l 
 
 Lb. 
 55-86 
 
 Lb. 
 66-79 
 
 Lb. 
 72-71 
 
 Lb. 
 74-22 
 
 Lb. 
 79-60 
 
 Lb. 
 73'72 
 
 Lb. 
 105-00 
 
 Lb. 
 108-59 
 
 Lb. 
 106-75 
 
 6603 
 
 6876 
 
 70-27 
 
 7475 
 
 77-05 
 
 74-00 
 
 88-25 
 
 85-72 
 
 94-50 
 
 ro8-9o 
 
 108-30 
 
 55'io 
 
 5643 
 
 61-45 
 
 62-80 
 
 66-60 
 
 69-00 
 
 7342 
 
 74-26 
 
 75-82 
 
 7280 
 
 96-30 
 
 53'oo 
 
 5660 
 
 59-05 
 
 60-79 
 
 63-92 
 
 67-50 
 
 68-75 
 
 68-50 
 
 75'87 
 
 
 65-00 
 
 
 54'37 
 
 5550 
 65-81 
 
 58-30 
 
 62-05 
 68-00 
 
 6373 
 
 69-33 
 73-00 
 
 70-63 
 
 71-14 
 
 :: 
 
 
 WEIGHT OF GIRLS. 
 
 10 
 Years. 
 
 roi 
 Years. 
 
 ir 
 Years. 
 
 ir} 
 Years. 
 
 12 
 
 Years. 
 
 I2i 
 
 Years. 
 
 13 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 14 
 Years. 
 
 Yeats. 
 
 yIL. 
 
 Ft. In.. 
 4 236 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 4-31 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 397 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 5-32 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 6-90 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 8-37 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 963 
 
 Ft. In. 
 4 ii'32 
 
 Ft. In. 
 5 0-25 
 
 Ft. In. 
 5 0-25 
 
 Ft. In. 
 
 4 3-25 
 
 4 2-75 
 
 4 5-00 
 
 4 4-75 
 
 4 7-25 
 
 4 9-00 
 
 4 8-30 
 
 4 10-75 
 
 5 0-50 
 
 5 1-25 
 
 5 0-25 
 
 4 1-76 
 
 4 3"35 
 
 4 4-12 
 
 4 4-25 
 
 4 5-70 
 
 4 6-14 
 
 4 7-30 
 
 4 8-87 
 
 4 5-70 
 
 4 10-00 
 
 
 4 0-17 
 
 4 0-30 
 
 4 l-o6 
 
 4 2-70 
 
 4 4-16 
 
 4 5-16 
 
 4 7-50 
 
 4 7-00 
 
 4 8-so 
 
 
 
 4 0-30 
 
 
 4 1-05 
 
 ■■ 
 
 -• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Lb. 
 
 59-85 
 
 Lb. 
 64-24 
 
 Lb. 
 62-34 
 
 Lb. 
 67-69 
 
 Lb. 
 73-19 
 
 Lb. 
 76-77 
 
 Lb. 
 80-23 
 
 Lb. 
 83-12 
 
 Lb. 
 78-00 
 
 Lb. 
 97-50 
 
 Lb. 
 
 57-50 
 
 55'46 
 
 61-38 
 
 60-70 
 
 71-31 
 
 77-30 
 
 7030 
 
 80-30 
 
 93-30 
 
 97-10 
 
 93-45 
 
 54-30 
 
 59-57 
 
 62-50 
 
 ei-20 
 
 67-07 
 
 6770 
 
 7316 
 
 75-80 
 
 74-57 
 
 84-00 
 
 
 52-75 
 
 53'2o 
 
 56-25 
 
 60-57 
 
 67-70 
 
 69-12 
 
 ' 7V30 
 
 74-00 
 
 82*00 
 
 ■ ■ 
 
 .. 
 
 51-30 
 
 
 60-60 
 
 
 •• 
 
 
 67-00 
 
 •• 
 
 
 
 • 
 
176 
 
 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 where these conditions do not prevail the effect is disastrous 
 to healthy development during childhood. 
 
 These statistics of Dr. Arkle, however, only reveal the 
 conditions produced by overcrowding at the commencement 
 of life. Dr. Arkle unfortunately has not been able to take 
 comparative statistics relating to the parents and adults in 
 the classes from whom the children in the various types of 
 schools spring. We can, however, obtain statistics from the 
 Registrar-General's Return for the United Kingdom, which 
 shows that the death-rate in England varies from about 9 per 
 thousand in suburban areas to about 35 per thousand in 
 congested slum areas, whilst the average death-rate in the 
 United Kingdom is about 16 per thousand. The birth-rate 
 also varies, the average for the United Kingdom being about 
 26 per thousand. 
 
 The statistics of death-rate and birth-rate for Port Sun- 
 light are as follows (figures now brought up to 1917) : — 
 
 Statement showing the Ratio of Births and Deaths per 
 1,000 OF Population at Port Sunlight. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Estimated 
 Population. 
 
 Deaths per i,aoo. 
 
 Biiths per i,ooa. 
 
 1900 .. 
 
 
 2.007 
 
 12-45 
 
 48-33 
 
 I9OI . 
 
 
 
 2.331 
 
 12-87 
 
 51-48 
 
 1902 . 
 
 
 
 2.484 
 
 7-24 
 
 39-45 
 
 1903 . 
 
 
 
 2,580 
 
 8'i4 
 
 52-71 
 
 1904 . 
 
 
 
 2,610 
 
 12-26 
 
 47.90 
 
 1905 . 
 
 
 
 2.700 
 
 5-55 
 
 42-70 
 
 1906 . 
 
 
 
 2,900 
 
 lO-OO 
 
 35-86 
 
 1907 . 
 
 
 
 2,981 
 
 8-05 
 
 31-36 
 
 1908 . 
 
 
 
 3,061 
 
 l2-08 
 
 33-50 
 
 1909 . 
 
 
 
 3.137 
 
 io-o8 
 
 28-17 
 
 I9IO . 
 
 
 
 3,198 
 
 9-30 
 
 26-20 
 
 I9II . 
 
 
 
 3.604 
 
 8-14 
 
 26-68 
 
 I9I2 . 
 
 
 
 3.662 
 
 7.46 
 
 22-93 
 
 I9I3 • 
 
 
 
 3,864 
 
 8-28 
 
 24-80 
 
 I9I4 . 
 
 
 
 4,100 
 
 8-04 
 
 19-75 
 
 I915 • 
 
 
 
 4.146 
 
 7-90 
 
 19-05 
 
 I916 . i 
 
 
 4,500 
 
 8-00 
 
 19-55 
 
 I917 . . 
 
 
 4,600 
 
 9-13 
 
 i6-73 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 177 
 
 In considering these figures of death-rate of Port SunUght 
 it is necessary to point out that the death-rate has repeatedly 
 been swelled, both with regard to the deaths of children and 
 of old people, by the fact that residents in Port SunUght 
 often invite their aged and infirm parents and the sick children 
 of their relatives to come and live with them in Port Sunlight. 
 This we know as a fact has often seriously swelled the death- 
 rate. As far as we can ascertain, after making due allowance 
 for the deaths in the village of non-residents, the death-rate 
 of the inhabitants of^Port Sunhght averages about 8 to 9 
 per thousand. 
 
 Another side of Garden City life is revealed by statistics 
 with reference to marriage and the size of famihes. The 
 following statistics relating to Port Sunlight have been drawn 
 up by Mr. Dimcan C. Fraser, the well-known actuary in 
 Liverpool. Mr. Fraser took for his calculation those em- 
 ployees of Lever Brothers who, at the end of 1905, had seen 
 ten years' service or over with the firm, their age and salary, 
 married, widower, or single, and number of children under 
 the age of seventeen years. Every employee of ten years' 
 service and over, of the age of twenty-five or over, was in- 
 cluded, from the highest ofiicial to the lowest labouring man. 
 On this clear basis Mr, Fraser divided the employees into 
 six grades : — 
 
 Lower grade workmen, earning on the average £67 a 
 year. 
 
 Higher grade workmen, earning on the average £99 a 
 year. 
 
 Lower grade clerks, with an average income of ;^i28 
 a year. 
 
 Higher grade clerks, being the higher section of the 
 clerical staff, heads of departments, and men in positions 
 of responsibiUty, the average earnings being ;^i9i a 
 year. 
 
 Lower grade business men who were actually engaged 
 in selling the products of the firm, the average income 
 being £346. 
 
 Higher grade business men who were directors, 
 managers, and controllers, witi salaries of over £1,000 a 
 year. 
 
 13 
 
178 
 
 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 The above six grades therefore fall into three well-marked 
 social divisions — ^working men, clerks, and business men — ^and 
 each division is subdivided into lower and higher grades. 
 
 The following table gives the percentage of married men 
 amongst these various grades : — 
 
 Lower grade workmen 
 
 Percent 
 . .. 78 
 
 Higher grade workmen 
 
 . .. 96 
 
 Lower grade clerks 
 
 .. 71 
 
 Higher grade clerks 
 
 .. 66 
 
 Lower grade business men . . 
 
 . .. 96 
 
 Higher grade business men . . 
 
 .. 92 
 
 The higher proportion of married men among the higher 
 grade of working men is very striking, every man over the 
 age of forty being married and having a wife living. 
 
 Mr. Fraser next compares the different grades with reference 
 to the number of children (the children who were Uving and 
 under the age of seventeen at the end of 1905 were classified 
 according to the ages and grades of their fathers), and the 
 average number of children per married man in each grade 
 was found to be as follows: — 
 
 Children under Seventeen per Married Man. 
 
 Ages of 
 Fathers. 
 
 Workman, 
 Lower 
 Grade. 
 
 Workman, 
 Higher 
 Grade. 
 
 Clerk, 
 Lower 
 Grade. 
 
 Clerk, 
 Higher 
 Grade. 
 
 Business 
 Man, 
 Lower 
 Grade. 
 
 Business 
 Han, 
 Higher 
 Grade. 
 
 25-29 
 30-34 
 
 35-39 
 40-44 
 
 45-49 
 50-54 
 55-59 
 60-69 
 
 I-O 
 2-0 
 2-9 
 2-6 
 
 3-1 
 
 2-9 
 
 0-4 
 
 1-7 
 
 2-7 
 
 3-5 
 4-1 
 
 2-9 
 2-9 
 I-O 
 
 0-4 
 
 I-O 
 
 1-7 
 
 2-0 
 
 I-O 
 2-0 
 
 1-5 
 
 2-0 
 
 6-0 
 
 I-O 
 
 I-O 
 1-7 
 1-2 
 2-2 
 I-O 
 
 1-7 
 
 2-5 
 2-5 
 
 1-6 
 2-2 
 
 From this table it will be seen that the higher grade of 
 working men take the lea«i in a most remarkable manner. 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 
 
 179 
 
 Mr. Fraser next calculated, taking the number, of children 
 per higher grade workman as the standard, the percentage 
 there actually was in the other grades, and the result was 
 shown to be as follows : — 
 
 Percentage of Children under Seatenteen per Married 
 Man compared with the Standard of Children of Higher 
 Grade Working Men. 
 
 Working men (higher grade) 
 
 Percent. 
 . lOO'O 
 
 (lower grade) 
 
 • 77-9 
 
 Clerks (higher grade) 
 
 . 6i-i 
 
 (lower grade) 
 
 . 42-6 
 
 Business men (higher grade) 
 
 . 62'4 
 
 „ (lower grade) 
 
 • • 47-5 
 
 Mr. Fraser next considers the question of children from 
 another point of view. The above table deals with the 
 nmnber of children per married man. Next Mr. Fraser 
 calculates the number of children per male employee in each 
 of the above grades, whether the employee be married or 
 single. This table, it will be noted, introduces as a further 
 factor in the calculation the percentage of men unmarried at 
 each grade. The result obtained in calculating the number 
 of children under seventeen per man to each grade, taking 
 the higher grade working men as the standard, was as 
 follows : — 
 
 Working men (higher grade) 
 „ (lower grade) 
 
 Business men (higher grade) 
 „ (lower grade) 
 
 Clerks (higher grade) 
 „ (lower grade) 
 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 
 . lOOO 
 
 
 . 65-2 
 
 
 • 58-3 
 
 
 . 46-8 
 
 
 • 45-3 
 
 
 . 33-0 
 
 Practically it will he seen that the male employees of all 
 the other grades, taken together, rise only half way to the 
 standard set by the higher grade working men. 
 
 Mr. Fraser next prepared statistics in which the children 
 are grouped in families, and the average number of children 
 under seventeen per family arrived at was as follows: — 
 
180 THE SIX-HOUK DAY 
 
 Working men (higher grade) • 
 
 Percent 
 
 . . 3-1 
 
 (lower grade) 
 
 2-1 
 
 Business men ^ligher grade) 
 
 . . 1-8 
 
 (lower grade) 
 
 . . 1-4 
 
 Clerks (higher grade) 
 
 2'0 
 
 „ (lower grade) . . 
 
 I'2 
 
 The preponderance of large families amongst the higher 
 grade working men is very striking, and it was also found 
 that more than half the childreh of the higher grade of working 
 men were in families of more than four children. So far 
 as Port Sunlight is concerned, it is clear that this is the grade 
 which provides the increase of population. If Port Sunlight 
 is representative of the general population of the United 
 Kingdom, then we can assume that the increase of population, 
 and in fact the great majority of the future population, will 
 be provided by the higher grade of working men, the most 
 intelligent and the fittest of their class, and we may take 
 the most optimistic view of the future. 
 
 But if Port Sunlight is not representative of the general 
 population of the United Kingdom, the figures are not the 
 less interesting, 'rtiey show that under favourable conditions, 
 as regards employment and housing and general environment, 
 such as exist at Port Sunlight, the most intelligent of the 
 working classes will provide their full share and even more 
 of the future population, and that Port Sunlight shows the 
 way to the rest of England. 
 
 Another fact disclosed by Mr. Eraser's statistics is that it 
 will be seen the marriage-rate varies in accordance with what 
 may be called the surplus income of the man. By the word 
 " surplus " income I wish to draw our thoughts away from 
 actual income. A manager in receipt of a few hundreds a 
 year, living in a certain style, may have little or no surplus 
 income. A clerk on £2 a week dressing in cloth has less 
 surplus income than a mechanic on 35s. per week. Bearing 
 this fact in mind, the figures clearly show that the marriage- 
 rate is higher among the better class artisans, which is the 
 class that enjoys, of all workers, the largest amoimt of surplus 
 income. A clerk stands at the lowest as far as surplus income 
 is concerned. This you will see affects both the marriage- 
 rate and birth-rate 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 181 
 
 I must apologize for occupying so much of your time with 
 these statistics, but they are essentially necessary in con- 
 sidering Garden City life and its effect upon the develop- 
 ment of the race. I am positive, from all the statistics avail- 
 able, that the most healthy conditions of the human race 
 are obtained where the home unit exists in a self-contained 
 house, with the living rooms on the ground floor and the bed- 
 rooms on the floor immediately over. All tenement dwellings, 
 flats, and such devices for crowding a maximum amount of 
 humanity in a minimum amount of ground space are de- 
 structive of healthy life, and whilst they may be endured 
 possibly by adults, are seriously and permanently injurious 
 to the growth and development of children. The building of 
 ten to twelve houses to the acre is the maximum that ought 
 to be allowed ; any excess beyond this ought to be strictly 
 prohibited by building by-laws, whilst the width of roadway 
 ought to be increased to a minimum of 45 feet. The neces- 
 sity for paving and macadamizing of the whole roadway and 
 flagging the whole of the footpath, kerbing and channelling 
 of the gutters, should be dispensed with in rural areas. A 
 strip down the centre roadway of 15 to 18 feet wide, properly 
 pitched and macadamized, for vehicular traffic, and strips 
 4 feet wide, flagged or gravelled, for footpaths down each side, 
 the remainder of the roadway and footpaths being finished in 
 grass, with, if possible, an avenue of trees on each side, will 
 be found to be the cheapest and best form of road construc- 
 tion. Houses should be built a minimimi of 15 feet from the 
 roadway, and 25 feet or more where practicable; every house 
 should have a space available in the rear for vegetable garden. 
 Open spaces for recreation should be laid out at frequent 
 and convenient centres. There is no difficulty in providing 
 these conditions. Even taking the area of London, I find 
 that these conditions could be enjoyed to-day if proper dis- 
 tribution of houses on the land within the area had been made. 
 The metropohtan area of London is 74,839 acres, with a popu- 
 lation of 4,536,541, which is at the rate of twelve houses to 
 the acre, each house containing five persons. The fact is, we 
 do our town planning after the mode of badly packed trunks. 
 We aU know that one's wardrobe badly packed in a trunk 
 is spoiled, and the trunk appears all too small for what it 
 has to hold. [But on our wardrobe being carefully folded, the 
 
182 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 same trunk holds all that is required, without damage, and 
 with greater convenience of access. Our by-laws already 
 limit the niunber of lodgers allowed in a lodging-house, and 
 there should be by-laws restricting the number of houses to 
 the acre. If this is done and a relaxation of the building 
 conditions as to the material to be used permits a greater 
 range of selection of buUding material, thus reducing the 
 heavy expense of building and of road-making to what b 
 absolutely reasonable and necessary, then not only wiU build- 
 ing become cheaper and road-making cheaper, but infinitely 
 superior in quaUty. Less elaboration in architectural effects 
 would be needed to make a beautiful city, town, or village 
 than under present conditions ; a few sprays of ivy and a 
 greensward in front of a house, a shrub here and there, and 
 the plainest and most economical cottage, architecturally, 
 becomes more beautiful than a more costly and elaborate 
 one built right on the edge of the footpath without any inter- 
 vening fringe of greensward. A home requires a greensward 
 and garden in front of it, just as much as a cup requires a 
 saucer or a hat the brim. Dust nuisance from passing traffic 
 would be reduced in all such homes, and the conditions of 
 living would become healthy and happy. 
 
 At Port Sunlight efforts have been made to carry out these 
 conditions, with what success you will be better able to judge 
 than ourselves. 
 
IV 
 STANDARDIZING WELFARE 
 
 Sheffield, September 24, 1917. 
 
 [The students of Sheffield University having expressed a desire 
 to know something more of the practical side of Welfare 
 Work than could ordinarily be learnt from speeches. Lord 
 Leverhulme wgs invited to address them. He congratulated 
 the University on possessing what he could well believe was 
 the finest metallurgical laboratory in the world and on having 
 provided the country with a Minister of Education. Under 
 Mr. Fisher's guidance, he hoped, our past errors would be 
 ■ obliterated by our future victories. He proceeded :] 
 
 I THINK the first fact that we must recognize is that, in 
 the coming days, the employer will not be considered to be 
 the sole arbiter of the conditions of employment, nor will the 
 employee'. The time is coming — and coming very rapidly — 
 when both employer and employee must be more subject 
 than they are to-day to control by the State. It is not 
 merely a question of the rights and duties of employer and 
 employee, but we know now that tke public, the consumer, 
 and, in fact, the well-being of the State and of the Empire, 
 have also to be considered. We have not yet developed 
 to the point that we can be trusted, any of us, to be unselfish 
 from the highest motives of enlightened self-interest. The 
 education and health and training in efficiency of the whole 
 nation depend upon the hours of labour and the conditions 
 of employment. ' 
 
 I know that there is a preconceived false idea in many 
 minds that welfare work in factories is largely a question 
 of canteens, model villages, free libraries, and so on ; but, 
 in my opinion, welfare work in factories is much more a ques- 
 tion of wages and hours, of ventilation in the factory, of 
 cubical air space, of heating and lighting and sanitation, 
 
 183 
 
184 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 than it is a question of any of the so-called welfare work of 
 canteens and so on. Every fact, circumstance, and condition 
 of employment affecting the workers engaged in a factory or 
 office— mentally, physically, or materially — ^must come within 
 its scope. ^ 
 
 Our modern problem in considering industrial develop- 
 ments is merely one of size. The metallurgical laboratory 
 you have shown to me this afternoon is probably many times 
 larger than the largest engineering works in Sheffield a century 
 and a half ago, and yet it is only an experimental and train- 
 ing college for students. A bigger development in indus- 
 triaUsm than that made in the last fifty years will be made 
 in the next fifty years ; and y^t the progress and development 
 made since, say i860, to the present time are probably 
 greater, in science and industriaUsm throughout the world, 
 than achieved in all the centuries preceding that time. Up 
 to now, the creation of our machinery with due suitability to 
 the work it had to perform has been the only item in a factory 
 that has received ftdl consideration. The men and women 
 operating the machines have been entirely forgotten and 
 neglscted. I need not enlarge on these points here; I 
 am speaking to those who have become aware of this out- 
 standing and appalling fact in the course of their study of 
 welfare work. It is quite sufficient merely to mention this 
 fact and to pass on, and I wiU, therefore, at once plunge into 
 a consideration of some methods of standardizing welfare 
 work in factories. 
 
 Before the employer approaches the consideration of wel- 
 fare work for employees, the first care of all must be the 
 factory buUding itself and its ventilation, Ughting, and sanita- 
 tion. Its position is much better in suburban or rural areas 
 than in the town itself. The factory buildings must be 
 well hghted and well ventilated. Canteens are a necessary part 
 of the equipment, but appHances intended to produce the 
 good health of the employees have not received in the past 
 sufficient attention, and they are entitled to the fullest con- 
 sideration. 
 
 Now that we have women workers doing the work of 
 men away on war service, the factory clothing has been 
 adapted to their new employment. Now, baths are an 
 essential in factories. Rest-fopms are an essei^ti?il as weU 9^ 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 185 
 
 clothing and other items ; but of the greatest inaportance of 
 all in these matters is the prevention of accidents — a move- 
 ment called " Safety First," which, I believe, originated 
 in the United States. But before I can explain a working 
 system with regard to the prevention of accidents, I would 
 like to explain to you a system of Works Committees, because 
 it is through the Works Committees that the scheme for the 
 prevention of accidents is carried on. 
 
 I am constantly being asked the question whether the 
 rank-and-file workers cannot sit on Boards of Directors and 
 engage in the highest policy of business management as 
 Directors. Now, may I put the problem to you thus : As 
 one who knew nothing at all about the business of soap- 
 making thirty years ago, I had to begin in a small way. Each 
 of our Directors has been a member of the staff, with one 
 solitary exception, and it was only as I and my colleagues 
 acquired knowledge and experience step by step that we 
 were qualified for the larger business and ever-increasing 
 business. That rule must apply throughout the whole of the 
 staff, and therefore we must begin with a system of Works 
 Committees. 
 
 Now, one system of Works Committees that I propose 
 to describe may be briefly defined as follows : It commences 
 with the formation of Divisional Works Committees ; these 
 Divisional Works Committees are subsidiary to a General 
 Works Council, which, in its turn, is subsidiary to the Works 
 Control Board, so you see there are three lines of committees 
 — ^Divisional Works Committees, General Works Council, 
 and Works Control Board. The constitution and duties 
 of the Divisional Committees are as follows : Each depart- 
 ment of the works appoints its own Divisional Committee, 
 consisting of ten members. That is, each department of 
 the works, remember ; and in the example I refer to there 
 are twenty of these Divisional Committees, which means a 
 total of 200 members. Of the ten members of each Divisional 
 Committee, five represent management and five represent 
 the staff, and the chairman is elected from the five members 
 of the management. The members of the staff, as well as 
 of the management, must be co-partners, which means that 
 they must have had at least four years' service with the firm. 
 They are flopiinated ?iTid elected by the employees of the 
 
186 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 department they represent. Employee representatives sit 
 for six months only and then retire, but are eligible for re- 
 election after twelve months. This system is to obtain 
 as wide an interest as possible. Where males and females 
 are employed, separate committees of females may, if desired, 
 be appointed. 
 
 The duties of Divisional Committees are : (a) Dealing 
 with suggestions made by the staff. These suggestions 
 cover a wide field : they relate to improvement in the con- 
 duct of the work, suggestions with regard to the safety and 
 health of the employees, and any matter about which a member 
 of the staff may desire to make a suggestion, {b) Suggestions 
 can be made for the betterment of the division, or the works 
 as a whole, (c) The third duty is to see to the observance 
 of the rules and regulations and to suppress waste and irregu- 
 larities, (rf) To inquire into all accidents, (e) To hear 
 appeals against dismissals — that is a very important matter ; 
 and (/) to make general recommendations on any subject. 
 Meetings may be held alternately in the Company's and in 
 the employees' own time ; therefore, you see, half the meet- 
 ings may be held in the Company's time, say morning or 
 afternoon, and half in the employees' time, in the evening. 
 No fees or payments attach to membership. 
 
 As I said before, there are twenty of these Divisional Com- 
 mittees. Of the duties mentioned, it is found that dealing 
 with and investigating suggestions and making sugges- 
 tions for betterment and prevention of accidents occupy the 
 largest portion of the time and attention of the Divisional 
 Committees. With regard to the first two. Suggestion Boxes 
 are installed in conspicuous and convenient places throughout 
 the works, containing necessary stationery forms and enve- 
 lopes. An employee wishing to make a suggestion does 
 so on the form provided for that purpose, signs his or her 
 name or not, as either may wish, places it in an envelope, 
 and puts it in the letter-box. The secretary of the Divisional 
 Committee, on receipt of the suggestion, enters it on the 
 register, gives a nmnber to it, and sends a receipt for it to 
 the suggestor. The Divisional Committee can, after dis- 
 cussion, recommend its adoption or rejection or modification, 
 but has no other power, and then it jpasses on to the General 
 Works Council, 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 187 
 
 With regard to accidents ; When an employee meets 
 with an accident, however trivial, he or she must immediately 
 report to the foreman or forewoman, who in turn reports 
 to the Divisional Manager, in order that a notice may be 
 sent to the Safety Inspector. It is the duty of the Divi- 
 sional Committee, after hearing evidence on the accident, 
 to record the cause of the accident. Arising out of the 
 inquiry, the Divisional Committee make recommendations 
 for prevention of similar future accidents by the installation 
 of sviggested safety appHances. There is no branch of wel- 
 fare work in factories that is so necessary and, in fact, so 
 essential to efficiency as the installation of a Safety First 
 Committee and a Safety First Inspector, and, in connection 
 therewith, a surgery or first-aid room. Accident prevention 
 pays. Prevention is not merely a question of guards. The 
 education of the employee on Unes of safety is most important. 
 The axiom of all of us must be that it is always better to 
 remove a source of danger than to set guards around it. 
 Guards are of great value, but they are not the only means 
 of protection. Careful and systematic education of the 
 employees in the principles of Safety First are of, at leaet, 
 equal importance. Now, there are Safety Museums in 
 France and in the United States ; we have none in the United 
 Kingdom. Our lack in this has been pointed out to the 
 Home Office. The Home Office does nothing beyond 
 expressing its blessing, but takes no action to grant the 
 blessing of a Safety Museum. Now, safety and prevention 
 of accident must not be merely a putting up of placards. 
 I could give you an instance of a suggestion from the 
 employees to show that mere notices in themselves are not 
 as important as the education and arousing the personal 
 interest of the staff. In the case of a machine operated by 
 women serious accidents were continually occurring, and 
 all attempts to adequately prevent them failed. A sugges- 
 tion of a safety appUance to be fixed to the machine was 
 made by one of the employees. It was so appHed,iand no 
 accident has since occurred. The time taken up by these 
 Divisional meetings is not large. 
 
 We have throughout the works a number of what are 
 called " Safety Bulletin Boards." These are placed at the 
 entrance to each factory building, and on these boards is 
 
188 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 exhibited a summary of the various safety notices, so that 
 the principal ones are at all times on view to the employee. 
 These occupy one-haJf of the board, and on the other half any 
 special notices for the day or week are exhibited from time to 
 time. When new notices are put up, a cut-out finger, printed, 
 is pointed to the notices and placed above them. Mottoes 
 are hung in various departments to get the various employees 
 interested in reading the notices, and new mottoes are con- 
 tinually gathered and added to the Ust. The most frequent 
 source of accidents is the neglect of employees to replace 
 the guards on machinery after cleaning or oiUng. To prevent 
 this there has been originated a system of small tablets, printed 
 in red, and so fixed as to come into view only when the guard 
 is removed, so that if the guard is not replaced this tablet 
 announces the fact to the operator. To superintend all 
 this finds full emplo3nnent for what is called a " Safety In- 
 spector," who devotes the whole of his time to the duties of 
 " Safety First." He makes a systematic inspection of guards 
 and sees that they are maintained in an efficient manner. 
 Now, I will give you the opinion of His Majesty's Chief 
 Inspector of Factories for the North-Western Division. In 
 reviewing the cases of accidents that came before him, he 
 suggests " the adoption of a scheme in force in a very large 
 works in his district which he thinks would do more to reduce 
 accidents than any Act of ParUament or an army of in- 
 spectors." He then proceeds to describe the scheme I have 
 just outUned to you — the Safety First scheme — ^but, of course, 
 without naming the firm or giving any clue for identification. 
 I will now give you some figures. I have got here a Safety 
 Inspector's Report for last August. It reads as follows : — 
 
 Since my appointment as Factory Safety Inspector of these 
 works the number of accidents has been reduced to almost a 
 minimum, and to achieve this end it was first of all necessary to 
 educate our employees to the knowledge that " Safety " was for 
 them. Safety Notices and Bulletins were freely exhibited, on 
 special Bulletin Boards throughout the factory, and at the com- 
 mencement of this campaign the employees wondered what was 
 meant by the steps taken. After accidents had occurred and 
 safety devices had been installed to prevent their recurrence, 
 they were quick to realize and appreciate the precautions taken 
 to eliminate accidents, however trivial. Our employees are now 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 189 
 
 almost as enthusiastic as myself» and from day to day I am in 
 receipt of suggestions as to the^ treatment of what they themselves 
 consider " danger zones." 
 
 It is evident to all that the number of accidents since the 
 inauguration of our campaign has been materially reduced, as 
 compared with the number reported during the corresponding 
 period of the year 1916. This, in face of the fact that a very 
 large proportion of our workpeople are new to our class of work, 
 consequent upon the dilution of male labour entailed by the 
 calling of our men to the Colours. Hundreds of women are now 
 engaged on work previously executed by these men, and 
 although working at abnormal pressure and under conditions, 
 which tend to an increased accident roll, I am happy to be able 
 to report a reduction in the number of reportable accidents of 
 64 per cent. During the first six months of 1916, 113 accidents 
 were reported to H.M. Inspector ; during the first six months of 
 1917 this number was reduced to 41, whilst the amount paid in 
 compensation showed a reduction of nearly ;fioo, and in loss of 
 wages to employees of £160. 
 
 Notices for our bulletin cases are changed weekly, with the 
 exception of those appearing in the left-hand portion of the case, 
 which are of a permanent nature. 
 
 In addition to these bulletins and permanent notices we have 
 also " Warning " Notices posted conspicuously throughout the 
 factory, such as — 
 
 " Crossing." 
 
 " Railway Track." 
 
 " Look Out For Trains." 
 
 " Transporters." 
 
 " Speed Limit," etc, 
 
 A copy of our " Safety Rules " is also posted at frequent intervals 
 throughout the works. 
 
 For a considerable time we had great difficulty in educating 
 our employees in the use of goggles and respirators. Notices 
 were therefore posted, and cases containing goggles and respirators 
 fixed in the various departments in which the use of these safety 
 devices was desirable, with the result that there is now no hesi- 
 tation whatever on the part of the employee in using these, or 
 in making appUcation for the renewal of those worn out. With 
 this enthusiasm on the part of our employees the efficiency of 
 these safety devices has been proved by the fact that there has 
 not been a single accident reported since their introduction. 
 
 The question of accident prevention is occupying much atten- 
 
190 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 tion, and I am sure that, considering the short time the campaign 
 has been in vogue, great and satisfactory results will be obtained, 
 both as regards accidents through " machinery in motion " and 
 accidents arising through other causes. 
 
 I would like to draw attention to some of our permanent notices 
 on machines, particularly to one relating to " machine running." 
 Many accidents have occurred owing to the machine-nunder being 
 called away from the machine and leaving it running, and to the 
 interference of other employees who had no knowledge of its 
 working. All machines worked by young people have a small 
 card of instructions fitted into a tin frame, and the operator, after 
 having been thoroughly instructed as to the machine's manipu- 
 lation and the use of Safety devices in connection therewith, 
 appends his or her signature to the card, which is then suspended 
 from the machine in a prominent position. In the event of 
 operators being moved from one machine tO another, the same 
 routine is again gone through. No operator who has occasion to 
 leave a machine now allows it to run during his or her absence, and 
 thus, through the notice under question, the risk of innumerable 
 accidents is avoided. Another notice, referring to the question of 
 men working on "shafting," is placed on the starting gear by 
 the oiler whose duty it is to attend to the oiling Of shaft bearings, 
 and the person responsible for the starting up of the machine 
 makes certain that all is clear before starting up. A warning 
 notice is attached to every electric motor throughout the factory. 
 In the past, many accidents have occurred in consequence of 
 workmen removing guards and neglecting to replace them. The 
 warning notices are now placed under each guard, and are not 
 visible while the guards are in position. Immediately, however, a 
 guard is removed, the notice is quite pronmnent, and reminds the 
 worker of the necessity of carefully replacing the guard before 
 starting the machine. We have not had a single accident from 
 this cause since the inauguration of these notices.* 
 
 Another innovation is our Waste Campaign. Anti-Waste 
 Bulletin Notices have been prepared and are placed in prominent 
 positions throughout the factory. Permanent notice boards are 
 fixed in all the main passages leading to the different departments, 
 whilst portable notice boards are placed in the workrooms, and 
 can be moved from one part of the room to the other, so that the 
 bulletins are always kept fresh in the minds of the workers. 
 
 Now, from the Divisional Committee all reports and recom- 
 mendations are passed on to the General Works Council. 
 The General Works Council I wish to describe to you is com- 
 * Foe statistics see next page. 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 
 
 191 
 
 The following Port Sunlight Accident Statistics for 1916 and 1917 illustrate 
 the results achieved by the "Safety First" Campaign which came into 
 operation in the middle of igi6. 
 
 Nature of Accidents. 
 
 Number of Accidents. 
 
 1916. 
 
 1917. 
 
 Slipping, stumbling, falling on floors 
 
 „ „ „ gangways ... 
 
 Trapped in Hand Stamping Machines 
 
 „ Machinery in motion, Winch and Crane, 
 Ropes and Slings, Belting, etc 
 
 Trapped in Wagon Buffers, etc 
 
 Tripping over Railway Metals 
 
 Self-inflicted through cutting, striking with ham- 
 mers, etc. 
 
 Falling of tools, fittings, materials, etc. 
 
 Scalds and burns from acids, steam, caustic 
 soda, etc. 
 
 Overcome by fumes 
 
 Slipping of tools, breaking of lifting gear, rope 
 lashings, etc 
 
 Strains and bruises from lifting, stacking, loading, 
 trucking, etc 
 
 [Many doubtful cases. See below.) 
 
 Giving way of roofing, tilting of staging, etc. 
 
 Splinters 
 
 Protruding nails, etc 
 
 Ironbound boxes, crushing, etc. 
 
 Chippings and filings in the eye 
 
 Other foreign bodies in the eye — as acids, soap, 
 dust, etc. 
 
 30 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 16 
 
 S 
 
 10 
 23 
 
 13 
 
 I 
 
 8 
 16 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 
 II 
 6 
 
 9. 
 2 
 
 3 
 S 
 
 18 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 4 
 2 
 
 2 
 15 
 
 152 
 
 49 
 
 68 
 
 33 
 
 DEGREE OF INJURY. 
 
 I9I6. 
 
 Fatal. 
 
 Severe. 
 
 Moder- 
 ately 
 Severe. 
 
 Slight. 
 
 Total 
 
 Accidents. 
 
 Per cent, 
 to Total 
 Employ. 
 
 Males 
 
 Females 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 146 
 48 
 
 152 
 49 
 
 f.^ 
 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 194 
 
 201 • 
 
 i 367 
 
 1917. 
 
 Males 
 
 Females 
 
 — 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 66 
 32 
 
 68 
 33 
 
 0*89 
 
 
 — 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 98 
 
 lOI 
 
 1-59 
 
192 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 posed of the chairmen of the various Divisional Committees 
 Its meetings are held monthly, and its chairman, in turn, is 
 the General Works Manager. Its chief functions are : (a) To 
 review recommendations from the Divisional Committees; 
 (6) to review accident recommendations from the Divisional 
 Committees ; (c) to consider questions of repairs and renewals 
 to the plant and buildings and to prepare estimates of the 
 cost of same ; {d) to discuss generally any matter which 
 members may bring forward ; and (e) other matters. Having 
 expressed its views on suggestions- and recommendations 
 and added recommendations of its own thereto, the General 
 Works Council passes on the various matters to the Works 
 Control Board. 
 
 The Works Control Board consists of the Managing Director, 
 who, as Director, has special charge of manufacture and 
 of the works, with the General Manager and with such of 
 the Divisional Managers as may be co-opted. The Control 
 Board has full power of adoption or rejection, but if the , 
 adoption entails capital expenditure over a very small and 
 Umited amount, the approval of the full Board of Directors 
 is required. The final decision having been obtained, in- 
 strtictions to management are given out on forms provided, 
 and the work is proceeded with. Awards to the suggestors 
 are made annually for suggestions made and adopted. 
 
 In addition to the above committees, there is a system of 
 conferences composed t)f the Head Management, managers, 
 heads of departments, foremen, and staff, for the purpose 
 of encouraging suggestions and establishing closer co-oper- 
 ation between the various departments. The General Con- 
 ference sits every four or six weeks, when matters of interest 
 affecting the industrial position generally, or the firm in 
 particular, are discussed. There has been also instituted a 
 system of periodic visits of the foremen and managers of 
 each department through the whole of the rest of the works. 
 Nothing that has been introduced has given better results 
 than that. Many of the foremen and managers only see 
 their own department, and in going around other depart- 
 ments they make suggestions to the managers of those 
 departments as to things they have found useful in their 
 own experience, and what they have done in their own 
 department in improvements, and they receive many sugges- 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 193 
 
 tions from the departments they are visiting. These visits 
 have been an unbounded success, just these little periodic 
 visits to the other departments by the foremen and managers. 
 
 The managers, heads of departments, and foremen have 
 formed a club called " The Progress' Club." This club has 
 a room and a special Ubrary of technical books and periodicals 
 for the use of its members. It meets once a month for 
 hearing papers read by the members, and discussion follows. 
 The Progress Club is a thoroughly live institution, and has 
 justified its existence and name. 
 
 Another institution which the employees have started 
 for themselves is the " Co-Partnership in War-time Com- 
 mittee." The staff were anxious to do what they could 
 during the war, and started this committee to consider on 
 what lines they could best work under war conditions. It 
 has been a thorough success, on hnes similar to the Progress 
 Club, but Co-Partners only are ehgible for membership. I 
 would like, if time had permitted, to say something on the 
 great question of Co-Partnership. I am positive it is a 
 binding and stimulating force throughout the whole organi- 
 zation of lousiness, and represents a very long step in advance 
 on the mere wages system alone. 
 
 Now, springing out of Co-Partnership, the firm I am taking 
 as an example have had a body of men who have started 
 themselves to work on their Co-Partnership motto, which 
 is, " Waste not, want not." I have brought specimens of 
 the notices of these, but I do not think it would serve any 
 useful purpose to attempt to exhibit them, as they would 
 not be seen, and, with your permission, I will not do so — 
 but these mottoes are very helpful, and they are inspired by 
 the Co-Partners themselves. Well, then, there are many 
 other institutions, such as Long Service Awards. These are 
 intended to encourage men to remain with the firm. The 
 staff have got their own Sick, Funeral, and Medical Aid 
 Society. There are an Employees' Benefit Fund, a Holiday 
 Club, and a Savings Bank, and, with regard to Savings 
 Banks, my own ideal, though I have never heard of 
 any firm who have put it into practice, is that the wages 
 of the rank-and-file worker ought to be paid to his credit 
 in a bank in just the same way that the salaries of the 
 managers are generally paid to their credit with their 
 
 U 
 
194 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 bankers. 1 believe the system of his going to a pay-ofi6ce 
 and waiting his turn and drawing his wages in cash and 
 slipping it into his pocket accounts for the excessive spend- 
 ing that takes place when wages are high. I believe that if 
 the employee's wages were paid into his bank to the credit 
 of his own private account, and he had to reverse the pro- 
 cess and go to the bank when he wanted money for himself 
 or for his wife, he would be inc^ned every week to leave a 
 little in the bank. I have mentioned this suggested method 
 of wage-paying to workers, and I find that more than half 
 were most favourably disposed to it. The only objection 
 I heard was from one man who said, " I like to see my wages 
 in my hand." 
 
 Well, now I come to the question of education. The firm 
 I am using as an example had for many years made it a con- 
 dition of employment that all young persons of eighteen years 
 of age and under, of both sexes, should attend the evening 
 classes for certain nights each week. That was found to 
 be a failure. Take the case of boys and girls of fourteen 
 years of age leaving school and commencing work. They 
 have been going to school at 9 a.m., they have had a quarter 
 of an hour break for play, have gone home at twel'^e noon, 
 going back again at 1.30 or 2 p.m., with another break during 
 the afternoon, have gone home at four o'clock. To take 
 them, at fourteen years of age, from such conditions and 
 plunge them into work in a factory or of&ce side by side with 
 adults, and after working them during the whole day to 
 expect these young boys and girls to attend evening classes, 
 never was likely to prove a success. They have not the 
 strength, and are tired out. They are not then in the mental 
 or bodily condition to receive education, and you will not 
 be surprised to hear the results were most unsatisfactory. 
 So this method has been discarded, and the firm have got 
 what they call a " Staff Training College." It was only 
 started experimentally this year. Young people under 
 eighteen in such departments as the firm are experimenting 
 with — and the firm are experimenting with as many as the 
 class-room accommodation will permit — take their education 
 in the firm's time ; they do not take it in the evening. It 
 is hoped in this way to give them a much better education. 
 The firm have a great many yplunteters from amongst their 
 
HOUSING AND SOCIAL WELFARE 196 
 
 own staff who are undertaking the teaching, all expenses 
 in connection therewith being paid by the firm. 
 
 Now I come, lastly, to what many people would place 
 first, and that is the provision of a model village. There 
 is much to be said in favour of such welfare work ; but my 
 own opinion is that the employer ought never to be in the 
 position of landlord to the employee ; still, if the employer 
 has to choose between being in the position of landlord and 
 the people being badly housed, then the lesser evil is for him 
 to build suitable houses and be landlord ; but it is not the 
 right relationship. There are various institutions spring up 
 in such a village. I would like to give you some statistics', 
 which I can readily do, as to the number of births and 
 deaths. The death-rate in the village in 1916 was 8 per 
 thousand, and the birth-rate I9"55 per thousand ; the highest 
 rate we had reached before the war for births was 5271 per 
 thousand in 1903. So that if one has to choose between 
 good homes built by the employer, with a high birth-rate 
 and a low death-rate, and the objection to the employer 
 being in the position of landlord, I think the lesser evil is 
 that he should be in the position of landlord. 
 
 Of all welfare work in factories, a proper apportionment 
 of the time is the one that will yield the best results. . 
 
 A six-hour working day would give all that we require 
 in production from our workers, so that we can pay to the 
 workers the same rate of pay for the reduced hours that they 
 receive for the longer hours : it would solve the education 
 question for the boy and girl on first leaving school ; it would 
 solve the question of physical training ; it wbuld solve the 
 question of military training, so that we could have a trained, 
 citizen army ; and it would solve the question of the outlook 
 on life of our workers. 
 
 It was never the Creator's intention to send us into this 
 world so many " hands " — He sent us with imagination. 
 He sent us with the love of the country. He sent us with 
 ideals and outlook, and these are simply stifled under our 
 present industrial system. 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 
 
YOURSELF IS MASTER 
 
 Bolton, December 7, 1917. 
 
 [The address reproduced below was delivered by Lord Leverhulme 
 at the Anniversary Meeting of the P.S.A. Brotherhood at 
 Maudsley Congregational Church, Bolton.] 
 
 When we have won the war we shall have an opportunity 
 that comes after most wars — a period of advancement in 
 the social life of the people. Are we going on at the close 
 of the war on the same lines, industrially, as we have been 
 travelling along for the last century or more before the war ? 
 True, we have progressed all the time — shorter hours, higher 
 wages, and, coupled with these two, cheaper cost of produc- 
 tion. Now, after the war we can make an enormous advance 
 forward, and it will depend on how we approach this subject 
 whether we are to be successful or not. 
 
 The lesson the Chairman read embodies the lines on which 
 aU progress is made. If Solomon had asked for money, 
 honours, enjoyment, instead of asking for wisdom, he would 
 have failed to attain them ; but because he asked for wisdom 
 and knowledge, then in receiving wisdom and knowledge 
 there followed, as a natural sequence, riches beyond anj^thing 
 the world had known before, and honour such as no king 
 after him would receive. 
 
 If we approach the six-hOur day from the point of view 
 of more wages and shorter hours, and see only that in it, 
 we shall assuredly fail. But if we approach it from the 
 point of view of giving opportunity for acquiring greater 
 knowledge, greater wisdom, doing our work in the world 
 better and more faithfully for our fellow-men, then we shall 
 achieve our end ; and not only shall we have a shorter work- 
 ing day, we shall have wages higher than we can dream of 
 
 199 
 
200 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 to-day, we shall have the cost of production of articles we 
 buy cheaper than we can dream of to-day, and, after all, 
 higher wages and higher cost of production must go together. 
 
 Increasing wages, as we see in these war-times, are a delu- 
 sion and a snare if they mean corresponding advances in the 
 cost of articles. Wages become merely nominal. Whether 
 we have a shilling an hour orv a sovereign an hour does not 
 count ; it is what the shilling or the sovereign will buy that 
 rules the axnount of comfort we shall have in our homes. 
 Therefore, we have to consider this six-hour day problem 
 from the point of view of increased production by machinery. 
 Machinery is bound to be the great factor in cheapening 
 products, increasing wages, reducing cost ; and if we can 
 so arrange and organize our industrial system that we can 
 work our machinery more and obtain a larger output from 
 it, then, certainly, we can reduce the hoiurs of labour, aiid 
 not only pay the same rate of wages for the shorter hours, 
 but pay higher wages for the shorter hours than we were 
 pa3dng for the longer ; but it all turns on the greater use 
 of machinery. 
 
 I remember a conversation I had with the late Sir Hiram 
 Maxim about ten years ago at a friend's house in London. 
 He always took great interest in aviation, and he was strug- 
 gUng with the problem, as he had previously struggled with 
 the problem of his machine gun, known as the Maxim gun, 
 and he said to me in his characteristic way : "In tr3dng 
 to solve this problem, we can do nothing with a baEoon sort 
 of machine- — one of the lighter-than-air t57pe. That will 
 not solve it. We shall require to fly, Uke the birds, with 
 a machine that is heavier than air." (In this he has been 
 proved to be right.) " We cannot do that until we can get 
 one horse-power for the weight of a chicken." That meant 
 100 horse-power for 300 lb. weight. I read in the paper 
 a fortnight ago that the King, when visiting a factory where 
 these machines were made, was shown an engine with 500 
 horse-power for 600 lb. weight. That is 2J horse-power 
 for the weight of a chicken, and so we have solved the problem. 
 We had to come to the practical conditions on which every- 
 thing depended, the generation of enormous mechanical power 
 with light weight, and then the problem was solved. ^ 
 
 We have to set our brains to solve the problem of the six- 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS Wl 
 
 hour day on the same lines — enormous power in machinery, 
 eaormousily pjrodiaotive power, enormously increased output 
 at reduced cost. 
 
 Yes, but some one says : "If you manufacture in all your 
 boot and shoe factories and your clothing factories and cotton 
 mills as much as the machinery can turn out by working 
 for two or three shifts of six hours a day, what will you do 
 with all the product ? You will only fill the warehouse ; 
 there will be no demand for these extra goods." Within 
 this last week I have seen it suggested in a paper that the 
 sup^sed difficulties of the absorption in industrial life of 
 five milHon men who will return from the Army at the end 
 of the war would be solved by reducing the output per man, 
 or cutting down the number of hours he would work so that 
 work might be found for other men. Let us see if that 
 su^estion would do any good in solving unemployment. 
 
 Who are the consumers in the United Kingdom ? I will 
 tell you who they are. Ninety per cent, of them are the 
 workers. Remember that ! The workers are not pro- 
 ducing goods to sell to some strange beings who Uve in the 
 planets and have nothing to do with the conditions under 
 which the goods are produced. Ninety per cent, of the 
 consumers of goods in the United Kingdom are the workers 
 themselves. The workers consume (to put this in the proper 
 way) go per cent, of the goods produced — of boots and shoes, 
 clothing, food, every commodity. Ninety per cent, is con- 
 sumed by the producers — don't lose sight of that great fact. 
 If you raise the price of the goods, the man who produces 
 them has himself got to pay that higher price, and if you 
 pay out with one hand the higher wages for the smaller 
 production at a higher price, then the higher wages are of 
 no value ; they buy no more goods than the lower wag«s 
 purchased before. If, on the other hand, you think you 
 will absorb these men by reduced output, cutting down 
 production to find work for the five milUon men, the 90 per 
 cent, of consumers will have to pay such fabulous prices 
 for their goods that purchasing will be out of their reach. 
 
 Perhaps you will say all this can be done by a system 
 of taxation of wealth — " Make the rich pay for this." Let 
 us see who are the rich, and who are getting the advantage 
 of the enormously increased demand for goods of all kinds 
 
202 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 at the present time. The basis of this proposd is that if 
 the wealth of the United Kingdom were confiscated, or con- 
 scripted, as some people prefer to call it, that course will 
 solve the difficulty ; that taking that wealth and conscript- 
 ing it and distributing it to everybody, or paying the cost 
 of the war with it, will put the matter fight. You can scarcely 
 take hold of some papers without finding that held as a basis 
 for a possible solution of the financial difiiculties at the end 
 of the war. Now. let us examine this proposal. We have 
 the income tax reports published ; and if we turn to those 
 for 1913-14, which is the test year before the war and 
 upon which excess profits tax is standardized, we find that 
 aU profits made above those of 1913-14 are subject to muni- 
 tions levy and excess profits tax. Take the profits in 
 trade. It is quite obvious we must eUminate entirely the 
 amount of money that is paid in salaries to managers, fore- 
 men, and so on, because even if we conscripted all the mills 
 and factories in Bolton and m the United Kingdom we should 
 still require managers, still require overlookers, foremen, 
 and so on, and we should have to pay them salaries, as we 
 do pay salaries now in Corporation and Government ofiices. 
 We must, therefore, eliminate aU salaries from conscription. 
 
 Then, as far as the capitalist is concerned in miUs and 
 factories, it is perfectly true we might, if we were so stupid, 
 conscript all the existing mills and factories, all the existing 
 cottages and houses, every form of wealth that is to-day 
 in existence. Of course, that is the limit to our power of 
 conscription. We cannot conscript the houses we will 
 buildjtwenty years from now, because they are not in exist- 
 ence, nor the mUls, because they are not in existence ; but, 
 if it were considered wise, and Parliament passed such a 
 law, we could conscript anj^thing that is in existence. But 
 the minute that we have conscripted all the mills in Bolton 
 they will begin to wear out, and not only would they wear 
 out by use, but they would wear out by better spinning and 
 weaving and manufacturing methods being discovered. We 
 are not going to stand still in the next twenty years. We 
 shall see as big advances and improvements in the next 
 twenty years as we have seen in the last twenty. Machinery 
 that was in existence in Bolton twenty years ago, as we know, 
 is getting not ■ only worn out but old-fashioned, and that 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 203 
 
 wiU be true in twenty years from now. Therefore, from 
 the minute capital is conscripted, we shall have to provide 
 some fund out of which we can rebuUd, repair, renew, and 
 reconstruct, for there is no scheme suggested under which 
 we can go to mechanics, engineers, carpenters, joiners, and 
 bricklayers and say they must build new mills and fill them 
 with machinery without receiving wages in the meantime. 
 And whether these payments for wages are in money, or 
 merely in paper which can be printed by a printing machine, 
 and is merely the token of the amount of work a man has 
 done, which he cem change into the commodities he requires, 
 or whatever the system might be, you would immediately 
 have to begin and pay out to the men who are building and 
 constructing ; and from that moment when you had con- 
 scripted all the wealth in existence, you would have to begin 
 to pay out, and these payments would have to be charged 
 to some fund or other. The money must be raised as a 
 loan. To raise this wages fund by direct taxation in the 
 year in which the rebuilding and refitting has beraa made 
 would lay an enormous burden upon all the existing workers 
 of the country, 90 per cent, of whom, remember, are consumers 
 — a burden they ought not to be called upon to bear. By 
 calling these loans capital and merely charging interest, as 
 we do in a waterworks or any scheme of construction, we 
 can defer the payment of that capital until we have the 
 income ; and out of that income we can pay interest and 
 sinking fynd and so gradually wipe out this expenditmre. 
 So, twenty years from now we shall be back in the same posi- 
 tion that we are in to-day, but we ought to be on this different 
 footing, that we should have Goverrmient ownership of miUs, 
 factories, workshops, houses, land, etc., and ofiiciaJs instead 
 of employers. Instead of what we call the master we shotild 
 have the Government ofiicial. If that would be better for 
 us, and give better results, by all means let us have it. 
 
 There is no earthly reason why the people of any country, 
 and less reason why the hard-headed, sensible people of Great 
 Britain, should work under any system other than the one 
 that will give them the best results, the greatest comfort 
 and happiness and enjoyment of life, and the capacity to 
 acquire all that is needed to make a full, complete and happy 
 life for the greatest number. Let us see what is meant by 
 
28* tHB 8IX-H0UB DAY 
 
 some texts you find iii' Hhe Bible on the subject of 
 masters. 
 
 St. Luke says, in chapter xvi. verse 13 : "No servant 
 can serve two masters.." 
 
 St. Matthew, in chapter xxiii. verse 10, sajre : " Neither 
 be ye called masters : for one is your Master, even Christ." 
 
 St. Paul, m Ephesiam, ebaptpr vi. verse 5, says: "Ser- 
 vants, be obedient to them that are your masters accordimg 
 to the' flesli, ■wiQi fear and trembling, in singleness of your 
 heart, as untOf Christ." 
 
 I make no claim to be able to expound Bible truths, but 
 I am convinced (rf this, that there is not a verse in the Bible 
 that has been written carelessly, thoughtlessly, or at hap- 
 hazard, and that if we cannot see thoroughly the meaaing, 
 that is our sboFt'Sightedness, not the error of the Bible. 
 When we come to read that no one can serve two masters, 
 and that we have to serve our masters in fear and trembling, 
 I think we must link them to the true master and employer, 
 ourselves as consiuner. I am confident St. Paul was not 
 a man who would ever go in fear and trembling of any other 
 man ; and I am certain he never intended a servant should be 
 in fear and trembMng of any other man, whatever position he 
 was in. St. Patd fcmght wild beasts, and faced every danger 
 and difficulty, and he never intended that any one should 
 work in fear and trembling of another man — never ! There- 
 fore, St. Paul was merdy cautioning all servants as to the 
 inevitable results of their own acts on themselves. Well, 
 he said that. The other verse says, " One is your Master, 
 even Christ, and ye are brethren." Have we not just agreed 
 that 90 per cent, of consumers are working men ? There- 
 fore, there are not two masters — ^the employer and the con- 
 smner— but only one master, who is the consumer; one 
 servant, who is also the consumer, and over and above all 
 there is Christ, 
 
 You will, perhaps, think I am a master and, perhaps, that 
 men who are working for the Company of which I am Chair- 
 man come under the description of servants. Think a little 
 more deeply for a moment. There is not a man in this room, 
 not one in this church, who has so hard a taskmaster over 
 him as the so-called masters have. So fer as this world is 
 concerned, the master of every employer of labour in Bolton 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 205 
 
 and ia the United Kingdom is the consumer. You can see 
 this every day. Articles go up in demand, and the enter- 
 prise that produces such articles is flourishing. Then the 
 consumer ceases to demand that article, takes to something 
 else — and the man who, as employer, was prosperous and 
 successful is reduced to the Bankruptcy Court, and is as 
 much discharged as the so-called servant. Take any em- 
 ployer's case, and imagine an article that is being made at 
 his works, and that the consumer ceases to demand ; it is 
 as much a dismissal of the employer as it is the dismissal 
 of the workman or servant. 
 
 There is not a master in the United Kingdom to-day who 
 has not a supreme master over him in the form of the con- 
 sumer. The so-called masters hava to consider the consumer 
 and consult the wishes of the consumer or their business 
 falls>away and they have no opportunity of employing any one. 
 Therefore, you cannot serve two .masters. You are your 
 own masters as consumers and must fear and tremble for 
 the result if you do not serve yourselves faithfully as con- 
 simiers. If you are to serve " ca' canny " as master, reduce 
 output as the way to make for prosperity— you can't so attain 
 success for yourselves as consumers. It is impossible. The 
 servants, as consumers, are the masters, and it is for the 
 consumers to say on what basis they will have an article 
 supplied. If the consumer can truthfully say, " It will 
 give me better and cheaper goods to have Government officials 
 going round looking after all factories," then let the workers 
 as consumers and the consumers as workers equitably arrange 
 for all the factories in the country to be 'pvrt on that system. 
 I say, " py all means." The consumer is the master, and 
 if he thinks that will give more and better commodities at 
 less money, give greater enjoyment to life, not only will it 
 not be possible to prevent such a course being taken on fair, 
 honest lines, but it would be wrojag to oppose it. But if 
 we are to get all enjoyments and wealth that life can 
 yield, we must first, just as did King Solomon, ask for 
 wisdom, because only as wisdom is granted us shall we 
 realize our aims. 
 
 Take the position of two men who are held up to public 
 odium before this country, especially the first of them, and 
 in the great country across the herri^g-'pond, the United 
 
206 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 States. Take Rockefeller and the Standard Oil Company, 
 and Carnegie. If any man has been held up to odium for 
 a long time it is Rockefeller, and, in a lesser degree, Carnegie 
 and other men. They were not bom capitalists ; they 
 began Ufe with nothing but ideas. Rockefeller's ideas were 
 these : He saw single oil wells, single pumping stations, single 
 refineries for single oil wells, and the oil had to be filled into 
 barrels and high freightage had to be paid on the railway 
 to the point of distribution. And this young fellow had 
 the idea that he could refine oil better and cheaper than that, 
 and organize pvimping stations much better than that. If 
 he had a group of oil wells and a central refinery to refine 
 for many wells, and if he could do away with casks and lay 
 pipes from the oil refineries to carry his mineral oil, as we 
 bring water to Bolton from Belmont, and save freightage, 
 and so on, he would have made a tremendous advance. Then 
 he had an idea that he could build tank steamers and convey 
 his mineral oil across the Atlantic to Liverpool without the 
 cost of barrels. 
 
 By putting all this into execution he made his fortune, 
 on the only basis that fortunes can be made, except gambling 
 fortunes — and it is rare that a man who makes a gambling 
 fortune dies a rich man, because gamblers are dealing with 
 something that is not adding to the value of the goods they 
 are handUng, and are depending upon their brains being 
 a Uttle smarter than the brains of other people ; and when 
 one man sets his bfains for smartness against the brains of 
 his fellow-men he always goes under. But when a man sets 
 his brain to see how he can serve his fellow-men better, he 
 becomes a rich man in proportion as he serves his fellow- 
 men. Rockefeller made a fortune on the only lines fortunes 
 can be made, by cheapening his product, and in time the 
 oil came to be reduced in price from one shilling per gallon, 
 when he commenced, to fourpence per gallon, as it was before 
 the war. In the process he made his fortune, and if he had 
 lowered his price still more it would have been no advantage 
 to the world, because he was already making the pace very 
 hot for other producers, and, indeed, it has been said against 
 him that he ruined many people in the process of lowering 
 prices. If he did ruin any one, he did so on the same lines 
 as we have all seen many men ruined in life, by their own 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 207 
 
 neglect and love of ease. When I was a wholesale grocer 
 in Bolton, I knew, when I saw a customer coming into his 
 shop in carpet slippers at eleven o'clock in the morning, what 
 to expect. It is always the same. Such men grumble 
 at some one who, they say, is ruining them. They never 
 think that their carpet slippers are the cause of their ruin. 
 If we carry ourselves back to the days of the first cab, the 
 men who carried the sedan chairs no doubt said they were 
 being ruined by the cab, and we have seen cabs ruined by taxi- 
 cabs. There has always been an absorption by other in- 
 dustries, and the consumer has always greatly and enor- 
 mously benefited, far in excess of either temporary incon- 
 venience or real hardship that may have been suffered by a 
 section. 
 
 Then take the case of Mr. Ford. As you know, he was 
 a farmer, but with some bent for mechanics. His mechanical 
 . ambitions got so strong with him that he told his wife he 
 would give up farming, go into Detroit, and see if he could 
 put an idea into effect for a motor that would deal with the 
 work on a farm. He gave up the farm and went to Detroit, 
 and engaged himself at a quarter or less of what he had been 
 making on the farm, and worked long hours to get to know 
 all about motors and electricity. After a while he was run- 
 ning a motor-car of his own amateur make about the streets. 
 His wife grumbled when she knew he was working in a shed 
 until three o'clock in the morning and had to be at his work 
 at six o'clock. But he won through. To-day we hear 
 criticisms that when he is making five millions sterling a 
 year he is making too much. It is said that twenty-five 
 million dollars for any man is too much. True, the people 
 who say that agree that he pays double the wages paid by 
 his competitors. He starts a boy from school at £i a day, 
 because he will not have any one at less than £x a day. 
 He sells his motors cheaper than they can be made by other 
 makers of motor-cars, and for their price Ford's cars are 
 wonderfully good cars. 
 
 You have seen that the master of all so-called masters 
 is ourselves as consumers. It is a fact that we are the 
 employers of our masters. It is the consumers' benefit that 
 must be considered, and only that ; and if there is any better 
 system than the present one we ought to have it. The 
 
208 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 world ought to have it. The present system is this : The 
 man has his Union, a necessary and important and successful 
 organization; the Union arranges the rate of pay for which 
 its members shall work, ajid the general tendency is, and 
 always must be, for increasing rates of pay. Therefore 
 the workers, the consimiers, say to the employers : " We 
 will only make those goods which we consume on the basis 
 that you pay the highest rate of wages we can get anywhere." 
 The workers are engaged on those terms, but when the workers 
 go to buy the goods they have been producing, every good, 
 careful, and thrifty housewife in Bolton says to the person 
 who is distributing the goods, " We will only buy the goods 
 that are made and sold the cheapest. We are not going 
 to buy goods from the manufacturer who charges the highest 
 prices, even if he pays the highest wages. We demand 
 the highest wages and we equally demand as our right to 
 spend those wages where we can buy the cheapest gocds." 
 
 This is the present economic position. On these lines 
 we ought to strive for a six-hour working day, because by 
 working our machinery for two or three shifts, and there- 
 fore a greater number of hours, we can undoubtedly produce 
 cheaper goods. And we ought to organize for a six-hour 
 working day, because the reports on the health of munition 
 workers show that after a certain length of time spent at 
 work the output decreases as soon as fatigue is present, and 
 that the output increases by the reduction of hours so long 
 as work can then be carried on without fatigue. We want 
 only 33^ per cent, increase to make it possible for each of 
 us to produce as much in six hours as in eight, and that 
 is less than the average scale which has been shown to 
 be possible. 
 
 With shorter hours we can have better education. From 
 better education springs the wisdom which was asked for 
 by Solomon, and our children and children's children can 
 receive, under a properly organized system of a six-hour 
 working day, as good an education as can be given to the 
 children of the master. 
 
 So you will see that in a few generations a great, healthy, 
 strong, and ambitious race of men would be produced who 
 could help to control the industries in which they worked, 
 but all this can only be realized by wisdom brought about 
 by education. On these lines, woi'kfng with wisdom, after 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 309 
 
 a generation or two, there could be a complete revolution 
 in our industries. We know that the consumers are the 
 masters, that wages must advance along with cheaper pro- 
 duction and increased purchasing power. All this can be done 
 with a six-hour working jday, which will give the worker 
 leisure for two hours a day to devote to education ; and by 
 working on these lines we can achieve a condition of pros- 
 perity in this country by increased wages, reduced cost of 
 production, and more leisure for enjojmient of all things 
 likely to add happiness to the workman as to the master. 
 On these Unes, keeping reduced cost of production steadily 
 in mind, we can have an England and an empire spreading 
 throughout the world, founded on lines that are so wi*e and 
 practical that poverty becomes unknown, unemployment is 
 never heard of, goods are produced in increasing volume 
 at lowest price, and happiness reigns supreme. 
 
 16 
 
II 
 FAST ASLEEP ON A GOLD MINE 
 
 Bolton, December 5, 1915. 
 
 [On revisiting Bolton and addressing, as on other occasions, the 
 Iraawdsley Street Congregational Church P.S.A. Brotherhood, 
 Lord Leverhulme recalled that he was born in the town, 
 and that his father, who settled there as a young man, was 
 a worshipper at the Mawdsley Street Church. He said :] 
 
 You are, perhaps, wondering why I chose the subject 
 
 for this address — " Fast asleep on a gold mine." You are 
 
 quite right if you say, " What does he know about gold 
 
 mines ? " Well, I don't know much about gold mines, 
 
 I must confess it. And yet I feel that there are men who 
 
 unconsciously are sitting on gold mines and are unaware 
 
 of the fact. 
 
 Some say all the great men died years ago. Don't believe 
 
 it. There's not a word of truth in it. There are finer young 
 
 men in England to-day than ever there were in the past. 
 
 We are not like potatoes, with the best of us underground 
 
 and only wurzels on the top. I believe each age produces 
 
 its right quantity of the very best. It is only that we should 
 
 take the right view and bring the best that is in us out. 
 
 Everything is possible to the young man. It is only for 
 
 himself to decide what course he wiU take. No, the danger 
 
 in good old England is that we are inclined to belittle the 
 
 young men, and the young women also. And the danger 
 
 to all young men and young women is that they think too 
 
 much of this belittling. Throw it aside, disregard it. You 
 
 know that lack of encouragement is the greatest stimulus 
 
 that a young man can have applied to him. You remember 
 
 the story of Lord Beaconsfield. When he first spoke in 
 
 the House of Commons they would not listen to him. But 
 
 210 
 
EDUOATIOJM AND BUBlNJfiBS 211 
 
 he was not discouraged because he was belittled. He told 
 them the day would come when they would have to listen 
 to him ; and it did come. After all, it is only a matter of 
 how we take these rebuffs. 
 
 Let me give you an illustration of what power we have 
 over ourselves. If we had a furnace in this building, and 
 two rods of iron and some brimstone, I could show you this 
 experiment. I could take one of the rods of iron and make 
 it white hot in the furnace, and if I then plunged it into the 
 brimstone, it would turn to slag and be useless. If I took 
 the other rod of iron and made it equally white hot, and then 
 put it on an anvil and struck it with a hammer, I could beat 
 it out, and then, if I made it hot again and plunged it in cold 
 water, I could harden and temper it and make it a piece of 
 iron that would do good service for any use iron can be put 
 to. Let us learn to despise those who would belittle us, 
 and learn to hate pity and sympathy and coddling. If 
 we want people to be praising us, sa5dng kind things of us, 
 it only enervates us. We are not a parcel of blind puppies, 
 wanting warm blankets to keep us from perishing, but men 
 and women every one of us. 
 
 You wiU remember the story of the Irishman who, every 
 now and then, used to take too much whisky ; and when 
 he had had too much whisky he thought he was going to 
 die. Abqut three o'clock in the morning he would wake 
 up certain he was going to die, and would send for the Catholic 
 priest. The priest got a little tired of this trapesing out 
 at three o'clock in the morning to a man who was only 
 imagining he was going to die, and decided he would not 
 go again. But when the call came again he said, " I had 
 better go, it may be something serious the matter." So 
 he put his Bible under his arm and off he went through the 
 rain at three o'clock in the morning, and when he got there 
 Pat said : " Oh, Father, I am going to die this time ! Look 
 at the rats crawling all over the bed, up the curtains, and 
 all over the walls ; I shaU never live till morning." " Why 
 did you send for me ? " said the priest. " It's not a priest 
 you want ; it's a fox-terrier." Believe me, any one who 
 wants sympathy and pity and to be coddled up is weakening 
 himself or herself. When we are determined to go our own 
 way, and beUeve that way to-be right, i^Js not sympathy 
 
212 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 and pity we want, it is a fox-terrier to shake us up. Oppor- 
 tunity will come to each one of us ; and don't let Fortune, 
 when she knocks at our door, find us asleep. We are every 
 one of us — ^myself, perhaps, the greatest sinner in this 
 respect of all — fast asleep on some gold mine or other and 
 don't know of it. 
 
 I remember my first visit to AustraUa in 1892, two years 
 before this P.S.A. was inaugurated. Whilst there I heard 
 of a wonderful gold mine — Mount Morgan. A farmer owned 
 the site for a farm at first. It was not very good land and 
 never had done much as a farm. One day a man came 
 along and thought he detected on the farm traces of gold, 
 so he went to the farmer and said, " This is not much of a 
 farm ; I will give you £600 for it." Well, £600 does not seem 
 much for a farm of over 100 acres, but in Australia you can 
 get land given to you free, and if you have enough money 
 to move your things you are all right. So the farmer said, 
 " All right, I sell." The fanner was farming to make money. 
 That was why he was in the business. That was his object 
 in farming ; and when he sold the farm he sold it because 
 he didn't think he could make money on it. He had not 
 found it easy to make money on it. The man who bought 
 it thought he saw gold, and it would be easy to make money 
 on it. With pick and shovel, the land being his own, he 
 digged down and found his ambitions confirmed, for the rocks 
 contained some gold. Another man came along and said 
 " Look here, I wiU give you £6,000 for it." Well, a profit 
 of £5,400 and only a week's work put in, he thought Jie would 
 have it ; so he said, " AU right." The man who paid £6,000 
 delved deeper still and found more gold ; and a syndicate 
 came along and said, " We wiU give you £60,000 for your 
 mine." Well, £60,000 is a lot of money, and he took it. 
 When I was there the mine had been fioated for £600,000, 
 and the £1 shares were £10 each, so it was worth six millions. 
 ^That farmer wanted money when he had it at his feet. 
 
 I will give you another instance. There is an island in 
 the Pacific that was the property of a firm in Sydney. It 
 was not much good to them ; only a few coco-nut trees that 
 would not yield much profit. Th€y sold it ; but before 
 they did, one of the captains of one of their small schooners 
 visiting the island had picked up a rock, and he brought 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSlNDsS 213 
 
 it home for some reason or other. When he got to Sydney 
 it was carried to the office, and the people at the office used 
 it to keep the office door open on warm days. One day a man 
 coming in from Sydney University nearly fell over the stone, 
 and picked it up and looked at it, and- said, " Where did you 
 get this from ? " They replied, " It came from Ocean Island, 
 in the Pacific, one of the islands we used to have." " Do 
 you know what it is ? " he asked. " No ; it is rock." " I 
 think it is phosphate. If you will allow me to take it, I will 
 analyse it." It proved to be the richest phosphate the 
 world had ever known, and the man who had sold the island 
 for a trifling few hundreds of pounds had in his possession 
 an island that contained some thirty or forty milUon tons 
 of phosphates, each ton worth £2. But he didn't know it ; 
 he was asleep on it. 
 
 There was a young fellow in America, brought up on a 
 farm with his father, but he didn't think much of farming, 
 so he went to a University. He was a clever, bright young 
 fellow, and he passed his examinations and was appointed 
 to one of the junior professorships at ^^3 a week. He 
 thought he had passed his old dad tremendously. He decided 
 to take up the study of mineral oil, the oil from which paraffin 
 and petrol are made, and he took it up. He became expert 
 in it, and because he had specialized on this subject the 
 University gave him a chair, specially dealing with mineral 
 oil, and he got £10 a week — 50 dollars a week. His father 
 died, and without going to look at the farm, he sold it. The 
 new man who came in looked up the stream. The old man, 
 to water his cattle, had had to put a plank across the stream 
 at the point where it came gushing out, to take off what 
 the old man called the " scum," because under the scimi the 
 water was clear and good. He put a plank to clear the 
 scum off. The new-comer found the scum was mineral 
 oU, the very thing that the young man who was bom on the 
 farm knew all about ; but he did not know there was mineral 
 oil gushing out of the earth on his father's farm. He had 
 been fast asleep when he was at the farm. He had never 
 gone up the stream to see where the cattle were watered ; 
 he had never seen the plank which took the scum off. That 
 farm and the oil became worth over twenty miUion pounds 
 sterUng. 
 
214 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 You will find that money is required for every good work 
 that is done in the world. I hear some one ask, " Can any 
 one, as a Christian, devote his mind to making money ? " I 
 say " Yes ! " " But surely not a rehgious, Christian young 
 man ? " I say again, " Yes ! " 
 
 Here comes in the confusion of thought. Money-making 
 and a good life are said not to be in accord ; the suggestion 
 is that you can take your choice of one or the other, but you 
 can't have both. That is a wrong impression about life, 
 responsible for the idea that the strong, virile young man 
 is not so religious as the weakling. The fact is that the 
 opposite is the truth. Religion is not a sickly sentimentality 
 or the practice of a maudUn mutual admiration society. Reli- 
 gion is not solemnity, but solemnity is stupidity. 
 
 A strong belief in God and the Bible, and the everlasting 
 struggle to live a better life, are the mark and sign of true 
 manhood. Without this belief and this eternal struggle 
 after the good, a man will be hindered and crippled in all he 
 undertakes. The weakling is the man who gives up the 
 struggle for good. All have sinned, but the unpardonable 
 sin of all is to give up the struggle for good. Do you think 
 any one believes the worse of Paul because in his youth he 
 ■<vas Saul ? Not a bit of it. He stands higher because of 
 the fact that he was once Saul, than if he had always been 
 Paul and never had the experience of Saul. Ridicule turns 
 the weakling, but cannot turn the strong. Ridicule has 
 been directed against those who attend P.S.A.'s, Sunday 
 schools, churches and chapels, and it is hard to stand against 
 it. In my opinion, it is easier to fight in the trenches against 
 the enemy than to stand the ridicule of friends at home. 
 Ridicule has been truly described as " The icy cold north 
 wind, endurance of which makes men into Vikings." 
 
 The fact is that the foundation of business success and 
 of Chrisitianity are the same, and that foundation is service 
 for others. In rendering service to others, money is the 
 most effective means of removing our Umitations. You 
 are, no doubt, sajdng and thinking you would have been 
 glad to have helped to make some life happier, but you had 
 not the money to do it. But let me say right here, you 
 must not think money is the only essential to doing good. 
 I have said nothing of the sort. I say money will relieve 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 215 
 
 your limitations, but you can do good without money : you 
 can do good in anything you set your heart to do, if you 
 are not limiting yourself by saying, "It is impossible for 
 me to do it — I have not the money." 
 
 I hear some say, " What chance has a man in Bolton of 
 finding a gold mine, or a phosphate mine, or an oil field ? " 
 None at all. But because of that it does not follow you 
 have not better chances and better opportunities than all 
 of these three add6d together. It is our duty — every one 
 of us — to make money, as much as it is our duty to worship 
 God and love our fellow-men. " What ! " you say; " is it 
 the duty of a Christian to make money ? " And I say " Yes." 
 You reply that the Bible says money is the root of all evil. 
 I read the Bible somewhat, and I have never found that 
 in the Bible yet. If I challenged you, you would, I have 
 no doubt, be able to turn up the page in your Bible, chapter 
 and verse, where you think you have read that money is the 
 root of all evil. But you will find what the Bible does say 
 is, " The love of money is the root of all evil." But there 
 is a great difference between the two. It means that making 
 money — holding on to it — Chugging it to our hearts, as we 
 would our God, is wrong, and is the root of all evil. Yes\; 
 but if making money is right, and you want to make money, 
 you will have to pay the price. That is necessary in order 
 to get money. 
 
 We know that everything in this world is said to have 
 its price, and, believe me, the price that you have to pay for 
 jnoney-making is within the reach of every boy or man in 
 this room. It is not outside the reach of ^any one of us. It 
 would be grossly monstrous and unfair, and I would not 
 myself believe in a Deity who could treat His children so 
 unjustly and unfairly as to make money-making possible 
 to some and impossible to others. It is within the reach 
 
 -of every one of us, it is a gold mine on which we are every 
 one asleep — but we have to pay the price, which is hard work 
 and self-sacrifice. I know this sounds an anti-climax ; 
 but, beUeve me, in whatever form you loolf at money-making 
 you will have to make a great deal of self-denial — give up a 
 great deal and sacrifice indulgences. But there is nothing 
 in life worth having to be got at any cheaper price, and we 
 
 can all pay it. Think of tljat. There is money to be got 
 
216 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 at a price that is well within the reach of every one of us. 
 Some of us in this chapel may never have a chance to fight 
 for our country. We are past the fighting age, maybe, 
 or medically unfit ; others may be unable to go for other 
 reasons. Some women who attend this church may never 
 have the chance to be a Florence Nightingale or a Miss Cavell, 
 but all of us can make money, much or little, and do some 
 good with that money. 
 
 I heard recently of a noble act, only this last summer, 
 in connection with the Red Cross Society, Two young 
 ladies in London, daughters of wealthy parents, decided that 
 for their summer holiday they would go into Wales. They 
 were amateur artists. They had no need to paint, but they 
 decided they would paint pictures of Welsh scenery, and 
 then they would put their work up for sale for the benefit 
 of the Red Cross Society. In a letter I received last week 
 I heard they had jointly made over ;f5oo for the funds of 
 the Red Cross Society by the sale of their pictures. 'They 
 sacrificed their pleasures, they sacrificed their indulgences in 
 many ways and worked hard ; and, as a result, they got this 
 money, which will help towards the care of some wounded 
 soldiers, and do such an amount of good that it could not 
 possibly be the root of evil. 
 
 But I think some of you say, " We never get the chance." 
 I have heard that said by so many — ^by school teachers. 
 " What chance has a school teacher of making money ? " 
 Do you know, one of the richest dry-goods store men in America, 
 who died a multimillionaire, even in English terms, let alone 
 dollars, was a school teacher when he began life ; and his 
 first venture in trade was to buy i dollar 50 cents worth of 
 goods, and he lost 87I cents in selling it. He determined 
 to make another effort, but he did not buy on his own judgment. 
 He went from door to door and inquired what people wanted. 
 Then he set to work to buy articles so as to sell at a profit. 
 He considered pubUc wants in order to make money ; in 
 other words, service for others, for that was what it amounted 
 to. I have heard shopkeepers say they cannot make money. 
 I would like to ask any such, " Have you ever studied what 
 your customers want, or taken a kindly, fatherly interest 
 in them — ^inquired after them if they are ill, or tried to help 
 them in any way ? Have you made yourself indispensable 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 217 
 
 to them ? " If you have not, you cannot make money out 
 of them. You only make money out of people when you 
 have made yourself indispensable to them. 
 
 I hear a shop assistant ask what chance he has of making 
 money. There are scores of the wealthy men in America 
 and in Europe to-day who started Ufe as shop assistants, 
 and who would answer the same as I, that the basis of their 
 life was service to others. They made themselves indis- 
 pensable to their employers. That was the stepping-stone 
 to their wealth. Mechanics — ^what chance has a mechanic ? 
 Ford was a mechanic only a few years ago, but he has rendered 
 a service to mankind in producing a cheap and, at the price, 
 a good car. He rendered a distinct service to the whole 
 civilized world, and the world poured its money on to him. 
 It is said he makes five millions sterling a year. He has 
 earned it by rendering service to the people. Of&ce-boys 
 — every rich man in America was an office-boy, from Carnegie 
 downwards. No, let me say right here, at once, our jobs 
 are aU right ; there is no fault with the job. We ought 
 to remember that man himself has always been the best part 
 of the opportunity. The secret of success is no secret at all. 
 Win a man pay the price of success ? That is the point. 
 That is all there is in it. There is only one certainty — ^hard 
 work and self-sacrifice and service for others. It must be 
 hard and unflagging, persistent work ; the self-sacrifice and 
 surrender of indulgences. 
 
 Hard work and self-sacrifice must be so practised as to 
 become habits. Some think hard work may kiU a man. 
 It never did so in this world. It is a good habit, is hard work, 
 and it is bad habits that kill. The basis of all business 
 success is hard work combined with service. It is not suffi- 
 cient to say, when we are serving a customer, or whatever 
 we are doing, " That will do." That is not the question. 
 The question is, " Is that right ? " And only when we aspire 
 to that, determined that whatever we are supplying shall 
 be the right article supplied in the right way, shall we succeed. 
 
 How many young men there are who beheve that if they 
 are punctual in attendance at the shop, the factory, or the 
 office ; if they do their work fairly well, so as to escape censure, 
 keep honest and respectable, they have paid the cost price 
 of success. There are millions who are willing to pay this 
 
218 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 price, and bidding this price every day. But the hammer 
 [lever comes down to one of these bids. Success is never 
 knocked down to that sort of bidder. They say they do 
 everything they are told to do, and ask what more they can 
 io. To occupy the position we are in counts for nothing, 
 success alone can be found in the way in which we fill the 
 position. 
 
 Yes, but some say, "There is no advancement for me; 
 ny employer does not appreciate me." What a false idea ! 
 What does it matter about your employer at all ? Never 
 nind your employer. Do more than you are obliged to do, 
 ind better, and be independent of your employer. If he 
 vill not appreciate you — and there are employers who can 
 36 as fast asleep on the gold mine of a good assistant as on 
 iny other kind of gold mine — some other employer will, 
 klake yourself indispensable to your employer, and be inde- 
 )endent of him, and then you will be wanted, either by him 
 )r by a better man. But only then wili you be wanted, 
 md only when you are wanted can you make money. What- 
 iver your job may be makes not the slightest difference. 
 ■ t is our business, each of us, to make ourselves indispensable. 
 That is the gold mine. 
 
 Yes, and some say, " I am short of capital. I could do 
 lU sorts of things if I had capital." Don't believe a word 
 )f it. Who are the men in the big world beyond who have 
 ;apital ? They are the poor, penniless boys of forty or 
 ifty years ago. Now, having made yourself indispensable, 
 ry to find out the wants that are not yet filled, and don't 
 )e afraid of competition. Believe me, it is only by finding 
 >ut these wants that we can succeed. 
 
 Don't be afraid of competition, for there is one great rule 
 n this universe — the law of resistance. We are apt to think 
 ve would do very much better if there were no resistance, 
 t is not true. Remember that none of us could walk if 
 he ground did not resist the tread of our feet ; we could 
 lot bicycle if there were no resistance to the muscles of the 
 eg in pedalUng the bicycle ; we could not fly in a flying machine 
 [ the air did not resist the spread of the wings of the 
 aachine ; the ship that sails on the water only sails to the 
 xtent of the force of the wind it is able to resist ; the steamer 
 nly progresses through the ocean because the water resists 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 319 
 
 the propeller or paddle ; we can only row in a boat 
 because the water resists the stroke of the oar. If the leaves 
 of the trees and of the plants did not resist the rays of the 
 sun, there would be no flowers ; if the drum of the ear did 
 not resist the sound-waves there would be no hearing ; if 
 the eye did not resist the rays of light there would be no 
 seeing. I could go on repeating the value of resistance 
 ad infinitum. Do not think competition, then, is hurtful ; 
 without competition we cannot succeed. There is no growth, 
 no Hfe, no progress, without resistance — merely stagnation. 
 It is the struggle with resistance that makes a man 
 strong, virile, and successful. A life without resistance 
 is a life of ease — ignoble and leading to poverty and rags. 
 If we take the right view, fighting with resistance can 
 only help us. Resistance is good and brings opportunity ; 
 resistance is hfe. But if the forces of resistance overcome 
 our strength, they can only do it momentarily. The struggle 
 against them increases our strength, and by that struggle 
 we so increase until, finally, we can overcome resistance 
 and succeed. The worst about our failure is not the failure 
 itself, but the oft-time effect of failure on ourselves ; the 
 important thing is never to give up, but to keep on with 
 our ideal aim persistently and perseveringly. 
 
 Is success worth the price ? That is for each man to 
 decide for himself ; and what, after all, is the final achieve- 
 ment ? — ^happiness. We are all in this world for happi- 
 ness ; our life was intended by our Creator to be one long 
 span of happiness. AU this effort, if it brings us happiness, 
 has put us severally on a gold mine that will give us riches 
 that we never dreamt of. John Bright said, " Happiness 
 is a congenial occupation, with a sense of progress." There 
 is a world of truth in that. I have always thought, also, 
 this, the description of the happiest day in his hfe, given by 
 a distinguished man, is the finest picture of happiness you 
 could conjure up. He said, " When I took my bride home 
 to the house I had furnished, and taking her by the hand, 
 said to her, ' Darling, every piece of furniture in this house 
 I have worked hard to buy, and it has been bought with 
 my savings, the result of my work, darling ; it is here, and 
 in future it is ours, it is yours and mine, and we join and 
 share together in it ' " — that, he said, was the happiest 
 
220 • THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 day of his life. Why ? Because that Weis the nucleus 
 of the home he had worked and struggled for. The man 
 who has made and saved money and can say this, and has 
 won the love of a woman worthy of such a home and of such 
 a man, has found a gold mine which will 3deld money and 
 happiness beyond the dreams of the wildest imagination. 
 Such a home is the living temple of the soul, in which nothing 
 vile or unworthy can endure ; and out of such a home come 
 Opportunities for good and service to others, which is the 
 purest metal of the richest gold mine the world has 
 ever seen. 
 
Ill 
 VICTIMS OF EDUCATION 
 
 Liverpool, October 29, 1917. 
 
 [Whilst regarding education as the root and basis of all national 
 progress, Lord Leverhulme is a severe critic of the past and 
 present errors and misdirections of the pubUc education 
 system of this country. It was with these that his address 
 to the Liverpool Literary and Philosophical Society was 
 mainly concerned.] 
 
 We are spending forty millions to-day sterling in this country 
 on education, out of the public purse, depleted already, and 
 with so many demands now coming upon it ; and I am not 
 sure that we are quite satisfied that we are getting what 
 we are entitled to get from this expenditure. We have no 
 clear aim and objective in our educational system ; we are 
 not preparing our boys and girls for their after-vocations 
 in life ; and firms in Liverpool, I am sure, would bear me 
 out in saying that boys and girls who come fresh from the 
 Board School are, practically, almost raw material, and 
 have to be made fit for their situations almost as much as 
 was the case forty years ago or more, before we had the present 
 elaborate educational system. Now, what do we mean by 
 an uneducated boy or girl, or man or woman ? I believe 
 that reaUy what we mean when we make use of this phrase 
 is simply a person without book knowledge. The boys and 
 girls before 1870 were educated for their business, but they 
 had no book education. Now, the so-called uneducated 
 person may be superior in knowledge of the rules of life, 
 superior in knowledge of the moral laws, superior in common 
 sense, but if that person is not book-learned, he will be called 
 uneducated. Are the boys and girls, after nine years in 
 Council and Board Schools, going to be worthy of the descrip- 
 
222 TfiB SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 tion " educated " V What smattering of knowledge they 
 will have gathered will be of little or no help to them, except 
 to enable them to read a daily paper and a " penny dreadful." 
 You know what Herbert Spencer said of our Education 
 Act after it was passed. He said it was " a measure for 
 increasing stupidity," and one of our great statesmen of 
 the nineteenth century. Lord Melbourne, said that " cir- 
 cumstances were the best education," and that all great 
 men had been educated by circumstances. And a cynic 
 has said that the key to all our difficulties in the United 
 Kingdom (and this best explains our difficulties in education) 
 is " imbecility." 
 
 Now, our special imbecihty in education affairs has been that 
 we have left ourselves too much in the hands of scholastics. 
 The scholastic builds his edifice on book learning. With 
 these men the belief is estabUshed that mankind knows 
 nothing except what it has learned out of books. In any 
 case, they act as if they beHeved that ; whilst most of our 
 best education — the best education of every one of us in 
 this room — ^we never get out of books at all, but in the daily 
 affairs of life. An unread ploughboy or mechanic can put 
 many scholars to the blush with his knowledge of Ufe and 
 of many matters that are of vital interest to the well-being 
 of the individual. We know that many bookworms are 
 veritable ignoramuses, and many so-called uneducated persons 
 — uneducated, that is, in book learning — ^may be veritable 
 encyclopaedias in all- the affairs of life. We worship book 
 learning to the summit of adulation. Yet what can it help 
 us ? Except in painting and sculpture, everythiug practical 
 in the way of handicrafts is despised. We despise a boy 
 who, at fourteen, is earning his own pocket money ; we 
 admire a boy who, at fourteen, is writing Greek pla5rs. And 
 as to our daughters — the daughter who is earning her own 
 Uving is, to-day, almost ccqjsidered scarcely an eUgible future 
 wife ; and whilst our sons who have taken a University 
 degree and have adopted, say, the medical profession or 
 the legal profession would be welcomed in every house as 
 eligible and desirable future husbands, the girl who has 
 adopted a profession, however high the University degree 
 may be that she has taken, does not receive invitations to 
 house parties, and does not receive invitations to receptions. 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 223 
 
 " At Homes," and garden parties, because she is not quite 
 in the " Class." Yet every man or woman who has attained 
 to any eminence has supported himself, or herself, more or 
 less, according to his or her necessity, from very early in Ufe. 
 
 Our whole system of education is carried on, as I said at 
 the beginning, without aim or objective. In fact, "the Edu- 
 cation Act was passed without any scheme of a national course 
 of training to fit the scholars for their after business-life being 
 prepared, and, as far as I know, no proper and complete 
 system of national education on those lines is even in existence 
 to-day. 
 
 The cry has been for a ladder to reach from the Board 
 School to the University; but there has been no asking of 
 questions as to what vocations in life are in want of men 
 or women who have had a University education. Why, 
 to-day, there is a greater demand for craftsmen than for 
 University men ; there is more demand for girls as tiooks 
 and housemaids than as graduates from Newnham. A 
 chauffeur or a skilled mechanic will often command a higher 
 salary, with more constant employment, than an M.A. or 
 B.A., or a Senior Wrangler who is merely a book-educated 
 man. We owe more to the craftsman than to the mere 
 scholar or bookworm, yet we still act as if books alone were 
 the only training for the intellect. We educate our students 
 to depend on books, and as practical units in after-life they 
 are in less demand than the chauffeur or the artisan. Do 
 not think for a moment that I am ridiculing book learning. 
 I would regret sincerely if you interpreted that as what I 
 have said ; but I am pointing out, and desire strongly to 
 call attention to, our failures through having r,o definite 
 system of training for vocation in life, so that we may, as^ 
 far as possible, get better results in the future from our edu- 
 cational system. 
 
 The cure is not less book learning but some practical 
 application of book learning. It is not book learning that 
 we must scrap — it is our vague wool-gathering aims and 
 objectives that we must scrap. A boy or girl Board School 
 scholar, and man or woman University student, who have 
 been well taught from books wiU make, if taught to apply 
 the knowledge so gained, superior craftsmen, or business men, 
 or housewives. May I give you an illustration from elec- 
 
224 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 tricity of what the idea exactly is that I wish to convey ? 
 Suppose we consider education as, say, equivalent to an 
 electric current. For transmission yoii must have a copper 
 wire : for the transmission of education you must have book 
 learning. If with electricity we worship only the trans- 
 mitter, what use would electricity be to us ? But take 
 that copper wire that acts as transmitter, with the electric 
 current running through it, then cut that copper wire, connect 
 the two ends by a fine wire, and you will find that that fine 
 wire will glow with heat. You have produced heat. Now, 
 cut again the wire in another place and attach to it a carbon 
 filament lamp, and you will find you have produced light ; 
 cut again in a third place, and suitably connect the two ends 
 with what is called a motor, and you will find you have pro- 
 duced power ; but there was neither heat, Hght, nor power 
 until you made the break from the transmission. So in 
 education, you must make a break from book learning to 
 actual practice. The current of book learning must be 
 applied to definite ends and aims within the powers of utility. 
 We should get nothing out of the electric current if we had 
 vague ideas as to its application for heating, lighting, and 
 power ; and so it is with book learning. 
 
 Now, the United States and Canada — if I may give you 
 a definite illustration of applied education taken from those 
 two countries — show the greatest interest in agricultufal 
 education. In England the total number of students study- 
 ing agriculture is under two thousand ; and yet agriculture is 
 our greatest industry of all, and employs more persons than 
 any other single industry. We have our Universities full 
 of book students ; how many have been studying Forestry ? 
 Yet we have millions of acres of waste land awaiting re-afforest- 
 ation. We are giving the same Board School education 
 to the sons of dwellers in towns to fit them as mechanics, 
 carpenters, or labourers for work in factories as we give to 
 the sons of dwellers in villages to fit them for the farm. Now, 
 if education is to pay the nation for the forty millions a year 
 it costs, then it must have a practical bearing on the after- 
 school vocation in life, otherwise education can only make 
 victims of scholars. We are sometimes inclined to ask 
 ourselves the question on this point— we do ttdt reftlly in 
 our hearts and minds believe it p6s4ibl«-^but still we ask: 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 225 
 
 Are people less efficient by book education ? Often it seems 
 to a business man that the University-trained man makes 
 less use of what brain he has than does a so-caUed uneducated 
 man. Edison, the great inventor, filled his laboratories 
 with University-trained men ; and yet no one was more 
 fond than he of showing that this University knowledge 
 had to be applied practically, and that University men were 
 lacking in the practical application of their knowledge. On 
 one occasion he took an electric candle, such as we have here, 
 and he handed it to a man who had taken the very highest 
 degrees in mathematics at one of the Universities. " Now," 
 he said, " just calculate for me the cubical contents of this 
 bulb." There you see a bulb overhead, and how it tapers, 
 and it is not an easy thing to calculate. Well, this man 
 took several hours, and covered several sheets of paper with 
 calculations, and finally brought the result to Mr. Edison. 
 " No," said Mr. Edison, " you are at least lo per cent, wrong." 
 Well, the man went back and calculated all over again, but 
 could arrive at no different result ; so he came again and 
 rather insisted that he was right. " No," Mr. Edison said, 
 " I know you are at least lo per cent, wrong ; let me have 
 the bulb." Edison took the bulb ; he took a common 
 plumber's diamond, cut round the projecting glass point 
 at the end, gave the end a tap and it fell out, leaving the 
 bulb as a cup or bottle. Edison then took it to the tap, 
 filled it with water, poured the water into a beaker, read 
 off the cubical contents, and did all this in a minute, and 
 the record proved that the man was, as Edison had said, 
 10 per cent, wrong. Now, that University man, with the 
 book learning, had his whole brain on calculations. The 
 practical man would know nothing about calculations. Edison 
 had not had a University education, and in trying to think 
 of the cubical contents, he made the bulb into what you 
 might call a cup or bottle, and then measured what water 
 it contained. 
 
 |So, after a certain point, what we want is not mere book 
 learning, bjit more practical training and education. It is 
 well known that nothing is so fatal to thought as contiimous 
 reading. In handicraft, the mind can follow its own train 
 of thought, and notorious in EngUsh history has been the 
 deep thinking of the village cobbler, and his great influence 
 
 16 
 
226 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 on village politics, all springing from the practical use of 
 his hands, his eyes, and his brains. Working these together 
 he could think better and clearer. It is said that the late 
 Sir Hiram Maxim discovered the principle of using the recoil 
 of a gun to place the next cartridge in position, in what is 
 known as the Maxim gun, when out shooting one day with 
 an old gun that kicked badly. The principle of the 
 safety-valve was discovered by a fourteen-year-old boy, 
 whose duty, for which he received his wages, was to watch 
 the gauge of a boiler, and, when the gauge recorded a certain 
 pressure of steam, to pull a string which opened the safety- 
 valve and reduced the pressure, and let the record on the 
 gauge go down. He wanted to go away and play, and 
 he arranged a series of weights to take the place of his hands 
 on the cord, and he found that when the steam got to a 
 certain pressure it would lift the weights, and allow the steam 
 to blow off, and so he was able to go and play marbles. I 
 only mention this to show that the brains of each of us — 
 I am convinced of this more and more every day I live — 
 are like, say, this room ; you have to have some Ught in this 
 room before you can see anjrthing, and our brains require 
 some stimulus outside to set them to work, and they respond 
 immediately to the stimulus. The stimulus to Sir Hiram 
 Maxim was the kick of the gun ; the stimulus to the boy 
 was the desire to go and play marbles with his companions ; 
 that stimulus would not have come by reading about guns, 
 would not have come by reading about pressure of steam ; 
 it came by the actual experience of life. 
 
 The educated who are nurtured on books alone are the 
 victims of education, and not the efficients of the nation. 
 And how do we arrive at our final gauge of the book-edu- 
 cated man ? The final acid test of book education is an 
 examination, and if the student passes this examination 
 he receives the hall-mark of College or University, with an 
 assortment of letters added to his name. But what about 
 the great world outside ? The late Sir Alfred Jones told 
 me himself that he would not have a University ^man in his 
 oflftce. I argued and debated with him because, at the time, 
 I intended to send my own son to the University^ which 
 I did, and have never regretted it, and I thought that the 
 only point was the question of appUcation. I argued that 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 227 
 
 a University-trained brain, if it applied itself to business, 
 must be a superior brain to the untrained brain of a man 
 who has not had a University training ; but there is no 
 sequence from the passing of these examinations to the pro- 
 gress in after-life. Senior Wranglers have often proved 
 the biggest failures of all amongst those who have gone 
 through Universities. Do you think that passing examina- 
 tions gives us what the nation wants in our Civil Service ? 
 Could you pick out, by any system of examination in their 
 youth, future Sir Alfred Joneses, or Thomas Ismays, Andrew 
 Carnegies, or Cecil Rhodeses, H. M. Stanleys, or Nelsons, 
 or Wellingtons ? An examination would not help us in 
 any of these, yet we worship the results of examinations. 
 But private firms, as far as my knowledge goes, have never 
 adopted the examination system of entry into their business, 
 or for a seat on their Board of Directors. No, the injustice 
 of our education is that it does not look beyond the cram- 
 ming with book learning ; that it victimizes the student 
 and condemns him, or her, to an after-Ufe of hard and toil- 
 some drudgery, merely because the learning has not been 
 applied to a definite object, such as I mention in the illustra- 
 tion of the electric current, of either heat, or hght, or power. 
 
 Now, when the Franchise BiU was passed in 1869, we were 
 told by a statesman it would now be necessary for us to 
 " educate our masters " ; but, instead of training and edu- 
 cating, we are producing an untrained, uneducated boy or 
 girl, who leaves school at the age of fourteen, and we, 
 naturally, are not satisfied with our product. 
 
 We are beginning to find the wisdom of the poet Pope, 
 who wrote : — 
 
 A little learning is a dangerous thing; 
 Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring : 
 There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain. 
 
 And an ancient saw runs : — 
 
 Who are a little wise the best fools be. 
 
 Now, how can we find a remedy ? It is perfectly useless 
 in any affair of life to call attention to what one believes 
 to be an evil without at any rate making some attempt to 
 
228 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 apply a remedy There is no remedy in evening classes 
 In a business I know it was made a condition of employment 
 that all young persons between fourteen' and eighteen years 
 of age must attend evening classes. The parents consented 
 and it was tried for many years, but it was not a success, 
 and the reason is obvious. You take a boy and girl of 
 fourteen from school, and what has their previous Hfe been ? 
 They have gone to school at nine o'clock, they have had 
 a quarter of an hour's break in the forenoon and gone home 
 at twelve o'clock ; they have come again at one-thirty or 
 two o'clock, had another break in the afternoon and gone 
 home at four o'clock, and immediately on leaving school 
 you take the boy or girl and you put him or her in a works 
 or office. They are working alongside adults and working 
 the adult hours. You do not say to the adult, after. a hard 
 day's work, " Go and attend an evening class " ; but you 
 say to these immature, growing boys and girls that you want 
 them to give three evenings a week to evening classes for 
 the improvement and development of their brain. Neither 
 their brain nor body is capable of receiving education under 
 such conditions. 
 
 So we must seek for, some other remedy, and the remedy 
 is not easy to find. There is such a great variety of in- 
 dustries in the United Kingdom that what might suit one 
 industry would not suit another ; but I do not think that 
 that should be any reason why we should not apply a system 
 to such industries as it might suit, and which would include 
 the great bulk of the people such as are employed to-day 
 in factories and workshops. Whilst it is true that agri- 
 culture is the greatest single industry, it is not true that 
 agriculture employs the most people, for in all the variety 
 of factory work the aggregate runs into many milUons more 
 than in agriculture alone. Now, in factories you have 
 two elements of production : you have the mechanical 
 utiUty, the engine and the machine, and you have the human 
 being, commonly called " hand," as if a human being could 
 be without a soul and have no horizon or outlook in life other 
 than the machines they are tending — a brutal description 
 which must be made impossible. Now, at any rate in fac- 
 tories where we have mechanical utihties, we know that 
 we could work these mechanical utilities, with a little extra 
 
EUUUSl'IOJN AND BUHIJNEHS 229 
 
 oil, a little quicker we'aring out perhaps, a little extra atten- 
 tion, continuously for twenty-four hours each day. But 
 the strength of the human being is limited, and it is hmited 
 not only because of its physical capacities, but it is also 
 limited because a human being must have something more 
 in life than merely working for a living. It must not be a 
 question of a whole life passed in work to produce and buy 
 food, washing, and lodging, then sleeping to prepare for the 
 next day's work, with no view of green fields, no time to 
 read books and elevate the mind — that is a feature in modem 
 industries that cannot be tolerated. Now, in the employment 
 of mechanical utilities our great burden of expense is interest, 
 depreciation, repairs, and renewals ; and before I come to 
 consider the human element, suppose I just deal with these 
 four items of expense in connection with mechanical produc- 
 tion, because we must be aware of this great fact — ^whatever 
 hours are worked in British factories, we are in competition 
 with the whole world, and we cannot maintain our enormous 
 export trade, nor, indeed, can we produce for the people 
 in the United Kingdom a sufficient supply of boots, shoes, 
 clothing, and houses unless each individual can produce 
 to the total of his capacity. 
 
 We exchange and barter, in one form or another, the 
 labour of one individual with others, and if the people in 
 the United Kingdom who are working in factories were to 
 produce less, then, obviously, there would not be enough 
 for themselves, to say nothing about others. We must 
 consider the output, and, I believe, it is equally an axiom 
 in economics that we have got to consider the price of the 
 output. If we do not, then, however much wages advance, they 
 will purchase no more boots, shoes, clothing, and houses than 
 the lower rate did when these were all cheaper. We must 
 continually aim to cheapen the product, for cheapening of 
 product increases the demand for the product ; it increases 
 the wages of the producer two ways — ^first, in actual cash 
 and, secondly, in purchasing power. Any reversal of that 
 process, whatever increase there may be in wages, reduces 
 the purchasing power of the wages and leaves a wage-earner 
 worse off. Now, I want us to accept that because it is vital 
 to the points we have got to consider ; but I want us to accept 
 it with a knowledge of what benefit we can get from mechanical 
 
230 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 utilities. Fii-st of all, wages are the highest in the countries 
 that have the most mechanical utilities in proportion to the 
 people ; that is to say, wages are the highest in the countries 
 that have the most capital invested in the mechanical utili- 
 ties in proportion to the population, and lowest where these 
 conditions are reversed. 
 
IV 
 GIRLS AND BOYS 
 
 Bolton, October 7, 1916. 
 
 [Lord Leverhulme, addressing the Girls' Side of the Bolton School 
 at their Prize Distribution, subjected the traditional views 
 on the relation of the sexes in education to the fresh thoughts 
 of a practical man.] 
 
 This School has been founded without any idea that it was 
 a work of philanthropy, or any nonsense or humbug of that 
 kind. I have never found that dukes ever objected to 
 send their sons to Eton, Cambridge, or Oxford because they 
 would be receiving an education that was not entirely paid 
 for by the school fees. All they ask for is good education, 
 and for the rest — whether the endowment goes back to the 
 time of Edward VI or not — ^this does not raise any difficulties 
 for the Duke who is sending his son to school or college. I 
 want to make it quite clear that the education of the Bolton 
 School can be accepted without any sense of humiMation 
 on the part of very wealthy parents, and without any sense 
 of patronage by less wealthy parents. 
 
 Why do not boys and girls always attend together in the 
 same school building ? The opinion is that the mentality 
 of girls and boys is not identical ; the same ideals are not 
 apphcable to the teaching of boys and girls, except in certain 
 classes. It is a mistake to separate scholars and to put 
 the students in separate buildings for girls or boys. In my 
 boyhood's days girls and boys were taken at the same school 
 up to a certain age, and I attended a girls' school myself 
 until I was eight or nine years of age. But I want boys 
 and girls to be educated at the same school together up to 
 a much higher age than that. I have always argued to 
 myself that if it was ever intended that the sexes should not 
 
232 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 be mixed there would be families consisting entirely of girls 
 and other families consisting entirely of boys. Mrs. Smith's 
 babies would be always girls and Mrs. Brown's babies always 
 boys, but not both boys and girls in the same family. Those 
 families are better, and the children grow up better, where 
 there is a mixture of boys and girls. You can always tell 
 if a boy has had a sister or if a girl has had a brother, b^ause 
 the influence of one on the other has been for good. I have 
 felt that if the Bolton Grammar School and Bolton High 
 School pupils could be brought together it would be of advan- 
 tage. I think there are many classes, such^as drawing classes 
 and science classes, and certainly the classes for music, 
 where, with advantage, the two sexes might be educated 
 together in the same class. You may depend upon it, it 
 is perfectly healthy, natural, and sane for the two sexes to 
 meet together in this perfectly natural way. Girls and boys 
 played games together in my younger days. There was one 
 game called " tig." I don't know whether you have that 
 to-day ; and there was another called " rounders " which we 
 used to play. One of the girls, who afterwards became 
 the wife of my oldest friend, was the best runner of any 
 of us. I met my own wife in that way. Boys and girls 
 were brought up together and played together. That is the 
 most natural way — ^through games and schooling, in a 
 perfectly healthy way — for the sexes to meet together. You 
 may depend upon it that in bicycling, motoring, in sketching 
 parties, and in many other ways, this perfectly natural 
 affinity is seeking expression. 
 
 Now, what is the object of the School ? We have here, 
 in the United Kingdom, and the British Empire generally, 
 the finest material in the world, and Lancashire is second 
 to none in its possession of the best of that material. There 
 is not any town in Lancashire superior to Bolton. Here, 
 then, we have the best material with which to commence. 
 The idea is to give to the boys and girls an equipment, an 
 education, wJaich will prepare them for the battle of life 
 and to take their places in discharging all the responsibilities 
 and duties that will await them in after-life. In doing this 
 we feel we shall be giving them a broader and more enlightened 
 outlook on all affairs and on matters connected with their 
 native town of Bolton, so that the future generation of Bolton 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 233 
 
 will be the better able to take advantage of all that science 
 and discoveries are daily placing within our reach, if they 
 have only got what we commonly call the " nous " to 
 seize it. What we are to-day we owe to yesterday, and 
 those who Uved then entrusted to us this great work. What 
 we are to be to-morrow depends upon what we do to-day. 
 With this retrospect and with this way of looking forward 
 we can set our hands to work on this task which we have 
 undertaken. 
 
 The war will make great changes. The war will not leave 
 England as it found it. England will be a different England 
 for the boys and girls in this room from what it has been 
 for us who have hved most of our lives before the war. This 
 war has discovered Woman. Women are in evidence every- 
 where, engaged in hundreds of useful and honourable occu- 
 pations, and discharging their duties excellently. It was 
 never imagined prior to the war what women could accom- 
 plish in other work than was then open to them. We are 
 proud of the work undertaken by all classes of women 
 in England to-day in this great war. I often wonder 
 what those grand dames, who danced in Brussels on the eve 
 of the Battle of Waterloo, would have said could they have 
 seen their great-grand-daughters and great-great-grand- 
 daughters doing the work the women of England are engaged 
 in to-day. They would have been shocked at the idea of 
 women working side by side with men without affectation 
 — easily and naturally — ^in munition factories, and making 
 shot and shell to kill the enemies of their country. It is a 
 grand work, and it is also grand to be engaged in taking care 
 of the sick and woionded, a work which is being well discharged 
 by delicate girls, and by matrons, and by those who are no 
 longer young. The whole nation is working together in a 
 way that could not have been possible in either the Crimean 
 War or the great Napoleonic wars, because the ground had 
 not then been prepared by education. We owe all this 
 response and patriotism to the passing of the Education 
 Act of 1870, but even education to-day is not as good as 
 we would have it, although superior to any there was in this 
 country at the time of any of the preceding wars. We are 
 reaping, in the advancement oft this war and the victory 
 which is surely, if tardily, coming, the results of a better 
 
234 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 educatfed England than ever before. We want to extend 
 that and to see in the years to come that we shall not fall 
 behind. 
 
 This war has taught us that, however valuable material 
 Education may be, its function of most value is to teach us 
 to think aright, and to realize that success in Ufe depends 
 most of all on character, and that unless a high character 
 and high ideals are aimed for in Education, it may even be 
 a curse rather than a blessing. 
 
 The old idea of women has got to go ; woman has to be 
 the companion and helpmeet of man, as was originally 
 intended, and it can only be done if she receives an equal 
 education in every way and an equal equipment with 
 man. Our ideas are very much mixed on this subject. 
 
 It is admitted by every one that they have an equal right 
 to earn their own living, and so long as they earn an honour- 
 able living and follow an honourable career they have a right 
 to choose for themselves. A brother and sister decide, 
 say, to enter some profession, say that of a doctor ; both 
 are equally well educated and take equally high degrees 
 at their respective Universities. Similarly if they had each- 
 chosen commercial careers. Well, somehow we feel that 
 when the young man has launched himself on a professional 
 or commercial career which may lead to great distinction, 
 he is a very fine feUow indeed. Our ideas about his sister 
 are not quite the same. 
 
 The young man is received everywhere. Fathers with 
 marriageable daughters are glad to receive him at their 
 houses, and the mothers give him equally flattering welcomes, 
 whilst the sister will be coldly received everywhere. Society 
 admits her brilliant ability, her cleverness and efficiency, 
 and that she has a perfect right to enter a profession and earn 
 her own livelihood, but does not want her to do so. The 
 modem young man nowadays without definite aim and calling 
 in life is looked on with contempt ; whilst the woman who 
 has a definite aim and calling, and is earning her own living, 
 is despised and neglected socially, and finds that few invita- 
 tions ever reach her. We are not so backward, perhaps, 
 as the Japanese, who, when a girl baby is born, hang over 
 their door a doll ; or as the Chinese, who do not consider 
 women quite human beings, but who beUeve that if a woman 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 235 
 
 is a good woman, she will after death be allowed to return 
 to this world as a boy baby, and so, as a man, become a human 
 being. 
 
 It is perfectly true that the destination and goal of the 
 majority of girls must be the home, marriage, and the house- 
 hold cares that come upon them in their position as mothers 
 of the household ; but it is equally true that a girl has a 
 perfect right to choose whether she will adopt that career 
 or another, and she ought not to be under the slightest 
 reproach if she has chosen contrary to the majority of 
 girls. If it is a career which gives distinction, then she 
 should be able to win for herself distinction. In all these 
 careers there will be a dozen openings and a dozen out- 
 stretched hands to welcome a brother, whilst there wiU 
 scarcely be one opening or one outstretched hand to 
 welcome a sister. Women are, for instance, absolutely 
 prohibited in law from practising at the Bar. This will 
 aU have to disappear after the war. We cannot, as we 
 have done, accept it as vital to the existence of this country 
 that a woman can go into a munition factory and yet not 
 be fitted to become the head of a business. It is no wonder 
 if woman does sometimes fail to make a success in business. 
 Method, regularity, and system in doing the daily task are 
 also rare in men as well as rare in women ; but it is to the 
 advantage of the State that they should occupy whatever 
 position they are best fitted for. The bringing together of 
 the two sexes wiU make in this direction. The war will clear 
 out all preconceived ideas on this question. And the Bolton 
 School will, without doubt, take a prominent lead in the good 
 work of education, and of nationalizing a clearer, more 
 definite, and wiser recognition of Woman's true position 
 and equal right with men to full opportunities for useful, 
 intelligent, efficient, and honourable service for the Empire 
 and Humanity. 
 
OUTPUT AND INTAKE 
 
 Bolton, August i, 1917. 
 
 [The text of old sermons on thrift was : " Take care of the pence, 
 and the pounds will take care of themselves." Lord Levet- 
 hulme, in an address on the Annual Speech Day at Bolton 
 School (Boys' Division), announced a more vital principle, 
 which may be summed up in the motto : " Make the best of 
 your output, and your intake will grow of itself."] 
 
 I WILL tell you a story of a benevolent old gentleman who, 
 coming home one day, saw right in front of his house an 
 overturned load of hay blocking up the road. A boy about 
 the size of one of you was trying to get the hay back into 
 the cart. The gentleman said to the boy, " Have you to 
 put all that hay back into the cart 7 " " Yes, sir," said the 
 boy. " Have you had your dinner ? " asked the gentleman. 
 " No, sir." " Well, then, come inside and have your dinner. 
 You will work better for it." " I don't thii^ my father 
 would like it," replied the boy. " Oh ! your father would 
 not mind. Why should he mind you having a good dinner ? " 
 Then he took him into the house and gave him a good dinner. 
 After dinner he said to the boy, " Now, just you have a 
 walk round my garden, and then you will be ready for your 
 work." ' " Please, sir, I don't think my father would like 
 it," said the boy. " Oh ! your father won't mind. He will 
 be glad for you to do it. You have a walk round." And 
 the boy did. On his returning to the house the gentleman 
 said, " Now, I have a nice book here. Just look at a few 
 pictures, and then you will be ready for your work." " But, 
 please sir, I don't think my father would like it." " Oh ! it's 
 all right, I am sure your father will not mind. But what 
 makes you keep sa3dng you do not think your father would 
 
EDUCATION. AND BUSINESS 237 
 
 like it ? " " Please, sir, he's under the hay." Well, boys, 
 every father is under the hay, and must be until his son 
 eases his burden. 
 
 The future of the nation depends on the boys and girls, 
 and I am quite certain it is still more true that the future 
 of the boys and girls depends on the nation. Don't you 
 think so ? I do. You can accomplish much more than 
 the grown-ups can. I have travelled a good many thousands 
 of miles in the Congo I am very fond of the Congo. I 
 like the elephants and other animals there, and I am delighted 
 with the stories the natives have there. The most excellent 
 folklore stories I have heard have been in the Congo. I 
 will tell you one. It is a Congo tale, and you must remember 
 that the people there are in the same state of civihzation 
 as the people of Bolton were a hundred thousand years 
 ago. They are in the Stone Age. They know little or 
 nothing about metals, but they know a good deal about 
 fighting. Nations learn that very early. 
 
 The story is about a hen which was sitting on a nest of 
 eggs. One day she left them for a walk round, and when 
 she came back a serpent was coiled round them. The poor 
 hen did not know what to do. She could not get the serpent 
 off, because every time she went near the serpent hissed. 
 So she went to the elephant and asked him to drive the 
 serpent away. The elephant came with his big feet, but 
 when the hen saw him she said, " Oh ! you go away, you 
 will break my eggs ; go away ! " She then went for a buffalo. 
 The buffalo came along with his big feet,i and she saw that 
 he, too, would break the eggs and sent him away ; and she 
 went for the giraffe and all the other big animals in turn. 
 But it was just^the same in every case : she was afraid of 
 their big feet breaking the eggs, and they all went away in 
 disgust. Then a tiny ant came out of the ground and said, 
 " Let me try." " You try to drive the serpent away ! Not 
 a bit of it." " Well, let me try," said the ant, " it will do 
 no harm." " No, it is only a waste of time if the elephant 
 and the buffalo and the giraffe cannot do it." " Well, let 
 me try," persisted the ant. " Very well, try," said the 
 hen. So the ant went back to the hole out of which it had 
 come and gave a signal. Ants came out of the hole in swarms' 
 and went all over the serpent and stung it and nipped it and 
 
238 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 pinched it. And the serpent, in order to get rid of them, 
 went away. 
 
 You can do many things we grown-ups cannot do. I 
 want you to remember how you can do them. You can 
 accomplish anything you want only in one way, and that 
 is by doing your best. A boy who has done his best has 
 done everything, and a boy who has not done his best has 
 done nothing. I do not care if he has taken prizes here this 
 afternoon : if he has not done his best he has done nothing. 
 If the boy who has not won a prize has done his best,' he has 
 done everything. It is only by doing the task we have 
 to do to-day that we fit ourselves for a bigger task to-morrow. 
 Some people say there is so much chance in life. I dare say 
 there may be something they call chance. I do not know ; 
 but a great English poet of about four centuries ago, Gas- 
 coyne, said a boy had better never be born than be un- 
 taught. Think of that. I think it was true. And it is 
 truer to-day than ever. 
 
 Do you know what the teaching you get here is like ? I 
 will tell you. If you take a trained boy and an untrained 
 boy, they are, if I might compare them, Uke a workman 
 with tools and a workman without tools. The trained boy 
 is the workman with tools. He has got them. He may 
 use them or he may not, but he has got them. It is like 
 the Cadet troop we have been seeing this afternoon. I am 
 sure the School is proud of the Cadets and of the Boy Scouts, 
 and I congratulate their officers^ You know perfectly well 
 that all this training is for a definite purpose. The boy 
 without education would be like a soldier without a weapon. 
 It is no good going into war if you have not the right weapons. 
 A boy without training would be merely like a soldier going 
 to war without weapons. Of course, having got them, it 
 depends upon us how we use them. Why take these books 
 we have given out to-day ? If you have not been trained 
 how to read a book and how to assimilate a book, they will 
 be no good to you. 
 
 Have you ever been to a circus ? Tused to love a circus. 
 I dare say they don't come to Bolton now ; but when I was 
 a boy, at Christmas and New Year and other times, there 
 used to be Wombwell's and Bostock's and Mander's Mena- 
 geries and a circus or two, and I used to love to go to them. 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 239 
 
 I used to watch the acrobats swinging on parallel bars and 
 doing all sorts of wonderful things. It is all only, a question 
 of training. I believe any of us could do it if we had the 
 training, though I should not like to start training for them 
 now ; but any one can do those things if they start training 
 at the right time. There is nothing marvellous about it. 
 The curious thing is that when we see a conjurer or an acrobat 
 we think he is doing something marvellous. It is all training, 
 and you can be trained by Mr. Lipscomb and the masters 
 to do far more wonderful things than that. 
 
 There are many people who think a college education, 
 or a University education, is not comparable to practical 
 experience in the cotton factory, at business, or in the office. 
 Well, I hold the opposite view. The better the training 
 he gets, the better the man will be for all positions in Hfe ; 
 but, of course, we need to have the practical knowledge 
 added to the theoretical. 
 
 I wiU tell you an amusing story of Edison. He never 
 had a University education, and every now and then he 
 delights in showing a University man that the practical man 
 is superior. On one occasion he took an electric Hght bulb, 
 and said to his most highly trained University man, "Tell 
 me the cubical contents of the bulb." Well, it looked about 
 as impossible as squaring the circle — pear-shaped tapering — 
 and he had to tell the cubical contents of it. Well, this 
 man, who had taken high degrees in mathematics, got sheets 
 of foolscap and covered them with calculations and figures 
 and, eventually, took the result to Edison. " No, you are 
 at least lo per cent, wrong," said he, and the young man 
 went back and worked it out agaiij and again, getting the 
 Same result, so he was inclined to argue. .Edison said, " I 
 know you are about lo per cent, wrong. Give me the bulb." 
 He took a plumber's diamond for cutting glass and cut round 
 the sharp point at the end of the bulb and then knocked 
 it off. Then he fiUed the bulb with water, poured the water 
 out and measured it, and in something less than two minutes, 
 he knew the exact contents of the bulb, and proved his assistant 
 wrong. Of course, the man was thinking merely of calcula- 
 tions ; he had not got his brain settled on the practical side. 
 There were many other ways of ascertaining the contents 
 besides calculations. He might have submerged it in water 
 
240 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 and seen what it displaced, allowing for the thickness of the 
 glass. The point is that you should always try to think 
 beyond the book you have learned. Don't assume the book 
 method is the only method, but try to think of another. 
 
 We talk about the circumstances of Ufe. There are two 
 great elements in life — one is power and the other is circum- 
 stance. Now, there is in a boy or girl the greatest power 
 the world knows — ^that is Mfe, a power greater than the steam 
 engine, or electricity, or hydraulic power. But this power 
 has a great tyrant, and that is circumstance. Even from 
 the tiny seed you can learn a lesson. Botanists will tell 
 you that when a seed lies on the ground, especially certain 
 seeds, they can be carried by the wind ; they will not attach 
 themselves to the soil until they get to soil that suits them. 
 That is a well-known fact. They roll along with the wind, 
 but as soon as they get on soil that suits them they settle 
 down and make the most of it. That is the control over 
 circumstance ; so circumstance is not such a great tyrant 
 after all. We have a say in what we are going to be. Each 
 of you boys is thinking of a career in life, and preparing for 
 it, and learning such lessons as will help you in your future 
 career, and having settled it, you are going to anchor your- 
 selves down. I know you are. 
 
 Do you know that one of the most tremendous cumulative 
 forces in this world is the power of persistence ? Settle 
 on a plan and persist in it, and every year it gains in power 
 and weight until finally it becomes irresistible. All this 
 training will have a definite effect upon you, and it will lead 
 you to something greater. I suppose if we dig down 20 feet 
 under where we stand we should come to a stratum of clay, 
 or something that is exactly the same as it was twenty thousand 
 or a hundred thousand years ago. That has not changed, but on 
 the surface here there have been all sorts of changes. Look 
 how many changes have taken place even in your lifetime. 
 Why ? Because there have been men here in the good 
 old town of Bolton who have been developing it all the time. 
 
 Many people think success in Ufe — ^the greatest success 
 in life — ^is a question of intake and no output. Get all you 
 can and stick to it — that is the way to succeed in life, they 
 think. You might as well try tp run a cotton-mill on the 
 principle of all intake and no output ; it would soon come 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 241 
 
 to an end. This good old town of Bolton, whilst the clay 
 20 feet below the surface has not changed, has gone through 
 all the changes of thousands of years of history. Why is 
 Bolton so much a better town to-day than ever before ? I 
 will tell you. It is because Bolton has been supplying the 
 wants of people in India, China, and all over the world, and 
 in suppl5dng the wants of others Bolton has acqmred the 
 means «0f making a better Bolton, leading a happier life, 
 a fuller and more complete life. I was in Japan four years 
 ago, and I went into a cotton-mill there, and there was 
 machinery made in Bolton. Sending out machinery from 
 Bolton, and doing something for other people, is what has 
 made Bolton what it is. The invention of the spinning 
 mule by Crompton, making machinery by Hick, Hargreaves, 
 and Dobson & Barlow's, and cotton goods by Barlow & Jones, 
 and other firms. That will apply to every one of you. It 
 will be by making yourselves wanted, badly wanted, that 
 you will succeed. 
 
 I know many people believe that it is capital a man wants 
 to start him. BeUeve me, there is not a single large firm 
 in the United Kingdom that is short of capital. They can 
 get all the capital they want. But there is not a single 
 large firm in the United Kingdom that has got all the best 
 men it wants, the men they want to pay big salaries to. 
 There is plenty of capital ; no trouble about that, but the 
 greatest trouble and difficulty is filling up their staff with 
 the men who can draw the biggest salaries. I do not mean 
 that there are not men who would like to draw them, plenty 
 of such men. But drawing a big salary means earning 
 more than you draw. That is the output. The intake 
 is the salary, but the output must be greater. It is the same 
 all over the world. A friend of mine in America says he 
 has on his Hst three positions vacant, for each of which he 
 can afford to pay 100,000 dollars a year salary, and he cannot 
 fill them. If he wanted 100 milhon dollars for his business 
 he could get it without trouble, but he cannot get three men 
 capable of earning 100,000 dollars a year each. Bear that 
 in mind. Never mind about the salary — that will be seek- 
 ing you all the time if you are worth it. Never mind 
 about capital — yQu will never be short of that if you are 
 worth a big salary. It is the difference between output 
 
 17 
 
242 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 and intake which has made the good old town of Bolton 
 prosperous beyond the wildest dreams of our ancestors of 
 a century ago, and it is as applicable to every boy and 
 girl here as ever it was in Bolton. It applies to every 
 one of us. 
 
 I want to say a word now to the teachers. I want you 
 to remember that boys need so much encouragement, and 
 it is in your power to fix in the minds of these boys the highest 
 ideals. In business we take stock periodically, and in taking 
 stock we have a debit side and a credit side, and so show 
 whether we have made a profit or loss. That is an exceUent 
 plan, both in business and in every other walk of life, in- 
 cluding your boy pupils in this School. In taking stock 
 of your boys in school, why not put all the drawbacks and 
 disadvantages on one side ? There is not a single boy in 
 the world of whom you can say ever37thing is in his favour. 
 On the other side put all the good points that help, and when 
 that is done by teachers they will find that the predominant 
 characteristic in human nature is goodness. The predomi- 
 nant element in boys' nature is goodness, and it is for the 
 teacher, by pulling out the right stop — ^not the same stop 
 for every boy — to appeal to his ambition and ideals and 
 tcf elevate the boy to the highest pinnacle. 
 
 Might I say a word to parents ? I don't think parents 
 quite reaUze, and I don't think boys and girls do when they 
 are children — I know I didn't — the enormous influence that 
 passes from parents to children. It is in the power of parents 
 to encourage the boys and girls when they come home, and 
 make their task easier. A boy came home one day from 
 school, and it was obvious that he had been badly caned. 
 His father looked very severely at him and said, " You have 
 been caned." " Yes, father." " Well," said his father, 
 " you must have been doi^g something wrong and deserved 
 it." " No, father, I didn't," said the boy. " You must 
 have," the father insisted. " No, father, I didn't." "Well, 
 what was it f or ? " " Well, father, you remember me 
 asking you, last night, how much a million pennies was ? " 
 " Yes," said his father. " And you said it was a devil of 
 a lot ? " " Yes." " Well, the schoohnaster says that 
 is not the right answer, and he caned me for it." When 
 the children come and ask these questions I dare say it is a 
 
EDUCATION AND BUSINESS 243 
 
 nuisance, but a little encouragement at the time will reap 
 the biggest harvest that can be reaped. 
 
 I am very proud to have been here. }t has been a very 
 great pleasure -to me. It always is, and I feel that under 
 Mr. Lipscomb, and the masters and the Governors, the future 
 of this School is being laid on solid foundations, that it will, 
 every year, add to the future prosperity of the good old town 
 of Bolton, by producing the type of citizen who wiU be proud 
 of Bolton, proud to help Bolton and of whom Bolton will 
 be proud, and who will look with pleasure on the days they 
 passed at the Bolton School. 
 
 Now, boys, I want you to remember some poetry. Can 
 you leam it ? See if you can remember this : — 
 
 Some ships go East, and some go West, 
 Whilst the self-same wind doth blow ; 
 
 For it's rudder and sail, and not the gale. 
 Decide where the ship shall go. 
 
 Nor wind, nor gale control our fate. 
 
 As we journey along through life ; 
 It's the set of the soul decides the goal, 
 
 And not the calm and the strife. 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 
 
INDUSTRIAL ADMINISTRATION 
 
 Liverpool, November 8, 1916. 
 
 [Having spoken so often, and out of such long and successful 
 experience, on the subject of Co-Partnership, Lord Lever- 
 hulme devoted the speech here presented to thoSe basic prin- 
 ciples of industrial administration which cannot be ignored, 
 even under the most harmonious scheme, without entailing 
 serious Umitations to the expansion of industries and actual 
 curtailment of both wages and profits. Incidentally, he 
 grappled with the great Trade IJnion question of " restriction 
 of output." His audience was the Liverpool Social Problem 
 Circle.] 
 
 The answer to the question, " What is the employer's 
 position at the present time ? " depends, like the answer to 
 so many other questions, upon the point of view that this 
 position is regarded from. You will remember the story 
 of the painter who was explaining to his sitter for a portrait 
 that he could only paint his portrait as he saw the sitter, 
 to which the sitter promptly replied, " But, unfortunately, 
 I can only see my portrait as you paint it." However, I 
 may, perhaps, better answer the question by adopting the 
 answer given to the question, " Is life worth living ? "—the 
 answer to which was, you will remember, that " It all depends 
 upon the liver." If the employer's liver is out of order he 
 is apt to take the view that " the times are out of joint " ; 
 and it is not impossible, under similar circvunstances, that 
 the workman, even when working in good conditions of em- 
 ployment, might, if he was told, as was the Irishman, that 
 he could not do too much for a good master, give the answer, 
 " No more will I." However, we shall all agree that to-day 
 it were wise if both employer and employee examined 
 
 »7 
 
248 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 their relationships in the past and looked well ahead into 
 the future. 
 
 And the first point in the near future that will present 
 itself to both will be the consideration of after-war conditions. 
 The experience gained by both employer and employee during 
 this war makes it impossible for either to resume work after 
 the war with conditions quite the same as they were when 
 the war broke out. For one thing alone, the war has added 
 nearly one and a half millions of income-tax payers to the 
 previous number who came within the net of the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, which of itself is a revolution. This 
 increase in numbers is not only the natural effect of lowering 
 the limit of exemption, but mainly, as far as is ascertainable 
 at present, from actual increases in wages and salary. This 
 is a grand fact and, if the employer can take a far-sighted 
 view, is an immense gain to the strength of industrial 
 production. 
 
 Statistics of incomes and income-tax payers, when care- 
 fully examined, reveal this great truth, that to bring a larger 
 body of wage-earners within the scope of the income-tax 
 collector has the undoubted tendency to increase the efforts 
 of each to earn a larger income out of which to pay the 
 tax. Equally, every raising of the rate at which income tax 
 is levied has been followed by increased efforts, successfully 
 made, to increase incomes out of which to pay the increased 
 tax. Therefore the effect of placing one and a half million 
 additional income-tax payers on this higher platform has 
 been to place an increased number of employers and em- 
 ployees side by side as income-tax payers, and give them 
 one common object to strive for, viz. to maintain and to 
 increase incomes. We are all incUned to say, with the Irish- 
 man, " Be jabers to the tax, if you will give me the income," 
 and having got the income, we are all incUned to make increased 
 efforts to make the income sufficiently large to stand. the 
 contribution demanded by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
 in the form of income tax, without diminishing the balance 
 remaining for the income earner. 
 
 To ensure the highest degree of efficiency in plant, machinery, 
 and all the mechanical utilities required for production 
 and distribution, the employer requires good profits ; and, 
 equally, to eiisure the highest degree of efficiency for era- 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 249 
 
 ployees, high wages and reasonable hours of employment 
 are necessary. Good profits for the employer enable the 
 prompt scrapping of old plant and machinery, and the in- 
 stallation of better equipment, to be successfully accomplished. 
 Equally, high wages and reasonable hours for the employee 
 react in increasing the physical and mental tone and eflfi- 
 ciency of the worker. Therefore, the tendency of modem 
 conditions is to bring the interests of employers and employees 
 nearer and nearer together, if these interests are rightly 
 understood, but not otherwise. 
 
 And what are the problems to be faced ? The biggest 
 problem the employer has to face, and one that is always 
 present with him, is to surround himself with a permanent 
 efificient staff, happy and contented in their emplosonent, 
 who will not only work for him, but, what is much more 
 vaduable, will work with him. I knew a manufacturer in 
 America, a very successful man, who was once asked which 
 he would prefer — a fire that burnt out his factory, his buildings, 
 machinery, and plant to total extinction, or some plague or 
 epidemic that killed off all his staff. There was no hesita- 
 tion in the answer, which was prompt and quick, that he 
 would prefer the fire ; because he could sooner replace the 
 factory, buildings, machinery, and plant than he could get 
 together another staff ; besides, with his staff remaining 
 to him, he declared, he could worry through all right without 
 the factory, the plant, and machinery, until he got the same 
 replaced. And the reason for this preference is obvious. 
 An efficient staff is a staff trained to their duties, and this 
 training depends upon constant repetition in performance 
 of the same duties, and in solving the same problems of the 
 business. Repetition is the basis of effickncy, which can only 
 be achieved as the result of long service. Therefore, one 
 of the principal objects of the employer must be to attach 
 to himself an efficient staff ; but, to ensure this, it is abso- 
 lutely essential to convince the employee working for salary 
 or wages that the welfare of the employer and employee are 
 identical. We are all agreed that, to ensure ideal conditions 
 and an ideal relationship between erdployers and employees, 
 employment must be so organized that profits earned shall 
 not only be sufficient to provide good living conditions for 
 the employees, and a reasonable return on the capital invested 
 
250 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 for the employer, but shall be such as to ensure the advance- 
 ment of the industry and the contentment and satisfaction 
 of both employers and employees. Mere desire to attach 
 a staff to a particular industry, and to ensure long service, 
 is not sufficient. The solution of this problem can only be 
 found in the actual working conditions themselves, and until 
 these working conditions are acceptable to both employers 
 and employees, neither are yet prepared to surrender their 
 weapons of attack and defence, or to " beat their swords 
 into ploughshares and their spears into pruning-hooks " 
 in order the better to cultivate a larger and richer harvest. 
 
 The gulf at present separating employers and employees 
 is very largely a misunderstanding of the conditions affecting 
 each. The employee has an exaggerated idea of the volume 
 of the profits produced under ordinary normal conditions of 
 the industry in which he is engaged. The employer, faced 
 with demands for higher wages and knowing the competition 
 he has to face, is nervous in granting advances for fear his 
 small margin of profit shall be turned into an actual loss. 
 As you know, a minority of employers, myself included, 
 hold very strongly the view that only under a system of 
 actual Co-Partnership can the spirit of greed and fear be 
 eliminated and a just division of profits as between employer 
 and employee be obtained. 
 
 But I propose that we devote ourselves to the considera- 
 tion, not of Profit-Sharing or Co-Partnership, which subject 
 I have dealt with elsewhere as fully as my hmited capacity 
 has permitted me, but rather of what, for want of a better 
 name, I propose to call " Industrial Administration," and 
 of those principles that must be recognized if there are to 
 be any profits available for division. But I would here again 
 repeat that under no scheme of Co-Partnership can the basic 
 principles of industrial administration be ignored without 
 entailing serious injury to employers and employees, and 
 serious limitations to the expansion of industries and actual 
 curtailment of both wages and profits. 
 
 Now, what are a few of the principles that, combined, 
 must form and under all circumstances include both the 
 employers' point of view, viz. good profits, with the employees' 
 point of view, high wages and reasonable hours ? The chief 
 of these basic principles are increased production with con- 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 251 
 
 sequent reduction of overhead charges and reduced operating 
 costs, combined with shorter hours for workers, resulting 
 in better working conditions, leading to greater efficiency 
 and producing higher wages and better profits. To ensure 
 the attainment of these aims and objects and of these sound 
 economic conditions, and as part of the control of labour, 
 the words " Scientific Management " have been applied. 
 Unfortunately, much that is preached and sometimes prac- 
 tised by "this school of employers is neither scientific nor 
 worthy of the name of management. But underlying all 
 the error of this school of thought are some good, sound, 
 wholesome practices. But perhaps a less stilted and less 
 irritating title would be " Industrial Administration." The 
 supreme spirit of scientific management worthy of that 
 description must be that of administration. " Management " 
 rarely considers the workman other than from the point of 
 view of control, and to thrust the antagonizing spirit of con- 
 trol to the front place, as so-called " Scientific Management" 
 would appear to be doing, is not to make the relations between 
 employers and employees less irritating, but rather the con- 
 trary. The whole idea associated with " Management " 
 is that of control, which idea has embalmed itself, and its 
 meaning, in the name " boss." But workmen have grown 
 and developed much during the last quarter century, and are 
 no longer blindly consenting to be " bossed " or controlled as 
 if they were children. Workmen have become responsible 
 human beings, and claim some just and sane share in the 
 management of their own lives and conditions. The work- 
 man to-day claims rights, and does not deny that the exercise 
 of rights will bring with it the responsibility for the perform- 
 ance of duties, and these duties he is willing to undertake. 
 But to show how inapplicable the word " Management " 
 is, it is obvious that you cannot have management of rights 
 nor management of duties. To show the better applica- 
 bility of the word " Administration," you can have admin- 
 istration of rights and administration of duties. Therefore, 
 if employers and employees are to be brought to work together, 
 and if all suspicion and distrust, not to say actual and active 
 opposition, are to be abolished, then the idea of " Manage- 
 ment " as " bossism " must be surrendered by the employer. 
 At this point, I think I can read the thoughts of many 
 
252 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 in the room, who will be wondering whether I am advocating 
 the surrender of all discipline in Industrialism. Nothing of 
 the sort. There must now, and for all time, be authority 
 and law in Industrialism as in the Army, and as in all places 
 where communities have to live and act and work together. 
 Both employer and employee must agree fully and without 
 reserve in this, otherwise IndustriaJism and the working 
 together of an organized system for production would be 
 impossible, and mankind would degenerate into a mob. 
 
 We must have authority and law and due observance of 
 discipline in the factory and workshop as on the steamship, 
 and as for the nation and State. But do not let us confuse 
 ourselves over this essential. The question is. Has the 
 authority to be autocratic ? If so, have your management 
 as " boss," and endeavour to make it as scientific as possible. 
 Or shall the authority be democratic ? In that case, let 
 us adopt the description for the authority we must provide 
 that best fits our aims and intentions, viz. administration. 
 You will find that whilst the dictionary gives " control " 
 as one of the meanings of management, that word does not 
 appear as one of the meanings of administration, but the 
 words " to direct," " to dispense" ; and the word " guardian" 
 is given as the meaning of the word " administrator." These 
 latter all form a good democratic basis, and the necessity 
 for authority, law, discipUne, and obedience, under these 
 conditions, is at once admitted, and can be accepted without 
 hmniliation or loss of self-respect, when " bossism," even 
 if called " Scientific Management," would raise a spirit of 
 opposition founded on the resentment we all feel to that very 
 idea when appUed to ourselves. 
 
 Scientific Administration we would all welcome as apply- 
 ing to established principles supporting the laws for the 
 working together of hundreds, or thousands, or millions 
 of men and women in productive enterprises for the combined 
 benefit of employers, employees, and of "the whole conununity. 
 Scientific Management is apt to be viewed as entirely designed 
 to increase the profits and advantages of the employer at 
 the expense of the employee, whereas Scientific Administra- 
 tion would be welcomed as merely the science of production 
 in the simplest, easiest way which would secure the highest 
 wages and the greatest prosperity for employers and employees. 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 253 
 
 Scientific Administration can be honestly based on the assump- 
 tion that the interests of employers and employees are identical, 
 and opposition thereto can only be possible on the asstimption 
 of the obvious error that these interests never can be honestly 
 identical. 
 
 Scientific administration will make clear that restriction 
 of output is not only immoral for the man who might have 
 made two articles but who only made one, but that he has 
 thus robbed his fellow-man even more wickedly than the thief 
 who had stolen one out of any two articles one of his fellow- 
 men might have made ; for whilst, in the case of the robber, 
 there would still be the two articles, and both would be of 
 service, there would be only one article in the case of restric- 
 tion of output, and the lapse in production could never be 
 made good. 
 
 Parhament has intervened to prevent the thraldom of 
 labour by passing Industrial Acts, limiting hours and con- 
 ditions of labour, fixing rates of wages, providing for em- 
 ployers' Uability for the safety and health of employees, 
 and tjie employers' responsibility for accident, ill-health, or 
 death the direct result of emplo5nnent. And just as Par- 
 liament has made these laws for preventing the thraldom 
 of labour. Parliament may also be forced to pass laws to 
 prevent restriction of output as an act of robbery against the 
 common weal, and, as an act of adulteration of service, just 
 as wrong as the adulteration of milk or any article of foQd or 
 commerce. 
 
 Just as attempts by combinations of employers to cheat 
 the public in quality and price have been met, when and 
 where attempted, by laws to prevent the same, so similar 
 attempts by combinations of Labour to cheat their fellow-men 
 by restriction of output must, and can be, prevented by laws 
 directed to that end. ^ 
 
 Such a state of affairs, however, need never to arise, 
 and ought never to arise, if the whole position of industrial 
 administration is properly understood. 
 
 The employers' contribution to the world's progress and 
 bettermf nt is organization of mechanical utilities and machine 
 efficiency, in order to give enormously increased output- 
 Industrial administration, by providing the means for inten- 
 sive mechanical production by increased steam-power and 
 
254 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 more efficient plant and machinery, demanding less and 
 less exhaustive strain on the employees, has unlimited oppor- 
 tunity for increased output at reduced cost after pajdng 
 wages on the highest world's scale ; and this can all be 
 accomphshed provided the fallacy of restriction of output 
 is not permitted to spoil the working of these economic prin- 
 ciples. Mechanical utiUties, mechanical horse-power, and 
 standardization of products are the keystone of the arch 
 of better conditions for employer and, still more so, of better 
 conditions for employee. 
 
 High wages cannot be paid without correspondingly in- 
 creased output by employees. Surely the employees' point 
 of view must be the amount of wages received, the length of 
 hours worked, and the strain of mind £uid muscle involved. 
 If 6pportunity of earning high wages can be assured in a 
 reasonable eight-hour day without strain or exhaustion, then 
 the amount of product need not worry the employee. The 
 employee cannot in his own interest wisely assume an attitude 
 of approval of restriction of output. 
 
 Under these conditions, industrial administration scien- 
 tifically appHed will provide that the profits resulting 
 from the enormously increased output are not all to go 
 as dividends on the capital employed, but shall be shared 
 in fair and equitable proportion between both Capital and 
 Labour. 
 
 Let us see if practical examples of the effect of a high 
 scale of output with high mechanical horse-power per wager 
 earner can be given as showing the direct bearing and con- 
 nection on high wages and shorter hours for the workman. 
 The lowest output and the longest working hours per wage- 
 earner in the world are to be found in China and India ; and 
 in these countries there is also the lowest mechanical horse- 
 power per wagfe-eamer and the lowest wages earned per wage, 
 earner. The example of the highest of all these will be 
 found in the United States. Let us compare these with 
 the same in the United Kingdom. Mechanical horse-power 
 per wage-earner in China or India is so low as to be negligible. 
 The mechanical horse-power pei;^ wage-earner in the United 
 States, as given in Government records of industrial produc- 
 tion, is two to three times that of the United Kingdom. The 
 value of the product per wage-earner per year in the United 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 255 
 
 States is also found to be two to three times that of the wage- 
 earner in the United Kingdom. And how do the wages 
 paid per wage-earner compare under these conditions ? In 
 India and China the average wages do not exceed, for un- 
 skilled labour, 4s. per week, and for skilled labour 6s. per 
 week. The weekly wages in the United Kingdom and the 
 United States for the year 1912, being the latest year avail- 
 able for comparison, are stated to be : — 
 
 Carpenters. . 
 Foundrymen 
 Builders' labourers 
 Other skilled labour 
 Other unskilled labour 
 
 U.K. U.S.A. 
 
 £200 £900 
 
 £210 £900 
 
 £160 £600 
 
 £200 £640 
 
 £120 £2 II O 
 
 Of course, the rates of wages vary in different parts of 
 the United States, as in various parts of the United Kingdom, 
 and these figures are merely quoted as illustrations, and 
 subject to such variations. Hence, whilst in the United 
 States the mechanical horse-power is two to three times per 
 wage-earner of that per wage-earner in the United Kingdom, 
 and the output is also two to three times of that per wage- 
 earner in the United Kingdom, the wages in the highly skilled 
 trades in the United States are over four times per wage- 
 earner of those paid in the United Kingdom, and in the less 
 skilled trades over three times, and the unskilled labour 
 two to four times that of the same grade of wage-earner in 
 the United Kingdom. 
 
 Now let us see if we can find a direct example of reduced 
 output per wage-earner in the United Kingdom as compared 
 with the same industry and increased output in the United 
 States. We can find this example most readily in the statistics 
 relating to coal, and whether this reduction of output in 
 the United Kingdom has been brought about by the " ca' 
 canny " policy in the restriction of output or not is quite 
 immaterial to the point it illustrates. I do not know, not 
 being connected with the coal industry, how the reduced 
 production in the United Kingdom is to be accounted for, 
 and I make no attfempt at guessing ; but whatever the cause 
 may have been does not affect the resulting injury to the 
 
256 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 consumer and the industries of this country in competition 
 with the rest of the world. 
 
 Tons of Coal Produced per Wage-earner per Annum. 
 
 U.K. 
 
 U.S.A. 
 
 312 
 
 400 
 
 260 
 
 613 
 
 1886-90 
 
 I9II 
 
 Value at the Pit Mouth. 
 
 1886-90 4s. lod. 6s. 4d. 
 
 1911 8s. id. 5s. lod. 
 
 So that we see in the United States by increased mechanical 
 horse-power, combined with increased output, the cost of 
 coal to the consumer has been reduced, and the employers 
 have been enabled to pay more than two to three times the 
 rate of wages per wage-earner in mines, as in all other in- 
 dustries in the United States, than can be paid in the United 
 Kingdom. Let me point out that these rates and statistics 
 are all pre-war rates and subject to pre-war conditions. This 
 increased cost of coal does not benefit either employer or 
 employee, and certainly injures the consimier. In fact, 
 under these conditions, the employer (or capitalist) in the 
 United States also makes better returns on his capital than 
 his fellow-employer in the United Kingdom. But the tragedy 
 of it is that it makes the cost of cooking, heating, and light- 
 ing oppressive for the wage-earner, and creates a handicap 
 to every British industry that uses coal, making the cost 
 of production of all articles higher. It threatens our iron 
 and steel industries and, with them, our world supremacy 
 in shipbuilding and our mercantile marine, upon which we 
 absolutely depend for our very existence as a nation. 
 
 And now let me give you figures of our greatest national 
 industry of all — a national industry which is even greater 
 than the iron, steel, and coal industries added together, viz. 
 agriculture. In this industry restriction of output is unknown. 
 The farmer has a free hand in the cultivation of his crops 
 and the rearing of his live stock. If we examine the pedigree 
 of the live stock that is most highly prized all over the world, 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 257 
 
 whether of horses, cattle, pigs, sheep, or whatever it may 
 be, we find the pedigree of this stock British ; and if we turn 
 to crops per acre we shall again see that British farmers, 
 imtrammelled by restriction of output, hold the highest 
 place in their productive enterprise of any nation in the 
 world. We will compare the four leading agricultural 
 products in the three leading nations. 
 
 Quintals per Acre, 1915-14, 
 
 
 Wheat. 
 
 Barl^r. 
 
 Oata. 
 
 Foiatow. 
 
 United Kingdom 
 
 . . lO-O 
 
 8-4 
 
 7-6 
 
 64 
 
 United States . . 
 
 4-4 
 
 3-5 
 
 4.4 
 
 39-4 
 
 Germany 
 
 .. 8-0 
 
 8-0 
 
 8-4 
 
 54 
 
 And we must not overlook the fact that, in obtaining this 
 high production, our agricultural industry has had to submit 
 to the handicap of underpaid, underfed labour, backward 
 position in mechanical appliances, and lack of knowledge 
 of the science of chemistry as applied to soils and fertilizers. 
 
 Just as we have seen that the highest proportion of 
 mechanical horse-power per wage-earner, aided by science 
 in administration, has raised the rate of wages in all in- 
 dustries, so when we get these modem aids applied to British 
 agriculture, so surely will the cost of production be reduced 
 by still further increased output, with greatly increased 
 wages to labour and better returns to the farmer. The 
 low wages of labour in agriculture have been a handicap 
 in every way to the farmer by greatly reducing the 
 efi&ciency of his labour and the attractiveness of farm work 
 to the wage-earner. He has had to stand impotently by 
 and see his best labour leave the country and seek the higher 
 rate of pay obtainable in the town and city. 
 
 We see clearly what an awful blunder for the Empire the 
 policy of restriction of output proves itself to be. Where 
 iigh mechanical horse-power per wage-earner is found, there 
 :he greatest output per wage-earner exists side by side with 
 the highest scale of wages. Restriction of output is not 
 )nly an economic fallacy but is the robbery, by the worker, 
 )f his mates of their rightful due in wages, food, clothing, 
 louses, and welfare conditions. It is the duty of every 
 
 18 
 
258 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Trade Union official to fight this false doctrine with all his 
 strength and might; and I say this because I know, and 
 I am convinced by a Ufelong friendship and acquaintance 
 with Trade Unions, that they have one sincere aim and 
 object which they pursue witii devotion — ^the welfare of 
 the wage-earner. 
 
 There is nothing in mechanical horse-power, new and 
 improved machinery, producing enormously increased out- 
 put, to incur the opposition and enmity of Trade Unions. 
 If it pays, as it does, scientific administration to scrap obso- 
 lete plant, buildings, and machinery (and we know that there 
 is no scrapping and destruction of obsolete property which 
 will not, in the long run, prove immensely /profitable when it 
 represents the price to be paid for superior and more efficient 
 methods), then similarly it may be said with equal truth 
 that it will pay the wage-earner to scrap obsolete, fsdse 
 economic methods and worn-out pohcies. And first of all 
 of these policies to be scrapped ought to be that of restriction 
 of output. 
 
 There is a much broader sphere for the operations of Trade 
 Unions, providing ample work for many years to come, in 
 bettering the industrial conditions of this country. The 
 scrapping of the poUcy of " ca' canny," or restriction of output, 
 will give all the more hberty and power for the advancement 
 of these higher aims and activities ; and, in addition, this 
 broader, better outlook and higher activities for Trade Union- 
 ism will prove to the world that Trade Unions are fighting 
 not only for the betterment of the workers, but are considering 
 the interests of the consvuner and of the British Empire in 
 competition with all other nations in the world. 
 
 When the British public are convinced that the good of 
 the community as a whole, and the progress and strength 
 of the British Empire in competition with all nations of the 
 world, are also receiving the attention and special care of 
 Trade Unions, then woe to the capitalist or employer who 
 attempts to oppose any just demands made for the further- 
 ance of these aims and objects. 
 
 The times are changed, thank God ! from when, in 1858, 
 Ruskin addressed these sentences to a British audience as 
 being the then thoughts of Capitc^l and of the general public 
 towards J-abour :— • 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 259 
 
 " Be assured, my good man," you say to him, " that if you work 
 steadily for ten hours a day all your life, and if you drink nothing 
 but water, or the very mildest beer, and live on very plain food, 
 and never lose your temper, and go to. church every Sunday, and 
 always remain content in the position in which Providence has 
 placed you, and never grumble, nor swear ; and always keep your 
 clothes decent, and rise early, and use every opportunity of im- 
 proving yourself, you will get on very well, and never come to 
 
 the parish." 
 
 * 
 
 Ruskin's biting sarcasm passed without effecting any 
 material change ; but what biting sarcasm has failed to 
 bring home to the intelligence of employers and the public 
 may, perhaps, be learned by both from our common 
 necessities in the evolution of industrialism. 
 
 When peace comes, bringing us victory over our enemies 
 and giving us rest from the clash of arms, we shall still have 
 to enter the field of struggle for commercial position amongst 
 the nations of the world. It is tmthinkable that we and 
 our Allies, proving victorious in this cruel war, fighting for 
 right and liberty, justice and freedom, should be defeated 
 in the struggle for industrial position by our present enemies 
 and Neutral nations. And yet defeat is certain if ovir in- 
 dustrial organization is founded on attempted oppression 
 of Labour on the one hand or restriction of output by Labour 
 on the other hand. 
 
 Our victorious Army has been drawn from aU classes, from 
 the highest to the most humble in the land, who have 
 been loyal and true comrades in the trenches, and it is un- 
 thinkable that when the war is over industrial antagonism 
 should prevent the Empire maintaining her former proud 
 commercial position. Let both employer and employee 
 scrap their old, antiquated, false ideas as to their mutual 
 relationships, and work with a better understanding of each 
 other's rights and duties, recognizing that this good old world 
 is far too small to hold any more than two classes in the 
 classification of people, viz. those who do their duty and those 
 who fail to do their duty. It is certain that in the next 
 world there will be only these two classes, whatever artificial 
 divisions between employer and employee may have existed 
 in this world. 
 
II 
 COMBINES 
 
 Port Sunlight, January ii, 1903. 
 
 [The following address has the special interest attaching to a 
 friendly talk by a great employer to an audience consisting 
 very largely of his own workmen on topics of intimate con- 
 cern to both parties. They met on the conmion ground 
 afforded by the annual gathering of the Port Sunlight Men's 
 Meeting. Lord Leverhtilme said :] 
 
 The subject I have chosen for my address is best described 
 by the word " Combines." I do not care whether it is a 
 combination of masters, in which case we probably call it 
 a Trust, or a combination of men, in which case we should 
 probably call it a Trade Union — there is nothing new in 
 Combines. And I am afraid that there is nothing new which 
 can be brought forward as to the principles that wiU govern 
 them. In my opinion, the principles that govern Combines 
 are just as old zs the law of gravitation and just as immutable. 
 The difficulty is sometimes to find out what these principles 
 are, but the principles are there, we may depend upon it, 
 and we may also depend upon it that they apply equally 
 certainly to the masters as to the men. I can best illustrate 
 that by imagining for the moment that a master and a man 
 (his workman) were walking down, we'll say, one of the 
 corridors of a cotton-mill, and we will imagine that the master, 
 by some mishap, became entangled in the machinery on 
 the left, and the workman became entangled in the machinery 
 on the right. The machines, we know, would be no respecters 
 of either master or man ; they would not stop on the master's 
 side nor on the man's side. If either got entangled in the 
 machinery, the mishap would be just the same whether 
 master or man. And so in my opinion it is if by any mishap 
 
 960 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 261 
 
 we forget economic conditions in dealing with Combines. 
 I believe that if we make a mistake destruction will just 
 as surely come on the master if he makes a mistake as upon 
 the employee if he makes a mistake. 
 
 Well, I believe there is a general impression sometimes 
 in the minds of employees that the master is a sort of 
 tyrant, who could pay very handsome wages if he would, 
 and who does not do it just merely out of cussedness and 
 an ill-wiU towards his men. And there is an opinion among 
 some masters that they are very unfortunate, they don't 
 make as much money as they ought ; but that it is 
 certainly not their fault, and that it is probably any- 
 body's fault but their own. Well, now, I would hke just, 
 if we can, to inquire what are the conditions that would 
 prevail to make a successful combination of masters, and 
 what would be the conditions that would prevail to make 
 a successful combination of men. It does not matter which 
 we take first — there is no order of priority in the matter. 
 The century that has just closed has seen an equally large 
 advance in combinations of men as we have seen in com- 
 binations of masters. The number of Trade Unions in Eng- 
 land to-day is larger than it ever was in the whole of the 
 preceding centuries of the world's history, and combines 
 of masters are larger to-day and represent a larger amount 
 of capital than was ever known in the preceding history of 
 tfie world. 
 
 Well, now, suppose we take the question of the combines 
 on the masters' side first — we shall find upon a close 
 examination into the combines of employers that those 
 combines have succeeded when one of the results of com- 
 bination has been an opportunity for producing a cheaper 
 product, an opportunity for producing a more abundant 
 product, and an opportunity for producing a better product ; 
 and we invariably find that combinations of masters have 
 faUed when the object has been, without having the ad- 
 vantages I have just mentioned, to increase the profits of 
 the masters — in other words, their wages — or to bolster, up 
 decaying industries. I will just give you one illustration 
 of a successful combination in our own country, that is 
 Coats' thread. They combined a number of thread-makers, 
 and they were enabled to save enormously in salesmen's 
 
262 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 salaries and expenses. An enonnous amount of money is 
 saved in advertising, and enormous simis of money are 
 saved in various other ways, with the result that the 
 undertaking is successful. Now, I might mention many, 
 but it would be invidious to do so, that have been gross 
 failures — you know of them; I hope none of you have put 
 your money into them — which have never had for their object 
 the cheapening of the product. They had no opportunity 
 springing out of the effect of the combination for cheapen- 
 ing their product. Their object, prominently held forth 
 in prospectus and dangled before the eyes of possible in- 
 vestors, has been to increase the profits by doing away with 
 competition, and this object they have alwas^s failed to 
 realize. I have never heard yet of a single instance where, 
 for even a small number of years, a combination, brought 
 about with that object, and without the other advantages 
 I have mentioned, has succeeded. Now, the position from 
 the employer's point of view is this : the market that he 
 caters for is no longer the local one. There was a time when 
 the manufacturer did not even makfe for all England, but 
 he made for the town, village, or district in which he lived. 
 The products were small and unimportant ; they were what 
 were called cottage industries, and many people lament 
 their disappearance ; but they have had to go in the march 
 of progress, and the manufacturer has had to face all the 
 consequences brought about by the invention of steam, by 
 the extension of railways and steamboats, and the enor- 
 mously increased capital required in consequence of these 
 things, In the old days a manufactory would be an indi- 
 vidual concern. Next, we can imagine, after that would 
 come the time when two or three individuals would join 
 their capital together and form a partnership, and that was 
 a state of affairs which continued until quite recently. Then 
 it grew beyond the capital available by two or three joining 
 together as a partnership, and limited companies became 
 necessary, with appeals to be made to thousands of investors 
 in order that still larger capital might be got together. Now 
 we have reached a further stage again, when a nxunber of 
 limited companies require to be grouped together into what 
 we call a Combine, the object being the concentration of 
 capital and the concentration of effort. If these Combines 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 263 
 
 result in cheaper production and a more abundant supply, 
 such undertakings will be successful ; if not, they will be 
 failures. 
 
 The very idea of large combinations is always alarming 
 to us at first. It is only when we become accustomed to the 
 altered conditions that we cease to fear it ; but we may, I 
 think, fqel certain that as inventions progress the amount 
 of capital required in business wiU be larger and larger, 
 and so Combines on a larger scale even than we know them 
 to-day will become necessary, practicable, and successful. We 
 may regret the disappearance of the smaU manufacturers, 
 but, after all, it is certain that the destruction of the small 
 manufacturer is simply his smallness. It is not himself, 
 it is merely a matter of size. The law is undoubtedly " For 
 whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have 
 more abundance : but whosoever hath not, from him shall be 
 taken away even that he hath." If the small manufacturer 
 could produce more cheaply than the large manufacturer, it is 
 as clear as the sun at noonday that before many years were 
 over the positions would be reversed, and the former small 
 manufacturer would have become the large manufacturer, 
 and the former large manufacturer would have disappeared 
 altogether. Therefore, it is clear that large manufacturers 
 are going to be the rule. They receive many advantages- 
 advantages of large capital enabUng them to make large 
 purchases, to buy improved machinery, to engage a large 
 and experienced and talented staff ; and they have facilities 
 for the utihzation of waste products which smaU manu- 
 facturers do not enjoy, and never can enjoy. And then they 
 can live on a smaller percentage of profits. What would 
 be a ruinous profit to the small manufacturer becomes an 
 ample fortune to the large manufacturer doing an enormous 
 turnover. The pubHc cry all over the world is always for 
 cheapness, and I do not mean, when I say cheapness, for 
 nasty cheapness, but cheap good quahty. The public are 
 continually supporting and rushing after the man who can 
 give them the best goods at the lowest possible price. The 
 third of a farthing a pound on the sugar consumed in the 
 United Kingdom would amount to somewhere about one 
 miUion sterling. I venture to say that the small sugar refiner 
 would find so small a profit as that probably spell ruin, but 
 
264 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 a large manufacturer, you can readily understand, could 
 make an ample profit out of such a margin. 
 
 Now, I have ventured to impress upon you the conditions 
 that prevail with regard to employers. If every one of you in 
 this room were a manufacturer, that is the state of affairs you 
 would have to face at the beginning of the twentieth century. 
 It is an iron law, and any manufacturer who feels competition 
 keen to-day and seeks rehef in combination with other manu- 
 facturers in the same line of business, thinking thereby to 
 avoid what he calls cut-throat competition, unless he can 
 prove to himself that such combination will enable him to 
 produce cheaper and to save expenses, wiU be simply putting 
 off the evil day, and the firms he has combined with will 
 simply drag each other down,'down, down, until they disappear. 
 Their place will be taken by men who are producing more 
 cheaply, with probably improved machinery and other better 
 conditions. If, as a result of the combination, he can pro- 
 duce cheaper, he may also depend upon it as an absolute 
 certainty that he will make better profits, otherwise called 
 wages, because the fund available for so-called profits or 
 wages will have been increased. 
 
 Now, what is the position with regard to the employees ? 
 We know that the employees are feeble if single ; we know 
 that if you take a number of employees and put them, 
 say, on a desert island in the Pacific, with merely their 
 hands, they would be not in any one bit superior, and 
 probably very much inferior, to the savages living on 
 the island. An employee's capital is , not cash like the 
 employer's ; an employee's capital is his intellectual and 
 bodUy attainments, and the knowledge he has acquired and 
 his natural aptitudes. But all the same, man is a machine 
 just as much as the engine he is driving, and is subject to 
 just the same unchangeable law. We all of us know that 
 the machine which can produce, in proportion to its consump- 
 tion of fuel, the largest amount of goods is the best, and the 
 one that will be secured at the highest price — and the same 
 it is with man. An employee has the responsibility resting 
 upon him to elevate and improve his condition — an employee 
 has just the same ambitions in that direction as his employer 
 — and if an employer can consider the question of combina- 
 tions as to whether they are going to benefit him, the employee 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 265 
 
 ^as not only an equal right to do it — ^which I venture to say 
 ik) one would be so foolish as to dispute — but he has the 
 reWnsibility resting upon him to seek out how he may do 
 it i^r the benefit of himself, his wife, and family ; and it is 
 his duty to seek out whether he can improve his condition 
 by combination, and if he finds he can on solid, sound business 
 lines, then it is his duty to do it. 
 
 No'^, in what way can an employee (to go back to the 
 illustration of the engine) improve his power of production, 
 and, consequently, his own value ; and what are the laws 
 that govern him ? I venture to support the views that 
 have most strongly appealed *to me under this head, and 
 they are these : firstly, the value of a man is in proportion 
 to his power and abiUty, mental and physical, and the 
 power of the implements he works Avith ; secondly, it 
 is in proportion to the abundance of circulating capital; 
 and thirdly, the value of a man is affected by the cost of 
 rent, food, and clothing. Now, suppose we take the first 
 of these three — firstly, that the value of a man is in pro- 
 portion to his power and ability, mental and physical, and 
 the power of the implements he works with. We have often 
 seen through lack of knowledge on this point that workmen 
 have declared over and over again that machinery was throw- 
 ing them out of employment, destroying their labour, and 
 lowering their wages. We find that the hand-loom cotton- 
 spinners in Lancashire declared, when Crompton and Ark- 
 wright made their discoveries which have resulted in the 
 present basis of cotton-spinning, that they were being ruined ; 
 and some of these men took extreme measures and smashed 
 the models of these inventors. In Samuel Crompton's house 
 you can be shown the hole in which Crompton had to bury 
 his model of his machine from his own class, his own fellow- 
 workmen hving in cottages, his neighbours, who, if they could 
 have got at it, would have smashed it to pieces. What was 
 the fact at that time ? Before the inventions of Crompton 
 and Arkwright there were only 8,000 cotton operatives in 
 all England, and no associated trades to speak of, going with 
 them. Of course, I am not including in that the wife, who 
 did a little bit of spinning for her family at home, as most 
 farmers' wives did. Twenty-seven years after these machines 
 had come into operation — these machines that these men 
 
266 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 wanted to break up — ^there were 300,000 workmen engaged, 
 and wages had advanced. Eighty years later wages had 
 still further advanced, and there were 800,000 men engaged 
 in England in the cotton industry, and to-day wages are 
 higher than ever, and including the associated trades that 
 go with cotton-spinning — such as calico-printing and the 
 making of the machinery — ^it is estimated that not less 
 than two and a half milUons of people are engaged in 
 the cotton industry in this kingdom. 
 
 We see now that it was machinery that enabled us to do this. 
 It has enabled the Lancashire spiimer to buy cotton in India, 
 to pay the carriage from India to Lancashire, to make it into 
 cotton goods, to ship it back to India, and whilst paying 
 we^.vers and spinners from 24s. to 36s. a week, to sell that 
 product cheaper on the Indian market than Hindoos getting 
 6d. a day. It is enabling Lancashire cotton-spinners to do 
 all that and yet beat the native Hindoo labourer working 
 at the rate of 6d. a day. What is the reason ? The reason 
 is that whatever increases the product increases the fund 
 out of which wages are paid. There is no other way of 
 pasnng wages. You cannot pay, wages except from the fund 
 from which wages are produced — ^the product of the man, 
 or the man and the machine he works — and therefore every 
 invention, every discovery, every machine, every improved 
 organization, every increase in product, increases the fund 
 available for wages. Now what could decrease the fund 
 available for wages ? Many things, but one thing most 
 certainly, and that is the employees rendering the task of 
 the employer more difficult, either by slovenliness or laziness, 
 or by compelling him to go to expensive and costly super- 
 vision ; aU this wduld decrease the fimd available for wages, 
 and tend therefore to lessen the siun paid in wages. 
 
 Now we come to the second point. The value of a 
 man, as of all producing machinery, is in proportion to 
 the abundance of circulating capital. The circulating 
 capital is the money that will bring produce to the 
 machine and be responable for all the floating capital- 
 required in the business. It is found that as capital in any 
 country increases, the wages invariably increase. It is a fact 
 that in all countries where wealth increases wages increase. 
 The reason for that is clear : that in coimtries that are wealthy 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 267 
 
 there is so much more capital available to purchase machinery, 
 for the pa5nKient of inventors, for the building of railways 
 and steamboats, for floating capital, for the purchase of 
 stocks, for opening up fresh markets, for providing for stabiUty 
 of credit. AH these things require money, and every one of 
 these tends to increase the fund out of which wages are paid, 
 and consequently tends to increase the, amoimt of wages. 
 The shrewd employer with ample capital, and who apparently 
 is making the very largest profits, and who very often is con- 
 sidered to be making them out of his workpeople, is really 
 producing a fund available for wages and salaries, and every 
 such employer that there is through the country must 
 have the effect of increasing the fund available for payment 
 of wages and salaries ; and every employer making smaU 
 profits or no profits, short of shrewdness, short of capital, 
 unable to meet modem improvements, to get rid of his old 
 machinery and put in new, is tending to decrease the fund 
 available for wages. 
 
 The next position is that the value of labour is in pro- 
 portion to the cost of rent, food, and clothing. We all 
 know that money value is only relative. If you go to a 
 country and you find that rent is high, clothes dear, food 
 dear, why, you natiurally require a larger siun of money to 
 live in that country than in one in which rent and clothing and 
 food are cheap. It does not matter, when I puU a penny out 
 of my pocket, whether I call it a penny or a shUling ; if the 
 purchasing power of the penny in a certain place is equal 
 to the purchasing power of a shilUng in another place, I shall 
 find it is immaterial to me as long as I can buy as much for 
 the penny in one place as for the shiUing in another. You 
 might just as well, for aU practical purposes, call the penny 
 a shiUing or the shiUing a penny. In Egypt a workman 
 can keep his wife and family, and live well, on 6d. a 
 day. In the United States a man can scarcely Uve — he 
 cannot Uve in comfort — on 6s. a day. It is, therefore, 
 perfectly clear that it is not the amotmt of money received 
 but what money will buy that is the standard. 
 
 Professor Thorold Rogers, who investigated this subject very 
 closely, was one of the first to draw attention to what was 
 the golden age for labour in this country, and what I believe 
 was the golden age for labour in the world, and that was here 
 
268 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 in England in the fifteenth century. Guilds, which preceded 
 our present Trade Unions, were prevalent in all trades ; they 
 were extremely wealthy, and we have many of them existing 
 right down to the present time, as the City Guilds of London. 
 The wages paid then — ^if I tell you the amount you will say 
 they were very badly paid, shockingly paid — ^the standard 
 wages for stone-masons, bricklayers, joiners, and most other 
 trades was 6d. a day, but they were paid for all days— 
 15s. a month. Let us see what the sixpence would do. 
 Supposing you formed a club here for buying each other 
 clothing, food, and paying your rents here in Port Sunlight, 
 and you took a thousand of your number, and said, " We'll 
 put all our wages into a conunon pool." Well, imagine you 
 have such a club in Port Smihght, and one man is buying 
 as cheaply as he can all your mutton, beef, pork, eggs, geese, 
 pigeons, etc., caUco, clothing, and paying your rent. Well, 
 imagine there was another club Uke that in the fifteenth 
 century, let us see what your wages would have to be to do 
 what the men could do in the fifteenth century. Each man's 
 wages would need to be £10 a week to pay your rent as 
 you pay it in Port Sunlight ; for bu5dng beef, mutton, and 
 pork, £3 los. a week ; geese, £5 5s. a week ; chickens, £4 a 
 week ; pigeons, ffi a week ; cheese and butter, £4 a week ; 
 bread only £x a week — ^that is entirely caused by the cheap- 
 ness of transport by rail and steam ; eggs, £3 15s. a week ; 
 caUco, 3s. 6d. a week — ^that is causecl, again, by the machinery 
 I have mentioned, the inventions of Crompton and Ark- 
 wright ; for the clothes you wear your wages would have 
 to be 15s. a week. 
 
 These men in the fifteenth century, therefore, were 
 extremely well paid ; in fact, food was so cheap in those 
 days that when these men went to work on the monas- 
 teries and the cathedrals which we see now in the country, 
 some in ruins and some stiU in existence, as York Minster, 
 it' was perfectly immaterial to the master whether he 
 gave the man food in addition or not. The man got his 
 wages, and if he Uked to have his food he could have it. 
 They worked eight hours a day in the fifteenth century; 
 therefore, the workmen of to-day are only striving for what 
 their forefathers enjoyed five hundred years ago. Another 
 feature of that age is the quaUty of the work. It has survived 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 269 
 
 to the present time ; it is unquestionable that each mason 
 took a pride in his work, and put a mark on each stone he 
 worked, and those masons' marks on the old stones are known 
 well throughout the country, very much like signed pictures 
 by a Royal Academician of to-day. I won't say we cannot, 
 but we do not produce such quality in stone-masons' work 
 and brickwork to-day. Won't you agree with me that such 
 a high quality of work would have been impossible if the men 
 had been paid starvation wages and worked long hours ? 
 I am perfectly certain of it, and when I know, as above 
 illustrated, that men were paid in purchasing power at double 
 the rate of wages that men are receiving to-day, and working 
 an eight-hour day, then when I see the quality of the work 
 that went with it, I see not, necessarily, cause and effect, 
 but I see an effect which might have been utterly impossible 
 of attainment under other conditions; and I also see that 
 when the work is excellent its value is increased, and when 
 you increase the value you again increase the fvind out of 
 which wages are to be paid. 
 
 Now, these Labour Associations in the fifteenth century 
 were extremely strong, but one of the special features of 
 them — and we see it in some of the lodges that come 
 down to us to-day — ^was that they inculcated temperance, 
 religion, good, honest work. The vices of the age had 
 not then reached the workmen. Whatever they were, 
 they had certainly not reached the working man of those 
 days. That was the high-water mark for workmen ; and 
 the low-water mark was just about one hundred years 
 ago. The Civil Wars, the Wars of the Roses, brought about 
 a great change, for as soon as you have war, you are reducing 
 the fund out of which wages are paid. There might be honour 
 and glory, but you are destroying product, and as surely 
 as you destroy product you destroy the fund out of which 
 wages are paid. Then, when the wars in France ceased:^ 
 for in those days we used to have periodical wars with France 
 — the soldiers who returned began to maraud the country ; 
 they never settled down to work again : they became bands 
 of robbers, pressing on industries and making the country 
 unsettled. Then bad government followed, resulting in the 
 great Civil War of Cromwell's time. All these things, I want 
 to impress upon you, are the factors that govern the case ; 
 
270 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 these things reduce the fund out of which wages are paid — 
 they reduce it so much that, in 1651, only two hundred years 
 after the golden age for labour — the magistrates attempted 
 to fix by law a minimmn wage for a man equal to 5s. a week 
 in its purchasing power to-day, and during the first twenty 
 years of the last century the wages paid were only equal, 
 in present purchasing power, to 6s. a week for a man. We 
 wonder how they could live on it — they did not live, they 
 starved. I have read reports cqpceming the workpeople 
 in some of the towns of Lancashire, at the period of one 
 hundred years ago, and there find there was often not a bed 
 in many families, in some towns only a bed for five 
 famiUes, and they had to sleep on straw and anything 
 they could get. 
 
 The three conditions I have mentioned are the only 
 conditions that can affect labour and increase wages, and 
 as in the fifteenth century, so in the twentieth century. 
 Trade Unions are absolutely necessary ; but don't let us 
 mistake their vocation ! In the fifteenth century the unions 
 insisted upon absolutely a high standard of excellence in a 
 workman before he was admitted. Trade Unions are 
 powerless to raise wages other than by widening, broaden- 
 ing, and increasing the only three sources out of which 
 the fund available for wages can spring. If Trade Unions 
 coulii raise wages they could maintain them. The Trade 
 Unions of the fifteenth century, rich and powerful beyond, 
 anything we hav6 to-day, would have done so, but they were 
 a broken reed, feeble as water, against the neglect and viola- 
 tion of the three sources above mentioned, powerless against 
 the destructive effects of war, bad government, and a waste 
 of capital. The present improved conditions of labour have 
 not been brought about by Trade Unions, else how can you 
 explain the fact that domestic service, which is absolutely 
 without any union at all, and which numbers more people 
 than any other single industry, has been able to obtain 
 larger iricreases of wages than any of the organized industries? 
 The reason is this : that in domestic servants you have got 
 these three conditions fulfilled. Domestic servants, as a 
 class, have immensely improved in the last fifty years ; they 
 have improved in the quality of the servipe they have rendejesd., 
 ami, consequently, there has been an incre%^9,d denjiHld 
 
SUMJBJ IJNJJUSTKIAL QUESTIONS 271 
 
 for their services ; but, further than that, there has been a 
 large and enormous increase of capital and of wealth in this 
 country : consequently, there has been a larger number of 
 people who have wanted domestic servants. Lastly, there 
 has been a reduced cost for food and other things, and as the 
 cost of keeping and paying for the mere food of a domestic 
 servant has gone down, the fund available for pasmient 
 of wages to a domestic has increased, and the domestic 
 has had the advantage of it. 
 
 If Trade Unions were to force wages up in any industry 
 higher than that industry could pay out of its funds 
 available for wages, that industry would soon cease to 
 exist — there can be no doubt about that. And is not this 
 a better footing to have the question upon than that of 
 mere bargaining between master a,nd man, in which the 
 workman asks for a rise of wages somewhat as if it were 
 a favour, and beheves that if he fought hard enough, 
 and struggled long enough, he would get it ? I think that 
 idea is degrading to every one of us ; and look at the false 
 position such a system places the master in. There is no 
 master who is a master Uterally : he is just as much the 
 servant of the pubhc, and just as much dependent upon the 
 quality of the service he renders to the public, as the men 
 he «nploys are his servants. The sooner we recognize the 
 economic conditions that govern these matters, the sooner 
 we shall find that we are all On one common platform, that 
 we can work together to increase the fund out of which wages 
 are paid, but no amount of bargaining, no matter of asking 
 as a favour for higher wages, no question of refusing as an 
 act of tyranny, has any effect upon the question whatever. 
 I prefer it so, and I believe every one of you, as I know you 
 do, prefers it to be on that footing. Trade Unions, I think, 
 have recognized these last twenty years this fact, and do 
 recognize it more and more ; they see that their greatest 
 sphere of usefulness is in increasing the power of the three 
 main influences that tend to enlarge the fund available for 
 the payment of wages. 
 
 The Trade Unions ParUamentary Committees have striven 
 for good government to protect their members from in- 
 justice ; they have agitated in Parliament for improved 
 conditions of labour ; they have agitated for enjployers' 
 
272 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 liability; they have , agitated for reforms of adtninistration 
 of justice; for the appointment of factory inspectors; 
 for the improvement of patent laws — a most important 
 matter ; they have agitated for certificates of competency 
 for engine-drivers, and for various improvements of the 
 Friendly Societies Acts. These are the lines along which, 
 I venture to say. Trade Unions can best gain their object. 
 Trade Unions are absolutely necessary ; there must be 
 combinations of men, but don't let us mistake either 
 what a combination of employers can do for employers or 
 what a combination of employees can do for employees. If 
 we take the right view of this, we shall see that any attempt 
 at restriction of output is only another way of reducing the 
 fund out of which wages are paid, and can only have one 
 effect, and that is to reduce wages. I venture to say that 
 Trade Unions might take just one little lesson from their 
 predecessors, the Gtiilds of the fifteenth century, and whilst 
 determined as these Guilds were in protecting their members 
 in the maintenance of the standard wage, that they should 
 accompany that by an equally strong insistence upon a 
 maximum of ef|iciency in their members. By doing so the 
 fund available for wages would be again increased. 
 
 Perhaps it might be argued that self-interest is quite strong 
 enough to deal with these matters ; that the man who wants his 
 wages increased will take such measures as he thinks right to get 
 them increased, and his own self-interest will keep him right, 
 I have never known the man who did right merely because 
 it was his self-interest to do so. It is to no one's self-interest 
 to get drunk, or to get locked in prison or to commit any 
 crime. We don't find self-interest strong enough to keep 
 men out of prison or to make them lead good lives, and the 
 reason is that self-interest must be an enhghtened self-interest. 
 If you will add the word " enhghtened," and say " enhght- 
 ened self-interest is a strong factor," I will agree with you; 
 and, therefore, it is extremely necessary, when we are discussing | 
 the points of self-interest, to see that we have enhghtened 
 self-interest. And if we do that, we shall find as years roll 
 on that we are improving our conditions. Not suddenly/ 
 perhaps — sudden changes are not very desirable — ^but gradually 
 improving our conditions ; and we may rest assured of this : 
 that anything that tends to violate the three conditions that 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 273 
 
 I have ventured to call your attention to wiU, sooner or later, 
 and in my opinion sooner than later, reduce the fund available 
 for wages. We are suffering a little from that now. We 
 have just come through a war,' and war, altogether apart 
 from whether necessary or unnecessary, is destructive ; and 
 as surely as we go to war, righteous war just as much as un- 
 righteous war, war of self-defence just as much as war of 
 attack, we shall have to pay the penalty. Whenever we go 
 to war, let us know and realize the step we are taking. Don't 
 let us think we can go to war any more than go to law, and 
 not have the bill to pay afterwards. The three conditions 
 I have mentioned are the three conditions we must keep 
 steadily in rriind. 
 
 I The Boer War. 
 
 19 
 
Ill 
 X PROBLEMS 
 
 Liverpool, November 23, 1917. 
 [In the plain terms of a worker speaking to workers. Lord 
 Leverhulme addressed the representatives of the Liverpool 
 Trades and Labour Council on topics to which the Great 
 War has given a new urgency.] 
 
 We have all of us ideals, and the following of our ideals 
 brings us into contact with many aspects of life, but we are 
 conscious that the only part worth living of our lives is follow- 
 ing those ideals ; and I know every one of us in this room 
 realizes that fact, and that we are all anxious to do every- 
 thing we can to realize our ideals. We recognize, fully and 
 completely, that present conditions are not right. When 
 we talk of Labour Unrest, then I say, if Labour were quiet 
 under present conditions it would be a bad look-out for this 
 country fifty years from now. The healthiest signs we have 
 got to-day are Labour Unrest and all the aspirations of Labour 
 — and I may be allowed to use the word "labour," because I 
 think I have worked as hard as any one in this room, and 
 have done so all my life. 
 
 As an ideal, we see urged on some hands that the confis- 
 cation of all the wealth to-day, the cancellation of aU the 
 war loans and so on, would be a short-cut to a more equal 
 enjojTment by Labour of all that wealth can place within the 
 reach of each of us. Believe me, that is a delusion. If all 
 the money possessed by each of us here in this room to-night 
 were placed on this table and pooled and divided out equally 
 to us as we left the room, the only residt that such division 
 could have would be this, that those who had been thrifty 
 and worked hard, and had saved a little money, would be 
 
 asking themselves to-morrow, knowing that the same process 
 
 aT4 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 275 
 
 would reqiiire to be repeated over and over again, Why 
 should they live laborious days and deny themselves enjoy- 
 ments and luxuries when this was the only result ? And, 
 equally, those who had received money that they had not 
 worked for would feel that this and future divisions would 
 abolish the necessity of their working to-morrow and their 
 practice of thrift to-morrow, so that both sections of us in 
 this room would go away discouraged from the exercise of 
 our full ability for work and thrift. 
 
 There can be no other way in which we can get greater 
 comfort and happiness for each of us than by producing more 
 goods. That is the ke57note of all, and there is no reason 
 why in the production of more goods we should not do so 
 on such lines as will ensure a more equal distribution of the 
 result of our labour, because that is what we do want. Well, 
 we are apt to think that unless there is going to be a more 
 equal distribution of wealth, there is something in the dis- 
 tribution at fault, and we are quite right in considering in 
 what way we can deal with the problem and rectify abuses. 
 Now, the only way in which we can increase wages — because 
 that is the first step to advancement — is by increasing pro- 
 duction. The only way in which we can soundly increase 
 production is by emplojdng more machinery. The only 
 way in which we can make a demand, a consuming demand, 
 for this increased production is by cheapening the product, 
 otherwise, no matter what the wages are, the price of the pro- 
 duct is so high that, as we are feeUng now in war-time, the 
 extra wages are of very httle increased value. And, finally — 
 and here is where I want to lay great emphasis — you cannot 
 increase demand greatly, notwithstanding that you have 
 raised wages, notwithstanding that you have cheapened 
 the product, unless you have elevated and increased the wants 
 of the people. You have to increase wants. You can only 
 raise their wants by giving them more leisure. I believe 
 that reduced hours of labour and more leisure for a proper 
 outlook on life are as essential to an increased consumption 
 of articles that can be produced as is a cheaper cost. 
 
 Now, we will imagine, for instance, that away in the Congo 
 we talked of greatly increasing the production of, say calico. 
 I have been through the Congo ; the native there has few 
 or no wants. A piece of calico the size of a towel makes a 
 
276 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 full dress suit for the husband ; another piece the same size 
 makes the full dress suit for the wife, and the children need 
 no dress at all. Now, if we were to produce any quantity of 
 calico, as soon as these simple wants were satisfied there 
 would be no demand for the remainder. We would have to 
 start in the Congo by first of all inspiring in men and women 
 a love for more clothing — blouses, skirts, trousers, coats, and 
 so on; and for houses that required table-cloths, sheets, curtains 
 to the windows and all the rest that makes for comfort, and 
 ''^then we would find that with these new wants came such a 
 demand that however much calico we could produce in reason, 
 it would be all required and aU be sold. Now, I believe as 
 firmly that the workmen of this country — I have endeavoured 
 to practise it in my own limited way — ^have as much right 
 to an artistic home, a comfortable home in a garden, with 
 all the amenities of life, as their employer. Now, I say that 
 that is the first essential to the enjoyment of this leisure.. 
 What use is it talking to a workman about a nice artistic 
 home with pictures or engravings on the wall, taste shown 
 in everything, when he only comes home to sleep and to 
 rest for the next day, leaves early, and his only time at home 
 is an occasional Sunday ? You won't raise a taste for an 
 artistic home under these coi^ditions. Art flourishes only 
 where there is leisure and all that art means, in increased 
 demand for books and everything that makes for comfort, 
 and, beheve me, reduced hours of labour are essential for 
 increased demand. 
 
 Now, if we have such a production that wages can be 
 raised, a greater volume of articles produced, costing less 
 money, and increased demand to sell them off as fast as'they 
 are produced, that is an ideal, and it is worth striving for. 
 We can only achieve this with machinery. There must be 
 no antipathy to enlarged output by machinery, and, believe 
 me, wages increases then would become quite a matter of 
 secondary importance. You know that there is automatic 
 machinery in which the wages of the operator, however high, 
 are a very small part of the cost of production. The great 
 part of cost of production is interest, depreciation, repairs 
 and renewals, and the cost of the central power station for 
 running the machinery. Now, we have these machines, and 
 if we are wanting a greater increased output we are simul- 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 277 
 
 taneously wanting more ships and we are wanting more 
 machinery for the ships ; and how can we greatly in the next 
 few years duplicate our machinery for factorJIfe ? All our 
 men will be wanted on shipbuilding, house-building, and 
 repairing of the devastation of war; but we can run our 
 existing machinery double time, and it does not cost us any- 
 thing more for interest, for depreciation ; only a little more 
 for raising steam in the boiler, a little more for oil, a little 
 more for repairs, and we get all that increased production, 
 with just those trifling expenses. Labour working six hours 
 a day, as has been proved over and over again, can produce 
 in six hours the maximum it is capable of in monotonous occu- 
 pations. We shall, therefore, be able to pay for six hours' 
 work at least the same rate of pay as we pay for eight, because 
 labour will be capable of as much work in six as in eight hours. 
 The machinery will produce more, and out of this combined 
 effort, the human element working two shifts of six hours 
 each, the mechanical element working twelve hours, or more, 
 we shall have two funds created, one for reducing the price 
 of the article and another for increasing the** wages on the 
 top of the reduction of hours. 
 
 These results are certain, provided we have the demand 
 for the goods when they are produced. Apart from export 
 trade, which we shall be bound to cultivate, and which is an 
 enormous trade and one which we can make still greater, 
 we must have the increased demand from the home trade, 
 and that I beheve the six-hour day, by giving us more leisure, 
 will ensure to us. Now, why do I talk so positively about 
 this ? Do you kiiow that we find all over the world that 
 wages are the highest where, per capita of the people, the 
 greatest amount of machinery is in existence and in employ- 
 ment — the wages are the highest there— and as a result the 
 wealth invested in machinery in these countries has always 
 an ever-increasing force compelUng it to still further similar 
 investment in that direction because it pays. In the United 
 States the capital per head in machinery is the highest of 
 an3^where in the world, and wages there, as we know, before 
 the war and maybe even to-day, were the highest also. In 
 china and India the amount invested in machinery is the 
 lowest of any countries in the world, and the wages are 
 the lowest. And, curiously enough, it was India, where the 
 
278 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 cotton is grown, where the men in the cotton-mill get pence 
 a day — eightpence and ninepence a day — and where native 
 engineers wl(fcn I was last in that part of the world were only 
 getting ninepence a day — ^it was India, that grows the cotton, 
 and where labour works long hours for these low wages, that 
 within this very year, only a few months ago, appealed to 
 the British Parliament to be protected — from whom ? From 
 people working longer hours and being paid less money ? 
 No ; but from Lancashire, where the workers receive more 
 shillings per day than the Hindoo receives pence, and where 
 they work less hours, and where they have to pay freight 
 on the cotton from India to Lancashire, make it into goods, 
 and again pay freight to send it back to India. So that 
 hi^er wages go with machinery and lower cost of production, 
 and lower wages and less machinery go with higher cost of 
 production and strangle any attempt to raise and uphf t labour, 
 as we see in India. 
 
 Now, I think we can claim at this point that aU employers 
 must abandon their idea that low wages mean cheap produc- 
 tion and high profits, and I think the workman must equally 
 abandon his idea that limited production means more labour 
 employed and at higher wages. They are both wrong, and 
 two wrongs do not make one right. 
 
 Now then, can we arrive at a prospect of some direction 
 in which we can work to lift the workers ? We want more 
 capital invested in labour-saving machinery to give us 
 increased output, higher wages, shorter hours, reduced cost 
 of production, and we want to eliminate the element of fatigue 
 by the reduced hours of labour as well. 
 
 Now, there is a theory, and you know the theory as well 
 as I, that labour produces all wealth. It was started by 
 Adam Smith, and is worshipped by many to-day. If that 
 were true, don't you think that the Manchester Ship Canal, 
 and other undertakings that I could mention, would be verit- 
 able gold mines ? In the making of a canal the cost is practic- 
 ally all labour — digging — ^it is practically all labour, and yet 
 we know that the original shareholders in the Manchester Ship 
 Canal, instead of making wealth, have never seen a penny 
 return on their capital in the last thirty years. If the theory 
 were true, not only would the Manchester Ship Canal be a 
 veritable gold mine, but the mere act of loading a ship, 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 279 
 
 which is the greatest labour, I imagine, in connection with 
 shipping, and the mere act of shovelling the coal on the 
 boiler fires, which is, perhaps, in many parts of the world a 
 still more laborious piece of work, ought to ensure a profit 
 on the voyage, but we know they do not. We know that 
 profits are not made because of the labour of loading the ship 
 or merely putting coal upon the fire. The men who can 
 make money are few. They are less than one per thousand 
 who can make money at all other than by the receipt of wages 
 for employment. They are less than one in a hundred thou- 
 sand in the very high undertakings, and in the highest underr 
 takings of all they are fewer than one in a miUion who can 
 organize large undertakings to make money. This good old 
 world has only produced one Ford, one Rockefeller, one Carnegie. 
 I know these men are held up to odium because it is the fashion 
 Let us see if they deserve it. Don't you think it was just 
 as sensible of the old man who blew the organ to say that 
 he produced the music as to say that it is labour that is the 
 source of all wealth ? I like this illustration, because it is 
 quite obvious that if the man ceases blowing the organ there 
 will be no music ; but it is equally true that he may blow 
 the organ as much and as laboriously as he likes, and that 
 unless there is some one there to play and touch the notes 
 with discrimination and skill there would be no music. Arid 
 when we search how these fortunes have been made by the 
 three men I mention and by all others, what do we find ? 
 We find that fortunes have only been made by producing 
 goods cheaper and selling them cheaper, and by increasing 
 the rate of wages paid to the worker and reducing the hours 
 of labour. 
 
 Take Ford's cars, for example. Ford started as a yoimg 
 man, and I think his first occupation was on a farm — ^his 
 father's farm. Then he got an idea that he could make a 
 motor that would do a lot of the farm work ; just the idea that 
 he is putting into practice now, thirty years later. He had 
 thought on the farm, and he wondered if he could not make 
 a motor to do a lot of the work on the farm, and he told his 
 wife he would go to Detroit and see some of the machines ; 
 so he went. He was a fairly successful farmer and he was 
 making a fair sum of money. He closed down his farm, 
 and he and his wife moved to Detroit, and he engaged him- 
 
280 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 self as engineer on the night shift to look after the Edison 
 plant for lighting the city of t)etroit, at something like a 
 quarter of what he had been making as a farmer. He was 
 quite content ; he had made up his mind he would get to 
 the bottom, as far as he could, of the electrical problem; 
 he found he would have to acquire a knowledge of electricity 
 to make his motor, and he worked on and on, and you know 
 the result. Now, does any man begrudge Ford his five 
 millions sterling a year that he is making ? Fancy, that is 
 ;£ioo,ooo every week. Does any one begrudge it ? If any 
 do I could imagine them sajdng to themselves — they would 
 say it truthfully, I know — something hke this : " It is true 
 Ford serves the pubUc with a cheap car and, for the price, 
 a good car. It is true Ford serves his workers in his 
 factories well, because he pays them double wages ; in fact, 
 he starts a boy fresh from school at a pound a day. But, 
 but, but, Mr. Ford, you make too much money ; you give 
 the public cheap cars, you pay double wages in your fac- 
 tories, but you make toa much money for yourself ; that 
 is our objection." Well, what would happen ? Would 
 other men be encouraged to emulate Ford's example if, after 
 all this toil of leaving the farm, working for a quarter of the 
 wage while he mastered the subject, all this laborious work, 
 he and his wife (a loyal and true wife, as every successful 
 man has always had) working together — if the result of all 
 that was to be told that he was making too much money? 
 You might as well tell some of his men who were drawing 
 double pay that they were making too much money. The result 
 would be the race of Fords would die out, cars would cost 
 the public more money, the wages to workmen would fall to 
 the lowest Trade Union rate — that is, to half the rate Ford 
 is pa5dng — and the future Fords would have hard work to 
 make bare interest on their capital. It would operate 
 against all three. 
 
 Now, let us imagine a scene at Ford's works. We will 
 imagine that his 20,000 or so operatives-^I am not sure how 
 many he has, but we will say 20,000, it may be 40,000 — 
 read in the paper, the local paper, that Ford has made 
 five million pounds sterhng, twenty-five million dollars, 
 the year before, and they have discussed that fact the night 
 before, and they have come to the conclusion that Mr. Ford 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 281 
 
 is making far too much and have decided that they will go 
 and interview him, because " labour creates all wealth," say 
 they, " Adam Smith told us so, and, therefore, this money is 
 not Ford's ; we make that money, we ought to have it." 
 They go and wait on Ford and they lay their case before 
 him fairly, perfectly fairly. Now we will imagine his reply. 
 Now, Ford I imagine would say this : " Now, my men, I don't 
 want you to make a penny of this money for me. Go right 
 away and make it for some other motor man, one of my 
 competitors, who cannot make money for himself, who is 
 perhaps losing money. Leave me right away and go and engage 
 with that man ; he will give you nearly all the profit ; he is 
 losing money now or making none. You can make your 
 own terms with him. He will give you at least nine-tenths 
 of the profit, because if he got a tenth he would be content. 
 You go and make him five millions and he will give you nine- 
 tenths, or he will give you even more — perhaps he will give 
 you nineteen-twentieths, perhaps even ninety-nine one- 
 hundredths of it ; but you can make your own terms with him. 
 You wiU get splendid terms from him ; in fact, you can dictate 
 your own terms. As to myself, those men who will be sacked 
 from this motor man who is not making money, why, I will 
 engage them ; it will be merely a change over. You men 
 who are making my money wiU go and make it for these other 
 people ; their workmen will come and work for me and I 
 will pay them double wages as I am pajdng you, and I will 
 see if I cannot make as much money without you as with 
 you. I will put them in my factory and they can work for 
 me. I do not want discontented men. I will engage these 
 men, who wiU be perfectly contented as soon as they come 
 to me, because they will be drawing the double amount of 
 what they are drawing to-day ; I will pay them double wages. 
 But I want you to be sure," he would say to them with a 
 twinkle in his eye, " when you engage with your new masters 
 you stipulate to receive the double wages whether he makes 
 the profit or not — the same as I am pajdng you now ; do not 
 trust yourselves or him to make profits for you ; insist on 
 having the double wages I am paying you, and then, of course, 
 make your claim for the profits in addition, because you say 
 labour creates all wealth. Now, if you draw double wages 
 from my competitors, it will make it easier for me ; for, paying 
 
282 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 only half ray rate of wages, their cars are already dearer 
 in price than my cars, and I shall have the trade more and 
 more in my hands. This, of course, you will be able to do 
 easily because you create the wealth ; out of that wealth 
 you will draw the double wages, and you will draw the ninety- 
 nine hundredths of the five millions you will be making for 
 your new master, because you say you create it ; you make it ; 
 it is yours, and take it and do not delay for a moment ; start 
 right away, and I will swop employees with these men." 
 
 Now, let us see, dismissing that picture — I will just 
 leave it at that to you — ^what is the wealth that the masters 
 make in the United Kingdom per head of the population 
 and per head of the workers, because it is estimated that 
 only three out of every five are workers. In the three I 
 am including the wife — you will understand I am including 
 all workers. Now, it is only pre-war income tax figures I 
 can take, but on the top of pre-war figures we can add 
 excess profits. If you will take the returns for 1913-14 
 you will find the income from land and houses, which I am 
 quite willing to throw in because we are going to divide every- 
 thing else ; let us divide all tliere is. We cannot divide 
 salaries, because we shall always want some one to do the 
 work, and they will always want salaries paid in proportion 
 to their appointments ; and the salaries paid to Govern- 
 ment officials and Corporation officials also will have to be 
 paid. I am merely speaking of the profits in business which 
 we are proposing to confiscate ; and see how they work out. 
 Now, the income from business, worked out per head of the 
 population, is 4jd. per head per day of the people, and the 
 income from land and rents of houses is 2jd. ; total, 6|d. 
 The excess profits tax divides out at 3d. per head per day of 
 the people — that is what the Government take.' The Govern- 
 ment began by taking 50 per cent., then 60 per cent., and 
 now it is 80 per cent. There is another 2|d. per head per 
 day of the people that the maker of the excess profits is per- 
 mitted to retain — total, is. per head per day ; now, dividing 
 this over three out of every five, it is is. 8d. per head per day 
 of the workers. Now, that would not eliminate poverty if 
 we took it all, if we did not pay a penny to employers in 
 England ; if we could get employers for nothing, that would 
 
 ' In 1917. 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 283 
 
 not remove poverty. In fact, since this war began, covered 
 by the period when these excess profits have been made, 
 wages, as you know, have risen from 2s. 6d. in some industries 
 for unskilled labour to 5s. in others for skilled, and in a few, 
 IDS. per day per head ; so that in dealing with this money 
 in the sense of confiscation, or any name we hke to give it, 
 aU the wealth of the country would not reUeve poverty or 
 lift the workman much. No scheme of confiscation or redistri- 
 bution can do that. The only way is the one we mentioned 
 — increased production. This will enable wages to be 
 advanced as I mentioned, hours of labour to be reduced, 
 cost of production to be reduced. 
 
 A policy of " ca' canny " defeats its own end. We can 
 see in the building trade the policy of " ca' canny " can 
 only increase the cost of building ; and whether the houses 
 are built by the municipality or the State, or by private 
 enterprise, wages will have to be paid in the building, material 
 wdll. have to be bought — and mafferial is largely labour cost 
 right up to the point of being on the job where the material 
 is going to be used — and the amount of rent, either directly 
 as rent or in rates and taxes, will be in proportion to the 
 cost. If " ca' canny " is in the coal mine, then coals will be 
 dearer. If " ca' canny " is in the factory, then boots, shoes, 
 and clothes will be dearer. No " ca' canny " policy can 
 produce wealth ; it is a robber of wealth and of feUow-work- 
 men and reduces and lowers the level of every workman. It 
 is not an uplifting force, it is a suffocating poison ; but it 
 has its devoted disciples in many industries throughout the 
 land, mistaken — don't think I am judging these men hardly ; 
 I believe they are as honest in their efforts by " ca' canny " 
 to help the working man as I am honest in my conviction 
 that " ca' canny " is a blunder. All I want to endeavour to 
 show is that the policy is wrong, not that the men's motives 
 are wrong. If it was mere laziness, I would say it was a 
 wrong motive ; if it was to save their own backs, I would 
 say it was the wrong motive ; but when it is a beUef that 
 " ca' canny " will employ more labour, will make wages go 
 up, and so on, then I say it is a mistaken poHcy. 
 
 Now, it may be thought that we could get relief from 
 Acts of Parliament. A noted man said — I think it was 
 Herbert Spencer — that he had inquired into thirty-two Acts 
 
284 THE SIX-HOUR CAY 
 
 of Parliament that had been passed to benefit the worker 
 and to relieve poverty, and twenty-nine out Of the thirty-two 
 Acts had produced exactly the opposite effect. Why, the 
 so-caUed People's Budget, for which I voted with great 
 pride and pleasure in 1909 — and I am not ashamed of 
 having voted for it, because that Budget was sound so far 
 as its taxation of wealth, its graduated income tax, its 
 graduated death duties, and so on, went, all of which 
 taxation ought to make us look gently on such clauses of the 
 Bill as have failed to achieve the objects intended — now; 
 that Budget has discouraged undoubtedly the building of 
 houses for workmen throughout the land ; it has discouraged 
 the landowner in developing his land ; it has not made 
 prospective builders eager to buy biiilding land ; in fact, for 
 the scarcity of houses the workman is suffering from to-day 
 the • Budget of 1909 is partly responsible — not entirely re- 
 sponsible, but it has tended in that direction. 
 
 When the war first broke out, we thought employment 
 was going to be very bad for the workman, and the Prince 
 of Wales's Fund was started and five million pounds subscribed 
 at once to assist the unemployed. People were urged not 
 to discontinue any work that employed labour, but to start 
 fresh work that employed labour — anything that employed 
 labour. We all expected that the war Was going to make 
 emplojTment very bad. The war has proved us all to be 
 very bad prophets. Wages have risen, employment is to- 
 day in the position that there are two jobs for one man. Now, 
 why is this ? Why should a Bill called the People's Budget 
 have failed to achieve the building of more houses, that part 
 of the Bill which was intended to so achieve, and war has 
 produced employment when it was expected that it would 
 reduce emplo5nnent ? Why is that ? Well, in the first 
 place, the one has discouraged and, in the second place, not 
 only in munition factories but in all other occupations, the 
 war has been a stimulus and an invigorator to both men and 
 women. From patriotism, from evety motive, we have all 
 worked harder in munition factories and in - our ordinary 
 occupations , since the war. This has increased the wages 
 fund, this harder work, greater employment, men, women, 
 and girls employed who were formerly not employed. This 
 has produced more wealth, not Acts of Parliament. It is 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 285 
 
 our determination to win this war, the high, patriotic effort 
 we have put forth, that has increased wages. Of course, there 
 has always been the destruction of property in the form of shells, 
 cartridges, guns, battleships, and ordinary ships, and so on — 
 that is going on all the time — but the big factor has been 
 the stimulus to us to work harder, the opportunity to work 
 harder. With equal stimulus to work and without war, the 
 demand for munitions would have been a demand for more 
 boots and shoes, more houses ; but it has been the stimulus 
 behind us to do our bit, and without that stimulus we would 
 have been in chaos in this country, as many nations are. No ; 
 we cannot increase our wealth by Acts of ParUament, because 
 we cannot see far enough what are the cross-currents and 
 under-currents that we have to face ; but we can organize our 
 time, and our work so that all shall have equal opportunities 
 and none be overworked, and on that line, with increased 
 machinery and a six-hour working day, higher wages, 
 reduced 'cost and improved leisure, increased consumption 
 can be attained. 
 
 Now, who are the employers to-day ? You think I am 
 one — great delusion. You think Ford is one — another 
 delusion. We are not employers ; the people who employ 
 " myself, and every one who works in the business I am con- 
 nected with, are the consumers. Let consumers buy other 
 products made by other firms, and where are we all at our 
 works ? Let the consumer of motor-cars buy other cars 
 than Ford's, where are Ford and his workmen ? The em- 
 ployer of Ford is the consumer. The employer of every 
 master in the country to-day is the consumer, and 90 per 
 cent, of the consuming power of products made by machinery 
 in this country are the workmen themselves. Therefore, 
 90 per cent, of those that employ me are working men and 
 their families. I want you to bear that fact in mind. My 
 employer is the consumer, and 90 per cent, of the consumers of 
 my article are working men, and so with aU the articles made 
 in cotton-mills, boot and shoe factories, and so on. Well, 
 now, don't you -see that the real employer is the consumer, 
 and not the capitalist — the so-called employer ? Don't 
 you see that the consumer's own best interests must be to see 
 that whoever is the nominal employer he shall be stimulated 
 to bring out the best that is in him ? If you choose a chair- 
 
286 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 man for any of your committees, you choose one who has 
 your confidence, and who you consider is hkely to give the 
 best results. If the capitaUst is a Rockefeller, the con- 
 sumer practically employs Rockefeller on the understanding, 
 and only on that condition, that he shall bore oil wells, build 
 oil refineries, lay pipe-lines, and build tank steamers to trans- 
 port the oil, and that he does this work cheaper than any other 
 capitalist can do it. That is the only basis on which Rocke- 
 feller was ever employed. If the capitalist is a Ford, the 
 consumer says to him that he can make motor-cars on condition 
 that he build them better in quaUty for the price, and lower 
 in price than any othfer capitaHst can build motor-cars for. 
 But that is the consumer's bargain with the capitalist. There 
 is not one of your wives going into a shop to-day who must 
 not be satisfied as to the quaUty and the price before she 
 purchases an article, and she will buy where — I know you have 
 all got good wives — she gets you the best value for your 
 money always. But the workman, how does he "approach 
 the capitalist ? Labour says to Rockefeller or to Ford that 
 they win only work for him on condition that he pays them 
 the maximum wages ; Labour in effect says, " We are going to 
 reverse this process on which we buy our goods, and we are 
 going to apply our rights as consumers in bu5ang goods on 
 that principle ; but when we come to sell our labour we are 
 going to sell it to the capitalist who gives us the most wages 
 for our work, and we claim our right to both these privileges." 
 And Labour can honestly claim the right when spending 
 wages to get the best value obtainable, and when seeking 
 employment to get the highest wages for producing articles 
 bought at lowest prices. It is as if Labour said to Capital : 
 " You are only our agent or broker. If you can give us the 
 highest price for what we have to sell and sell to us the pro- 
 ducts of our own labour at the lowest price we can obtain 
 the same for anjTwhere, then we will pay you a commission 
 for so doing ; ; but if you lose money over the transaction 
 you go down and out and into the bankruptcy court and you 
 must not look to us for help." 
 
 And what is this brokerage or commission ? I have shown 
 you that the profits on trade would be 4^d. per head per day 
 of the population : the excess profits retained by the capitalist 
 2id. per head per day ; total, 6f d. (for the purpose of this illus- 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 287 
 
 tration we are now dealing only with profits in trade, therefore 
 I am leaving out, at the moment, land and houses) or about 
 iid. per head per day of the workers. But from this we 
 ought to deduct certain items that do not appear in the in- 
 come tax returns. The bankrupt employers — employers who 
 reach the bankrupcy court — their losses are not deducted 
 from the income tax of the successful ; there is no deduction 
 for interest on capital. Income tax returns include interest 
 on capital. Whether our factories and machinery are State- 
 owned, or whether they are owned by private enterprise, 
 we shall always have to employ capital to pay out wages to 
 the workman whilst building our new factories and new 
 machinery. If we had obtained all our existing factories 
 and machinery by confiscation, in twenty years we should 
 have just as much capital raised to pay workmen to build 
 new machines and build new factories. We could not get 
 away from capital and interest. Now, if you deduct interest 
 on capital and losses of bankrupt capitalists, you will find 
 that the net profits do not work out at more than 3d. per 
 head per day of the workers ; in other words, a most modest 
 commission on the basis of the bargain, which is the highest 
 wages for the workman and the cheapest selling price for the 
 product of his labour. Abolish private enterprise, and you 
 would not save the iid., you would not save the 3d. For 
 competitive capital you would get State Civil Service ; every 
 Govenunent department, it is essential, must be run on what 
 we call the lines of red tape. Wages would become nominal, 
 not real, and whatever wages were nominally, they would 
 always represent reduced purchasing power to the consumer. 
 Now, all I want us to ask ourselves is this ; whether working 
 on lines such as we have hitherto worked sonsistently has 
 not increased wages solidly and substantially ? Every oppor- 
 tunity for advancing wages — and, believe me, the prosperity of 
 a country depends as much upon high wages as upon any other 
 element that can make a country prosperous — ^must be taken 
 advantage of. But this means more machinery, and it has 
 to mean, also, cheaper production. Wage increases must 
 not be sham increases; they must be real increases, with 
 increased purchasing power, as well as increases in amount. 
 I want us to realize that, and then on sound lines we can, 
 I believe, realize all our ideals. 
 
288 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 But behind all this is the ambition that I rejoice at of the 
 workers to control their own industries. I think that is one 
 of the healthy signs of the day, and I can see it and feel it 
 in the very fibre of my being, because, as I mentioned at the 
 beginning, I began in a modest way and I have worked up, 
 and I can realize your desire, the desire of every healthy 
 man in the kingdom to raise himself and become pilot of 
 his destiny. How can this be done ? The greatest attraction 
 to me of the six-hour working day is the education of the 
 young. I ask myself. Why should not the sons of the work- 
 man have the same education as the sons of the master? 
 They must have, if they are going to control industries in the 
 next generation. Do not think for a moment that control 
 can be achieved on any other hues ; but, with better educa- 
 tion and with the same ambition to control industries, who 
 can say nay to Labour ? But merely a desire to sit on a 
 Board of Directors, without a knowledge of all that that 
 position means, can help neither the workman, nor the in- 
 dustry, nor the country; there must be a period of training. 
 
 But if we get this training we shall be a better nation physi- 
 cally, we shall be better in brain power ; and note well this, 
 and I say it without any hesitation : sons and daughters who 
 are trained with hand and eye as well as brain will make 
 better educated men and women than the mere University 
 bookworm — ^infinitely better; and, you may depend upon 
 it, the control of industries in the future will go to those who 
 can work them to the greatest advantage. The circum- 
 stance that gave Ford his to-day's position was that he was 
 thirty years ahead of anybody else when he was working on 
 a farm, and he set himself to reaUze his ideals, and gave up 
 the farm to obtain a bigger field for his energies. The circum- 
 stance that made RockefellerVas that he had the conviction 
 that single oil wells and single oil refineries, putting oil into 
 casks and sending it on the train at high freights, was stupid, . 
 and he bought a number of oil wells ; he combined big oil 
 refineries, he laid pipe-Unes from the refineries to the coast, 
 he put tankers on the ocean to bring the oil to England, and 
 he brought the price of oil down from is. to 4d. a gallon, and 
 in that process he made a fortune. Now, that is the way it 
 will be for your sons, for my son, if they have to make money, 
 if they have to raise themselves, have more comforts for them- 
 
HUMJ^J 1JVDD8TRIAL QUESTIONS 289 
 
 selves and their children than we have had. We can only 
 achieve these ideals by increased production. 
 
 Education, the consideration of which I have left to the 
 finish as the crown of all, is the keynote of the situation, 
 and I would rejoice, as every one of you would, that the sons 
 of the workman should be the equal in education of the sons 
 of the master. But behind the master, behind the hollow 
 title of employer, is the consumer, and the fact that 90 per 
 cent, of the consumers are the working men and women, 
 that the whole mass of the consumers of the country will 
 be elevated and raised, the whole of our industries in which 
 they are employed will be elevated and raised, and we shall 
 march forward a proud nation to further achievements un- 
 dreamt of even to-day ; and Great Britain, at home and over- 
 seas, the largest Empire the world has ever seen, will contain 
 a people whose joyous lives are spent in such happy surround- 
 ings as are unknown to us in this room to-night, where life 
 will lengthen and joy will deepen, and where happiness wiU 
 be assured for all. 
 
 20 
 
IV 
 
 ZERO YIELDS OF CAPITAL AND 
 LABOUR 
 
 London, February 13, 1918. 
 
 [The Royal Society of Arts devoted a considerable proportion of 
 its proceedings during the winter of 1917-18 to problems of 
 Reconstruction, and in pursuance of this design Lord Lever- 
 hulme was invited to read a paper at one of its meetinp. 
 He gave cogent reasons against what is called " Conscription 
 of Wealth," and set up instead an ideal of comradeship in 
 the mutual relations of Capital and Labour. Mr. Robert 
 Tootill, M.P. for Bolton, who presided on this occasion, and 
 spoke with the authority of a Labour leader of many years' 
 experience, echoed Lord Leverhulme's call for a real comrade- 
 ^ ship of Capital and Labour, and the late Sir Swire Smith, 
 M.P., said the paper opened up a vision of what the country 
 could do even in the present difi&cult circumstances. Here 
 follows the paper :] 
 
 We are 'living in strenuous times, and are making sacrifices 
 of life and treasure on a scale that we are apt to believe is 
 greater than our forefathers, even in their most difficult wars, 
 were ever called upon to endure. But this is obviously only 
 true of dimensions. It is not true of proportions to scale 
 with the resources or wealth of the present British Empire, 
 as compared with her former war periods ; nor is it true in 
 relation to the resources Science has placed at our disposal 
 for our more rapid recuperation from the effects of this war, 
 by the exploitation and development of the nascent wealth 
 that Nature, with lavish hand, has stored up for us within 
 our boundaries. To realize the natural strength of the 
 British Empire, let us think of it in the words of the poet : — 
 
 As some tall cU£E that Ufts its awful form. 
 Swells from the vale, and midway leaves the storm, 
 Though round its breast the rolling clouds are spread, , 
 Eternal sunshine settles on its head. 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 291 
 
 Our most cruel and deplorable loss in this war is the awfu 
 sacrifice of human life. The irreparable, disastrous conse- 
 quences to civiUzation and the progress of the world that 
 must result from so many of the flower of our manhood having 
 been taken from us it would be impossible to overstate. This 
 welter of blood has made the world one huge sob and stifled 
 moan. There is not one single family group in the whole 
 of the peoples of the belligerent nations that has not to mourn 
 some loved dear ones lost or returned mutilated and torn, 
 blinded or crippled — the wreck and shadow of their former 
 selves. No loving care nor patient toil can restore these or 
 make good to us their loss. 
 
 But for the rest the loss can, on certain well-known and 
 proved estabhshed Unes, be fully recovered, and most speedily 
 of aU the money wastage. Many worthy good souls are worry- 
 ing themselves and the nation as to the undoubted load and 
 enormous burden of national war indebtedness we shall 
 have to carry when this war is over, and are worrying still 
 more as to our ability as a nation to repay these debts. In 
 their alarm, and suffering from an attack of nerves and cold 
 feet, some openly advocate unblushing repudiation of our 
 war debts, and call the same by some such specious name as 
 Conscription of Wealth. And in their haste to propound 
 this " cure all " for our ills they cannot even wait until we have 
 won a decisive victory on the battlefield and obtained the 
 unconditional surrender of our enemies, but must needs weaken 
 the national credit by advocating this impossible pohcy 
 even whilst the necessity for further borrowing still continues. 
 ^. There are seven pillars of national and individual prosperity 
 and happiness. These are : — 
 
 Justice. 
 
 Science 
 
 Truth. 
 
 Art. 
 
 Labour. 
 
 Leisure. 
 
 Capital. 
 
 
 The imit of the Empire, as of all democracies, is the home 
 and fireside, and along the Unes defined by the seven pillars 
 of prosperity, individual nations and the home units have 
 progressed from slavery to fullest Hberty. What were the 
 conditions of life in Great Britain in, say, OUver Cromwell's 
 time, when we experienced our greatest advance towards 
 
292 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 our present ideal form of Government — a Ginstitutional 
 Monarchy ? London, even then, was the largest, the richest, 
 and most populous city in the then-known world. Yet it 
 was indescribably dirty, overcrowded, insanitary, badly lighted 
 and worse drained, and neither health nor life was safe from 
 attacks from disease, pestilence, or robbers and footpads. 
 The then death-rate was over 49 per thousand in ordinary 
 years, and much higher in years of special visitations of plague. 
 In Oliver Cromwell's time, close to the then London, were 
 25 square miles of swamps, which to-day are absorbed within 
 the boundaries of the Metropolitan area, drained dry and made 
 healthy and bmlt over. In wet weather the streets and roads 
 were impassable, a quagmire of mud, in which chariots, wagons, 
 and carts sank to their axles. Robbers, footpads, and high- 
 wajTmen made it dangerous to travel in dayUght, and impossible 
 at night to do so without being under convoy of a guard. 
 In the United Kingdom at that time there were 34 counties 
 without any, even the most primitive, form of printing press. 
 The master flogged his apprentice, and the husband flogged 
 his wife. The stocks, the ducking-stool, and the whipping- 
 post were national institutions in the most pubHc centres of 
 every town and village. Even a century later we were very 
 httle improved in our social life. 
 
 What has changed all this to conditions such as exist in 
 the United Kingdom to-day ? It has been the discoveries 
 of science and the inventions of mechanics. About the close 
 of the eighteenth century. Watt, Arkwrjght, Hargreaves, 
 Crompton, Cartwright, and others invented various of our 
 most important " key " mechanical utiHties, such as the 
 steam-engine, the spinning-jenny, the mule, the power-loom, 
 the carding-machine, and scores of others. It is said that 
 as a result of these inventions, twenty-five men and fifty women 
 and boys can produce to-day as much cotton goods as could 
 have been produced by the hand labour of aU the men, women 
 and boys that were engaged in the cotton industry in Lanca- 
 shire in OUver Cromwell's time. 
 
 And what is the condition of London to-day ? The popula- 
 tion is more than a scorefold what it was then, and it has be- 
 come the cleanest, most healthy and sanitary, the best lighted 
 and the best drained city, as it is also the largest city in the 
 world. And all traces of special visitations of plague or 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 293 
 
 pestilence have ceased, and the death-rate is the lowest of 
 any of the largest cities of the world, being no more than 
 15 per thousand. 
 
 And corresponding progress has been made in every city, 
 town, and village in the country, and in the social betterment 
 of the lives of the people, and the British Empire has become 
 the greatest Empire in the world, not by repudiation of the 
 Napoleonic War debts, not by Acts of Parliament, but by the 
 steady maintenance of the beneficent support of the seven 
 pillars of prosperity, and by the labour of employer-capitalist 
 and employee-workman. These, as inventors, manufacturers, 
 merchants, explorers, and shipowners, have often been handi- 
 capped in the march of progress in competition with other 
 nations by stupid Acts of Parliament and ignorant statesmen ; 
 but in rectifying this handicap of progress let us be careful 
 that we do not commit still greater errors of government in 
 the future. Our best hope for the future is that the whole 
 of the difficulties to be overcome, and of our social betterment 
 to be achieved, shall be fully considered in all their bearings, 
 shall be fully discussed and understood, before we enter upon 
 the putting into effect of immature and ill-considered new 
 and experimental policies. We must approach the considera- 
 tion of the problem with minds free from thoughts founded 
 on prejudice, hatred, or temper — free from taint of selfishness 
 or injustice. Above all we must dismiss from our minds and 
 souls any idea of what, for want of a better name, we call 
 " class against class " antagonism. In all countries, throughout 
 all ages, there have been numerous divisions of peoples into 
 so-called " classes," but this good old world, large as it is, has 
 never been big enough to contain more than a division into 
 two great classes — the class that is doing its duty and the 
 class that fails to do its duty. These two great divisions are 
 wide enough and deep enough to include the whole human 
 race, and all other distinctions are purely artificial. But we 
 have got into a slipshod way of thinking of mankind as exist- 
 ing in " classes," and nothing, in the present temper of the 
 world, is more unjust or dangerous. Peer and peasant, 
 employer-capitahst and employee-workman, have fought side 
 by side in the trenches, and laid down their lives side by side 
 on the battlefield in this great war, and as comrades in this 
 war they honour and respect each other as never was possible 
 
294 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 before, and we have all- learned that in about equal pro- 
 portional numbers there are included in all the artificial 
 " class " divisions the industrious and the idle, the intelligent 
 and the stupid, the brave and the cowards, the honest and 
 the cheat, the truthful and the har, the virtuous and the 
 vicious, the temperate and the drunkard, the strong and the 
 weak, the healthy and the sickly, the thrifty and the spend- 
 thrift, and that so long as these opposites of characteristics 
 exist there will always be the rich and the poor. Let us 
 uproot this habit of thinking qf individuals according to 
 certain artificial so-called " classes." Nothing is more unjust 
 and nothing could be more dangerous. 
 
 Long before this war began we were experiencing the influence 
 in poUtics of a new Parliamentary Party, whose leaders scorned 
 the beaten tracks of old-school poUticians, and who called 
 themselves the Labour Party. The employee-workmen, 
 through their Trade Unions, have also become more active, 
 and have rightly and properly — so long as they respect the 
 just rights and Mberties of others — organized to improve their 
 position. The betterment of the condition of the employee- 
 workers is declared, and I believe truly so, their sole objective 
 and goal, but so far as my knowledge goes the employee-workers 
 have not yet unanimously decided upon what might be the 
 best methods for them to adopt to realize betterment and 
 advancement. In short, whilst their aims, ideals and ambi- 
 tions are clear and definite, their proposed methods for realiza- 
 tion are most indefinite and hazy. 
 
 When the dissatisfied colonists in North America won, 
 under the leadership of General Washington, their severance 
 from Great Britain nearly a century and a half ago, they 
 declared as their ideals — and in these the whole English- 
 speaking world agrees to-day — that all men were endowed 
 by God with certain inalienable rights, amongst which were 
 life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Washington and 
 his co-founders of the United States believed and tnisted 
 that, if all men were given an equal opportunity, and if the 
 citizens of a country could frame their own laws and levy 
 their own taxes, the inequahties in wealth that existed in the 
 Mother Country could never exist in the United States. This 
 was the view held in 1776, and the founders of the United 
 States were convinced that the rich and wealthy were rich 
 
SOMBTTNUUSTKIAL QUESTIONS 295 
 
 and wealthy in consequence of some unfairness in the laws 
 of the United Kingdom. But after nearly a century and a half, 
 in spite of the Declaration of Independence as to equality, 
 in spite of universal manhood suffrage, there are greater 
 inequalities of wealth in the United States to-day than there 
 are or ever were in the United Kingdom, and it is clear that 
 neither Acts of Congress nor the Constitution of the United 
 States have been able to make all men equal in wealth any 
 more than in health, weight or stature, brains or muscle, 
 piety or morals, character or worth. But this inequality of 
 wealth, although infinitely greater in 1916 than in 1776 (at 
 which time, as often is the case to-day, it was thought to 
 be the cause of all the poverty of the poor), has been proved 
 to have relieved the extremes of poverty and wretchedness, 
 and to have greatly raised the average of comfort and better- 
 ment, and to have resulted also in actually a better distribution 
 and more plentiful supply of wealth amongst the employee- 
 workmen. The United States has produced miUionaires in 
 greater number and of greater individual wealth than ever 
 the United Kingdom produced, and yet the employee-work- 
 man in that country receives the highest rate of wages known 
 in the world. In 1776 ^ was believed that in the United 
 Kingdom the Government had somehow interfered with some 
 great principle underl5mig all social well-being, and that in 
 the United States, under the Constitution adopted in the 
 Declaration of Independence, wealth would be more equally 
 distributed and poverty would cease. But the result has 
 clearly proved that, so long as some men are stronger, or more 
 healthy, or more intelligent, or more industrious, or more 
 virtuous, or more self-denjdng, or more thrifty than others, 
 there will be inequalities of wealth, that the employer-capitalist 
 was not responsible for these, nor was the employee-workman 
 to blame, and that, if either changed places with the other 
 by Act of Parliament, that change over would constitute no 
 remedy for acknowledged inequalities nor be a stimulus to 
 social betterment for all. Employer-capitalists in acquiring 
 their wealth by hard work of brain and energy of body have 
 benefited not only themselves and their families, but have, 
 even if unwittingly, conduced to the betterment of the em- 
 ployee-workman and also to the progress of the whole of the 
 industries of the United Kingdom. 
 
296 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 And now I venture to assert, notwithstanding that all 
 the above circumstances are inevitable and normal and 
 natural, that still no employer-capitalist with a true feeling of 
 brotherhood can be quite happy in the fullest sense in the enjoy- 
 ment of wealth (the product of his own hard work, intelligence, 
 self-denial and thrift, every penny earned without com- 
 mitting injury to any man, and the acquisition of which has 
 resulted in enormous benefits to his employee-workmen) 
 without feeling a sense of dissatisfaction with present industrial 
 conditions and a strong desire to improve them so that the 
 employee-workman may be raised to a much higher level 
 in social well-being. 
 
 But this ideal cannot be achieved by an Act of ParUament 
 for the conscription or confiscation of wealth. 
 
 The men and women of British stock who crossed the Atlantic 
 and founded the United States did not state in their Declara- 
 tion of Independence that all wealth must be confiscated to 
 the State. What they did declare was that man was endowed 
 by God with certain inalienable rights of life, Uberty, and the 
 pursuit of happiness. Do these rights mean that Government 
 sRould conscript or confiscate the fruits' of the industry of one 
 man who had led a thrifty, whollsome, industrious life in 
 order that Government might use the same for the benefit 
 of men who had hved hves of exactly the opposite type ? 
 That was certainly not what the citizens of 1776 ever intended. 
 What was meant was that every citizen had the fullest liberty 
 to hve his own life and to make his own hvelihood in his 
 own way so long as that was honest and true, and that 
 he was entitled to the full enjoyment of the product of his 
 labour, whether of muscle or brain, and for the pursuit of 
 his own happiness — also within honest and true limits — ^in 
 his own way. 
 
 And what was meant by Uberty ? One of the best defini- 
 tions of liberty has been stated bj*— if I remember correctly 
 — a French Convention in the following words : " The liberty 
 of one citizen ceases only where it encroaches on the hberty 
 of another citizen." And as to the pursuit of happiness, 
 John Bright has given us one of the best definitions of happiness 
 in the following words : " Happiness consists in a congeilial 
 occupation with a sense of progress." In addition, this 
 Declaration of Independence laid down the axiom that Govern- 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 297 
 
 ments were instituted to preserve these rights to the people 
 and that the people themselves were the source of all the power 
 that Governments possessed. The force that has created 
 the United States has not been Congress, nor was the British 
 Empire built up by Parliament. There would have been 
 no United States and no British Empire without the labour 
 and toil and sweat of the people of the two nations. Govern- 
 ments create no wealth as such, and possess no money but 
 what they receive from the taxation of the people. All Govern- 
 ments are paupers, and only exist in free democratic nations 
 by the consent of the governed. All Governments being 
 paupers, they have only two means for raising money — by 
 taxation and by borrowing. In times of war or for great 
 public undertakings such as waterworks, or municipal develop- 
 ments, such as docks, etc., borrowing has had to be resorted 
 to in the past years as in the present years, and will have to 
 be resorted to in the years to come when this war is over. 
 The power and ability of a Government to borrow and the rate 
 of interest to be paid depend entirely on the credit of the 
 Government concerned, and on the assured belief of the 
 lenders in the borrower's ability and good faith for the due 
 payment of interest and the repayment of the debt. Our 
 British Imperial and Colonial Governments and our munici- 
 palities have hitherto enjoyed the power to borrow all their 
 requirements at the world's lowest rate of interest. This 
 advantageous position is entirely due to pubhc confidence 
 in the honour, honesty, and good faith of our Governments. 
 If we once shake confidence in either our ability or our willing- 
 ness to repay our indebtedness, then our credit, our power 
 to borrow, is either seriously damaged or may be hopelessly 
 destroyed. And with this destruction of credit and confidence 
 would come equally the ruin of our industries, and unemploy- 
 ment and hunger would be our chronic condition. If we, as 
 British citizens, cannot realize these truths, then we are in 
 greater peril than if the Prussians had landed on our shores 
 and were marching through an undefended country on defence- 
 less cities and towns. The British Empire might recover 
 in time from defeat in war, but the British Empire never could 
 recover from its own default to repay its war loan indebtedness. 
 The credit and confidence enjoyed by the British Empire is 
 the one and only foundation on which stand, foursquare to 
 
298 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 all attempts to overthrow them, the prosperity and stability 
 of British industries and ability to provide full employment 
 at fioll wages for the British workman. The repudiation of 
 debt, or the so-called conscription of wealth, would be an 
 assassin blow at the very^eart of the British Empire. But 
 even if it were a practical and honest policy, there would be 
 two questions still that would arise and require to be answered 
 — ^how could such conscription be accompUshed, and what 
 would it 3deld ? The suggestion is that we conscript sufficient 
 of the wealth of the coimtry on some graduated scaJe to enable 
 us to repay at least ;£4,ooo,ooo,ooo. of war loan indebtedness. 
 How would our Government collect this £4,000,000,000 and 
 convert the same into cash ? — for it is obviously only as cash 
 that wealth could be used for the repayment of war loans. 
 At present this wealth exists in the form of furniture, pictures, 
 china, works of art, houses, land, workshops, factories, 
 machinerj', ships, horses, cattle, sheep, and the thousands of 
 other forms of wealth, including debentures, shares, mort- 
 gages in public railways, industrial companies, municipal 
 and dock loans. Government War Loans, deposits in banks 
 and building societies. And this wealth includes the savings 
 of the frugal father for his widow and children equally with 
 those of the millionaire. We know the depreciation that 
 takes place when trustees are forced to sell some portions of 
 an estate in order to pay death duties. But only seme 
 £30,000,000 a year are paid in death duties, and much of this 
 we know has been received by the trustees in hard cash from 
 banks and insurance companies. It is only a cautious estimate 
 to assume that not more than two-thirds had to be raised by 
 forced sales — say £20,000,000 a year. But to realize even 
 this modest sum each year has tended to depress the market 
 value of securities. So that it is clear that no market could 
 be found for £4,000,000,000 of conscripted wealth at what 
 I may call par value, and as practically every one with wealth 
 would be sellers and there would be ahnost no British buyers, 
 it is only reasonable to say that the £4,000,000,000 of con- 
 scripted wealth would not realize in cash as much as 
 £400,000,000. It would be almost valueless and unsaleable, 
 and therefore not available for the purpose intended of repajdng 
 war loans. The confiscation of wealth would carry the 
 country icebound below zero. Left to fructify in the pockets 
 
SOMJS INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 299 
 
 of its owners, we should have its yield in income tax and death 
 duties to the State, and in employment for employee-workmen 
 not only of the then existing factories and workshops, but 
 stUl more important, of extensions and additions thereto, 
 and for the provision of capital for working and building the 
 same to be obtained on the credit of the security available. 
 But conscript lo per cent, or 20 per cent, of the wealth of 
 the country, and not only would the conscripted portion be 
 imsaleable, but the balance would be depreciated as security 
 for credit to finance our industries to the lowest level of the 
 conscripted portion. This would be like cutting out the 
 roots of the tree to anticipate the next year's crop of fruit. 
 
 But this cutting out of roots is certainly not what wise 
 men would do. They would guard the roots, fertilize them, 
 prune the dead roots, support the limbs and branches, protect 
 from frost the blossoms, and finally reap an abimdant harvest 
 — ^growing larger in quantity and better in quality each year 
 of patient care and cultivation. Therefore, our course for 
 repajmient of war loan lies in cultivating our industries and 
 fertilizing them — root-pruning by death duties and collecting 
 the harvest by means of income tax graduated so that all 
 citizens with incomes of £80 a year and over contribute 
 according to their means. In no other way can we realize 
 so large a cash income to so speedily and quickly pay off our 
 war loans, maintain British shipping and industries, find 
 ever-increasing emplo5anent for British labour, and maintain 
 British credit and the pre-eminent present position of our 
 world-wide British Empire. 
 
 It may be asked how steeply can income tax and death 
 duties be graduated; the answer can only be, that if our 
 needs require them, the only limit can be that point at 
 which they yield the largest return to the State with the 
 least injury to our industries. If income tax at 5s. in the 
 pound and death duties at 20 per cent, yield the largest 
 return to the State with least injury to our industries, and 
 if income tax at los. in the pound and death duties at 
 50 per cent, would yield actually less to the State and 
 would also threaten our industries with ruin, then the lower 
 figure without risk to our industries would be proved to be 
 the only practicable rate. In other words, at the higher 
 rates you would be killing the tree that bears the golden fruit. 
 
300 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 Every farmer and gardener knows that such a hint from 
 Nature as to the limits of cropping as a decreased yield would, 
 if disregarded, sour the land and the plants, with ruinous 
 results. The reduced yield from the higher rate would also 
 prove that trade and commerce, house-building, shipbuilding, 
 and our manufactures were suffering from being denuded of 
 capital by excessive taxation, and that unemployment would 
 soon be stalking, with famine and sickness, through our land. 
 And we should find that a just, fair, and reasonable scale 
 of graduated taxation would not only yield the largest amount 
 of cash to the State, but that the remainder, left to fructify 
 in the pockets of its producers, would act as a stimulus to the 
 production of ever larger and larger taxable incomes, and to 
 the employment of an ever-increasing number of employee- 
 workmen by employer-capitalists, to the expansion of British 
 shipping, trade, and commerce, and to the maintenance of our 
 present pre-eminent position amongst the nations of the world. 
 So- graduated income tax has its zero-point. 
 
 All that Freedom's highest aims can reach 
 Is but to lay proportion'd loads on each. 
 Hence, should one Order disproportion'd grow. 
 Its double weight must ruin all below. 
 
 No ! there is only this one way available to enable us to 
 repay our war loans, to re-establish our mercantile marine, 
 our trade, commerce and manufactures after this welter of 
 a World War, and that is to stimulate the production of wealth 
 and to tax the annual income to the limits of utmost jdeld, 
 but always so that the producers of wealth are encour- 
 aged, stimulated, and left with the necessary means for the 
 production of more wealth. This production of increased 
 wealth will demand and necessitate that every adult man 
 and woman of all classes shall, up to the limit of their abilities 
 and capacities, work hard and strenuously for its production. 
 But human strength has its economic zero-point also. If 
 in the production of this wealth either the employer-capitalist 
 or the employee-workman is overfatigued by working a 
 longer number of hours than the hmitations demanded by 
 health and strength, then the result can only be disastrous 
 to the production of wealth. But if all adults, of both sexes 
 and of all classes, peer and peasant, employer-capitalist and 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 301 
 
 employee-workman, work each a reasonable number of hours 
 per day, then, without overfatigue of any, we can produce 
 a wealth of products sufficient for our own home markets 
 and wants and for overseas exportation far in excess of any- 
 thing we have ever previously accomplished. The exact 
 number of hours that will produce overstrain and fatigue, 
 with resulting lower production, will obviously vary with the 
 nature of the occupation and with the conditions under which 
 the work is performed. On the farm, for instance, and on 
 board ships, surrounded by green fields or green ocean and 
 fresh air, the hours worked may presumably be longer than 
 would be possible in factories, mines, workshops, foundries, 
 offices, or stores, where perfect ventilation is never quite attain- 
 able and where the occupation is more or less monotonous. 
 But in every kind of work and employment there must be 
 some limit to human strength and endurance, and experience 
 has taught us that between eight hours a day as a maximum 
 and six hours a day as a minimum, the safety-point may 
 most probably be found to rest. These hours of daily toil 
 are what may be called the income-making period — the 
 remaining hours are available not only for sleep, eating, 
 recreation, and leisure, but also for education and pubUc 
 service and aU the refinements of life. St. Paul has told us 
 that he " laboured with his hands that he might be chargeable 
 to no man," and we know that he was by trade a tentmaker. 
 The hours of labour for tentmakers were, I am told, at that 
 time from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m., 'that is, six hours per day, 
 and the remaining hours St. Paul devoted to his hfe's work — 
 service to his feUow-man. Let us organize our time better 
 At present all our time is devoted to gathering income for 
 maintenance, as if we were so many cows and sheep, all of 
 whose time we know is devoted to the work of maintenance. 
 Our factories, foundries, mines, workshops, stores, offices, 
 and farms, throughout the British Empire, are fuU of men 
 or women with ideals and ideas for utilities and inventions, 
 and who, in addition to their capacity for the work of income- 
 earning for maintenance and support of themselves and 
 families, are capable of, and keen for, work of enormous social 
 value to their fellows and the Empire. What a wealth of 
 inventive genius and ideas have we there running actually 
 to waste through our bad organization of their hours of work 
 
D2 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 tid their subjection to overstrain and fatigue in the perform- 
 nce of the daily round of routine duties for income-producing ! 
 fnder our present system, each day has to be fully occupied 
 eyond the fatigue-limit in work of income-earning for main- 
 3nance, with the result that our machinery is underworked 
 nd our workers are overwrought, giving us less wealth, pro- 
 uced at greater cost than need be the case. Thought and 
 leas for new inventions and processes require intelligence, 
 lertness, and leisure — all impossible under conditions of over- 
 atigue during long hours of laborious toil. Then see how the 
 i^age and salary fund is impoverished. We can only work our 
 lachinery and mechanical utihties longer hours by workiflg 
 uman beings fewer hours. We have already exceeded the 
 imit of human endurance from schoolage to dotage. But we 
 an reorganize our factories so that by working a number of 
 hange shifts of employee-workers six houts each shift we 
 an run our machinery twelve, eighteen, or twenty-four hours 
 ach working day. The wages paid at present for longer 
 lOurs would require to be paid for the fewer hours, and in 
 trder to do this the total cost of production, which is partly 
 nterest, depreciation and repairs for machinery, aU of which 
 rould be little if at all increased by the additional hours 
 worked, would on an increase of from 50 to 200 per cent, in the 
 >utput give us lower costs out of which wages could be increased 
 tnd selHng price to customers reduced. And, beUeve me, it 
 s impossible to lay too strong emphasis on this crux of the 
 vhole proposal, which is the one and only basis which would 
 nake reduced hours and higher wages possible, namely, 
 educed final costs and lower seUing prices for the consumer, 
 vith more wages to the worker and fewer hours of toU. The 
 jmployer-capitahst could, of course, work with a lower per- 
 ;entage of profit and yet reaUze on his increased production 
 L larger income to meet the demands made upon him for 
 ligher graduation in rates of income tax. 
 
 But in addition to a better organization of time in our 
 ndustries, we require to still further advance in the direction 
 )f a more logical basis in the relationship between the em- 
 jloyer-capitalist and the employee-worker. There must be 
 iome consideration given to the division between these two 
 )f the profit resulting from the joint laiboui of both. The 
 vages sj'^stem alone is not sufiicient, but the wages syston 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 303 
 
 must of necessity remain the basis for the employee-worker. 
 It is a system that has stood the test of time ; it is con- 
 venient ; it is logical and practicable. Under the wages 
 system the employee-worker practically says to the employer- 
 capitaHst : "I cannot undertake to bear any of the risks of 
 this business. I must receive a weekly or monthly income, 
 regularly, upon which I can absolutely rely and depend for 
 my household expenses : therefore, if I engage with you we 
 must mutually first agree on a sum which you shall pay me 
 as wages or salary in exchange for my services. If after 
 paying this sum of money to myself and also after your 
 payment of all other expenses of the business there is a profit 
 remaining, I agree that profit shall be yours. If there is a 
 loss, you must make good that loss yourself alone, even to 
 the extent of bringing ruin and disaster upon yourself and 
 yom: family. I cannot share with you your losses, and I 
 agree to make no claim upon you to share in your profits." 
 This, I repeat, is the logic of the present wages system, and it 
 is perfectly sound and just in its basis and principles. 
 
 The admission to Co-Partnership is not a right that the 
 employee-worker can of necessity claim. It is obvious that 
 there must always be the right with each of us to choose 
 our partners by mutual consent if the true Co-Partnership 
 spirit is to be maintained. The employer-capitahst can choose 
 his partners, and does choose them, from those who can give 
 him the best help and can best strengthen his business, 
 either by contribution of capital or assistance in the manage- 
 ment of the business ; and in making this selection of partners 
 every care and effort is directed to avoiding entering into a 
 partnership that may prove undesirable in practice. The 
 happiest and most successful relationships in business Ufe 
 have been reahzed under the partnership system, and it is 
 equally true that occasionally, from various causes vmforeseen 
 at the time, private partnerships have proved disastrous, 
 both from the point of view of prosperity of the business and 
 the happiness of the partners. But the intention has always 
 been the same, namely, to help and strengthen the business 
 and to share the responsibility and risks of the business 
 between the partners. I am confident that, viewed in this 
 light and not as a profit-sharing device, which in my opinion 
 would be wrong, a Co-Partnership relationship with the 
 
J04 THE -SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 smployee-worker would be an added source of strength to 
 my business to which it could be applied, and increase the 
 prosperity and happiness of both the employer-capitalist 
 ind the employee-worker. The principles of Co-Partnership 
 between these two would be as logical and as sound and practi- 
 :al a business arrangement as between any body of partners, 
 md one that might be just as wisely entered upon. 
 
 Under the operation of our modern industrial developments, 
 capital is generally raised from a body of shareholders, in the 
 iorm of ordinary shares. These ordinary shareholders divide 
 imongst themselves the total remaining profits of the business 
 ifter payment of all claims for salaries, wages, interest, and 
 )ther prior charges. The ordinary shareholders of a company 
 ire practically the partners who control the destinies of the 
 ;ompany by their vote, but it is very rare for any of them 
 ;o be engaged actively in the business as employee-workers. 
 [t can never be a source of strength to the business that the 
 vhole of the surplus profits, after pa5dng a reasonable and 
 jroper rate of interest, should be entirely devoted to dividends 
 ;o ordinary shareholders. I am convinced that the best 
 nterests of the ordinary shareholders would be better served, 
 50th in regard to the rate per cent, of their. dividends and 
 :he security of their capital, if the surplus profits coiUd be 
 iivided, under some scheme of Co-Partnership, between the 
 jmployee-workers and the ordinary shareholders of the 
 business. 
 
 It is not in the best interests of the success of any business 
 lor the progress and development of British industries as 
 I whole that the entire surplus profits should take only one 
 channel, and that channel a direction away from those most 
 nterested in the business, and upon whom must depend the 
 continued success of the business. It would not be right 
 ;o view this question of Co-Partnership from any benevolent 
 Joint of view. There can be no philanthropy in business. 
 But the cultivation of a spirit of Co-Partnership and of a 
 ceen interest in the firm in which the employee-workers are 
 jngaged is not philanthropy but sound policy. The whole 
 jf the goodwill of any business, which goodwill is often of 
 greater value than the actual bricks and mortar, plant and 
 machinery, depends on mutual confidence. The employer^ 
 capitalist and the ordin9.ry shareholders to-day view the 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 305 
 
 anployee-worker solely as a liability. Employees are riot 
 liabilities, but the most valuable asset of any business. 
 
 An objection often raised to Profit-Sharing, and I think 
 rightly raised, is that there can be no Loss-Sharing. Under 
 the system of Co-Partnership, Loss-Sharing can be linked up 
 with participation in profits. After all, what are the losses 
 of capital for the employer-capitalist ? His losses of capital 
 are that certain shares that he holds, by purchase or original 
 application and pajmient, have become valueless because 
 they have ceased to hav^ earning capacity. One has often 
 heard of shares in some company that has entirely lost its 
 earning capacity being only fit to make into spills to Ught 
 cigarettes with — their capital value has become nil. Equally, 
 the Co-Partnership certificates issued under a scheme of Co- 
 Partnership to the employee-workers would be only so many 
 specimens of printing and absolutely valueless, if the power 
 of the business to earn profits had ceased, notwithstanding 
 all the efforts of employer-capitahst and employee-co-partner. 
 It is quite obvious that under a S5retem of Co-Partnership, 
 whereby an employee-worker receives each year an allot- 
 ment of Co-Partnership certificates, in proportion to the 
 amount of his salary or wages and the length and value of 
 his services, and which Co-Partnership certificates are, during 
 the Co-Partner's connection with the firm, entitled to dividends 
 in proportion to the dividends paid to the ordinary share- 
 holders, the Co-Partner would see the number of Co-Partner- 
 ship certificates growing each year. He would experience 
 the fact and realize the cause why dividends in some years 
 were higher than others, and why in some years, from un- 
 avoidable causes, dividends might fail to be earned or paid. 
 He would realize the direct connection between profits and 
 all the problems that the Management have to solve in a , 
 business, and in this way the employer-capitalist would have 
 secured a partner whose brain would be at work as well as 
 his hands in effecting economies and avoiding waste in the 
 business, and in making suggestions for the improvement 
 of processes and improvement in the organization of the time 
 of himself and comrades, so that profits might be increased 
 and higher dividends be paid. 
 p I claim that the employer-capitahst is not reasonable if 
 Lhe expects, in exchange for wages, any more than the per- 
 B 21 
 
506 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 iormance of the services which he has contracted for. But 
 n addition to services that could be rendered on a wages 
 system, there is that constant thought and care outside business 
 lours equally as during business hours for the good of the 
 jusiness which the employer-capitalist himself does constantly ' 
 nanifest, or his capital would be in danger and his profits 
 night never materialize. 
 
 Under a system of Co-Partnership the employer-capitalist 
 would have all his employee-workers who had been with him 
 I certain number of years as Co-Partners, now reaUzing that 
 :heir interest in the business equally with that of the employer- 
 :apitahst ran along the lines of increased output and of cheaper 
 :osts of production, and there would come what I may call 
 ' team-work," which in the Army is, as you know, called 
 isprit de corps, and which iresults in a spirit of comradeship 
 n overcoming all obstacles, and which spirit is specially 
 Manifested in times of difficulty and danger. 
 
 And now let me say a word on the value of a better organiza- 
 ;ion of time devoted to income-earning in its effect on educa- 
 ;ion of brain, body, and mind, and the power it would give 
 :he State for training citizens for mihtary service. In all 
 ;hange shifts the shift workers who one week worked in the 
 norning would the next week work in the afternoon, so that 
 ;here would be for every one the* morning or afternoon free 
 ;ach week alternately From fourteen to eighteen years of 
 ige there would be for boys and girls two hours morning or 
 iftemoon each day required by the State to be devoted to 
 ligher grade education and physical training. From eighteen 
 :o twenty-four the State would require that these two hours 
 ae devoted each day to technical and higher education, such 
 is is provided to-day only in our Universities, and for physical 
 :raining, and from twenty-four to thirty years of age the State 
 ivould require that these two hours each day be devoted to 
 mihtary training and preparation for National Service. After 
 thirty years of age the citizen would have completed his period 
 >f compulsory attendance under State Regulations, and would 
 be fully equipped by education and training for all the duties 
 Df citizenship, and might reasonably be trusted to make, as 
 iid St. Paul, but in his own way, his own voluntary contribu- 
 :ion to social advancement and betterment. 
 
 But whilst my endeavours have been to record the view§ 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 307 
 
 I hold, and hold very strongly and sincerely — that Govem- 
 mepts of themselves cannot create wealth, and that the power 
 of Governments to confiscate or tax wealth is strictly limited 
 within the range of such rates as wiU produce the largest cash 
 income for the service of the State without danger of check 
 or hindrance to the production of wealth and opportunities 
 for employment— and whilst I have endeavoured to show that 
 we shall require the labour of aU adults of both sexes and of 
 all classes, from peer to peasant, to repay our war indebtedness 
 and to provide products for home consumption and for ex- 
 portation overseas ; and have, further, endeavoured to show 
 that work also has its limitations of profitable production, 
 and that to overstrain employee-worker or employer-capitalist 
 is not to produce the best results from either, I hold equally 
 strongly that Governments can render such services of the 
 State as will furnish opportunities and facilities, encourage- 
 ment and stimulus for the creation of wealth by the citizens 
 who have entrusted the State with powers of government. 
 The State should and could make concentrated and well- 
 considered efforts to provide every facihty for honourable 
 eriterprise and honest*" industry. Our mercantile marine 
 must be protected at sea and provided with ample harbour 
 and dock facihties in the pgrts of the Empire. Shipowners, 
 manufacturers, and merchants must be encouraged and helped 
 by an efficient Consular and Foreign Office service so that our 
 ships may sail over every sea and our flag be flying in every 
 port. The State can improve our banking system by en- 
 couraging and stimulating our bankers to render increased 
 credit facilities for the manufactures, trade, commerce, and 
 mercantile marine of the Empire. In our Crown Colonies 
 our Government can construct roads and bridges, build rail- 
 ways, open up new and rich territories of virgin forests, fertile 
 soils, and rich minerals to developers, planters, and traders 
 on terms that would encourage and justify private enterprise 
 in the investment therein of capital. The State can improve 
 the sanitation and healthiness of our villages, towns, and cities 
 at home and in the Colonies, and so not only lengthen human 
 life but reduce the toll on productiveness caused by ill-health. 
 Government can protect child-life and see to its welfare, and 
 can improve our educational system so that we get the utmost 
 in the finished product for the many miUions we spend upon 
 education, so that the child of the employee-workman can 
 
308 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 have the opportunity of becoming as well educated as th( 
 child of the employer-capitalist. Government can remove al 
 incidence of taxation and rating, local or Imperial, from im 
 provements on land such as houses and buildings of £dl kinds 
 and from machinery, and provide that all such taxation anc 
 rating shall, in future, be provided from local and Imperia 
 income tax source and on site values. All obstacles, in short, 
 for the development of the resources of the Empire at home 
 and overseas must be removed and every facility, encourage- 
 ment, and security be given to stimulate the production ol 
 wealth, otherwise what right or title have we members of the 
 British race at home and overseas in the possession and en- 
 joyment of a world-wide Empire on which it is our boast 
 that the svm never sets ? If our Government is not sufficiently 
 far-sighted or so wise as to foster facility and encourage great 
 industries capable of producing enormous surplus wealth 
 by the enterprise of her citizens within this world-wide Empire, 
 which would not only find emplo3mient for all but provide 
 a basis for taxation of incomes that would enable us to repay 
 our war debts, then the British Empire is suffering from the 
 palsy of old age, and we shall soon cease to exist as a World- 
 Power. Empires rise and fall as they are w^ell and wisely 
 or badly and stupidly governed. Under wise government 
 they become rich and powerful, their ships sail over every 
 sea and carry the national flag into every port ; their Colonies 
 cover whole continents ; their peoples are happy and contented, 
 well housed and well fed, and not overwrought to maintain 
 themselves in comfort in homes where, with wife and children, 
 life lengthens and joy deepens ; their rulers and statesmen 
 are honoured and respected by surrounding nations, who can 
 view without bitter feehngs of wrong to themselves a world- 
 wide Empire wisely governed with every faciUty and oppor- 
 tunity, and where welcome is given to all right-minded citizens 
 of all right-minded nations. Nothuig can be better for the 
 progress of civilization and the well-being of the whole world 
 than such a government of such an Empire. And it must 
 with equal truth be stated that there can be no more pitiable 
 sight in the whole world than such an Empire held and pos- 
 sessed by a nation that has neither the vision nor the intelli- 
 gence to wisely develop or justly govern. " Where there is 
 no vision, the people perish.'' 
 
V 
 DAY-WORK OR PIECE-WORK— WHICH ? 
 
 Poet Sunlight, January 13, 1904. 
 
 [Submitting theory to the test of practice, and keeping the two 
 in close mutual touch, Lord Leverhulme, in this paper, which 
 was read before the Port Sunlight Mutual Improvement 
 Society, communicates his thoughts on the resources, possi- 
 bilities, and consequences of SociaUsm and Individualism.] 
 
 It has always appeared to me that the question of Socialism 
 or Individualism resolves itself very largely into a question 
 of Day-work or Piece-work. We require to produce commo- 
 dities for mutual consumption, and Socialism would appear 
 to be a question of whether these can best be produced by a 
 system of Day-work, and IndividuaUsm to be a question as 
 to whether it would be more profitable to the community as 
 a whole to produce them by what may be called Piece-work. 
 We all agree that evils exist in the great extremes of wealth 
 and poverty in the world to-day, but when Socialists propose 
 remodelling society on a very high plane of intelligence, they 
 do so without first endeavouring to find out what are the lines 
 on which society can best make progress. If Socialists would 
 content themselves with pointing out the goal which we are 
 all aiming for, namely, the greatest possible amount of social 
 well-being and comforts for all, and then if they would join 
 in concentrated efforts to the discovery of what direction 
 ought to be taken to ensure these benefits in accordance with 
 the principles underlying all society, I venture to think that 
 we should make greater progress in the future than we have 
 done in the .past. Sometimes we can see, say in Switzerland, 
 a beautiful mountain whose summit is clothed in perpetual 
 sunshine, but if in attempting to reach that summit we dis- 
 regard all the precipices and ravines that have to be crossedX- 
 make no effort, in fact, to discover the only road that can 
 
 DOS 
 
310 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 safely be taken — in all probability we shall never arrive ai 
 the summit. 
 
 So with a higher civilization we cannot disregard the con- 
 stitution of society, nor can we disregard the very slow rate 
 of progress we can make in the future, as we have made ir 
 the past, during the countless ages mankind has taken tc 
 develop to our present not very high state of civilization. 
 
 Now, before we come to the question of its distribution, 
 let us consider what are the elements that enter into the 
 creation of wealth. The principal elements are three : Labour, 
 Capital, and the Employer. It is not a question of Labour 
 and Capital alone ; the Employer is as essential as the other 
 two, and the Employer may be"^ a private individual, or a 
 Board of Directors, or a Government or State. Labour is 
 wisely represented when organized by Trade Unions work- 
 ing on their own individual lines. Now, in the production of 
 conamodities the payment of wages to Labour is under the 
 present conditions the first fixed charge which has to be met. 
 The next fixed charge is the payment of interest on capital. 
 The payment to the employer comes last and is not fixed : 
 it is variable. In fact, all that the employer can get for 
 his labour is the leavings after Capital and Labour have 
 received what has been agreed upon. 
 
 Sometimes there will be a loss ; that is to say, not only no 
 leavings at all, but an actual loss, in which case, after the 
 employer has been exhausted. Capital may share in that 
 loss. But under the present conditions not only is it a fact, 
 but it is a law of the land, that the payment of vsjages must 
 not suffer loss under any circumstances whatever. Therefore, 
 under the present state of society, pa3nnent for labour is a 
 first charge on production, equivalent to a first mortgage or 
 a debenture bond. 
 
 Now, what do the Socialists propose ? They propose to 
 nationaUze all the implements of production and to make 
 the State the owners of aU capital, and therefore the one and 
 only employer. But, by nationaUzing the implements of 
 production they will not have abolished capital : they will 
 have altered the nominal ownership of capitals but they 
 cannot abolish capital, and for this reason — that capital is 
 essential to production. Now, let us suppose it was considered 
 that as a first step towards nationalizing the implements of 
 
summ IJNUUSTKIAL QUESTIONS 311 
 
 production, miUs, tools, machinery, and railways should all 
 be confiscated. I don't suppose that this is seriously proposed 
 by Socialists or by any one, but we will imagine for the 
 moment that confiscation would be carried out and private 
 ownership cease. That would not abohsh capital. Railways 
 would wear out, mUls would become old-fashioned as to 
 machinery, and would want renewing ; and how would this 
 wearing out be remedied and machinery be renewed ? It 
 could only be by the employment of labour to build fresh 
 mills, to make fresh railways, and for this work labour would 
 have to be paid. To provide payment for labour, loans 
 would have to be raised on the credit of the nation as a whole 
 and interest on them would have to be paid. Therefore, 
 although temporarily, for a few years only, by the confiscation 
 of all the means of production, the private ownership of the 
 capital of the country might cease, this would not be per- 
 manent. From the very moment the nation took over the im- 
 plements of production there would be decay going on, renewal 
 would become necessary, and capital would again assume its 
 position and would again be a charge on the undertaking. 
 
 Neither would Socialists have abolished the employer, 
 whose salary is at present a variable quantity. The employer 
 would still be required just as much in the nationalized indus- 
 tries as when enterprises were carried on by private individuals, 
 but under the new conditions the employer — that is, the 
 State — ^would be represented by managers, who would have 
 to be paid fixed salaries. Then we should have effected this 
 change only : that whereas formerly the employer took for 
 remuneration only the leavings (if any) of Capital and Labour, 
 the employer would now take, as manager representing the 
 State, a fixed salary to be added to the cost of production. 
 
 We have stUl got Labour to consider. Now, we have seen 
 that under the present system Labour receives wages whether 
 production is successful or not, and we have also seen that 
 under the altered system proposed by Sociahsts, managers, 
 representing the employer, would require to receive fixed 
 salaries, whether production was successful or not, and would 
 rank equal with Labour as a prior charge on production. 
 When accounts came to be balanced in these nationalized 
 industries, they could only be balanced by advancing the 
 prices of the articles produced, at the expense of Labour, 
 
312 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 because Labour is always the greatest consumer. The con- 
 Siumption of products being mainly by Labour, it would resuH 
 that the wages of Labour would cease to be real and becpndt 
 nominal ; that although wages had apparently not beec 
 reduced, their purchasing power had been reduced, and thai 
 therefore Labour would actually be receiving less in real 
 wages, although the same in nominal wages : consequently, 
 under the system proposed by the Socialists, Labour would 
 have changed places with the employer. 
 
 Now, with regard to the employer. Management, to be 
 really effective, must have a direct interest in the results of 
 its labour. There is a peculiar quaUty, call it temperament 
 or what you will, about management, that is produced under 
 the present system by which management is the employer 
 and is compelled to take risks, inculcating that alertness and 
 activity of mind, that perfect mingling of caution with 
 audacity, that grasp of possibilities, opportunities, and con- 
 tingencies, which makes all the difference between success and 
 failure. Therefore, Management, being paid a fixed salary, 
 would not be brought into that state of tension, that bedding 
 of the bow, as it may be called, which is so essential to good 
 management. Not being controlled by Labour, because 
 Management would still have to control Labour; not being 
 controlled by Capital, because Capital would still be a fixed 
 charge on the business, but being controlled perhaps by 
 some elective body, taking the form probably of a couiicU 
 appointed or elected for the purpose, the whole temperament 
 of Management would be changed, and I venture to say it' is 
 not in that way that we can improve the position of Labour. 
 The bow would be unbent and useless. i 
 
 The profits earned by employers are not great, if averaged 
 over the whole of the industries of the country. If we inclide 
 those undertakings which, instead of making profits, are 
 making losses, and take the average over all, I venture to say 
 that employers as a body would make more money as man- 
 agers under a system of fixed salaries than under the present 
 system, and that the production of goods would not be cheaper 
 but dearer under the system advocated by Socialists tian 
 under our present system, imperfect as that system is and 
 wasteful in rtiany directions. 
 
 Well, now, we want to consider another point in the case : 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 313 
 
 I refer to the statement that Labour is the source of all wealth. 
 I think it was Adam Smith who first uttered this fallacy. 
 It is a great fallacy, and one that has done the greatest possible 
 harm. But supposing it were the truth, then I think we 
 should agree that if Labour created all wealth, Labour must 
 possess all wealth, and any attempt to take any portion of 
 wealth from Labour was an act of robbery. Well, let uS 
 see what the income tax returns will teach us as to what 
 is the wealth that is created, and what it would amount to 
 if equally divided amongst our 42,000,000 of population. 
 Now, the first portion of the wealth we have in this country 
 is the land, and the income received from the land. To the 
 extent that land is a monopoly it ought to be the property 
 of the people ; to the extent that land yields an income to 
 private enterprise, there would be no gain in it becoming 
 the property of the people. But all monopolies in every 
 free country ought to be retained in the hands of the 
 people. Now, the income tax returns for 1902 show that 
 the income in the United Kingdom received from land and 
 occupation of land was about £70,000,000 sterling. Let us 
 try and divide this income amongst all the inhabitants 
 of the United Kingdom on the grounds that all good 
 government must have for its basis the greatest good of 
 the greatest number, and consequently that we have the 
 right to nationalize the land without paying a penny piece 
 of compensation to the owners of it ; in other words, to 
 confiscate it — and we shall have one penny per head per 
 day to give to every man, woman, and child in the United 
 Kingdom. That would not be any great wealth. That 
 will not lift us very far. None of us will be very wealthy 
 on one penny per head per day more than we have got now 
 Now, let us come to the houses that are on the land, and let 
 us suppose we confiscate these also, whoever they belong to : 
 the widow, the orphan, the building society, or the miUionaire. 
 Let us consider how we should stand if we confiscated all 
 the houses on the groimds that if Labour created all wealth — 
 and houses are a very substantial form of wealth — then the 
 income from the houses so created ought to belong to Labour. 
 Let us confiscate the income from all houses and try if that 
 will help us. The income, as shown by the income tax 
 returns for 1902, received from houses in the United Kingdom 
 
314 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 is £184,000,000 a year. Let us divide this amongst the inhabi- 
 tants. It comes to 3d. per head per day when divided amongst 
 our 42,000,000 inhabitants. That won't make us very rich 
 either. We have got a penny from the land and threepence 
 from the houses. Well, this is not very encouraging, and as 
 we go through the remaining income tax returns, I am afraid 
 the next item is less so, since when we come to consider the 
 income that is received from the National Debt, we cannot 
 confiscate that, because later on we are likely to want to 
 borrow money to rebuild our works, and if a nation does not 
 pay its debts it would not be able to borrow money at all. 
 Therefore we cannot, for the sake of our own future, confiscate 
 the interest paid on our National Debt, and we must pass 
 by that source of income. We come next to the salaries of 
 Corporation officials and civU servants. It is a very large 
 item. We see from the income tax returns civU servants 
 and Corporation officials receive amongst them £79,000,000 
 a year. We cannot confiscate that, because we shall want 
 servants, and we cannot get a man unless we pay him a 
 salary. It is quite clear that, if the workman in the factory 
 is to have his wages, we cannot confiscate the salary of the 
 man in the office, and therefore we cannot confiscate this 
 income, but must pass it over. We now come to foreign in- 
 vestments, which bring in about £65,000,000 a year. We have 
 no power to confiscate this income, because if we attempted 
 to do so, such income would never reach this country. Sup- 
 pose that the holder of investments in American railways 
 found that the minute the dividends from the same readied 
 this country they were confiscated, the holder would write 
 abroad stopping this flow of dividends to this coimtry and 
 would invest the same abroad, and our country would be 
 the poorer and not the richer, owing to the fact that these 
 dividends would never reach us. Therefore, we could not 
 confiscate them. 
 
 Now we come to something at last we can confiscate. 
 We can confiscate all the profits of all employers, and of 
 course our grounds for doing so would be that if Labour 
 creates all wealth. Labour ought to possess all wealth. I '* 
 quite agree with that view, if it is a fact that Labour creates 
 aU wealth. Let us see what would be the wealth we had to 
 divide. It appears from the income tax returns to be 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 315 
 
 £361,000,000 a year, but this also includes the salaries of all 
 salaried servants receiving £160 a year and over, and also 
 the earnings of all professional men. We can certainly con- 
 fiscate that, and we ought to confiscate it, if Labour has created 
 it all. Still, we should want managers, lawyers, doctors, etc., 
 and supposing the number of managers, lawyers, doctors, 
 etc., would not be le^s, nor the salaries paid less than we now 
 pay Government and Corporation officials, then we should 
 have, after deducting for salaries, etc., as above, £282,000,000 
 that we can divide. If we divide £282,000,000 sterhng, we 
 get 4|d. each per day more for every man, woman, and child 
 in the United Kingdom. There is no great wealth there. 
 
 Add this to the 4d. a day from land and houses, and we 
 get 8^d. each per day for every man, woman, and child to 
 receive. Therefore, we find that if Labour does create all 
 wealth, as it is said to do, when you come to divide the pro- 
 duct there is nothing to divide. It has vanished. It has 
 been a shadow, this 8Jd. per day. Now compare that with 
 the benefits that Labour has received during the last thirty 
 years through the operation of natural forces and of its Trade 
 Unions. The Board of Trade Returns show that Labour has 
 received 20 per cent, increase in wages, accompanied by 25 
 per cent, decrease in the cost of commodities, which means 
 that for every 20s. paid in wages thirty years ago there is 
 now 24s. paid, and the commodities that cost 20s. thirty 
 years ago now cost 15s., a sohd gain of gs. per week for Labour. 
 
 So we find that by peaceful processes, working in the ordi- 
 nary way, Labour has secured benefits solid and substantial, 
 more surely and probably more lasting than it would have 
 secured by confiscating the capital of the country and all 
 the implements and means of production. 
 
 Therefore, we may adduce from this that Labour has re- 
 ceived the whole of what Labour has created, and that any 
 attempt to enrich any one section of the community at the 
 expense of any other section is not hkely to be successful. 
 We can only improve the well-being of the whole nation by 
 improving the well-being of every section of the community. 
 
 Now let us see whether, if Socialism could only have brought 
 us to this point, profit-sharing could not have brought us any 
 nearer to our ideal. I think you will agree with me that 
 the profits we should have had to divide would have been 
 
316 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 £347,000,000, and against that we should have had to deduct 
 the salaries of salaried servants and the earnings of lawyers, 
 doctors, and other professional men, and in addition interest 
 on capital. The result would probably be that we should 
 not have so much as 2d. per day for each man, woman, and 
 child in the United Kingdom. Therefore, I think you will 
 agree with me that those Trade Unionists who have always 
 looked on profit-sharing schemes with distrust, and who prefer 
 to depend upon their own organizations for increases of social 
 comforts and increases of wages, have acted wisely. They 
 are more likely to get increases of social well-being and com- 
 forts in that way than by any profit-sharing scheme. We 
 now ask ourselves how it is that, if it be true that Labour 
 creates all wealth. Labour is not better off than a paltry 
 8Jd. per head per day if all wealth that we could confiscate 
 were divided equally. The answer to that is that Labour 
 does not create all wealth ; the wealth is created jointly by 
 Labour, Capital, and Employer, and of those three Labour 
 is in the most favoured position, but none of the three 
 can create wealth without the other. My objection to 
 Socialism is that it would attempt to benefit some at the ex- 
 pense of others. You cannot increase the wealth of any one 
 class by lessening the wealth of any other class, as stated 
 already. You cannot increase the wealth of the community 
 or of any class permanently by any method of confiscation 
 or redistribution whatsoever. 
 
 Then what means have we for increasing wealth ? First 
 of aU, let us consider the three elements that go to the pro- 
 duction of wealth : Capital, Labour, and Employer. In the 
 first place, what is capital ? I have endeavoured to show 
 that we cannot get rid of capital under any system whatsoever 
 — ^that capital would exist under Socialism exactly as it does 
 to-day. Mere abstract capital is owned by widows, by orphans, 
 by minors who are Uving on the money left them by their 
 parents ; by retired people who are living on the savings of 
 their Hfe, and by frugal people who have saved ; by co-oper- 
 ators ; in short, by everybody who has saved money by 
 spending less than their income. Those are the only abstract 
 capitalists we have to-day. How did capital come into exist- 
 ence ? Suppose we just imagine our earHest ancestors. 
 They would be Uving on roots, on fruits, and on seeds that 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 317 
 
 they gathered. They would have no cultivation ; they would 
 also be living on the game they were able to trap or capture, 
 or the fish they could catch. Let us suppose a community 
 of one hundred of thege ancestors of ours Uving in this way. 
 Every member would have to gather in for himself or herself ; 
 they would have to be constantly at work, just as the birds are, 
 to feed themselves and their young. And now we will imagine 
 that ten men and women of this hundred offer to make spades 
 for the purpose of digging up the roots, another ten offer to 
 make bows and arrows, and another ten offer to build boats 
 to go fishing, and another ten offer to build huts for 
 protection from the weather, on condition that in exchange 
 for the providing of these implements of production by these 
 forty people they should receive clothing, food, and shelter 
 as consideration from the sixty who would be using the 
 implements of production they were going to create. 
 
 Now, the sixty remaining would find that with the aid of 
 these implements of production they coidd obtain for the 
 whole commimity of one hundred more food and clothing 
 and better shelter, with less labour to themselves, than they 
 could under the old conditions have provided for themselves 
 alone. That is to say, that with the aid of these implements 
 of production they were able to make enough for themselves 
 and the other forty who created these implements, and that 
 notwithstanding that they now produced for the whole 
 community, they had more leisure and less exhaustion for 
 themselves than when they worked without implements for 
 themselves alone. And being better off under this system, 
 they would adopt it permanently, and in future their com- 
 munity would be conducted on these lines. This would then 
 be the first introduction of capital — the implements of pro- 
 duction — and some members of the tribe would permanently 
 devote their lives to the creation of these implements of 
 production, and receive their return in food, shelter, and 
 clothing. Therefore, you see that capital and the implements 
 of production must have had a very long history. And what 
 do we find to-day ? We find that the production of wealth 
 and its distribution is most general and most equal where 
 capital is most plentiful. I want you to think of that — that 
 the production of wealth and its even distribution is most 
 general where capital is most plentiful. 
 
318 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 In the United Kingdom the productive capital per head 
 is two and a half times that of the Continent of Europe, and 
 the income per head averages double. In the United Kingdom 
 the capital per head is five times that of Italy, Spain, and 
 Portugal, and the income per head is increased in proportion 
 again. In England, capital is twelve times that of China 
 and India, and the income per head is thirteen times that 
 of China and India. In England, labour itself is only 4 per 
 cent, of the productive power, and capital is 96 per cent, 
 of the productive power as represented by machinery — that 
 is, labour represents 4 per cent, of the productive power, 
 and machinery — ^in other words, capital — ^represents 96 per 
 cent. In Spain, labour is 24 per cent ; in Italy, labour 
 is 34 per cent. ; and in Portugal, labour is 42 per cent. ; 
 and consequently we find that the productive power of 
 four Englishmen is equal to that of twenty-four 
 Spaniards, thirty-four Italians, and forty-two Portuguese, 
 and it is probably equal to sixty Chinamen and Hindoos, 
 and that wages are proportionately higher in England. 
 Therefore, this extra earning power, just as in the case of our 
 first forefathers, when it was provided by bow and arrow, 
 has been provided by capital. When this fact is grasped, 
 I venture to say that workmen will cease to rail against 
 Capital, and will view Capital as the friend of Labour. 
 
 The next element in the productive wealth is the employer ; 
 and by the word " ■employer " I refer to the owner in private 
 enterprises and to the Board of Directors in pubhc companies, 
 or whatever constitutes the supreme responsibihty. As we 
 have pointed out, at present the employer takes all the risks 
 of the undertaking, guarantees labour its wages, capital 
 its interest, and is willing to accept for himself the leavings. 
 By adopting such a system we bring reward or loss into direct 
 contact with the employer. If you turned a man under such 
 conditions as these on to a bleak rock, you would have adopted 
 the surest way of making it into a garden. The successful 
 employer can only be a man working on piece-work. 
 
 Now we come to the consideration of the position of labour 
 in the production of wealth. There are two classes of labour : 
 there is labour engaged on productive work, and there is 
 labour not engaged on productive work. I think it was Adam 
 Smith who said that a man got rich in proportion to the 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 319 
 
 number of servants he employed in productive work, and he 
 got poor in proportion to the number of servants in his 
 domestic employ. However, we do not need to go into the 
 question of domestic servants, but I would Mke to point out 
 two facts in connection with domestic servants. First, they 
 are a wonderful force, working in the direction of the more 
 even distribution of wealth. Second, although entirely un- 
 organized, their wages have advanced at a greater rate than 
 any other class of labour. 
 
 Well, now, in considering labour and the position of 
 labour, we come to this great fact — that a large production 
 and a large consumption go together with high wages. You 
 could not have low production and low consumption and high 
 wages, but you can have large production and large consump- 
 tion and high wages. Wages may be real or nominal. I will 
 give you an illustration of wages that were only nominal. At 
 the time of the outbreak of the rebellion in the United States 
 under Washington, when our American Colonies made war 
 against us, Washington had to issue paper money. He issued 
 the first in March 1778, and then one doUar cash could be 
 exchanged for I1.75 of paper money. Twelve months after, 
 one dollar cash would exchange for $19.00 paper money. 
 Twelve months after that again one dollar cash would exchange 
 for $40.00 of paper money, and three years later, in May 1781, 
 one dollar cash would exchange for $500.00 paper money, 
 and after that it got up to the point when one doUar cash 
 would exchange for $1,000.00 of paper money. Now we find 
 at that period there was a minister at Brookfield, Mass., 
 named the Rev. W. Appleton. In 1776, before the war, his 
 deacons had a meeting and voted the Rev. W. Appleton a 
 salary of 400 dollars a year, paid in cash. In December 1778 
 the deacons had to meet and voted the Rev. W. Appleton 
 1,100 dollars more in paper, in addition to his 400 dollars 
 which, no doubt, they were then paying him also in paper 
 money. Twelve months after they had to give him 3,600 
 more dollars in paper money, and in 1780, 12,000 dollars of 
 paper money was required to keep the gentleman going. 
 Therefore, in the last year he would receive 12,000 dollars in 
 paper as the equal of 400 dollars in cash, but this was poor 
 pay to the Rev. Mr. Appleton, because he would be enjoying 
 fewer advantages on 40,000 dollars a year paid in paper in 
 
320 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 1780 than on 400 dollars paid in cash in 1776. We must 
 distinguish between nominal wages and real wages, and the 
 only way you can distinguish between them is the amount of 
 social well-being and comforts that the wages will purchase. 
 Those wages are most real that will purchase the largest 
 amount of social well-being and comforts. Consequently, to 
 improve the position of labour, you must increase the product 
 of labour, make it more abundant and cheaper, and then 
 you can also improve wages and also make them more real. 
 Wages can only be paid out of the product of labour, and it 
 is for this very reason that employers make their first and 
 most serious mistake, because, knowing that wages are paid 
 out of the product of labour, they consider that the lower 
 the wages they pay the bigger the margin of profit that will 
 be left to themselves. On the other hand, labour, knowing 
 that wages are paid out of the product of labour, considers 
 that restriction of output will tend to keep wages at a higher 
 level. These are two most remarkable fallacies, because both 
 employer and employee overlook the important fact of the 
 power of increased consvimption. Labour overlooks the ques- 
 tion of the difference between real and nominal wages, and 
 the manufacturer overlooks the enormous power of a large 
 consumptive demand. Every increase of wages gives in- 
 creased power of consumption to labour, and consequentiiy a 
 larger production for the manufacturer, with a cheaper cost 
 of production and the possibihty of increasing " profits. A 
 larger volume of production, by lowering prices, gives increased 
 consimiption of the products out of which labour is paid. 
 This pressure is constantly operating in the direction of the 
 raising of wages and the lowering of prices at the same time 
 that it operates in the direction of making wages more real 
 and less nominal. Therefore, all combines on the part of 
 employers to raise prices and all strikes on the part of labour 
 to raise wages defeat their own ends by lessening the con- 
 sumption and by lessening the production. Don't let us 
 forget, and don't let employers forget, that the profits of 
 employers are merely the leavings of labour and capital — the 
 greater the product and the greater the consumption of pro- 
 ducts the greater the possibility of profits. The increased 
 power of consumption of the people and their ever-increasing 
 wants are the basis of the employer's margin for profits. 
 
aujvua IJNDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 321 
 
 We now come to the consideration of another point : 
 Supposing we had no increase in requirements, all wants 
 being already fully satisfied, whether wages would increase. 
 Happily we are none of us content to live to-day as our fore- 
 fathers did. If we were, there would be no increase in 
 consumption, and consequently no increase in production and 
 no increase in wages. But, fortunately for all three partners 
 in -production. Labour, Capital, and Employer, the standard 
 of living is rising even more rapidly than wages, and this 
 fact brings us to the consideration of the next factor govern- 
 ing the rate of wages, and that factor is that the standard 
 of Uving determines the rate of wages. This factor partly 
 explains why wages are higher in one country than in another, 
 and also partly explains why wages of skilled labour are 
 higher than the wages of unskilled labour ; but the standard 
 of living, for it to be effective as a wage-raiser, must always 
 be in advance of wages. As soon as wages get in advance of 
 the standard of living, progress stops. The navvy with ideas 
 of a higher standard of living aspires to become a ganger, or 
 by increasing his power of production to obtain an advance 
 in wages ; but the navvy with no desire for a higher standard 
 of living remains content with his wages, and has no wish to 
 raise his wages by increased efficiency. It is the same with 
 the mechanic, and every other department of labour. There- 
 fore it is as important to develop the desire of Labour to 
 consume wealth as it is to produce wealth. 
 
 Social progress is promoted just as much by consuming 
 wealth as by saving wealth, and it is as true that the cost 
 of production is governed by the standard of living as it is 
 true that the standard of living depends upon the social 
 character of the people. Now let us see how this is. The 
 successful investment of capital in machinery is only possible 
 in proportion to its power to cheapen production whilst 
 raising wages, and so giving increased power of consumption 
 to Labour. The higher the wages the higher will be the 
 power of consumption, provided the social standard of living 
 is also rising ; and consequently the higher the wages the 
 better will be the return for capital, provided the use of capital 
 can increase and cheapen production and can also increase the 
 rate of wages, but not otherwise. Capital recognizes this 
 fact, and flows into channels where it can effect the greatest 
 
 22 
 
9M THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 saving in the cost of production. If what we call "hand- 
 made " goods can be produced the cheapest, quality and suit- 
 ability considered, then it is clear " hand made " will be in 
 the most demand ; but if what we call " machine made " 
 goods, in other words, " capitial and labour made " goods, 
 can produce the cheapest, quality and suitability considered, 
 then '• machine made " will be in greatest demand. That 
 which is able to undersell will always supplant that which is 
 undersold. Consequently the increased use of capital and 
 machinery is only possible on the basis of cheaper production 
 and higher wages, because the higher wages are necessary to 
 give the increase of consuming power. If wages do not rise 
 with increased and cheaper production, there will be very 
 Httle increased demand and Httle advantage to be gained by 
 the use of machinery, of greater producing powers. We see 
 how these two elements act and react upon each other, and 
 that rises in real wages depend upon increased production 
 with decreased cost, and that the successful use of capital and 
 the profits for the employer depend on rises in real wages to 
 bring about this increased consumption which is possible 
 only with; decreased cost and increased wages. : 
 
 Now let us see if we can illustrate this statement. We will 
 imagine a nation of Hottentots, Eskimos, or Zulus, with no 
 capitahsts and no employers, for the reason that their stan- 
 dard of life, their social condition, was so low and their con- 
 sumption of commodities was so small that all their require- 
 ments could be supplied by hand labour. If machinery and 
 capital' were employed, this coiild serve no useful purpose, 
 but would, from lack of increased demand, actually raise the 
 price of production. Under these circumstances it is clear 
 that production of commodities by hand labour would be 
 cheaper for the hmited requirements of Hottentot, Zulu, etc., 
 than production of commodities by capital and machinery. 
 
 All increase of wages to be permanent must be accompanied 
 by cheaper production and by increased standard of living. 
 Let us take tJie cotton industry, because it is the chief industry 
 in Lancashire, and most, of us know something about it. 
 At the beginning of the last century the capital employed 
 in the cotton industry is estimated to have been ;£i30 per 
 operative, and the production 936 lb. per operative, or 7 lb. 
 per sovereign of capital employed, By the middle of last 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 323 
 
 century we find that capital had increased to 1^240 per 
 operative, and the production had increased to 3,519 lb. per 
 operative, or 15 lb. per sovereign of capital employed. 
 To-day it is estimated that the capital per operative is £500, 
 and the production has correspondingly increased. To find 
 how this has affected wages in Lancashire, let us compare 
 the wages of cotton operatives a hundred years ago, fifty 
 years ago, and to-day, ever increasing, ever getting more real, 
 and better able to purchase more social well-being and comforts. 
 
 I will now endeavour to illustrate how increased production 
 and increased wages cheapen production. 
 
 We will take the manufacture of watches for our illustra- 
 tion, owing to the important part that machinery plays in 
 the production of watches. Imagine four employers manu- 
 facturing watches, whom we will call No. i. No. 2, No. 3, 
 and No. 4, and suppose that No. i, with inferior plant and 
 old premises, can barely make watches to cost los. each, 
 No. 2, with a little better plant, can m.ake watches for 9s., 
 No. 3, with better plant still, can make watches for 8s., and 
 No. 4, with up-to-date modern plant and machinery, can make 
 watches for 7s. Now it is clear that No. i must sell at los. 
 or else become bankrupt, but if No. i is able to sell at los., 
 it could only be for so long as Nos. 2, 3, and 4 also sell at 
 los. And this they would continue to do provided they had 
 nothing to gain by adopting a different policy. Now suppose 
 that No. 4 saw that by selling at 9s. he could make more net 
 profit for himself, having knocked No. i out and so increased 
 his own production, than by continuing to sell at los. If he 
 adopted this course he would then find that his watches cost 
 him less by reason of increased production, and that instead 
 of costing 7s. as formerly, they now cost him only 6s. He 
 would probably next boldly lower his price to 7s. 6d. and 
 would find his total profits greater than when selling at 9s., 
 because of his increased production which brought down his 
 cost to only 5s. per watch. No. 4 would also find that as 
 his cost of production per watch came down he was able to 
 increase the weekly wages of his men far beyond what Nos. i, 
 2, and 3 could do, and so he would seciire a better class of 
 workmen, and his workmen would find that as they got better 
 and more regular employment, with higher wages, they were 
 in consequence larger consumers of watches and all other 
 
324 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 articles than they had ever been under the old conditions. 
 The ttade of No. 4 would be helped in every way and his 
 success would be certain. 
 
 How does this reduction in the cost of watches come about ? 
 I will endeavour to give you what would be called a pro forma 
 balance-sheet. We will assume the prices of raw materials 
 were fixed. We can assume that, because they would be 
 affected only by the world's supply governing each of the 
 four watch factories. We will suppose each of the four fac- 
 tories produces 52,000 watches a year, 1,000 a week each, 
 and that the cost of the up-to-date plant of No. 4 was ;£5o,ooo. 
 Now, the raw material for the watch would probably cost 
 about IS. We will say No. 4 employs 200 workpeople at an 
 average of 20s. per week for men, women, and boys. This 
 would be 4s. per watch for labour. The interest and depre- 
 ciation would come, you will see, to 2s. per watch, making 
 a total of 7s. as the cost of the watch. By seUing watches at 
 los. each he would make a gross profit of £yfioo, out of which 
 he would have to pay selling expenses and provide a margin 
 df net profit for himself. After No. i had gone, his productioii, 
 we Will say, would be about 104,000 watches, and he would 
 have cost of increase of plant, £20,000, making total cost of 
 plart now £70,000. His raw material would again cost him 
 IS., and he would probably require not 200 additional work- 
 people, but 100, making a total of, say, 300 workpeople, and 
 would pay them, say, an average of 24s., instead of 20s. as 
 formerly, making labour now 3s. 7d. per watch. The interest 
 and depreciation would be is. 5d., making the total cost of 
 the watch 6s. Selling the watdies at gs. each, there would 
 be a gross profit of £15,600 to provide for selling expenses 
 and for his own net profit. After Nos. i, 2, and 3 were 
 gone, his production would be 208,000 watches, and the cost 
 of plant would probably be increased a further £30,000, 
 making a total of £100,000 for plant, raw materials again 
 costing IS. He would probably now have 400 workpeople, 
 whom he would pay now at the average rate of 30s., which 
 would make labour now cost 3s. per watdi, and interest 
 and depreciation is., amounting to a total cost of 5s. per 
 watch, and by selUng at 7s. 6d. he would make £26,000 of 
 gross profit out of which to pay selling expenses and leave a 
 margin of net profit for himself. 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 325 
 
 Now what becomes of the 400 workpeople thrown out of 
 employment ? We saw that the total amount paid to the 
 workpeople under the old conditions, men, women, and boys, 
 was ;£8oo per week ; the total paid under the new conditions 
 for 400 workpeople was ;f6oo per week. The 400 workpeople 
 formerly engaged in making watches are now liberated, and 
 as the 400 workpeople who are left in the business have £200 
 a week more to spend than formerly, they have increased the 
 demand for clothing, houses, and for all the things that make 
 for social well-being and comforts ; consequently the 400 
 workpeople who left watchmaking find occupation in supplying 
 this increased demand for commodities from the 400 work- 
 people who were left in the watch business and for others, 
 because these rises in wages of watchmakers affected not only 
 the watchmakers, but also tended to raise the wages of the 
 400 workpeople who went out of watchmaking and of all 
 other workpeople. That is the case so long as our social 
 well-being is continuously improving, but no longer. 
 
 Now all these things are very gradual. No sudden dis- 
 location occurs, for the selling price of a commodity is always 
 nearer to the dearest cost of production than it is to the 
 cheapest cost of production. The balance between the dearest 
 cost of production and the cheapest cost of production repre- 
 sents the margin of profit available for the capable employer, 
 and for increasing wages. Therefore, instead of all losing 
 money and having to reduce wages except the one fortunate 
 employer who can produce the cheapest, all make money 
 and are able to raise wages except the employer who manu- 
 factures the dearest. These industrial movements are like 
 the Yeomanry regiment : they move at the speed of the 
 slowest horse, and not the fastest. 
 
 The next point for us to consider is that in addition to the 
 standard of living the social opportunities of Labour affect 
 profits and wages. We have seen that we can only increase 
 profits and wages by increased production, that we can only 
 increase production by increasing consumption, that we can 
 only increase consumption by raising wages and the standard 
 of living. Now, we will try to prove that we cannot improve 
 the standard of Uving without as a first step increasing the 
 social opportunities of life, and that this latter can only be 
 done by reducing the hours of labour. Two conditions have 
 
326 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 to be observed in reducing the hours of labour. The first 
 essential is that it shall be general, for you could not have 
 one section working one set of hours in an industry and another 
 section working another set of hours. The second essential 
 is that it must be gradual. Well, now, we must look into 
 history to see what the eifect of reducing the hours of labour 
 has been. In 1800, you will hardly believe it, the hours of 
 labour of adults in this country were fourteen to sixteen hours 
 a day, and children commenced to work at the age of six 
 years and worked for twelve hours a day. The hours for 
 adult labour and children were gradually reduced, and the age 
 limit for children was gradually raised until you have the 
 present scale, which is as well known to, yourselves as to me. 
 It varies from nine and a half hours to eight hours a day for 
 adults, and we have an age-limit of twelve or thirteen years 
 for children. As each Act came into operation the benefit 
 was so marked that the efforts of friends were strengthened 
 and the position of opponents was weakened. In 1847 Lord 
 Ashley, better known as Lord Shaftesbury, proved that wages 
 had not fallen, but had risen ; that profits had not fallen, but 
 risen ; production had not diminished, but increased ; that 
 the gineral prosperity of the whole country had not suffered 
 but had been benefited by each reduction of working hours. 
 And now to-day, fifty years later, we can state that all these 
 assertions have been still^further proved to be correct, and 
 with even more astonishing results. The reason for this is 
 that increased time for social advancement has improved 
 the standard of living, that increased leisure has raised the 
 tastes and habits and intelligence of Labour. Shortening the 
 hours of labour, therefore, has brought about a natural rise 
 in real wages for labour, and, consequently, more opportuni- 
 ties for profitable employment of capital and larger profits 
 for employers. At the same time, it must not be overlooked 
 that shorter hours do require intensified labour in the hours 
 devoted to labour, but that need not and must not result 
 in greater exhaustion, but rather in less exhaustion for 
 labour. 
 
 Our factory system is not perfect, but it does give more 
 equal opportunities to skilled and unskilled labour, to the 
 strong and to the weakly, than we have had under any other 
 system. Every automatic machine we possess is simply a 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 327 
 
 storage battery for the brains of the inventor, enabling a less 
 gifted intellect to intensify production without intensifying 
 exhaustion. Let me now give you an illustration to show 
 this. The whole quantity of yarn produced by hand labour 
 in Lancashire two hundred years ago is estimated not to have 
 exceeded the quantity that 50,000 spindles of our present 
 machinery can produce. One man and two boys can super- 
 intend 2,000 spindles, and therefore twenty-five men and 
 fifty boys with modern machinery can produce by intensified 
 production, but with less exhaustion of the individual, as 
 much product as all the cotton operatives, men, women, 
 and children, of Lancashire, working for fourteen to sixteen 
 hours a day, with excessive exhaustion, could produce two 
 hundred years ago. 
 
 Our engine power in England to-day is estimated to repre- 
 sent a greater power of production than 120,000,000 ,of adult 
 workmen, working day and night without rest or sleep, could 
 produce by hand labour with the implements of production 
 of one hundred years ago. And yet the product is all too 
 small for our wants. Whatever poverty we have to-day is 
 due to the fact that the commodities produced are not sufficient 
 to satisfy the requirements of the people. We have a more 
 even distribution of social well-being and comforts, and less 
 poverty to-day than we had one hundred years ago, simply 
 because production is greater, and when production is sufficient 
 to satisfy requirements, nothing except bad laws can prevent 
 an equitable distribution. We have seen the enormous advan- 
 tages brought to Labour, Capital, and the Employer working 
 along natural courses. Socialism could not have secured this, 
 because the wealth of any one class, as we have endeavoured 
 to prove, cannot be increased by lessening that of any other 
 class. Nor could we secure this by means of any method of 
 redistribution whatsoever. We can only increase social well- 
 being and comforts, and secure a more even distribution of 
 them, by increasing the total wealth produced. We can 
 only increase the total wealth produced by intensified produc- 
 tion and increasing the wages of labour, and consequently 
 Labour's power of consumption. This we can in turn secure 
 [through elevating the standard of living by enlarging social 
 'i>. opportunities made possible by a general and gradual reduction 
 of the hours of labour — brought about by means of intensified 
 
328 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 production, but wMch must not be accompanied by increased 
 exhaustion. 
 
 By these methods only can. we succeed, for the natural 
 order of social progress must always be from the material to 
 the intelle<&tual, moral, and social, and the progress of every 
 nation must depend mainly on increasing the opportunities 
 for improving the material condition and social well-being 
 of its people. 
 
VI 
 
 SOCIALISM, OR EQUALITY AND 
 EQUITY 
 
 [From " Bibby's Annual," 1918] 
 
 One of the most clearly defined of our human aspirations 
 is a desire for EquaUty. It is upon this yearning of humanity 
 for Equality that the Socialist, the Anarchist, and the Bol- 
 shevist found their hopes for the realization of their ideals 
 as to the re-organization of Society. 
 
 But they are following a mirage of the desert — a will-o'- 
 the-wisp — that can only lead them into a waterless, barren 
 land, where hunger and famine are the constant accompani- 
 ment of life, or into a quaking bog where mankind would 
 sink into sUme and ooze and death. 
 
 For let it be noted that this yearning for Equality is never 
 coupled with any basis of Equity. It is a desire for an 
 equality that would divide the wealth of others amongst 
 those who consider that such division would bring gain — 
 not loss — to themselves. 
 
 The Trades Unionist, Artisan, or Socialist desires to share 
 with his employer, but will not agree that his labourer should 
 share with himself, nor even receive the same rate of wages 
 as himself. His interpretation of EquaUty is tiiat he should 
 say to his employer, " I am equal with you," but not that 
 he should also say in Equity to his labourer, " You are equal 
 with me." When the Socialist wears khaki he has to accept 
 the gradations of rank and pay that follow from Private 
 to Corporal, from Sergeant to Lieutenant, from Captain to 
 Colonel, and so on up to Field-Marshal, but in industries the 
 Socialist claims equality with all above him, whilst denying 
 equality to all others beneath him. We all wear khaki through- 
 
330 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 out our lives, invisible to all eyes but our own, but our own 
 conscience sees our uniform, and we appoint ourselves to our 
 own rank, and no man chooses for us. 
 
 The basis of all social conditions and advancement is the 
 law of service to others, and in this only can we realize 
 Equality and Equity with both the man above and the man 
 below us. The earliest manifestation of selection amongsjt 
 most primitive men was that they chose as their King and 
 Ruler the man most distingmshed by prowess in defending 
 them from their enemies, and right down to the present day 
 Kings are looked up to to serve their peoples. When Kings 
 cease to make service to their peoples their title to Kingship, 
 and demand instead service from their peoples, that moment 
 Kings have themselv^ signed their own abdication. Neither 
 King nor Priest, nor poUtician, nor people, nor capitalist, 
 nor employer, nor employee-worker who has ceased to serve 
 can survive, and no SociaUst " cure-all " can produce equality 
 in value or fruits of service until our Creator sends us into 
 this world all equal in health, strength, energy and abiHty. 
 There will always be gradation of rank of service from King 
 to peasant, from Field-Marshal to Private, from Admiral to 
 Jack Tar. Equally by service and by service alone in Busi- 
 ness, Science, or Art come gradations in rank and advance- 
 ment. 
 
 Gigantic combinations, whether called Trade Unions or 
 Trusts, or Labour or Capital, which are solely concerned 
 with their own selfish, narrow aims 'and ideals cannot succeed 
 or continue any more than a one-winged bird can fly. Their 
 continuance depends on their fulfilling the eternal law of 
 service. That great truth is as immutable as the law of 
 gravitation, and service means, to work for and to serve 
 others. It does not mean " ca' canny " by a " Trade Union- 
 ist," or slackness and competition dodging by the Employer- 
 Combine ; nor does service for others mean overstrain or 
 work beyond limits of continuance in frenzied competition 
 with fellow-man — that is War, not Service. The Employer- 
 Capitalist or Employer-Worker, or SociaUst, or Anarchist, 
 who thinks only of Equality and ignores the Equity of ser- 
 vice, will stand no chance of survival under modern social 
 conditions of life. Life is a game that must be played with 
 scrupulous fairness. The outstajading law of life is service 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 331 
 
 to others and just and equal rights and Hberties for all. 
 Life will not surrender a bishop for a knight, nor a queen 
 for a rook. However alert we may be we shall never catch 
 Equity napping in that way. 
 
 Either by ourselves directly, or by our fathers or fore- 
 fathers, the corresponding service must have been rendered. 
 We can inherit good health or ill-health, strength or weak- 
 ness, strong raentaHty or feeble-mindedness, energy or slack- 
 ness, application or inertia, with their corresponding rewards 
 or punishments " to the third or fourth generation of those 
 that serve.." No typewriter or calculating machine more 
 correctly records the key we ourselves or our ancestors have 
 struck than does Life record our service, be it high or low, 
 noble or mean. Equity is depicted as silent but scrupulously 
 just and pitiless. Nature or Equity — call it what we will — 
 knows no pity. The game of life is difficult and our antagonist 
 Equity is wary and adept, but victory always rests with the 
 man whose hfe conforms most successfully to the rules of 
 service. Equity or Nature is always more than willing to 
 be checkmated by the man of boldness who brings courage 
 and efficiency and noble service to the game. And equally 
 true it is that Equity will exact the fullest price for every 
 false move and for every error and blunder of ourselves or 
 of our forefathers. Nature or pquity — call it what we will — 
 — is absolutely infalUble. Judas thought to sell his Lord for 
 thirty pieces of silver and make a profit on the deal. But 
 he only sold himself and broiight about his own suicide. Cain 
 sought his own happiness by killing Abel, but he only achieved 
 his own misery and undoing. And these truths are written 
 large through all the pages of History. All down the echoing 
 vaults of time there comes only one recorded note as the 
 basis of success, and that note is — service to others. 
 
 It is quite out of the power of any one of us to escape from 
 our ego any more than we can escape from our own shadow 
 in an open field on a sunny day. Our ego is the central 
 force of our very life and being, and consequently we are 
 all by nature IndividuaHsts and not Socialists. We are all 
 egoists just as surely as snow is white and coal is black. All 
 snow is not ahke in whiteness, but all show is white. All 
 coal is not alike in blackness, but all coal is black. And so 
 we may each of us differ individually, but we are all egoists— 
 
332 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 we cannot avoid being so if we would and we would not if 
 we could. But rich or poor, high-bom or low-bred, saint 
 or sinner, peer or peasant, philosopher or fool, wolfish or 
 lamb-like, bold or timid, courageous or cowardly, we are all 
 egoists. 
 
 Even whole nations are egoists. The Germanic nation are 
 egoists in their ideals of " Mittel Europe " and world domina- 
 tion. Great Britain, France, Italy, United States and their 
 Allies are egoists in opposing this Germanic ideal. All our 
 best Heroes, Statesmen and Citizens have been egoists, and 
 believing in themselves have worked for hirnian happiness, 
 have saved mankind from disaster, or have deluged the world 
 with blood, suffering, hardships and misery according to 
 their ideals and ideals of their ego. Lincoln, Washington, 
 Cromwell, Pitt, Wellington, Nelson, Napoleon, Caesar, and 
 Alexander were all egoists of different ideas and ideals. An 
 ignoble idea of self, a weak, feeble egoism is the root of all 
 evil more surely than any other cause. 
 
 As is the compensating balance to the watch, or the safety 
 valve to the boiler, so is the power of self-criticism and self- 
 valuation to our ego. The power of self-criticism must be 
 as true and exact as a beam scale with just balances founded 
 on accurate self-knowledge. It is when our ego is self-judged 
 by the power of self-criticism that it leads us to power and 
 dominance over aU the forces which oppose our aims and 
 ideals. We can only fulfil our full and useful service when 
 we have impartially subjected our ego to the searchlight of 
 self-criticism. 
 
 The unique attribute of the successful man, who does 
 accomplish results as compared with the mere dreamer, is 
 this power of self-criticism. The great power of an ideal 
 is not so much in the ideal but in the balanced egoism of 
 the idealist. If he be a true egoist then he possesses the 
 inward strength to realize his ideal. Without this inward 
 force of the egoist the ideal will never progress beyond a 
 dream. 
 
 The world owes its position and' advancement to-day not 
 to self-distrust and self-effacement, but to the self-centred 
 individualists, well-balanced egoists who, with confidence in 
 themselves and faith in their ideals, have dared and done 
 all for their realization and achievement. It has been said 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 333 
 
 that the British are a nation of shopkeepers ; that the Ameri- 
 cans are thinking only of the dollars ; and Bismarck had 
 a saying that Germany was a nation of servants. Her soldiers 
 are drilled units of humanity. Her workmen are dragooned 
 into service, but they are consequently, as rank and file, 
 not equal in ego to the rank and file of other races. They 
 lack the ego of individualism and its power of initiative. 
 
 We are egoists because we are human. We serve with 
 our ego the happiness of others because we are Divine as 
 well as human. It is the Divine in us that triumphs always 
 and ever ; it is the base in our ego that lowers and destroys 
 us. But through it all our ego is to each of us what the sun 
 is to Nature, and we can no more triumph without our ego 
 than Nature can produce food and flowers without the central 
 radiance and power of the sun. 
 
 But whatever we call ourselves — Individuahst, Socialist 
 or Anarchist — ^we cannot escape by adoption of any name or 
 bp.dge the obligation laid upon us of service for others. That 
 must be our highest ideal and the goal to which we travel 
 in our national and personal aims and ambitions. And let 
 us consider the joy of ideals founded on service to others. 
 First, there is the joy of the ideal itself, the inspiration. Then 
 our inspiration to achieve that ideal. Then the joy of tireless 
 and ceaseless appUcation to overcome all obstacles and diffi- 
 culties, and, lastly, the final joy of realization. 
 
 But we so often fix our attention too much on the goax 
 of our ideals rather than on the best methods to adopt to 
 make sure of reaching that goal. The point is not how high 
 we can climb or how far we can travel each day, or year, or 
 life-time, to reach our goal, but to see that our methods are 
 true and right for ourselves and posterity. If we are to 
 concentrate solely on our ideals and not equally concentrate 
 on methods that will stand the test of all conditions of time, 
 then we are no more Ukely to reach the summit than would 
 be an Alpine Climber who, with eyes fixed on mountain peaks, 
 ignored the ravines, precipices, rivers and glaciers , he had 
 to traverse and overcome. 
 
 The Sociahst would look to attain a higher state of civili- 
 zation by the giving of all power to Governments. The 
 Anarchist would hope to attain the same ends by the denial 
 of any power to Governments. There have always been 
 
334 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 \two types of Government — one nearest to Socialistic ideals, 
 and the other nearest to Individualistic ideals, but there is 
 no record of social life in communities without Governments. 
 From the days of ancient Egypt and ancient Rome there 
 have been Governments that pauperized the people ; that 
 gave doles for a cheap loaf ; doles for house-building that 
 the workman might pay less for his bread and less rent for 
 his house than he had received for his labour as the cost of 
 their production. This type of . Govermnent is considered 
 by Socialists to be the protector and guardian of the people, 
 and is said to live and exist for the people. The other type 
 of Government gives no doles for cheap bread or cheap 
 houses. It beUeves that the individual should be a freeman 
 and self-supporting. It concentrates on Justice and Equity 
 and equal rights for all ; favouritism or pauperizing for none. 
 This Government is proud of its reputation that its policy is 
 to encourage the people to live for themselves. 
 
 Every act of the Socialistic Government makes each man's 
 penny — the penny of those who receive Government dmes 
 equally with the penny of all others — ^worth less than one 
 penny. Every act of the IndividuaHstic Government makes 
 each man's penny worth more than one penny in the comfort, 
 health and happiness it places within his reach. 
 
 Reward must be linked to effort, and without effort there 
 can be no reward. It is only when we play the game of 
 life, not on the basis of asking and looking for doles and 
 grants from Governments, not on the basis of " ca' canny " 
 or cunning, but on the basis of whole-hearted service for 
 others, that we can reach the sublime heights for ourselves, 
 and make it the easier for all others to reach there and to 
 attain to a full and complete life of happiness. 
 
 Who can set a limit on the influence of a human being 
 for good or ill ? But we are poor and feeble whatever may 
 be our wealth or health, if we lack the leisure to satisfy 
 healthy wants of mind and soul as well as of muscle and 
 body. Material, individual and national progress is in- 
 separably interlocked with the progress and development of 
 men, women and children as individuals. We have seen in 
 Russia the collapse of hopes for betterment founded on the 
 fallacies of Socialistic theories. We are a democratic nation 
 living under the finest and most sane" and stable form of 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 335 
 
 Government the world has ever known — a Constitutional 
 Monarchy — and it would be nothing less than a scandal if 
 we, a democratic nation and empire, could organize suc- 
 cessfully for War at short notice, as we have done, and could 
 not equally successfully and rapidly organize for Peace. 
 
 There is a saying amongst sailors that if the wind were 
 always south-west by west then children might take ships 
 to sea. But we British with our brave Allies have for over 
 four long years on individuahstic, democratic principles suc- 
 cessfully weathered the tornado hurricane of this present 
 World War, and surely we can successfully navigate in the 
 calmer winds of Peace. Our only ally that has dropped out 
 has been the Ally misled by Sociahstic fallacies, but that 
 Ally will, let us all hope, yet turn from these fallacies and, 
 rejoining her friends, achieve liberty and freedom. 
 
 Our greatest hindrance for betterment reconstruction after 
 the War will be that we always find it difficult to shake our- 
 selves clear of prejudice and preference for former habits 
 and lines of thought. The inertia of former habits of thought 
 and habits of action is difficult to overcome, and inertia 
 makes cowards of us all. But science was making rapid 
 progress, and moving with accelerated speed during the 
 War, and will move with still more rapid strides immediately 
 Peace follows on War, 
 
 It is true that as marked by figures' on a Calendar there 
 is a greater interval of time from the days of Adam to the 
 days of Sir Isaac Newton than from the days of Sir Isaac 
 Newton to to-day. But as marked by the progress of science, 
 civilization and of the unlocking of the secrets of Nature 
 by man, and his acquisition of correct knowledge of the 
 universe and of the infinite power of such natural forces as 
 electricity, there has been a greater span and interval from 
 the days of Sir Isaac Newton to the present time than in all 
 the preceding centuries since the foundations of this world 
 were laid. 
 
 It is Science, and the wealth of Capital and mechanical 
 utiUties made possible by Science, that havcyraised mankind 
 from a race of cave-dwellers clothed in skins of beasts into 
 house-dwellers clothed in scarlet and fine Hnen. And yet it 
 is these very modern conditions of life that have given us 
 power for increased production, accompanied by lessened 
 
336 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 exertion, that are viewed as powers that can be made to 
 produce greater well-being if they are accompanied by a policy 
 of " ca' canny." Tlie workman fears the mechanical utility, 
 believing it reduces employment, and is obsessed with the 
 fallacy that Capital and the Capitahst, which have made 
 Science and machinery possible, are the sworn enemies of 
 the workers, whilst a closer examination of these operations 
 would prove that both are the best friends the Workers and 
 mankind have ever enjoyed for the service of man. But 
 to the ignorant or partially informed the truths of know- 
 ledge and facts of history do not exist any more than if they 
 were not. The preSent-day attitude of Trades Unionists to 
 labour-saving machinery is just as logical as if our cave- 
 dwelling ancestors had decided that the first inventors of 
 bows and arrows, canoes and fishing nets or clubs and spears 
 for the men who hunted, fished or fought, were likely to bring 
 about periods of distress through over-production by giving 
 increased facilities for securing more game and fish, and 
 better^ defence from attack, involving social danger that 
 might bring ruin in its train if not " cabined, cribbed, and 
 confined " by " ca' canny " methods. 
 
 We are told that the cave-dweller had a shallow, receding 
 skull fashioned like an inverted saucer and which skull held 
 little more than a Spoonful of brains. He did not worry 
 about Socialism or any other " ism " ; and let us thank 
 God that he had brains enough to see that the inventor who 
 invented for him the mechanical utility, crude as it was, of 
 a bow and arrow that enabled him to kill the fleeing deer 
 without the necessity of running himself off his legs on foot 
 chasing after the deer, or who invented the mechanical utihty 
 of the canoe and nets which enabled him to catch more fish 
 in an hour than he could take in a month without them, 
 or who invented the club and spear that enabled him the 
 better to defend his wife and children from attacks of enemies, 
 and so live in greater security and comfort, could not possibly 
 be other than his friend ; and that every mechanical utility 
 that enabled him to produce more food and clothing with 
 less exertion, and in greater safety for his wife, children 
 and himself, was something to be sought after and to be 
 employed without hesitation or doubt as to future ill effects. 
 
 The greatest of our utilities to-day for the production of 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 337 
 
 more food and clothing, with greater safety and comfort 
 for our wives, our children and ourselves, is Capital ; for 
 Capital is the result of the developed heart and mind of man 
 which has enabled him to produce more than he consumes. 
 Hence we get stored-up Capital. Capital to-day is man- 
 kind's best friend, which with magic wand, harnesses the 
 waste forces of Nature into the service of mankind, making 
 the desert places and wildernesses of the earth to blossom 
 and bring forth food and clothing and to provide comforts 
 for our sheltering homes. And yet Capital and the so-caUed 
 Capitalist system is the most abused, the most misunder- 
 stood and probably the best hated of our institutions. With- 
 out Capital and the Capitalist there could be no machinery, 
 no mechanical utihties, or opening up and development of 
 our Colonies or of the distant waste lands from the frozen 
 North or South poles through the torrid tropics and temperate 
 zones. Unless some one had rendered service to others by 
 self-denial, in order to save up Capital with which to purchase 
 machinery and mechanical utilities, our feeble physical 
 strength could not produce one-hundredth part of the food, 
 clothing, shelter and bare necessities of life required to main- 
 tain our highly civilized modem hfe at one tithe of its present 
 level of comfort, health and happiness. 
 
 Capital, machinery and mechanical utihties, plough, sow, 
 cultivate and harvest our fields ; milk our cows and prepare 
 our food ready for consumption ; spin, weave and make 
 our clothing ; dress our leather and make our boots and 
 shoes ; make our furniture and carpets, and erect our houses, 
 build our ships, locomotives and engines ; and by electricity 
 can light and heat our homes^ cook our food, clean our knives 
 and our boots. A vacuirai cleaner will sweep our floors, 
 carpets and curtains. Machines typewrite our letters, add, 
 subtract and multiply our calculations for us, set up the type 
 for and print off our newspapers, and, in fact, perform for 
 us, without entailing strain or overwork on ourselves, thou- 
 sands of services too numerous to describe, which, without 
 the aid of Capital, machinery and mechanical utilities we 
 could never by our own feeble strength accomphsh. 
 
 "Capital, machinery and mechanical utilities bear our 
 heaviest burdens for us and prevent our own backs from 
 being broken under the heavy load we would othenvise have 
 
 23 
 
338 THE SIX-HOUR DAT 
 
 to bear, or be forced to return to the misery and discomfort 
 of the life of our ancestors, the cave-dwellers. If Capital, 
 machinery and mechanical production were withdrawn from 
 the world to-morrow, or their service to mankind curtailed, 
 or hindered, or arrested, this would cause millions of our 
 fellow creatures to perish, and force the remainder to exist 
 in abject misery and wretchedness. In awe and wonder we 
 exclaim this is a machine age, and that it is all too wonderful 
 for us to understand or reaUze, or adequately appreciate. 
 
 But the modern street-corner orators and Socialists, and 
 large masses of employee-workers, and ill-informed Trades 
 Unionists attack what they are constantly denouncing as 
 the " Capitalist system," and they speak of " Wage Slavery," 
 " Capital," " Machinery " as the cause of each and every 
 ill that a distorted imagination can depict. Even rehgion 
 and Christianity are described as part of the Capitalist system 
 of " Wage Slavery." If our Christian rehgion and its Founder 
 teach us that our own well-being and happiness are abso- 
 lutely dependent for realization on the extent of our own 
 services and the services of our fathers and forefathers to 
 our fellow-man, and that service to our fellow-man is a duty 
 we can never disregard without bringing suffering also on 
 ourselves, then revolutionary orators declare that rehgion is a 
 device of the so-called " Capitalist system " for the enslave- 
 ment of mankind, and is " fundamentally " wrong, and one 
 that must be abohshed by the " proletariat" as the enemy 
 of the people. Talk to the man who would carry the " Red 
 Flag " through the land, talk to the SociaUst or Anarchist of in- 
 creasing production, or of volume of output and its relation 
 to the costs of production, and you receive a vacant stare from 
 out their bloodshot eyes and a scornful reference to " Capital- 
 ism " and " Wage Slavery." They hold all increases in pro- 
 duction as solely the exploitation of the workers, and they 
 view machinery and mechaiiical production as part of a 
 " CapitaUst System " and " Wage Slavery " to be met and 
 defeated only by Trades Unionist secret rules for limiting 
 output by " ca' carmy " methods. Abohsh the " Capitahst 
 System," abohsh " Payment of Interest," abohsh the " Wage 
 System," confiscate all wealth, let aU the industries of the 
 country be run by Committees of Workmen without Capital- 
 ist heads to guide, direct and control, and they declare we 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 339 
 
 shall then have discovered the secret of " Perpetual Motion " 
 in our industries, the " Philosopher's Stone " of Government, 
 the " Elixir of Life " for social well-being, and the " Trans- 
 mutation " of baser metals into gold for every employee- 
 worker, and finally that but for the so-called " CapitaUst 
 System " and so-called " Wage Slavery " mankind would 
 bask in the perpetual sunshine of satisfied wants and realized 
 ideals without any corresponding labour. 
 
 This mental outlook of the SociaUst and Anarchist has 
 been cartooned by a satirist in a French journal, who depicted 
 some Bolshevik workman reading a poster put out by the 
 Bolshevik Russian Government, which reads, " Our soldiers 
 and citizens are without bread and all other necessaries. 
 Let every citizen do his duty and work" — the Bolshevik 
 workman's comment being, " Work ! ! Our Government has 
 betrayed us. The Capitalists have triumphed." 
 
 But " if a man will not work, neither shall he eat " must 
 always be the law of the universe, and instead of Capital, 
 machinery and mechanical utilities being the foes of the 
 worker, making his laborious task the harder, they are just 
 as much his friends and more surely improvers of his con- 
 dition, and are even more necessary to his civilized existence 
 than were the first club, spear, bow and arrow, canoe and 
 net invented for the use of our cave-dwelling ancestors. 
 
 Who and what are the CapitaHsts ? Every man or woman 
 with good health, good character, common sense, who exer- 
 cises self-denial and practises the essential law of service to 
 others, can become a Capitalist. 
 
 Capital and wealth or health are the results that Equity 
 records in the game called Life, when we strike the keyboard 
 letters and figures with habits of industry, economy, attention 
 to duty, service to mankind, and hard concentrated work. 
 Every man or woman lacking in these qualities will become 
 bankrupt in Capital, wealth or health, even if he or she 
 inherited the same from father or remoter ancestors, who had 
 possessed and had practised them. Nor can Capital, wealth 
 and health be fraudulently acquired and retained. Poverty 
 and ill-health'are the record of Equity in the game called 
 Life when the keyboard letters and figures of fraud or of 
 idleness, extravagance, slackness, selfishness in regard to 
 others have been struck by ourselves or our fathers. But 
 
340 THE SIX-HOUR DAY 
 
 when we see Capital, wealth or health, poverty or ill-health, 
 we view them as causes not as effects. It would be as reason- 
 able to view the rosy flush of health or the pustules of smallpox 
 as the casue of health or disease. But with these manifesta- 
 tions we do not fall into any such error. We know they 
 are not causes, and we recognize them as effects, and as the 
 outward and visible sign of good health or ill-health. 
 
 It would be just as logical and productive of service to 
 mankind to declaim against health and, strength as it is to 
 declaim against Capital and Wealth, l^he more we desire 
 to produce conditions that result in rosy cheeks of health 
 and strength, the more we find ourselves dependent on the 
 conditions that equally are necessary for the production of 
 Capital and Wealth. Do we wish mankind to become each 
 succeeding year the possessor of more Capital and of more 
 Wealth, Health and Strength, then we must make easier the 
 practice of the qualities that lead to the acquisition of either 
 and both. We must do nothing to discourage the acquisition 
 of Capital and Wealth, any more than we should discourage 
 the acquisition of health and strength ; otherwise we shall 
 bring suffering and distress on the whole human race — on 
 ourselves equally with all others. 
 
 If we could bring greater prosperity and happiness on 
 mankind by preventing the fertile valley from yielding a 
 more plentiful and a richer harvest as compared with less 
 fertile soils, or by preventing the cow that was a good milker, 
 the hen that was a good layer, from producing more than 
 the poor milker or poor layers, we might then achieve pros- 
 perity and happiness by preventing or discouraging the man 
 or woman of exceptional powers for the acquisition and the 
 production of Capital, Wealth or Health, from producing 
 more than was produced by those of feeble powers for the 
 acquisition of either. Any attempt at limiting the powers 
 of the individual to acquire wealth is like endeavouring to 
 lower some one's standard of health because it is higher than 
 the average. The healthy of a community are a source of 
 strength to all others, and so are the wealthy. What we 
 require to do is not to weaken the strong or impoverish the 
 wealthy, but to show to the weak and the poor the way to 
 become healthy and wealthy. 
 
 Our hope tor the future is a deeper and wider knovvledge 
 
SOME INDUSTRIAL QUESTIONS 341 
 
 and a broader outlook, a frank discussion without prejudice 
 or temper. We are, in our industrial and economic con- 
 ditions, merely like a healthy, strong child that has grown 
 faster than it could be provided with new clothes. No blame 
 attaches to Capital for this, and no blame attaches to Labour ; 
 both have become entangled in the strong currents bearing 
 along the drift weeds of previous grdwths. The strong and 
 wealthy are as helpful and generous as the sickly and poor 
 would be if they were to change places. Men work and are 
 saving and frugal, not only for themselves, but for their wives 
 and children. If we abolished distinctions between men 
 there would still be the strong and the weak, the healthy 
 and the ailing, and consequently the rich and the poor. The 
 healthy and strong of to-day may be the sickly and weak of 
 to-morrow, and the wealthy of to-day may become the poor 
 of to-morrow, and the children of the poor of yesterday will 
 then take their places. The brightest hope for the future 
 is our ever-increasing healthy wants and ever-increasing 
 desire to live and enable our children to live in greater happi- 
 ness and comfort. The old wages will not supply the new- 
 wants, and science and the better organization of our indus- 
 tries enable us by increasing production to reduce the hours 
 of toil, increase the wages, and cheapen the product. 
 
 On these lines our future happiness lies, and not on dreams 
 of an impossible Sociahsm. Already we see the coming of 
 a new day, and are warmed by the glorious rays of its rising 
 sun. 
 
INDEX 
 
 Accidents.precautions against, 1 8 7-9 1 
 " All Electric " scheme, the, 28 
 America — 
 production in, 11, 23, 27-8, 45-6, 
 
 257 
 machinery and wages in, 277 
 inequality of wealth in, 294-5 
 
 Birkenhead, prosperity of, 167-8 
 Book-learning and education, 225-7, 
 
 288 
 Borrowing, 297 
 Business and the human factor, 66, 
 
 88,92, 1 13-15, 134 
 
 " Ca' canny " policy, the, i, 6, 14, 
 
 18, 48, 53, 66, 205, 255, 283 
 Capital — 
 
 distrust of, 14 
 
 antagonism with Labour, 53, 55, 
 
 114 
 relation to wages, 65, 101-2 
 dependent on Management and 
 
 Labour, 77 
 its obligations, 91 
 relations to Labour, 113-20, 266-7, 
 
 286 
 and Henry Ford, 279-82 
 a pillar of national prosperity, 291, 
 
 295. 297-8 
 
 and nationalization, 310-11 
 
 its origin, 316-17 
 
 international statistics, 318 
 Capitalists, attack on, 338 
 Certificates, Ix>rd Leverhulme's 
 
 scheme of, 80-3 
 Cheapness, 264 
 Class antagonism, 293-4 
 Coats' thread, 262 
 Co-education, 231-2 
 Combines, 260-5, 288 
 
 Comfort of employees, 5 
 Competition, 219, 263-5 
 Conscription of wealth, 152, 202-3, 
 
 264, 281-3, 290-1, 296, 298-9, 
 
 313-15 
 Control, 69, 96 
 
 Co-Partnership, 54, 59-122, 303-6 
 its ba^is, 91, 95-6, 99, 102 
 defined by Board of Trade Report, 
 
 92 
 in the fishing industry, 103 
 at Lever Brothers Limited, 135-7 
 Cottage industries, 263 
 Cotton industry statistics, 266, 322-3 
 Crompton's and Arkwright's spin- 
 ning-looms, 266, 292 
 
 Day-work ». Piece-work, 309 
 Death duties, 299 
 Demand, 275-7, 320 
 Democracy, 40 
 Discipline and authority, 252 
 
 Education, 193-4, 221-35, 288-9 
 Effort necessary for reward, 334 
 Ego, we cannot escape our own, 331 
 Egoists, 331-33 
 
 Employers and employees, 127-9, 
 148, 183, 248-54, 259, 261, 
 
 265, 302-3 
 Equal distribution, 8 
 Equality, insincere claim for, 329 
 Equity, 329-31 
 
 Evening classes, 32, 228 
 Excess-profits tax, the, 149-50, 282 
 
 Factory Acts Amendment Bill, 1874, 
 
 debate on, 21-2 
 Factory Act Legislation, an essay by 
 
 Miss Victorine Jeans, 22-3 
 
 342 
 
liN UHlA. 
 
 Us 
 
 Ford, Henry, 279-82, 285, 288 
 Free land for housing,' 163-7 
 
 General Works Council, igi 
 George, Henry, 9 
 Germany, 50-2 
 Government — 
 
 control, 41 
 
 types of, 333-34 
 Guilds, 268, 273 
 
 Habit as a sleeping partner, 125, 217 
 Happiness, John Bright's definition 
 
 of, 296 
 Happiness, 332, 333 
 Health of munition workers, 25, 208 
 Housing, 142-95 
 in London, 1 7 
 after the war, 30 
 private enterprise checked by the 
 
 war, 143-4 
 schemes for remedying the situa- 
 tion, 144-8 
 land for houses, 155-69, 284 
 Human factor in business, the, 66, 88, 
 92, 113-15. 134 
 
 Ideal, highest, 333 
 
 Imitation as a sleeping partner, 126 
 Income tax, 248, 299-300 
 IndividuaUty, Germans lacking in, 
 
 333 
 Industrial Acts, 253 
 Industrial administration, 230 
 Inertia as a sleeping partner, 126 
 Intelligence of workers, 5, 7 
 Inventions, English-speaking races 
 
 lead in, 52 
 
 Labour — 
 
 as a Debenture Holder, 60 
 
 and control, 69-70 
 
 not benefited by philanthropy, 66, 
 
 75 
 
 and eligibility for Boards of Direc- 
 tors, 88-9, 106, 122, 288 
 
 relations to Capital, 113-20, 286, 
 310 
 
 in the fifteenth century, 268-71 
 
 compared to the organ-blower, 279 
 
 under Socialism, 311-12 
 
 " Labour the source of all wealth " 
 fallacy, the, 313-15 
 
 and production of wealth, 318-20 
 Labour Party, the, 294 
 
 Labour unrest, 6-8, 31, 122, 274 
 Large manufacturer, the, 264 
 Leisure, 12, 47, 275-6 
 Leisured class, the, 8, 18 
 Liberty, 296 
 Loss-sharing, 93-4, 305 
 
 Machine power versus human energy, 
 
 10-13, 16, 19 
 Machinery increases wage-funds, 267 
 Management, 66-7, 69, 77, 88, 95, 
 
 102-3, 118,251, 312 
 Manchester Ship Canal, 278 
 Masons' marks, 269 
 Money-making and Christianity, 
 
 214-15 
 Money only relative, 268 
 Monotony, 7, 17 
 
 National credit, 297 
 
 Debt, 15, 291 
 
 prosperity, seven pillars of, 291) 
 293 
 Nationalization, 310-11,313 
 
 of industry, 42 
 
 Output in United Kingdom and 
 
 colonies, 48 
 Overcrowding, 157-62, 176, 181 
 
 People's Budget, the, 284 
 Philanthropy v. Business, 66, 68, 75, 
 
 78, 85, 105, 304 
 Physique statistics at Liverpool 
 
 schools, 1 7 1-5 
 Piece-work, 85, 103, 309 
 Port Sunlight, statistics of births, 
 deaths, and marriages at, 176-80 
 Port Sunlight paper, the, 85 
 Poverty, 9 
 Production — 
 
 cost of, 6, 14 
 
 affected by six-hour day, 19—21 
 
 of wealth, 300 
 Profit-sharing, 59-122 
 
 not supported by Trade Unions, 61 
 
 does not prevent strikes, 63 
 
 average life five years, 66, 77, 105 
 
 on basis of assured rate, of wages, 
 78,93 
 
 its definition, 92 
 
 objections to, 305 
 
 versus Socialism, 315-16 
 Profits of trade and commerce, 44, 
 109. 151. 320 
 
m 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Progress Club, the, 192 
 Progress — 
 
 foundations of, 98 
 
 modern lines of, 335'-36 
 " Protection " for brains, 52 
 Public as a business partner, the, 
 129-31 
 
 Raw material, 30 
 
 Rents, 162 
 
 Restriction of -output, 11, 14, 253, 
 
 255. 257-8. 272 
 Rogers, Professor Thorold, 268 
 Russia, factory hours in, 2 1 
 Russian collapse, causes of, 334 
 
 " Safety Bulletin boards," 187 
 Safety Inspector's Report, 188-90 
 Self-criticism, 332 
 Self-interest, 90, 273 
 Service — 
 
 advancement only comes by, 330 
 
 outstanding law of life, 330-1 
 
 to others, 330 
 Shaftesbury, Lord — 
 
 speaks in Parliament in 1844, 23 
 
 at Manchester in 1866, 24-5 
 Short hours and effect on output, 
 
 25-8 
 Six-hour day, the — 
 
 not yet applicable to agriculture, 1 9 
 
 full-time machinery not inter- 
 rupted, 28, 277 
 
 effect on education, military ser- 
 vice, culture, 31-5, 194-5, 288, 
 306 
 
 not a loafer's paradise, 1153 
 
 and St. Paul, 301 
 
 must be general, 326 
 Small manufacturer, the, 264 
 Social conditions in Oliver Crom- 
 well's time, 292 
 Socialism, 310-28 
 Standard Oil Company, 261 
 State, duties of the, 307-8 
 Strikes, 63, 75, 320 
 
 Taxation, proper basis of, 18, 38-9, 
 149 
 
 Ten Hours Bill, the, 14, 29 
 
 Trade Unions, 271-3 
 distrust of, 14 
 mistaken pplicy of, 46 
 under Co-Partnership, 121 
 and restriction of output, 258 
 versus Combines, 261 
 in the fifteenth century, 271 
 
 Trader as business partner, the, 131 
 
 Trust and Distrust of Labour, 4 
 
 Value of the employee,265-8 
 
 Wages, 47, 74, 78, 98, 100, no, 200, 
 
 287, 319-20 
 war-time demand for increase, 15 
 after the war, 36 
 relation to output, 48, 254-5, 302, 
 
 319 
 relation to capital, 65, 267 
 under Co-Partnership, 96 
 and cost of living, 107, 109-10 
 and Savings Banks, 193 
 comparison with United States, 
 
 255-6 
 in agriculture, 257 
 represent profits, 261, 265 
 increased by machine inventions, 
 
 267, 275-8, 287 
 under the Guilds, 268 
 in the seventeenth century, 270 
 in America, 295 
 logic of the present wage system, 
 
 303 
 real and nominal, 320 
 factors that govern their rate, 
 
 321-2 
 War loan indebtedness, 298-300 
 Waste, 28 
 Wealth, 8-10 
 and taxation, 39 
 increases wages, 267 
 conscription of, 152, 202-3, 264, 
 
 281-3, 290-1, 296, 298-9,313-15 
 inequality of, 295 
 production of, 300, 316, 318 
 its principal elements, 310 
 Welfare work, 183-95 
 Works Committees, 185-91 
 
 Ptinied in Great Britain by 
 UNWW BROTHERS, LIMITSO, THE GRESHAM PRESS, WOSING ANO LONDON 
 

 Date Due 
 
 
 ^1 1«'*^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 «^^^ 
 
 SSI- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (l) 
 
 
 
 
 Cornell University Library 
 HD 8390.L4 
 
 The six-hour day & other industrial ques 
 3 1924 002 657 231 
 
PROPERTY OF LIBRARY H D 
 
 NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL 0^.0 
 
 INDUSTFSAL Af'D I.A0OR RELATIONS < ^ ^ ' 
 
 CORf'TLL UNi-'.-RS«TV .