ment was the first of a new class of strikes. It was originated by the society of engineers, machinists, millwrights, etc., engaged in the iron trades, which had, in 1851, 121 branches in different towns of the United Kingdom, and 11,829 members, with an income of over $110,000 annually. The society was pledged to attempt the abolition of over-time and piece-work in the iron trades, which were deemed injurious to the business interests of workmen. They demanded the abandonment of self-acting machines, and the employment of mechanics in their stead. Their organization against employers was perfect. On the other hand, the employers' association came into the field, held meetings, and resolved that the efforts of the society were an infringement on the right of every British subject to dispose of his labor or capital according to his individual views of his own interest, and would compel the industrious and careful to share his profits with the slothful and inexpert. By the end of 1851 the amalgamated society of workmen having pledged themselves to leave their workshops if their demands were not complied with, the members of the masters' association pledged themselves to close their establishments in that event. This resolute bearing took the workmen by surprise. The strife became bitter; a lock-out took place January 10, 1852, as well against non-society men and laborers as against the amalgamated society; 3500 members of the latter and 1500 skilled workmen not members of the society, with 10,000 laborers, were at once thrown completely out of employment. An appeal was issued to the trade and the public in behalf of the society, and a subscription of $4000 from private persons was the result. During the strife the society paid to non-society members and laborers, from their own funds, nearly twice as much as they received from outside subscription. Unsuccessful efforts were made to get the dispute referred to arbitration. The masters opened their workshops after a month, but little business was done, though no interference took place on the part of the men turned out with those who chose to go to work. Finally, on the 30th of March, the discontent of the men so long out of employment prevailed over the dogged resolution of the executive council of the society, and overtures were made to the employers' association, but the latter refused all compromise. By the end of April, almost all the men had gone back to work, under the old arrangements, the bread of their families depending upon it. The cost of the lock-out to the society of workmen was about £42,000, or over $200,000, to which should be added the amount of wages lost to the men during their three months' idleness.

This strike may serve as an example of the history of the results of the majority of such combinations, although in some cases workmen have partially succeeded. In the memorable strike of the building trades in London in 1859-60, were included bricklayers, masons, plasterers, carpenters, joiners, painters, plumbers, and glaziers. In these

important trades 38,000 workmen were employed, under 450 masters. The strike was to secure a reduction in the hours of labor from ten to nine hours. The builders replied that to grant the demand would be equivalent to taxing the public more than ten per cent. On the 6th of August, 1859, 225 of the largest master-builders, employing 24,000 artisans, closed their shops, and the associated laborers raised subscriptions and got along from month to month. Late in September the association of masters opened their shops to such operatives as would agree to a declaration recognizing the freedom of labor and acknowledging the independence of both employers and workmen. The recusants refused this declaration, and the shops were gradually filled with laborers from the country. At last the strikers gave in, in February, 1860, and the old hours of labor were maintained. The net result of the strike was the expenditure of £23,000 for the support of the needy, while the amount of wages sacrificed by them was about ten times that amount, and the losses entailed upon the masters by the stoppage of their trade, the loss of profits and interest on capital, were still greater, and the inconvenience to the public from the stoppage of many works of much importance was incalculable.

The strike of the flint-glass makers in 1858 involved, by March, 1859, 1100 workmen. Its cause was the disregard by some employers of the regulations of the workmen's union restricting the number of apprentices, and fixing a minimum of wages. The strike led to a general lock-out of operatives through Great Britain, and the avowed object on the part of the masters' association of extinguishing the glass-makers' union. The dispute, after a duration of months, ended in a compromise offered by the operatives and accepted by the masters, the men withdrawing or qualifying the rules which were obnoxious.

The great strike of the cotton factory operatives at Preston, in 1853, was for a ten per cent increase of wages. It lasted six months, and being made at an unpropitious time, when gloomy prospects of trade prevailed, aggravated by the Russian war, it failed, the whole body of spinners and weavers again applying for work and being received back at the old rates. This cotton strike is styled, in a report of the British Social Science Association, a contest unprecedented in history, and which, if the lessons of experience be not without effect, will never again be repeated.

In the West Yorkshire coal strike and lock-out of 1858, 3200 men were engaged. The strike was against a reduction of wages caused by a fall in the price of coal. It lasted something over two months, with the public feeling enlisted rather in favor of the men. At length, coal becoming scarce, a compromise was effected, the laborers returning to work at a reduction of 7 per cent on their former wages, which were still, however, 22 per cent higher than five years before; while the masters withdrew the conditions they had insisted upon as pre

liminary to receiving back the men. The cost of this strike has been reckoned at £100,000 in all, of which £54,000 fell on the men, namely, £46,000 in wages, and £8000 in subscriptions.

The printers' strikes in Great Britain, although numerous, have invariably been local, affecting only one office in the same locality. London, Liverpool, and many other cities have been the localities of strikes, which in each case were aided by the National Typographical Association, founded in 1845, and having about 4300 members. One of the objects of the association has been to enable some of the printing trades to emigrate. In all, sixty-six disputes, or trade differences, between employing printers and compositors, occurred from 1850 to 1860, and in each of these cases the funds of the association were employed to aid. In thirty-seven of these cases the offices were closed to members of the Union, and non-society men took their places. The London Society of Compositors was established to protect the wages of labor, which in that city varied from 33 shillings to 36 shillings per week, working ten hours and a half per day.

As the net result of English experience on this question, it is found that strikes have materially diminished during the last fifteen years. Parliamentary law has been invoked, trades-unions have been legalized, arbitration has worked well in many cases, and in place of any restraints on the combinations of workmen, old restrictions have been repealed. The practical results of strikes have been conflicting: some have been successful in raising wages or reducing the hours of labor; a much larger number have failed. It has been shown that the state of trade, of prices, and of profits left no margin for compliance with the demands of workmen, while employers were sometimes positive gainers by the suspension of business. It is urged against strikes that profits in any business cannot rise above a certain average, and, as a consequence, advances in wages will come spontaneously from competition; while, if such advances are brought about by a strike, the value of the labor unemployed while it lasts is lost, both to the workmen and to the public. Strikes have sometimes caused the transfer of manufactures and industry to other localities; and it is claimed that the emigration of capital from England to America proves that its profits have long been at a minimum in Great Britain, and can bear no further reduction. The great misery and want, even leading to crime, which strikes have occasioned to working people, and the load of debt under which the strikers sometimes labor through life, are also pointed to in deprecation of them.

On the other hand, it is claimed that the occasional failure of strikes is no proof of their impolicy; that the profits of trades are very great, and the fortunes of capitalists are frequently built up in a few years; that competition may benefit the public through a fall in prices, but does not benefit the laborer; that the suffering caused to the workmen by strikes is justified by the law of present sacrifice for future

gain; and that many strikes have been crowned with immediate or ultimate success, and have compelled employers to yield terms which they at first refused.

Amid these conflicting views, one notable fact seems incontestably shown by the history of strikes; namely, that strikes for a rise of wages frequently succeed, but strikes to prevent a fall commonly fail. The obvious reason is, that the demand for higher wages comes in prosperous times, when profits are good and can bear a reduction; whereas the lowering of wages by employers very rarely comes except in times of depression, when there is more labor upon the market than demand for its products. There is no doubt that one beneficial result of the agitation growing out of strikes has been to bring prominently to public view the equities which govern between labor and capital; to encourage industrial partnerships and co-operation for the benefit of laborers; to liberalize the rules and policy of trades-unions; to abate the tyranny of employers on the one hand, and of workmen's societies on the other; and to lead to a wider disposition for conciliation and arbitration in all differences between employers and employed.

In the United States, the history of strikes up to the present year is rather a succession of isolated movements to better their material condition on the part of certain trades, than any general or concerted schemes for raising the wages of labor. The trades and occupations which have witnessed the most of these workingmen's movements are the coal-miners, the iron-workers, the cotton and woollen spinners, the railroad employés, and the printers, although there have been numerous instances of strikes among day-laborers and skilled workmen in almost all employments, including the building trades, railroad construction, shipping and freighting industries, and even farm labor. In this country, where all voluntary organizations are free, no laws have ever been passed to prevent the action of organized societies of workmen for the protection of their own interests. Here is a partial list of some of these societies in the United States, a few of which control considerable funds and wield a large amount of power in their respective industries:

Some of these Unions are scattered over many States, while others are chiefly local in the large cities. All of them assert the right to secure higher wages, or to protect themselves against lowering wages, by stopping work. Nearly all of them go further, and assert the right to reach the ends of a strike by constraining others than members of the Unions to quit work, or at least to refrain from taking the place of strikers. In numerous cases the Unions have held out for weeks, subsisting upon reduced receipts, and aided partially by funds subscribed, and by the private charities of friends or relatives. As a rule, the operations of unions in striking for higher wages, when accompanied with constraint of other laborers, have failed to command the sympathy of the community, and have been of short duration. When an organization of laborers passes from refusing themselves to labor (which is their right), to violently compelling other men to cease labor, they at once pass from the ranks of law-abiding citizens into those of rioters and resisters of the law. There is no principle in human society more universally recognized or resting upon a stronger foundation, than that no man has the right to interfere with the rights of his neighbors, nor can any body of men assume that right. No man nor association can take from others the right to work and to enjoy the fruits of their labor. The moment violence is used, and willing laborers are compelled to become idlers and drones, that moment a strike passes the limit of public sympathy, and makes those engaged in it rioters and outlaws.

It was this principle, joined with the almost universal indignation at the violence committed and the destruction of property, added to the interruption in the traffic across the country, which made the great railroad strikes of 1877 so short-lived. Millions of private and corporate property were destroyed, many lives lost, and hundreds of thousands of laborers, depending on their work for daily bread, thrown out of employment, through an endeavor on the part of the employés of a railroad to secure better wages on a falling market. Widespread and disastrous as were the immediate results of this strike, enormous as was the public loss and inconvenience, frightful as were the passions aroused, and astounding as were their effects as exhibited in the conflagration of buildings, the wreck of railway trains, the stoppage of multitudes of industries other than those immediately concerned, and the pillage, havoc, violence, and murder that broke out almost simultaneously among the mobs in so many cities, the whole history of the struggle occupied barely two weeks. And it may be added, the whole mischief might have been prevented if the timely decision and pluck in putting down the rioters manifested in some cities had been made the rule in all.

The great railroad riots of 1877, unprecedented in their circumstances as well as in their extent by any thing in the history of the country, began at Martinsburg, on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad,