Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

sound, but that which answers to the primary meaning of the word— to weigh, to consider. Remembering that it is ever better to have no opinion at all of a matter than to have a false one, let us hold fast by the intellect, and prove all things before accepting them. Dogmatism, and assertion, and assumption may endure for a day, but the truth only is eternal, and will abide

"Till the earth grows old,

And the stars grow cold,

And the leaves of the judgment book unfold."

THE GERMAN IMPERIAL BANK (REICHSBANK).

[From Crump's English Manual of Banking, London, 1877.]

THE German Imperial Bank is under the supervision of the Government. The capital is 120,000,000 Reichsmarks (about $30,000,000), consisting of 40,000 shares of 3000 Rm. each. The bank buys and sells gold, discounts bills not having more than three months to run, and not less than three (exceptionally two) signatures; makes advances for not longer than three months on specie, on German Government securities up to three fourths of their value, on non-German Government securities up to one half of their value, on bills of exchange up to 90 per cent, or on merchandise up to two thirds of its value. It buys and sells stocks and shares on commission, makes payments and collections, receives money on deposit and valuables for safe custody. Part of its funds may be invested in German Government securities or German railway debentures.

The bank issues notes, of which one third must be covered by gold or German paper money, and two thirds in bills on Germany of not longer currency than three months. The bank is obliged to cash its notes at Berlin in legal money (gold or Reichskassenscheine), and to issue its notes against gold bars at the price of 1392 Rm. per 1 lb.

The profits are divided as follows:

(1) The shareholders receive 4 per cent.

(2) One fifth of the remainder goes to the reserve fund till the latter reaches 25 per cent of the capital.

(3) Half of what then remains is divided among the shareholders; half goes to the Imperial treasury till the shareholders get 8 per cent. After that the shareholders get one fourth, and the treasury three fourths.

Should the profit be less than 41 per cent, it is brought up to this figure out of the reserve fund.

In 1875 there existed in Germany besides the Bank of Prussia, thirty-two other banks issuing notes under widely different charters. The law of 1875 forbade the circulation of these notes outside the state which had granted the charter, unless these barks submitted to certain rules, the most important of which were (1) always to keep one third of the notes covered by gold, and two thirds by three-months' bills, and (2) to pay the notes at Berlin or Frankfort. Eighteen banks (exclusive of the Reichsbank) submitted to these rules, and consequently their notes are allowed to circulate throughout the whole of the Empire. The other banks either gave up their circulations in favor of the Reichsbank, or continue a local issue.

The notes of the German banks are not legal tender, and the lowest denomination is 100 Reichsmarks ($25).

The German Imperial Bank is located at Berlin, and has 154 branches, scattered widely over Germany.

STRIKES, PAST AND PRESENT.

THE word "strike," as expressing the refusal of workmen to labor on terms offered by employers, is modern, though the act which it denotes is by no means so, as strikes occurred in England more than five centuries ago. Not long after the great plague of 1349, English laborers refused to work for the small wages then current; fruitful crops went to waste for want of harvesters; buildings in course of construction were left unfinished, and even workmen employed on the king's palace deserted their business. Labor could not be had in town or country, except at prices considered ruinous by employers. These strikes of the fourteenth century were succeeded by several repressive statutes rigorously suppressing all combinations of workmen, imposing fines and imprisonment as well as the pillory on all mechanics, servants, or laborers who refused to serve for the former wages. The "statute of labor" of Edward III. provided that every man and woman not possessed of landed property, or other means of livelihood, should work for any employer requiring their labor, at the old rate of wages.

But the general prevalence of strikes or combinations to raise the wages of labor may be said to belong distinctively to the present century. Though most prominent for the last forty years in Great Britain, they belong to no country. Hardly a nation in Europe has been free from striking combinations and trades-unions, and the year 1877 has witnessed the great power and disastrous effects of even suddenly organized strikes upon the great and varied interests of trade and transportation. Those easy-going theorists who fancied that the United States is the one country so favored with vast natural resources, abundant means of living, and good wages for all workers, as that we were insured for all time against the evil effects of strikes, have found reason to amend their opinions.

In Great Britain, where strikes and trades-unions have assumed a magnitude unknown in any other country, the most extensive movements of the workmen in combining against employers occurred between 1850 and 1860. In an account of the lock-out of Operative Engineers in 1851-52, by Thomas Hughes, it is stated that tlris move

4

1

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 em. ployed 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

« AnteriorContinuar »