The Remedy for Unemployment

At Ralahine, in Ireland, eighty-one men, women, and children, all ordinary labourers of the lowest class, and with a very bad reputation in the district, farmed 618 acres of land, including bog and waste, under a committee chosen by themselves (Mr. Craig, who kept the accounts and supervised the household, being ignorant of agriculture), and they not only paid the very high rent of £900 a year (in produce estimated at market prices), but in the course of three years brought waste land into cultivation, purchased a reaping-machine, and at the same time increased their capital and lived well and contentedly. Then, the owner, having gambled away his property, suddenly disappeared, while the tenants were evicted and all their property confiscated by the Irish Court of Chancery!

At the Dutch colony of Frederiksoord, a miscellaneous body of “unemployed” have, under wise administration, converted an absolutely barren waste of moorland into what Mr. Mills terms “a paradise in the midst of a wilderness.” Here a large number of “free farmers” have been trained, who now support themselves in comfort and independence, while another body of labourers carry on the ordinary work of the estate (which must be largely educational and unproductive), and yet so nearly support themselves that the Director informed Mr. Mills that he did not use agricultural machinery because it would make it difficult to find work for all, and they would then be less easily managed.

Mr. Edward Atkinson, the great American statistician and advocate of capitalism, has given striking estimates of the productiveness of labour when aided by modern machinery. Two men’s labour for a year in wheat-growing and milling will produce 1,000 barrels of flour, barrels included, which will give bread enough for 1,000 persons. But as we grow more bushels of wheat per acre than is grown in the American wheat fields, we could certainly produce our bread on the spot quite as cheaply, if not much cheaper. Again, he tells us that one man’s labour produces woollen goods for 300 people, or boots and shoes for 1,000. Now, as far as productiveness goes, spinning, knitting, weaving, or shoe-making machines suitable for the employment of a dozen or twenty men or women could, in our co-operative colony, be worked quite as economically as in a great factory where 1,000 hands are employed—perhaps even more so, because no overseeing would be required, and all would be close to their work; while as the hours would be shorter and would alternate with outdoor or household work, the workers would be healthier and their labour more effective.

Again, as every inmate of such a colony would be trained in at least two distinct occupations, one involving mostly outdoor work, a large proportion of these textile fabrics would be made during wet days and long winter evenings, and would thus utilise time that is now often wasted.

Another great economy in such a colony is, that the whole of the middlemen’s and retailer’s profits would be saved, as well as the cost of the various forms of advertising, including commercial travellers and the high rents of retail shops in good situations, and that of railway freights, cartage, and other costs of world-wide or cross-country distribution. The result of all these needless expenses is shown by the well-known fact that, on the average, goods of every kind in common use are produced for about half what they are sold for by the retailer; and to this great loss must be added, in the case of the individual producer for sale, the loss of time expended in selling and buying, and the frequent difficulty of finding a purchaser except at a ruinously low price. It is these numerous economics at every step of the process that justify Mr. Mills’ careful estimate of six hours’ daily work being ample to supply all the necessaries of life for a well-organised co-operative population, including the children, the sick, and the aged; while a small farmer works usually ten or twelve hours to secure the same result, and can only succeed in doing so under somewhat favourable conditions, and with much greater risk of failure.

One other point remains to be considered. What would be the initial cost of such colonies as are here suggested, up to the time at which they became self-supporting? Here, too, Mr. Mills has given us the answer. By a careful estimate, founded on ascertained facts, he shows that the total cost, both of the land and of the stock, buildings, and other appliances, together with a half-year’s food, would only equal the amount of two years’ total expenditure for the same number of paupers. The result of this outlay would be that after two or three years the necessity for poor-rates would cease. It would therefore be an enormous saving, even if each union or county purchased the land and stocked it as part of its Poor Law expenditure, and this would be the case even if Mr. Mills’ calculations are found to be too favourable to the extent of even 50 per cent. (which I consider wildly improbable). But I believe that if the scheme was carried out under an Act of Parliament and under the general supervision of the Board of Agriculture, still greater economies might be effected, especially in the matter of land. For power should be given in the Act to take any land required at a valuation based on the net rental now obtained by the owner (or on the valuation in the rate books), for which amount he should receive Government Land Bonds. As soon as the colonies became self-supporting, and had absorbed most of the unemployed, so that pauperism in the ordinary sense was abolished, the respective local authorities would only have to pay the interest and sinking fund on these bonds, which would be a mere trifle as compared with existing poor rates, and would itself disappear in the course of less than two generations.

The farmers and labourers, as well as mechanics or others, who might be living upon the land thus taken over, would have the option of remaining upon it in the capacities for which they were severally fitted, as superintendents, foremen, or labourers; or if they preferred to leave would receive a reasonable “compensation for disturbance.”

There are always people who will not be satisfied with any proposed remedy for a great evil unless it deals with every possible phase and form of it, so as to abolish it completely at once, and for ever. Some of these will be sure to object that the worst of the unemployed—the tramps and the men who will not work under any conditions—will still remain; and they will ask triumphantly: “How will you bring these into your system? They will flock into your colonies in winter to enjoy the good living and do nothing to earn it.” There are two replies to this objection, which is really no valid objection at all. In the first place, it was not for this class of men that the “Unemployed Workmen Bill” was brought into Parliament, or for whom legislation has been promised by the Government. It was not of these unfortunates that either Socialists or Liberals drew such vivid pictures of undeserved misery, but of the genuine workmen, the men or women whose one object in life is to obtain work, however hard, however it may injure their own health or shorten their lives, in order that they may save their families from starvation, or from the deservedly hated workhouse. The whole of this great and successful agitation has been in behalf of those willing and anxious to work, but to whom by our actual social organisation it is forbidden. It was for them only that the “Right to Work” was demanded—not the right to food while refusing to work. It is a sufficient reply to the objectors, therefore, that Mr. Mills’ proposal really solves the problem as regards those very classes of workers for whom the “Right to Work” clause was drawn.

But, secondly, it is certain that the system of co-operative colonies here explained would, in the course of a few years, absorb also the so-called unemployable, who are in reality by no means numerous, and have never yet been offered the kindly assistance, the sympathetic treatment, the amount of liberty and the congenial surroundings they would find in these colonies. General Booth’s experience at his Essex colony has shown that a considerable proportion of these men are easily reclaimable, and the system there is far less favourable and less educational than it would be in our proposed co-operative colonies.

Before concluding, I will briefly advert to a few matters of high public importance, involving great cost, much loss of time and energy, widespread physical and moral deterioration, and terrible sacrifice of life, which would all be ameliorated and would ultimately disappear in proportion as these co-operative colonies spread over the country.

First and foremost, the cost of Old Age Pensions, which all admit to be absolutely necessary now, would steadily diminish with increase of these colonies, and ultimately become unnecessary. Next, the terrible mortality of infants, due to our present competitive manufacturing system, would rapidly disappear when the health and comfort of mothers were thoroughly safeguarded as a primary social duty. What would be the result of such a natural, simple, healthful, yet fully-occupied life as would prevail in these colonies may be judged by the condition of some of the German colonists in Central Brazil. A young friend of mine is now living among them. They subsist almost entirely on the direct produce of their own labour; they have large and healthy families, and his two nearest neighbours have twelve and eight children respectively, mostly grown up, without having lost a single child.

Then there is the enormous and ever-increasing system of inspectorship of factories and workshops, to guard against dangers of machinery, unhealthiness, and overwork, all quite unnecessary, and which would never even be thought of where there was no one to profit by such enormities.

Lastly, there is the curse of adulteration, ever increasing, pervading all commercial products, clothing, food, and even drugs, injurious alike to the health and the morality of the nation, and which inspectors and penalties have hardly any effect upon. All this would absolutely disappear when everything now adulterated would be produced in these colonies for home consumption, and not for the profit of capitalists; and this fact would certainly re-act upon the private manufacturers. The safety and healthiness of all the co-operative shops would soon compel private capitalists to improve the conditions of their factories under the penalty of not being able to obtain men or women to work for them.

A collateral but highly beneficial result of the system here advocated is, that just as it extended and flourished, it would, by absorbing all surplus labour, raise the standard of wages over the whole country, and of itself produce that “minimum wage” that we may decree by law, but which, so long as our present system persists unchecked, we can certainly never enforce. The generally higher wages thus caused will almost all be spent on home-made products, and thus more than compensate for any diminution of foreign trade that may occur: for it must always be remembered that foreign trade is mainly carried on for the profit of the capitalist or to supply luxuries for the wealthy, and is little needed when all workers are enabled to produce the necessaries of life, co-operatively, for themselves.

Yet another important economy not yet referred to arises from the essential nature of a co-operative community producing everything for their own consumption, and therefore absolutely free from the faintest suspicion of adulteration. We have seen that Mr. Mills estimated that not more than one-fifth of the total produce would have to be sold in order to purchase articles or materials which the colonists could not produce themselves. Each colony would decide, or rather would find by experience, which articles it would thus produce in larger amounts than it needed—one might sell butter, cheese, and perhaps cream; another woollen fabrics; another shoes, etc., or some combination of these. But it would soon become known that everything made at the colony was genuine. The butter would not be margarine; the cloths and flannels would be wool throughout, the boot-soles would not be of brown paper; and the matches, the china-glazes and the paints would all be made of non-poisonous materials. The certainty that this would be so—everything being made primarily for use and not for profit—would ensure a large and constant demand for everything the colonists had to sell. They would thus be saved all the costs of advertising or of taking their goods to market; as was found to be the case with the best of the Communistic Societies in the United States, whose garden and farm seeds, dried and preserved fruits, tubs, washing machines, traps, and chairs, are still widely known and sought after for their purity and good workmanship.

All the goods which the colony had for sale would thus bring the highest market prices with the minimum expenditure of time and labour; so that one fatal circumstance that caused the failure of so many attempts at co-operative workshops—the difficulty or impossibility of selling the produce—would never arise.

The result of this brief, but I believe accurate, examination of the capitalistic and the co-operative systems in their essential conditions and proved results, is to show that the former is inherently wasteful to an enormous degree, and so productive of physical and moral evil as to be incompatible with a true civilisation. In every part of the world it is alike productive of poverty, degradation, and crime for large numbers of the workers, and the latter perhaps in an equal proportion (though in different ways) for the capitalist employers also. Such a system stands condemned at the bar of reason, justice, and common sense.

I think I have now shown that the way to solve this great “Problem of the Unemployed” was clearly pointed out nearly twenty years ago, with precision, fulness of detail, and sufficient basis of fact and experience. But the time had not then come. The few read and appreciated the book, but it was generally ignored, with the usual cry of “Utopian”! Now, however, the hour has arrived, and here is the Man whose long-neglected book shows us clearly the lines on which alone we can successfully overcome the difficulty.

But a proviso has here to be made, which is of the most vital importance and which must always be kept in view. Even if the scheme here advocated is carried out to the letter, so far as its methods are concerned, complete success will only be attained if its organisers are imbued throughout with the human, the philanthropic, the brotherly spirit of the propounder. This will depend almost wholly on the choice of men for directors of the several co-operative colonies. If the head is chosen for his supposed power of managing and governing large bodies of men, in the way our governors of prisons and masters of workhouses have been chosen; and if he enters on his duties with the one idea of compelling all to work alike, from the very first, and with that end draws up an elaborate system of rules, with fines and punishments to be rigidly enforced in the various departments of industry, then failure will be inevitable. Neither is the successful manager of a great factory or large estate more likely to succeed if he is a man who looks upon workers as mere “hands”—as parts of a great productive machine, each to be kept in his proper place, and to have no will of his own.

Our object should be to train up self-supporting, self-respecting, and self-governing men and women; and we should aim at doing this by developing the conceptions of solidarity and brotherhood—that good and honest work is expected from each because he benefits equally with every other worker in the joint result, and that it is therefore his plain duty to do his full share in producing that result. The type of men to be sought after are such as Mr. Craig, who, though a suspected stranger and supposed emissary of the landlords, yet gained the affection of a body of wild Irish labourers, and in a year of sympathetic guidance so changed their lives that, in their own words: “Ralahine used to be a hell; now it is a little heaven;” and Robert Owen, the self-educated Welshman, who in less than twenty years changed a population of over 500 persons, all Scotch mill-workers—who were living in chronic destitution and debt, and in habits of almost continuous drunkenness, dirt, and vice—into a cleanly, well-to-do, contented, and grateful community.

The methods by which these men produced such results should be studied by everyone who would undertake the directorship of one of the proposed co-operative colonies. For those who talk so confidently about human nature being not good enough for any such co-operative life as is here suggested, I would adduce Owen’s work at New Lanark as an unanswerable reply. I know of no more wonderful example in history, of the results to be obtained by appealing to men’s higher feelings rather than to the lower and baser, than Owen’s account, in his story of his own life, of how he stopped almost universal thieving, drunkenness, neglect, and other faults in his great body of workers, by means of his invention of the “silent monitor”—a little record on four sides of a tally, of each worker’s conduct the day before, as indicated by four colours—black, red, yellow, and white, one of which only was displayed. These tallies were attached to each worker’s place every morning, so that as Owen walked through the work-rooms he could see them both collectively and separately. At first the majority were black, while white was rare. But gradually the colours changed, and in a few years yellow and white prevailed. During all this time there were no punishments, either by fine or in any other way, neither did Owen ever scold a man, or even speak harshly to him. He merely, when the colour was black, looked at the man in sorrow; and he tells us, how after a time he could tell a man’s conduct by his very attitude as he passed him, without looking at the tally.

It may be said, we have no such men now; but I think that is a mistake. Mr. Mills himself would probably be one of the first appointed; while a post as responsible director of 5,000 workers would be congenial to many of our broad-minded clergy, to the more educated among the officials of the Salvation Army, and to such sympathetic writers about the poor as Mr. Whiteing, Mr. Zangwill, and many others. It should be considered a position of high rank and importance, equal, say, to that of a judge or a bishop, and none should be appointed who are not in perfect sympathy with the avowed objects of the “colonies,” and determined to do all in his power to make the experiment a success. The salary should not be high; in fact, the lower the better, in some respects. The office would almost certainly attract the best men, since it would enable them to initiate and develop one of the greatest social reforms ever undertaken in a civilised country. They should, of course, have practically a free hand, and be judged only by results. They must have complete power to change the heads of departments, if they found them difficult to work with, or of characters unsuited to the task of rendering the labour of the community at once efficient and attractive to the workers.

There would, I believe, very soon arise a healthy rivalry between different colonies, in which every individual, from the Director to the youngest worker, would bear his part, as to which shall exhibit the best results in the various industries carried on; in the cleanliness, comfort, and even elegance of their domestic arrangements and general surroundings; in their amusements and their studies; and especially in the general contentment, order, and happiness of the whole community.

To attain such a result would be a truer honour to our country than all our past and prospective victories, gained at the cost of untold misery to both victors and vanquished, vast burdens of taxation, rivers of blood and tears. To attain such a beneficent result seems now actually within our reach; and my chief hope is that I may live to see it inaugurated, and that all parties and classes alike shall for once forget their prejudices and antagonisms, and work together for the success of some such scheme as is here laid before them.

It is after a considerable acquaintance with the literature of this subject, from the time of the grand pioneer, Robert Owen, down to the present day, that I have arrived at the most absolute conviction that Mr. Mills has pointed out to us the one true road to success, and that any considerable divergence from it will lead to failure. I therefore most earnestly call upon all social reformers, and especially all members of Parliament, whose duty it will be to legislate upon the subject, to make a careful study of his small volume—but really great and illuminating work—to read it carefully throughout; to study it in all its parts; to imbue themselves with its spirit as well as with its facts, its principles, and its arguments; to familiarise themselves with the practical results of co-operative undertakings so far as their opportunities permit; and, by means of the knowledge they will have gained from Mr. Mills, satisfy themselves as to the essential causes of failure or success.

Above all these things, let them see that when the time of legislation, and of giving practical effect to the legislation arrives, the principle of the whole scheme shall be, in Mr. Mills’ words: “That within the bounds of the ‘Co-operative Estates’ we shall endeavour to cultivate able and tender-hearted men, and brave and independent women; and not to accumulate wealth.”

1

Mr. Mills quotes this from an article in Chambers’ Journal of January 1st, 1881. Mr. Jas. H. Rodgers, for many years Chairman of the Guardians, has been so good as to inform me that the system of employing paupers in various kinds of productive industry is still in force at Newcastle; but that owing to a change in the class of inmates it is not quite so satisfactory. Over two-thirds of the number are now either chronic invalids, aged, or lunatics, with children who are mostly boarded out. Still, all who can do anything are employed productively, and nearly all the vegetables required by 1,000 to 1,500 inmates are grown on 15 acres of land cultivated by male paupers.

Pass On Pamphlets.

Every Friday Fortnight.

One Penny.

These Pamphlets are intended to explain the need for Socialism, to explain what Socialism is, to answer objections to Socialism, and to suggest methods for the attainment of Socialism.

NOW READY.

By R. B. Suthers.

No. 1.—JOHN BULL AND DOCTOR SOCIALISM.

No. 2.—JOHN BULL AND DOCTOR FREE TRADE.

No. 3.—JOHN BULL AND DOCTOR PROTECTION.

By Julia Dawson.

No. 4.—WHY WOMEN WANT SOCIALISM.

By A. M. Thompson.

No. 5—SOCIALISM AND INVENTIONS.

By F. H. Rose.

No. 6.—STOP THE STRIKE.

By R. B. Suthers.

No. 7.—JOHN BULL’S RENT AND INTEREST.

By Alfred R. Wallace.

No. 8.—THE REMEDY FOR UNEMPLOYMENT.

By Robert Blatchford.

A NEW RELIGION.

By F. W. Jowett, M.P.

WHAT IS THE USE OF PARLIAMENT?

Order them from your Newsagent.

Every Friday Fortnight—One Penny.

MERRIE ENGLAND.

By ROBERT BLATCHFORD. A New Edition.

Paper cover, 3d.; by post 4½d. Cloth, 1/– by post 1/2.

“Merrie England” first appeared as a series of articles in the Clarion in 1892-3. These articles, with some revisions and additions, were afterwards produced in volume form at a shilling. The book met with immediate success, some 25,000 copies being sold.

In October, 1894, the Clarion published the same book, uniform in size and type with the shilling edition, at the low price of One Penny. As the book contained 206 pages, and was printed by trade-union labour, and on British-made paper, it could only be produced at a loss. This loss was borne by the proprietors of the Clarion.

The sale of the penny edition outran all expectations. No one supposed that more than 100,000 would be called for, but in a few months over 700,000 had been sold, without a penny being spent in advertisement, and in face of the tremendous opposition excited by Socialistic publications in those days.