Capital and Labour.

Maoriland Worker, Volume I, Issue 1, 15 September 1910, Page 6

Capital and Labour.

♦ (BY A. H. MAUDE.) Probably none of the big economic questions of the day domande more full and careful consideration than does the relative position of capital and labour—what are the rights of each, and how can an equitable adjustment of the rival claims be arrived at? It is one of the greatest mistakes to regard capital and labour as really antagonistic to each other. On the contrary, the one is the complement of the other, and capital is the fund from which labour draws its wages. The only antagonism is that which may be said to exist between the buyer and the seller of every commodity. The buyer, being anxious to get as much as he can for his money, and the seller to get the best price obtainable for what he is selling. Without capital, labour (as we understand the term) would have no meaning, and men would be reduced to the primitive condition of savages. There would be no one to buy their labour, and all their energies would have to be directed to an endeavour to find sustenance for the day, while copital without labour would be as helpless as Robinson Crusoe on his island, and the possession of unlimited stores of gold would be useless. By the joint efforts of these two mighty forces, directed by genius and science, modern civilisation and all that this means has arisen, and is maintained in ever-increasing splendour of achievement. All the great works of public and private utility or beneficence are the product of the twain working in unison. United, it is difficult to place a limit to human progress or perfomance. Disunited, or seriously disors:ams_ed, we have anarchy and chaos. Capital is an indefinite term, and may mean much or little. Every man who has a few pounds' worth of property or money which he does not require for immediate use, ie a capitalist to that extent. The difference between these smaller capitalists and those who have a large capital available is only one of comparison, not of kind. Ijet us now glance at the part played by capital and labour respectively in carrying out any large undertaking, such as the building of a great steamship or the development of a mine, etc. Such an undertaking would be impossible for labour by itself, as it could not afford to purchase the necessary plant and material, and then wait two or three years or more before any returns could be obtained for the work done. It is here that capita] comes in and provides the needful cash to buy material, etc., and pay labour its wages ; not to mention that it takes all the risk of the undertaking not turning out profitable, a by no means impossible, or even infrequent, contingency. "We see here how important a part is played by capital, and how it benefits the workers, while on the other hand good and efficient labour is essential to the profitable use of capital. The crux of the whole position is what share of the profits (if there are any) should be given to labour, and what portion retained by capital ? This is a very difficult question to answer, as so much would depend on the nature of the employment, and a variety of other considerations. Broadly, however, it seems clear that labour has a right to demand such remuneration as will enable it to live in decency and comfort at the least, while the margin of profit left to capital must be sufficient to render it willing and anxious to enter into industrial undertakings, and to take the risks incident thereto. Should the demands of labour be unreasonable and excessive, and constant strikes interfere too seriously with the conduct of affairs in which capital is engaged, it is evident that capital, in self-defence, must, and Avill, gradually withdraw from enterprises dependent largely upon the co-operation of labour for their successful prosecution. This would be even worse for labour than for capital. Much has been done of late years to improve the condition of labour, and we may look for further advancement in the future. The old Freetrade maxim of " freedom of contract " has most justly been relegated to oblivion, and we have now Factory Acts and other legislative enactments, providing for the safety and health of the workers, shortening the hours of work, etc. The position

of labour has also been greatly strengthened by the spread of trade unionism, and wages have been raised considerably. The possible danger seems to be that labour may not be content with reasonable and steady progress, but may be led away to demand the impossible. The ancient maxim which advises us to " hasten slowly " is., I believe, a wise one in most cases. Precipitation is often fatal to success, and leads to disaster. It is therefore to be hoped that wise counsels will prevail on both sides, and that, wherever possible, arbitration and conciliation may take the place of strikes and lockouts, and so avoid all the loss and suffering which these acute forms of industrial disputes occasion. The questions .we have been considering are far too vast and complex to be dealt with, except in a very sketchy and imperfect fashion, in one short paper. There is, as far as I know, no " cut-and-dried " solution of the problem. Both sides require to be carefully considered, and the " pros and cons " of any proposed course of action duly weighed. The greatest advantage will accrue to labour if it endeavours to improve its position in a just and practicable, manner, on sound and logical lines, rejecting all vain and chimerical ideas and proposals.