may settle the wages and conditions of labour for six or twelve months, but as the men and the employers are entitled to terminate the hiring at a minute's notice, payment being generally by the hour, there is nothing to prevent the employers from discharging the men, or the men from leaving their employment, whenever they choose to do so. If an award were given which the men thought unfavourable, there would be nothing to prevent them striking for better terms. Unless, therefore, the men and masters contract for a considerable time, or, which is the same thing, agree to lengthen the required notice, there is no legal means of enforcing the award. Moral means are in fact the true protection against such breach of faith. It is better, therefore, not to depend on legal means, but for both sides to rely solely on moral means and to endeavour to strengthen that in every way. By trusting to legal redress, I cannot but think that an obstacle is put in the way of the development of the mutual trust between employers and employed which is the only real reconciliation. The statute gives a very excellent form of contract, and may

possibly be used in some industries, but will have little practical effect, as the opinion of both employers and employed, confirmed by experience, is against legal and in favour of voluntary arbitration outside the law. Here, as in so many other parts of our social life, we find the legal system becoming inefficient and antiquated. Legal remedies and the legal system were created by the past. The law and the lawyers have been the instruments of part of the human progress, and they have still a great and noble work to do. But it is a work that must constantly diminish. Professional lawyers naturally exaggerate the importance of their own profession, and judges will inevitably attempt to arrogate to themselves a moral authority which they do not possess. On labour questions they have shown how utterly incapable they were of grasping the conditions of the moral problem. The history of their action in the Labour Laws and in the Law of Conspiracy ought to be the most valuable warning to the working classes not to trust to law for the solution of these great industrial and social difficulties. The law and our tribunals,

L

admirable and worthy of veneration as they often

are, cannot be the means of reconciling capital and labour.1

1

1

See statute 35 & 36 Vict., chap. 46, Masters and Workmen (Arbitration), in the Appendix.

INDUSTRIAL conciliation is an economical success. This is a mere truism, as far as the putting a stop to strikes

or lock-outs is concerned. Industry,

instead of being subject to constant interruptions, is continuous. The waste and misery consequent on stoppage, even for a short time, are avoided. Objections are, however, drawn from the truths of political economy to invalidate the position of the advocates of arbitration and conciliation. Some of these have no real foundation; others, which have a very narrow foundation, raise important questions for our consideration.

I have heard it asserted that a board of conciliation was neither more nor less than a gigantic conspiracy between employers and employed against the consumer and the public. The promoters of the system laugh at this idea. The consumer, they He has the remedy

say, can take care of himself.

in his own hands; he need not buy. The very essence of trade is to please the consumer, to establish a market, and induce the public to buy, to increase or even create a demand. The truth and force of this argument do not dispose of the difficulty. By union between employers and employed a force is created which may be abused like any other force. In some occupations it is untrue to say that the consumer need not buy, or that demand and supply will equalize an inequality in the long run.

There are two trades in London of which I have tried in vain to get information and exact details. If my information is correct there is in these trades complete harmony between masters and men; and a conspiracy is alleged to exist between them, by which the most extravagant prices are forced from