2,601,3861.; Germany, 19,170,4551.; Holland, 14,017,2071.; Belgium, 13,639,020.; France, 29,476,1411.; Portugal and Azores, 4,280,7427.; Spain and Canaries, 7,568,9361.; Italy, 4,558,3131.; Austria, 1,310,0367.; Greece, 2,037,7481.; Turkey, 6,921,7411.; Roumania, 1,136,0991. The treaties following the wars of 1864, 1866, and 1871 somewhat affected the areas of country included under the political names of Denmark, Germany, Austria, Italy, and France; the above figures relate to the territorial arrangements in force in 1871.

Asia and Asiatic Islands. Java, 481,948/.; Philippine Islands, 1,386,0447.; Japan, 115,473.; China, 11,577,6681. Asia Minor, Syria, &c., are included under Turkey; the imports direct from Arabia and Persia are but small; some of the imports from Japan are credited to China, after re-shipment.

Africa. Algeria, 441,8947.; Egypt, 16,335,6471.; Morocco, 418,8441.; West Coast, 1,922,0461. Egypt is here credited with much that comes from the East by the Suez routes—canal, Nile, and railway.

America. United States, 60,066,2017.; Mexico, 396,740l.; Central America, 1,056,204.; Haiti and San Domingo, 222,300l.; New Granada, 1,026,680l.; Venezuela, 60,2581.; Ecuador, 277,4911.; Brazil, 6,679,778.; Uruguay, 1,180,854l.; Argentine Confederation, 1,977,9771.; Chili, 3,816,8011.; Peru, 4,071,2121. British Possessions in Europe and Africa. Channel Islands, 567,1037.; Gibraltar, 78,157.; Malta, 158,842l.; Cape of Good Hope and Natal, 2,875,560l.; Mauritius, 835,5127.; West Africa, 537,5881. British Possessions in Asia and Australia. British India, 30,961,2657.; Straits Settlements, 2,685,3117.; Ceylon, 3,230,676.; Hong Kong, 368,8871.; Australian Colonies, 14,517,5867. British Possessions in America. British North America, 9,258,4301.; West India Islands and Guiana, 6,996,372.; British Honduras, 155,317.

Numerous small items, not specified, make up a further amount of 1,149,975l.

TRADES' UNIONS are working-class associations, often of a complex character, which in addition to the general features of sick and benefit societies have that of being combinations "of workmen to enable each to secure the conditions most favourable to labour."

the rate of wages was fixed in 1720, but it was not enforced. The men thus deprived of their old safeguard naturally combined for self-protection. Their associations were prohibited, but the magistrates were ordered to fix the rate of wages to be paid. The men petitioned them to do so in 1756, but on a counter petition from the masters they declined. The result was an industrial revolt which cost the country some 15,000l. The gradual transformation of the trade by the introduction of machinery, and the substitution of mill-work for domestic industry, led to an entire change in the relative position of employer and employed. Under the old system of small masters and domestic industry, the men were to a large extent considered as a part of the master's family and were treated in a manner unknown under the factory system. The larger capitalists into whose hands the trade was now passing could not exercise the same personal supervision over their men as the small clothiers had been able to do.

The fluctuations of the market were sooner felt. The factory did not offer the same regularity of employment as the older system. Each vibration of the money market led to reductions and discharges. The small clothiers had rarely changed their men, except for death or sickness. No wonder that under these circumstances the operative cloth-workers should have founded an institution at Halifax, which had for its object the enforcement of the old laws and custom of the trade, and the succour of its members in sickness. The prosecution of several manufacturers led to the suspension of the acts regulating the trade and their repeal in 1809. At first some masters were members of the institution, which expended from 10,000l. to 12,000l. in petitioning Parliament for the regulation of the trade, especially as to apprenticeship. The institution assisted some men in a strike; upon which the masters left it. The manufacturers combined to put down the institution, but were unsuccessful. The suspension of the woollen acts led to a feeling of desperation on the part of the workmen, and a factory was burnt down. Yet when the trustees of the cloth-halls determined again to take up the case of the workmen and small masters, the institution was dissolved and its funds handed over to them at Christmas, 1805. After 1809 the combinations amongst the workmen were frequent. This may be taken as a typical case. By the failure of the authorities to carry out the laws for the regulation of trades, the men were forced to combine for their own protection, or to submit to many changes of which they could not be expected to approve.

The condition of the working classes in many trades during the last century was almost intolerable. A characteristic saying of an employer of framework-knitters was that the best workmen were only to be found in ragged coats. The end of the long struggle came with the repeal of the statute of apprentices in 1814. The workman had no longer even an obsolete law to rely masters and men, and left them to fight the matter out. Combinations of workmen were, however, prohibited by law, and hence the earliest trades' unions were disguised as friendly societies. This was generally the case before 1824, when combination laws were repealed. The greater freedom then allowed was eagerly utilized, and trades' unions became very common. Many of the earlier ones were small, local associations, marked by ignorance and violence. The increase of education and the higher moral tone of the working class have led to great improvement in this respect. Devised as a means of combat, they have always preserved the marks of their origin. To enter here upon their detailed history would be out of place. The circumstances under which they arose have been stated, and will sufficiently explain their subsequent career.

Trades' unions may be looked upon as the successors of the old craft-gilds. It has even been argued that some of the earlier trade societies were formed by the withdrawal of the masters from the craft-gild, but Dr. Brentano considers that in no case did this withdrawal take place. The many points of resemblance he considers to be due to the operation of similar causes. Notices of trade combinations and strikes occur at an early period in our industrial history, but they appear to have been clearly exceptional. They are oftenest seen in connection with the building trade, which was more in the nature of a great industry of the modern type. Side by side, however, with the master-gilds thereupon. The State gave up the task of seeing justice done between appear to have arisen on the continent supplementary associations of journeymen. In London these organizations were very jealously regarded by the city authorities, and in 1383 they were forbidden by proclamation. When these workmen's gilds (although founded for purely social or religious purposes) came under the notice of the masters, they were suppressed lest they should be used as a means of raising wages. In spite of this opposition workmen's societies appear to have occasionally existed, and it is even doubtful whether these were not at one time allied to the craft-gilds. How the master-gilds fell in England is well known. They degenerated into close corporations, selfish monopolies whose influence caused the removal of industry to places free from corporate control. The modern industries of Birmingham and Manchester owe not a little of their success to the absence from them of the vexatious regulations of the craftgilds. But the growth of the modern industrial system, and the destruction of the old-fashioned plan of household work, were not unattended with evil. The transition from one system to another is always marked by suffering. The general regulation of the labour system was in the hands of the magistrates, and the Statute of Apprentices (5th Eliz. c. 4) laid down the principles by which they were to be guided. This fixed the minimum term of apprenticeship at seven years; and for the first three apprentices there was to be a journeyman, and an additional man for each apprentice after. The journeymen were to be hired yearly, and to have a quarter's warning. They worked during daylight in winter, and about twelve hours daily in summer; there were, however, several holidays. Wages were fixed annually at the Easter sessions. The duty thus laid upon the magistrates they failed to perform. In the woollen trade after an interval of disuse,

The tendency of late years has been towards amalgamation. Many of the trades' unions now represent varied interests, spread over a wide area. "The best and most powerful of them, the Amalgamated Society of Engineers and the Amalgamated Carpenters and Joiners, have an organization and practice as far removed from those of the old local unions as a court of justice is from a rabble of rioters executing lynch law."

The objects of trades' unions have already been stated in general terms. They are for the most part associations for the relief of the members and their families, when deprived of wages by sickness, accident, and death, and in addition they watch over the trade interests of the members and strive to obtain for them advantageous terms as to wages, hours, and general conditions of labour. It is the last characteristic which constitutes their essential difference from the ordinary friendly society. The means employed are, keeping a register of labour

2103

TRADES' UNIONS.

TRADES' UNIONS.

2104

to practice, without having first entered in the ordinary manner what is really a gild.

Some trades' unions have still rules against machinery. These are survivals of old-world notions which increasing intelligence may be left to correct. Equally mischievous in its effects are the regulations by which a few of the unions prescribe a maximum of work. The object is to check over-production. It is sometimes urged in defence that without a prescribed maximum, the most skilful worker would be selected, and his best exertions held out to the remainder as the minimum which could be required from them.

Trades' unions attempt to keep down the quantity of competing labour, by insisting upon long service apprentices and the limitation of their number. The question is partly economical and partly historical. The unionists may at least say that if their practice is an error it has run through all our industrial history.

wanted, issuing reports of the state of trade in various parts of the country, regulating the number of apprentices, assisting men on tramp in search of work, regulating the hours of labour, helping men in resisting any action of the employers considered to be detrimental to the trade, drawing up trade rules, organizing strikes. It is not intended to say that every union adopts all the above methods, but they are in very general use. There is a very wide difference of opinion as to the wisdom of the attempt of the trades' unions to regulate the conditions of labour. It is sometimes contended that it should be left to the law of supply and demand; each master being free to offer what terms he might think proper, and each man at liberty to accept or refuse. To this the unionist replies that fair contracts are only possible between those who are on something like terms of equality. A master capable of employing a thousand men, is practically as strong as a union with a thousand members. In dealing with a single man, if the master drives a hard bargain, the man has no chance of successful resistance. The capitalist has a hundred fields in which to work, but the labourer only one. The labourer's necessities are too keen and pressing to leave him really a free agent. A single individual cannot insist upon fair and honest remuneration when poverty and starvation are dogging his heels. Again, there is often a tacit if not an expressed agreement as to the rate of wages amongst the employers. The employers seek to absorb as much as possible of the joint product of labour and capital. A depression of trade is followed by a reduction of wages; but the converse is seldom the case, until the united action of the men compels it. That the master has a disproportionate strength in an individual contract is undeniable, and it is difficult to see what other remedy the work-rewards for the conviction of offenders whose crimes had been man could adopt except combination.

It is notorious that the worst paid trades are those without unions. Equally certain is it, that working men owe to the unions many advantageous regulations which they could never have obtained by individual effort. The workman's ideal is regular employment and steady wages. Fluctuation is disastrous to him, and trades' unions appear to have a steadying influence, tending towards uniformity of wages in the same trade. In the cotton trade wages are now settled by the joint action of a committee of the union and the employers.

Whether trades' unions can raise the average rate of wages to a higher point than they would otherwise reach has been ably debated. Some high authorities in political economy have contended that such a rise cannot be effected. They consider that every addition to the workman's wages results in an enhanced price of the article he produces. If this were true trades' unions would simply be taxing the great body of consumers for the benefit of small sections of producers. But the theory involves the existence of an absolute unchangeable remuneration for capital. In this it is difficult to believe. The money returns of any trade are the result alike of capital and labour. The problem is how to divide them equitably. Too little paid to capital will lead it to seek other investments; too little to labour will be disastrous in the other direction. Between these two extremes there must be a broad band of profits which may go to the one or the other agent, according to circumstances.

Trades' unions have also the power of causing many modifications in work tending to the increased safety of the labourer, which individual effort would be powerless to effect. In this way they have done good service, and may be expected to do still more.

The relation between the unionist and non-unionist members of the same trade is a point of some interest. Trades' unions differ from the old gilds in being merely voluntary associations. They do not in any case include the entire body of the trade. Often they are a minority. They will generally be found to be the picked men of the trade, for skill and intelligence. Their number in relation to that of the working class at large is small. The total number of unionists has never been estimated at more than half a million; that of the labouring class has been calculated by Professor Levi as six millions, excluding women and children. Whilst the union must necessarily have authority over its own members, it has no claim upon those outside. Whatever may be a workman's reasons for not joining the union, the law is bound to protect his full individual liberty against all corporate claims. The workmen however may naturally point to some bodies which possess coercive powers, and include the whole of the persons following a particular profession simply because all others are prohibited from exercising it. It is conceivable that there are men as learned in the law outside the profession as in it, but their learning is not allowed to be a claim

The charge of violence has often been preferred against trades' unions, and the dreadful disclosures of unionist murders and terrorism at Sheffield, Manchester, and other towns created a feeling of prejudice in which no distinction was drawn between the innocent and the guilty. The most fervid apologist of trades' unions would be ashamed to utter a word in defence of the atrocities which were then dragged to light. Yet it is worthy of remark that those implicated by these disclosures belonged almost exclusively to the most ignorant and degraded of their class. The trades requiring the least of mental effort were those most deeply tainted. To the committal of arson, and assassination, was sometimes added the unblushing hypocrisy of offering directed and paid for by the union. The object of this violence was sometimes to terrify a master, sometimes to coerce a nonsociety workman. In 1854, a man had his house blown up by gunpowder, his horse hamstrung, and was himself disabled by a pistol shot. His offence was working with non-unionists. James Linley, for changing his trade and keeping an undue number of apprentices, was murdered in 1859. These were both Sheffield incidents. A minor form of annoyance is known as "rattening." This is a Sheffield term where a member of the union who fails in his payments or becomes otherwise obnoxious to club law, will lose his tools in a mysterious manner. On submission they immediately reappear. There has been a great change for the better in the temper of the working class, as any one familiar with the industrial history of the last century and the early part of the present century will readily admit.

Trades' unions vary so greatly in their methods of self-government that it is impossible to describe any general type. They are all as a matter of course organized on a democratic basis, the officers being chiefly honorary. The ordinary affairs of each branch are managed by a local committee, but there is ample power of appeal, and generally checks against hasty and inconsiderate action. From time to time general conferences are called to which each branch sends its accredited delegate. These conferences are at once the parliament and the supreme judiciary court of the union. Sometimes the great unions, instead of being simple amalgamations of a number of smaller ones, are really federations of the various local societies.

The Amalgamated Society of Engineers is the largest and most successful trades' union in the world. It was founded in 1851, and was a union of the separate societies of the Engineers, Machinists, Millwrights, and Pattern-makers. It had 11,829 members, and a cash balance of 21,705l. The great lock-out of 1852, one of the fiercest of the many struggles between capital and labour, reduced its men to 9,737, and its money to 17,812l., and was almost expected to kill unionism outright. But at the end of 1872 the Engineers had 41,075 members and 158,3131. of funds. The expenditure for that year was, "donation" money (that is, assistance given to members in search of work) 9,377%, sick benefit 18,563/., trade disputes 6000l.

This last item will show how erroneous is the opinion still very common which regards trades' unions as mere machines for organizing and carrying out strikes. On the contrary, a strike is always a thing which they desire to avoid. Probably the unions have oftener checked than encouraged the desire of their clients for a strike. The reasons for this are obvious. A strike even if successful is a fearful waste of wealth, and quickly depletes the treasury of even a rich society. When a strike has been undertaken rashly and on insufficient grounds, failure is inevitable, and results in a loss of money and prestige. Many of the struggles which have marked the present generation have been drawn battles. Those who object to the unions as opposed to the