Ill

THE RETURN TO GOLD

261

placed in some ways than their grandfatherswere.

Why should coal miners suffer a lowerstandard of life than other classes of labour?They may be lazy, good-for-nothing fellowswho do not work so hard or so long as theyshould. But is there any evidence that theyare more lazy or more good-for-nothing thanother people?

On grounds of social justice, no case can bemade out for reducing the wages of the miners.They are the victims of the economic Jugger-naut. They represent in the flesh the “funda-mental adjustments” engineered by the Treas-ury and the Bank of England to satisfy theimpatience of the City fathers to bridge the“moderate gap” between $4-40 and $4-86.They (and others to follow) are the “moderatesacrifice” still necessary to ensure the stabilityof the gold standard. The plight of the coalminers is the first, but not—unless we are verylucky—the last, of the Economic Consequencesof Mr. Churchill.

The truth is that we stand mid-way betweentwo theories of economic society. The onetheory maintains that wages should be fixed byreference to what is “fair” and “reasonable” asbetween classes. The other theory—the theoryof the economic Juggernaut—is that wagesshould be settled by economic pressure, other-wise called “hard facts,” and that our vastmachine should crash along, with regard onlyto its equilibrium as a whole, and without