6
first linking'himself to Mirabeau, points out, in confirmation, thepeasant serfs of the Continent. The same, however, would applyto the English workman if by bureaucratic regulations, either infixing wages or in making the necessaries of life dearer, thereward of working more was eventually withdrawn from him.Such a policy must lead, if not to rebellion, to general stupidityand lethargy. The author denies the proposition that with highwages and low prices less work would be done than under theopposite conditions. It is true that in an isolated case a suddenrise of wages might lead to less work being accomplished; but,generally, there would be more vigour and cheerfulness throwninto work the more the worker could better his position thereby.A similar view, though not clearly defined, and without sufficientproof, is taken by J. Anderson (14). The writers here mentionedas being friendly to the working classes are generally behind,when compared with the advocates of the opposite opinion, becausethey bring forward fewer results of observation than these latter,and limit themselves mainly to general assertions. Josiali Tucker,who judges the problem solely from the point of view of experience,and thereby arrives at a defence of high wages, draws attentionto the fact that in a country with high wages and plenty of capitalonly those products were brought forth which required plenty oflabour, whilst less cultivated countries with low wages had theirstrength in goods in the production of which Nature had a largeand human labour a slight share. Tucker quotes an array ofinstances in confirmation of his statement. Scotland producedtimber ; England wheat, requiring more labour ; certain portionsof the South of England , garden products, needing still morelabour; in spite of which agricultural wages in the latter districtswere the highest, and in England higher than in Scotland . Horn,wool, and hides were produced in countries with low wages;their manipulation took place where the wages were high. Not-withstanding which, labour had in the first case a small, in thesecond a large share in the production. Holland, which did notproduce a single log of timber, and where the wages were high,was pre-eminent in shipbuilding. Tucker ascribes these facts,in addition to the possession of larger capital, to the reasonthat more skilled and more trained labour was evolved in con-sequence of greater division of work. It may be cheaper to pay