« AnteriorContinuar »
THORNTON, W. W. A treatise on the Sherman anti-trust act. (Cincinnati: W. H. Anderson Co. 1913. Pp. lxiii, 928.)
This volume is designed for the legal practitioner. with a chapter on the congressional history of the Sherman act, which presents but little that is new to those who have read Walker and similar studies. The author claims to have presented all of the decisions involving the Sherman act in both the state and federal courts. The economist will welcome the collection of a large number of examples of restraint of trade and monopoly which are so described as to render unnecessary resort to law reports for the facts in regard to certain organizations. W. S. S.
VOIGT, J. F. Federal regulation based on the commerce clause of the Constitution. (Chicago: La Salle Extension Univ. 1913. Pp. 23.) A public service securities manual, containing detailed descriptions of upward of two hundred corporations. Revised to October 1, 1913. (Cleveland, O.: Local Securities Manual Company. Pp. 95. 50c.)
Labor and Labor Organizations
The World of Labour: A Discussion of the Present and Future of Trade Unionism. By G. D. H. COLE. (London: G. Bell and Sons, Ltd. 1913. Pp. vi, 435. 5s.)
Mr. Cole's book is an argument for a new form of industrial organization; it contains other matter, but that is incidental. His plan of economic reorganization may be very briefly stated: the trade unions are to take over the actual conduct of industry, while the means of production are to be owned by the state. The author is at one with the syndicalists in committing the conduct of industry to the unions, but he disagrees with them as to the future of the state. The increased powers of the unions, in his opinion, will not make the state superfluous, for the state must represent the consumers as against the unions of producers. An elaborate plan for the joint control of industry by the representatives of the state and by the representatives of the unions is, therefore, presented.
It is around this synthesis of syndicalism and socialism that Mr. Cole centers his book, which professedly deals with present trade-union problems. But the problems are reviewed merely to show that the author's plan of industrial organization is inevitable. In the course of this survey the author considers a number of tradeunion questions which are of urgent interest to trade unionists in all countries, as, for example, whether organization should be on an occupational, industrial, or craft basis; whether strikes or politics are the best weapon for the working classes; how can the
workers be given a greater share in the real control of industrial processes and methods of production.
A satisfactory comparative study of these problems would be very valuable. Trade unionism in all the great industrial countries tends toward similarity and the same problems must be solved. Unfortunately, Mr. Cole is not equipped for making such comparisons. He is well acquainted with the French syndicalist literature, but his knowledge of German trade, unions is apparently based entirely on a brief descriptive paper by Mr. W. Stephen Sanders recently published in The New Statesman. His information as to American trade unionism appears to be drawn almost entirely from the pamphlet literature of the Industrial Workers of the World. He thinks, for example, that the "tyranny on the part of Mr. Samuel Gompers and the 'Old Gang' gets every day more difficult," and that "it is coming to be regarded as inevitable that the socialists should shortly gain control of the American Federation of Labor and oust the 'Old Gang.'
But even more serious than lack of information is Mr. Cole's propensity to decide every question entirely with reference to how far a proposed solution fits into his own scheme of industrial reorganization. For example, in discussing the question as to how far unions' should favor profit-sharing, he dismisses the matter with this sentence: "Any device, therefore, which ties the workers' hands by prohibiting strikes or giving them 'an interest in the business' is fatal to the whole purpose for which labour is organized the gradual abolition of capitalist exploitation" (p. 329).
Mr. Cole is so well satisfied with the soundness of his own views that he is impolitely impatient of all those who follow other counsels. The English trade-union leaders, accordingly, "have, for the most part, singularly thick heads" (p. 191). As to the rank and file of English trade unionists, "the apathy is still profound, the stupidity incredible" (p. 208).
Johns Hopkins University.
GEORGE E. BARNETT.
Revolutionary Syndicalism. An Exposition and a Criticism. By J. A. ESTEY. (London: P. S. King and Son. 1913. Pp. xxxii, 212. 7s. 6d.)
At a time when most of us are inclined to draw a sharp line of distinction between trade unionism and syndicalism, regarding the
former as the outcome of experience and the latter as a product essentially of temperament and pure speculation, Dr. Estey's book comes as a most opportune corrective. "Revolutionary syndicalism," the author tells us, "both as a socialistic theory and as a method of action, is a product of circumstances. If it flourishes today, it is as the outcome of experiments in revolutionism rather than of the intellectual travail of social philosophers." This statement sounds the keynote of Dr. Estey's book. Revolutionary syndicalism is in its genesis and development essentially pragmatic; it has its speculative aspect-a socialistic theory-but the theoretical formulation succeeded the practical evolution and is a thing apart; the movement itself follows the dictates of experience.
Dr. Estey's exposition is an attempt to state the character, structural and functional, and to present the rationale of the practical movement in France. As such it is a notable contribution. We are given a clear-cut and systematic statement of the organization and methods of the C. G. T. and its constituent elements, and the author shows striking ability to visualize and present the conditions and forces which have moved the practical syndicalists, and the mental processes through which they have arrived at their conclusions. The method is realistic and inductive; the conclusions forceful and convincing. As an exposition, the book furnishes perhaps the best introduction to the subject to be found in the English language.
To the reviewer there is a marked falling off in power and tone when the author proceeds from exposition to criticism. As an expositor, Dr. Estey is notably detached, unbiased, scientific. As a critic, his work seems somewhat commonplace. In this Dr. Estey appears as an advocate; there seems to be running through the work an assumption that what is, must always be; there is no real penetration to fundamental forces; there is much elaboration of the commonplace.
Nevertheless one is not disposed to quarrel with Dr. Estey's conclusions: namely, that revolutionary syndicalism has already reached the zenith of its power and is due for a decline; that its theory of the militant minority is practically untenable; that while "its insistence on the practical application of the great motto of the International-'the emancipation of the laborers must be the work of the laborers themselves'-has engendered a habit of self-reliance, a courage, and an optimism among the work
ers, that can only be a cause of general gratification," its onesided policy and its constructive ideals are alike invalid.
The book is graced by an introduction from the facile pen of Mr. L. L. Price of Oxford. It is marred, especially toward the close, by typographical defects.
University of Chicago.
R. F. HOXIE.
Boycotts and the Labor Struggle. Economic and Legal Aspects. By HARRY W. LAIDLER. (New York: John Lane Company. 1913. Pp. 488. $2.00.)
Although the boycott has had its greatest development and its most extensive application in the United States, it has heretofore received careful study only at the hands of continental political economists, principally the Germans. From the studies of von Waltershausen published in the eighties to the more recent works of Maschke, Kestner, Schwittau, and others, the boycott, in all of its manifestations has been subjected to painstaking analysis from both the economic and juristic standpoints. Studies in this country, however, have been fragmentary in form and partisan in treatment; and have been designed primarily to establish the illegality or to justify the legality of the boycott. Those written by employers, or by their spokesmen, assumed from the first a highly denunciatory tone; whereas the representatives of labor organizations, condemning the adverse judicial decisions, saw in the boycott only an effective and a legitimate weapon to be used against the most oppressive of their employers.
In this first substantial American treatise on the boycott, Mr. Laidler, while exhibiting throughout his work a more sympathetic attitude toward the laboring than toward the employing class, is able to bring to the support of his contentions a variety of data and experiences that lend plausibility and force to his conclusions to a degree that earlier American writings on the subject lack.
The three divisions of the book are concerned with the history and forms of the boycott, with its legal status, and finally with the arguments that have been advanced for and against the legalizing of the boycott. In the first section there has been collected much interesting information of a descriptive nature. The second part contains within the convenient compass of less than a hundred pages a discussion of many important boycott cases, both here and abroad, and of the principles underlying judicial deci
sions. The author concludes that the boycott as employed by labor organizations should be legalized. The employers possess great wealth, he argues; they are banded together in powerful employers' associations that inflict serious injury upon workingmen by the use of the blacklist; they employ spies to learn the secrets of labor unions and to disrupt them; when strikes are in progress they import armies of strike-breakers and soon enlist the support of the local police, the militia, and the courts. The laborers, on the other hand, are poor; their industrial battles must be fought in the face of a hostile public opinion fashioned by a press and a pulpit that have been subsidized by the employing class; as individuals they are able to extract from employers no concessions; strong organization is essential to their well-being. It follows, then, that such a weapon as the boycott, designed to foster the organization of labor, imperfect as it may be, susceptible as it is to abuse and violence, is made necessary by the organization of modern industry which requires the use of abnormal industrial weapons. The author believes, too, that there is discernable a growing conservatism in labor-union officials and members that will tend to check recklessness and abuse in future applications of the boycott.
As the title of Mr. Laidler's book indicates, the greatest interest in the boycott turns upon its employment by organized labor. It would seem, therefore, that a prime requisite for a study of boycotts and the labor struggle should be a familiarity with the literature of labor organizations. In the endeavor to obtain this familiarity the author has studied the proceedings and journals of the American Federation of Labor, but has entirely neglected the wealth of material to be found in the publications of the many national and local unions in this country. The result is that he has greatly overestimated the influence of the American Federation of Labor as a boycotting agency and has, in addition, drawn conclusions from the unfair list of that organization which the actual facts in the matter do not warrant. It is, for example, misleading to refer to the watch-case engravers, the rubber workers, and the gold beaters as "the most active boycotting unions." In fact, all of these unions are so insignificant in size and influence as to be undeserving of classification as either "active" or "inactive" boycotting unions. Nor is it possible to deduce from the "We Don't Patronize List" published in the American Federationist whether or not The Coopers, for instance, was one of the unions which "had