Democratic industry : a practical study in social history

Contents

PAGE

Preface vii

I. Egyptian Labor Unions .... i II. Greek and Roman Trade Unions io

Preface

B ASED upon historic facts, the present volume is purely constructive in its nature. It applies the acid test of experience to the great social issues and closes with a definite program of practical social action.

Thoughtful men are daily realizing more fully that the only economic bulwark to safeguard the domestic peace of the nations is the establishment of a true democracy in our industrial life. The task of the writer has been to show how signally the ancient pagan civilizations failed in this regard at the very height of their artistic achievements and national prosperity. With the aid of the Church, labor rose from slavery to serfdom, and from serfdom to democratic industry. These developments are carefully traced and the causes which interrupted this progress explained by the author. Abundant documentary evidence is offered, together with frequent citations gathered from the most impartial and reliable sources.

The last few centuries immediately preceding the World War, viewed from the standpoint of democratic industry, may rightly be called the Dark Ages, in an economic and social sense. This

vii vm

PREFACE statement, which might once have been received with incredulous astonishment, is a truism in our day. Within them took place the full growth and unhampered evolution of that unrestricted concentration of wealth which contained, as all can now readily perceive, the seeds of social anarchy. It was not necessary, then, to delay upon these otherwise than to show the nature and reason of their failure.

The aim of society must be to promote the public good, and not a mere deceptive national prosperity absorbed by a privileged few. The author’s main purpose, therefore, was to point out the ideal to be followed in a true conception of democratic industry.

From another point of view the argument for the present volume was thus stated years ago by a writer in the London Month:

“ Whilst a certain amount of negative criticism of Socialism and other theories cannot be dispensed with, most of our attention must be given to the expounding of positive doctrine. Workingmen are much more likely to be impressed by knowing what the Church advocates than by knowing what she condemns. They will grasp all this the more readily and thoroughly if it is placed in its historic setting, if they learn something of what the Church has done in the past for society in general and the working class in particular.” 1

1 H. Somerville, Jan., 1913.

PREFACE

IX

The book, it is hoped, will serve as a text in social history as well as a volume for popular circulation. False history has been made the basis of false social philosophy. We must first correct these distorted views before we can hope to lead the masses aright towards the attainment of the ideals which all true men will gladly follow.

Of particular importance is the extensive chapter on Modern Industrial Democracy, with its many examples showing the nature and growth of the new democratic movement in industry, and pointing out its rightful development.

Digitized by K^OOQ le

DEMOCRATIC

INDUSTRY

Chapter I

W E can well imagine the existence of labor organizations centuries before the building of the pyramids. The natural longing after fellowship and the advantages of association between members of the same class or craft was almost certain to have exercised its influence, under one form or another, unless hindered by positive restrictions. The first historic references to trade unionism are, however, very vague and shadowy. As a legalized institution it is believed to have taken its origin almost simultaneously in Egypt, Greece and Italy, some six or seven centuries before Christ. The three great leaders mentioned, respectively, as its founders in these different countries are the Egyptian ruler Amasis, the Greek law-giver Solon, and the second legendary king of Rome, Numa Pompilius.

Communities of craftsmen are mentioned in the Old Testament. Such were “ the families of them

i

Digitized by )OQle that wrought fine linen in the House of oaths,” such, too, were the potters of King David, or one of his successors, who settled in Netaim and Gedera . 1 But no special reference is made to any developed trade organization. Yet owing to religious influences labor was held in far higher respect among the Jews of the Old Dispensation than among any of the other great Eastern nations of antiquity, whose stupendous monuments were erected at the cost of untold human misery, of blood and stripes and grinding oppression.

In Egypt King Amasis, it is stated, considered the formation of legalized trade unions a necessity for obtaining an accurate knowledge of the number of his subjects and of their means of support. However this may be, we find that in course of time a systematic division of craftsmen into State corporations was established with a thoroughness unsurpassed in the imperial days of Prussia. Each trade had its own appointed chief or its head-men, whose duty it was to maintain the interests of the craft and to represent it before the public authorities. Laborers employed in the same crafts were quartered in the same sections of the city, or at least worked in shops located together along the same streets.

The paternal interest of the Government in the trade of its citizens was in great part to be accounted for by the fact that besides a poll tax

1 I Paralip. iv:i4, 21, 23.

and a house tax, the laborer was also obliged to pay a trade tax. These levies, it was understood, could be obtained from him only after a vigorous application of the collector’s rod. His organization would therefore prove an invaluable aid in directing the Government in its work of wringing from the laborer the hard-earned product of his toil. Doubtless it likewise had its economic advantages for the worker, but they could hardly have been more than to save him at times from bonds, stripes or starvation. The stelae of the little town of Abydos still record for us today the names of the labor representatives of all the various trades that flourished along its busy streets millenniums ago, from the head-mason, Didiu, to the master-shoemaker, Kahikhonti.

We are particularly fortunate also in possessing a detailed description of labor conditions in ancient Egypt from the hand of one of its own contemporary poets. A translation of his verses was made into French by the famous Egyptologist G. Maspero , 2 whose researches are applied in the present article. Though depicting in striking and realistic language the misery of labor, the poet’s attitude is one of cynicism rather than of profound human sympathy. Like all Egyptians of his class, from the haughty ruler to the snobbish scribe, he had been brought up to despise the manual worker. Yet the different types of artisans are made to

•“History of Egypt,” II, pp. 98-10*.

stand out before us in his verse more vividly and with more minute realism of detail than even in the sculptures and paintings of this remarkable race. We behold there the metal worker, his fingers “ rugged as the crocodile ” ; the stonecutter, who knows no rest until his arms drop from weariness, but who is cruelly bound in a cramped, unnatural position should he chance to “ remain sitting at sunrise ” ; the barber who runs from street to street seeking custom, “ and when he falls to and eats, it is without sitting down ” ; the artisan, with 'his chisel, who labors at timber or metal all the day and “ at night works at home by the lamp or the mason dragging huge blocks of stone, “ ten cubits by six,” who is “ much and dreadfully exhausted,” and when the work is finished returns home, “ if he has bread,” only to find that his children have been beaten mercilessly in his absence.

With barely the scantiest covering for their poor, wasted bodies, the workers shiver in the wind or swelter in the broiling sun. But their comrades, confined in the workshops, enjoy no better fate. In verses out-moderning the moderns the old Egyptian bard continues his picture of hopeless toil, implying in a mere allusion the whole hidden history of the bitter lot of woman beneath this galling yoke of paganism :

The weaver within doors is worse off than a woman; squatting, his knees against his chest,

I he does not breathe.

If during the day he slackens weaving, he is bound fast as the lotuses of the lake; and it is by giving bread to the door-keeper, that the latter permits him to see the light

The dyer, his fingers reeking — and their smell is that of fish-spawn — toils, his two eyes oppressed with fatigue, his hand does not stop,

and as he speeds his time in cutting out cloth, he has a hatred of garments.

The shoemaker is very unfortunate; he moans ceaselessly,

his health is the health of the spawning fish, and he gnaws the leather.

The baker makes dough, subjects the loaves to the fire; while his head is inside the oven, his son holds him by the legs; if he slips from the hands of his son, he falls there into the flames.

In vain shall we look for any understanding of democracy among the pagan Oriental nations. Least of all may we hope to find it in their conception and treatment of labor.

Yet trade organizations were never more comprehensively developed than under this government absolutism. On the testimony of the Greeks, even professional robbers had their own trade corporations, with duly accredited representatives at police headquarters. Their task was to “ discuss the somewhat delicate questions to which the practice of their trade gave rise,” and to fix the ransom to be paid for any stolen article, which then was invariably returned to its owner: an institution equally convenient for police and citizens and the honest and honorable order of Egyptian highwaymen . 8

We may here advert in passing to similar gilds of even the most disreputable occupations, that existed among the Turks in Bagdad under the early Sultans. Pocket thieves and others of their kith paid a stipulated sum to the police for the unhampered exercise of their trade on certain occasions; but wo to them if they were nevertheless caught in the act ! A double penalty was then exacted of them. It is of further interest to know that they belonged to the same general gild as the police officials . 4 While this appeals to our sense of the ludicrous, it may be well to look nearer home. The legalizing of modern profiteering interests, we might gently hint, for instance, is an even worse recognition of organized robbery carried on upon a far larger scale.

Labor organizations have just one lesson to learn from the Egyptian labor gilds or trade unions. It is the danger of undue State intrusion which in modern as in ancient life is. bound

always to end in tyranny. It is very simple for labor to hand over to the State, whether capitalistic or communistic, its hard-gained liberties. But this once accomplished — aside from a passing crisis where liberties are surrendered for a time in the interest of patriotism — it will thereafter be difficult, if not impossible, to regain them. Given the little finger, the State will lay hold on the entire body. There is a reasonable State control and a reasonable State, ownership within proper limits. These may be extended as far as the common good requires, but no further. To transfer to the State the entire means of production is for labor to place its head in the lion’s mouth. Gracious as the lion may appear, compared with the Egyptian crocodile, the laborer is wise in not entrusting his head to either, but in securing and maintaining his own liberty. Capitalism, enforced communism and general State Socialism alike exclude him from a reasonable personal ownership.

“ Away from the servile State ! ” must be his cry. Whether the means of production, on which his livelihood and liberty depend, are in the hands of a capitalistic regime or a communistic bureaucracy will matter little in the end. There is but one way towards freedom, popular prosperity and democratic industry, and that, as was pointed out at the very conclusion of the World War by the

Catholic Episcopacy in America, lies in bringing about a social reconstruction in which the major* ity shall attain to a personal ownership and control, wholly or in part, of the means of production. This must be our ultimate aim.

“ The majority must somehow become owners, or at least in part, of the instruments of production,” was the final word of the Bishops of the United States speaking through the Administrative Committee of their National War Council . 5 The education suggested as necessary to reach this stage was the establishment and management by labor of cooperative productive societies and copartnership arrangements. In the former the workers will themselves own and manage the industries, in the latter they are to have a substantial share in the corporate stock and a reasonable share in the management. “ However slow the attainment of these ends, they will have to be reached before we can have a thoroughly efficient system of production.” Here, therefore, is the mountain of vision the American Bishops pointed out, where alone industrial peace and social justice can be attained and where popular prosperity shall flourish for all, provided that the code of Sinai is not forgotten nor the charity of Christ. Labor must yield up its desire of a maximum wage for a minimum service and capital must remember that : “ The laborer’s right to a decent livelihood is the

* “ Social Reconstruction,” Reconstruction Pamphlet No. t, Jan., 1919.

Die :ed by uooQle first moral charge upon industry,” preceding all rights of the employer to profits, aside from the latter’s own reasonable living. And neither may neglect the interests of the consumer.

Chapter II

M ORE Interesting than strictly historical is the description Plutarch has left us of the origin of the Roman labor gilds, which he attributes to Numa Pompilius. 1 To blend together by common interests the racial factions in the newly founded city of Rome, and so to end the deadly party strifes between the Sabines and the Romans within the same walls, the politic ruler is said to have devised a plan of dividing the citizens into groups according to their arts and crafts.

The distinct craft gilds mentioned by this historian as founded during the reign of Numa are eight in number. A ninth was added into which were gathered all the remaining trades. Departing somewhat from the customary interpretation of the Greek text, we may classify the eight Roman craft gilds as follows: i. flute players, 2.

goldsmiths, 3. builders, 4. dyers, 5. tailors, 6. tanners, 7. coppersmiths, 8. potters. That all these trades existed in a specialized form at this early period, about the seventh century before our era, is seriously to be questioned. Other employ-

1 Plutarch, “Numa,” 17.

II ments, moreover, which probably were then of greater importance, are not at all mentioned.

One thing alone is historically certain: that a century before Christ trade unions existed at Rome which in the popular mind dated back to time immemorial. These ancient unions were regarded with special respect by the Romans so that they outlived the laws which proved fatal to other organizations. According to a method sufficiently common at a period when historic criticism was not too exacting, the origin of the labor gilds was naturally ascribed to the rather mythical Numa Pompilius to whom Rome was said to be indebted for other important public institutions. For similar reasons, doubtless, the Roman labor organizations were attributed by Florus to Servius Tullius, the sixth legendary King of Rome . 2

Of the eight craft gilds enumerated by Plutarch three only are spoken of by various Roman historians as incorporated in the Constitution of Servius Tullius: the builders, the coppersmiths, and the flute-players or horn-blowers. Whatever prominence may for a time have been given to these labor gilds, some centuries before the Christian era, was due to their eminent usefulness to the Romans as a military nation . 8 The members of the remaining gilds not mentioned in connec-

2 Florus, I, 6, 3.

8 Etienne Martin Saint-Leon, “ Histoire des Corporations de Metiers” pp. 3-5.

tion with these laws were evidently classed according to the wealth which they individually possessed, or more probably did not possess. Such was the sole criterion of this Constitution. They soon found their place in the lowest stratum of the social layers and were without political significance. As artisans they were held in utter contempt by the classic pagan world. Such we find is the attitude assumed towards the craftsman throughout the entire range of Roman literature. “ The laborers are all engaged in a base occupation,” says Cicero, “ nor can there be anything honorable to a freeman in a workshop.” 4

Shortly after the period to which tradition ascribed the beginning of the gild system in Rome, Solon (born in 638 B. c.) introduced his sweeping reforms in Greece. They completely changed the conditions of capital and labor at Athens. The poor had there been ground down to such utter destitution and misery that they sold their very sons and daughters, and lastly, even their own bodies into slavery to the masters of bread, in whose hands were the keys of wealth. In this stress of popular despair, which threatened to culminate in a bloody revolution, rich and poor alike chose Solon for their archon. Unlimited power was conferred on him to introduce whatever economic and constitutional reforms might be needed. As a consequence the law which re-

4 Cicero, " De Officiis,” I, 42, 150.

duced the laborer to slavery in lieu of the payment of his debt was abrogated. He was given the right to vote, although he could not himself be elected to office, and was ranked in the fourth class of citizens. Slight as such benefits may seem to us, they were regarded as a great boon in their day. A Greek fourth estate had thus been created.

To Solon likewise is ascribed by Gaius the Athenian law, considered as the charter of subsequent trade unions, which permitted the organization of societies, provided they were not hostile to the State. The Roman law engraved upon the Twelve Tables, which granted this same privilege, is regarded by Gaius as only a translation of the Solonic legislation. Sed haec lex videtur ex lege Solottis translata esse?

The gilds were in Rome commonly called collegia, in Greece eranoi and thiasoi. Other names were likewise in use, but all these appellations, like the English equivalent, “ gild,” were applied to societies of almost every variety. While little is known of the statutes of the Greek labor organizations in particular, the constitutions and customs of the gilds in general are perfectly familiar to us. We reproduce a description from a monograph study by H. Tompkins which comprises the salient characteristics of the Greek association.

5 Gaius, Fourth Book on the Laws of the Twelve Tables. Digest XLVII, Tit., 22, " De Collegiis et Corporibus ”

It is not, of course, to be presumed that each of the details here given was to be found in every instance.

Let us now consider what these companies were which are called by the name of eranoi and thiasoi , and of which the inscriptions have revealed the number and importance. They were formed of members who met together to sacrifice to certain divinities and to celebrate their festivals in common; besides this they assisted those members who fell into necessitous circumstances, and provided for their funerals. They were at once religious associations and friendly societies. Sometimes they daringly partook of a political and commercial character. These private corporations, recognized by the State, had their presiding and other officers, their priests, their funds supplied by the contributions of members and the liberality of benefactors. They assembled in their sanctuaries and made decrees. They were found in great numbers in the important cities, and especially in the maritime ones. At Rhodes, for example, they were the Companions of the Sun, the Sons of Bacchus, of Minerva Lindienne, of Jupiter Atagyrius, of Jupiter Soter. 6

Although the reality was not always as idyllic as this picture represents it, and a statue of a god was usually sufficient to constitute the sanctuary, if we may so call their locals, yet the idea of a perfect Greek gild is here sufficiently expressed. Greater stress might, however, be placed upon the convivial nature of the banquets, which in the latter state of Greek and Roman society may almost have been the principal reason for the existence of such associations, and probably consisted in wild debauches and orgies. Political intrigues,

e H. Tompkins, “Friendly Societies of Antiquity.”

as we shall see, were frequently a prime motive. How closely the trade gilds approximated to the description here given it is difficult to say, yet they were doubtlessly conformed, as far as possible, to the general gild ideal of their time.

It is to Rome, however, that we must turn for a complete and systematic development of craft and merchant gilds. The inscriptions dealing with them are countless in number and amazing in their variety. Almost every division of trade seemed to possess its union. Tarruntenus Paternus, who was Prefect of the Imperial Guard in 179, enumerates thirty crafts which were especially privileged by the Government. Yet he mentions such trades only as were connected with military works. It is commonly accepted that each of the occupations enumerated, mensores, medici, etc., was represented by a union. 7 Constantine in 337 extended special privileges to thirty-five trade corporations.

It is interesting to note that a grouping similar to that of the Middle Ages was likewise observed at Rome, as in Egypt and elsewhere. The potters occupied the Esquiline, the silk-workers and perfumers were settled in Tuscan Street, the oil-dealers and cheese-mongers had their booths in Valabrum, and the silversmiths and tanners were located beyond the Tiber.

i6

As in the Middle Ages, so here also streets or sections of the city were often named after the tradesmen and merchants who displayed their wares in them. Thus we have Perfumers’ Street, Harness-makers’ Street, Corn-venders’ Row, and Sandal Street. In the latter Apollo Sandaliarius, or Apollo of the Sandal-makers, had his shrine.

The ancient Roman gilds were, according to general custom, placed under the special guardianship of some divinity. While merchants naturally turned to Mercury, the craftsmen most frequently dedicated their gilds to Minerva, the goddess of the arts. Ovid in particular tells of the many various classes of workingmen and women who assisted in great throngs at the celebration of her feast . 8 The gilds, as we have seen, at times made the temples of a god their meeting places. Thus the merchant gild described by Livy, which met in the temple of Mercury, took for its feast the anniversary of the temple’s dedication. The same author writes of a gild of flute-players, who went upon a strike because the censors forbade them to hold their banquets in the temple of Jupiter at Rome, as had been their custom from the earliest times. In great indignation they left the capitol in a body and betook themselves to another city, where they were well received. But when they had celebrated their feast, and were deep under the influence of Bacchus, oblivious of their cares and grievances, the citizens cast them together into a cart and so returned them to Rome. There a reconciliation took place. 9 Liebenam refers to other classic authors who have different versions of the same story, but it serves at all events to illustrate existing conditions.

Roman labor gilds were not to mark any final progress towards a more democratic conception whether of industry or politics. The reasons for their absolute and pitiable failure will be made plain in the following chapters.

•Livy, IX, 30.

C HAPTER III

N EITHER during the Republic nor during the Empire was it ever the intention of the Roman law to interfere with pure labor unions. But unfortunately the economic purpose of these institutions was too frequently forgotten by the gildsmen themselves and their political influence or physical mob-power was sold to the most unworthy demagogues or venal politicians, in return for immediate bribes, profits or assurances. The proper use of the vote on the part of the laborer to effect some social measures is not here called into question. It is not merely a right, but a duty. It was the false political ' character which Roman trade unions often assumed, the excesses to which they led and the dangers which they were thought to threaten to the State that brought about their dissolution from time to time. Yet even then the intention of the law was manifested by the fact that the steady ancient craft gilds, which had continued for centuries, were not molested. Thus the historian Suetonius writes of Cassar that “ He destroyed all the gilds except those which had been founded in ancient times.” 1 Again of Augustus he says : “ He dissolved the gilds, except such as were of long standing and legalized.” 2 During the disturbed times and amid the hideous immorality of the last days of the Republic, pictured so graphically by Sallust, the gilds mingled largely in the intrigues of political life. Their services were courted, with bribes and promises we may presume, by every politician at election times. Ambitious men used them for their own dark purposes, and even Cicero, with all his disdain of the lower classes and the laborers, is said to have availed himself of their assistance. We can, therefore, understand the reason for such severe measures as the Lex Gabinia, which forbade all secret gatherings of the people, under penalty of death. Such laws were directed not against the gilds, but against political agitators and revolutionists, who cared for them only as steppingstones to the acquisition of personal power. As W. Warde Fowler writes:

It is curious to notice, that by the time these old gilds emerge into light again as clubs that could be used for political purposes, a new source of gain, and one that was really sordid, had been placed within the reach of the Roman plebs urbana; it was possible to make money by your vote in the election of the magistrate. In that degenerate age, when the vast accumulation of wealth made it possible for a man to purchase his way to power, in spite of repeated attempts to check the

1 Suetonius, " Caes.,” 42.

2 Suetonius, " Octav 32.

evil by legislation, the old principle of honorable association was used to help the small man to make a living by choosing the unprincipled and often the incompetent to undertake the government of the empire. 8

Most interesting is the discovery at Pompeii of the electioneering posters of the trade gilds. The wealthy and luxurious city was throbbing with political life on the eve of the great catastrophe, and the labor unions were active in every section to secure the election of their favorite candidates. Signs like the following were prominently displayed near popular taverns and public places, soliciting the votes of the bewildered citizens:

The Fishermen Vote for Pompidius Rufus as Edile.

The United Goldsmiths Want Cuspius Pansa for Edile.

The latter, as other similar notices indicated, was the choice of gilds as varied in their interests as the trade unions of the jewelers, the muleteers, the carpenters and the worshipers of Isis.

Casellius Marcellus is put forward for the same office in a notice which would appear rather amusing in our day:

His neighbors favor Casellius Marcellus.

That the influence, however, of this politician extended beyond the circle of his immediate friends is evident from advertisements showing that he

8 “ Social Life at Rome in the Age of Cicero,” pp. 46, 47.

had the support of the wagoners, farmers and other unions. Even Venus, the protecting goddess of Pompeii, is made to declare herself in favor of his election :

Venus Wants Casellius for Edile !

Neither did the gilds fail to put forth the usual electioneering promises. Thus in the year 73 the Bakers’ Union of Pompeii canvassed for C. Julius Polybius, because “ he brings good bread.” Probably he had promised them to secure a reduction in the price of grain, or other similar favors. Particular oddities are the announcements of such gilds as the “ Night Drinkers ” and the “ Sleepyheads,” indicating in the former case, we may presume, the propensity of the members to carouse until the morning. Certain women, likewise, as the placards show, were carrying on a vigorous campaign for their political favorites. There is nothing new beneath the sun, as all these discoveries show! A list of the various political posters was drawn up at Paris by P. Willems in 1887. 4

It was not, as would appear, such canvassing that the Roman statesmen dreaded, but rather the secret gatherings in which the gilds were made a cloak for ulterior and dangerous designs. They were the anarchist and I. W. W. tactics that not seldom led to the disruption of Roman trade

unions and prevented the attainment of economic ends.

In the provinces especially, the Emperors exercised the greatest watchfulness. A classical illustration is that which occurs in the famous correspondence between Pliny and Trajan. The former, writing from Nicomedia, desires to obtain permission for the organization of a gild of craftsmen to serve as a fire department for the city. He recommends the project favorably, and argues that, since only about 150 members are to be admitted, all of them craftsmen, he will be able to see to it that no unlawful purposes are pursued. 6 The Emperor, however, is not convinced. In his reply he states that all previous societies formed in that province, under whatever pretense, have invariably degenerated into political clubs. “ Let us bear in mind,” he says, “ that this province, and in particular this city, have been disturbed by factions of just this kind.” 6 Yet Trajan was not opposed to gilds as such, and conferred special privileges upon a bakers’ union in Rome; nor were the gilds as uncommon in the provinces as a passage from Gaius might suggest.