FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231  
232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   >>  
They were intended to increase British efficiency and well-being, and our statesmen received every courtesy and help in studying German methods. It will be said by many that we shall not study those methods again. Perhaps not. They may prefer an English method as propounded by Lord Headley when speaking at a luncheon in connection with the Bakery and Confectionery Trades Exhibition held at Islington. The report is from the _Glasgow Herald_ as reproduced in the _Labour Leader_ (October 21, 1915): In regard to many industries, the plain fact was that the foreigner lived much more cheaply than the British workman and charged far less for his labour. Where labour, and not machinery, formed a small part of the cost of production we should be able to compete with the foreigner, and that should be the case in high class confectionery more than in anything else. If we were to defeat the foreigner in other industries after the war, it seemed to him that the British workman would have to consent to work for lower wages than hitherto. At any rate, he hoped so, in order that the country might supply itself with necessities without having to go abroad for them. It seems to me that in this way we should "defeat" not only the foreigner, but the Englishman as well--except the privileged few who could get workmen at low wages without lowering their profits. I remember saying to a Colonial lady that we had gained much from the science of German settlers in this country. "Damn German science," was her reply. A certain type of employer desires two protections--protection against the knowledge of the foreigner, and protection against the aspirations of the worker. Both the knowledge and the aspirations of others are a disturbance of repose. At a Nottingham meeting of the Society of Chemical Industry the unscientific character of British methods was again emphasised. So, too, at the Edinburgh meeting in December, 1914. Principal A. P. Laurie, speaking of paints and colours, said: "There were very few cases among those he had inquired into of a chemical, a colour product, or a pigment which was being made both in Germany and in England in which the German product was not better than that made in this country.... Again, it was admitted that German barytes was better ground than English. Yet an extensive literature on barytes and barytes mining had been published by the Germans, showing exact
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231  
232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   >>  



Top keywords:
foreigner
 

German

 

British

 

methods

 

barytes

 

country

 

science

 

product

 

labour

 
knowledge

aspirations

 

meeting

 

protection

 

industries

 

workman

 

defeat

 

speaking

 
English
 
protections
 
profits

Englishman

 

privileged

 

desires

 

settlers

 

Colonial

 

gained

 

worker

 

employer

 
remember
 

workmen


lowering
 
pigment
 

Germany

 
England
 
colour
 
inquired
 

chemical

 

admitted

 
ground
 
published

Germans
 

showing

 

mining

 
extensive
 
literature
 

Chemical

 

Industry

 

unscientific

 

character

 

Society