murder or illegal abstention from it.  Sufficient pay to ensure a livelihood ought to be given to every person who is willing to work, independently of the question whether the particular work at which he is skilled is wanted at the moment or not.  If it is not wanted, some new trade which is wanted ought to be taught at the public expense.  Why, for example, should a hansom-cab driver be allowed to suffer on account of the introduction of taxies?  He has not committed any crime, and the fact that his work is no longer wanted is due to causes entirely outside his control.  Instead of being allowed to starve, he ought to be given instruction in motor driving or in whatever other trade may seem most suitable.  At present, owing to the fact that all industrial changes tend to cause hardships to some section of wage-earners, there is a tendency to technical conservatism on the part of labor, a dislike of innovations, new processes, and new methods.  But such changes, if they are in the permanent interest of the community, ought to be carried out without allowing them to bring unmerited loss to those sections of the community whose labor is no longer wanted in the old form.  The instinctive conservatism of mankind is sure to make all processes of production change more slowly than they should.  It is a pity to add to this by the avoidable conservatism which is forced upon organized labor at present through the unjust workings of a change.

It will be said that men will not work well if the fear of dismissal does not spur them on.  I think it is only a small percentage of whom this would be true at present.  And those of whom it would be true might easily become industrious if they were given more congenial work or a wiser training.  The residue who cannot be coaxed into industry by any such methods are probably to be regarded as pathological cases, requiring medical rather than penal treatment.  And against this residue must be set the very much larger number who are now ruined in health or in morale by the terrible uncertainty of their livelihood and the great irregularity of their employment.  To very many, security would bring a quite new possibility of physical and moral health.

The most dangerous aspect of the tyranny of the employer is the power which it gives him of interfering with men’s activities outside their working hours.  A man may be dismissed because the employer dislikes his religion or his politics, or chooses to think his private life immoral.  He may be dismissed because he tries to produce a spirit of independence among his fellow employees.  He may fail completely to find employment merely on the ground that he is better educated than most and therefore more dangerous.  Such cases actually occur at present.  This evil would not be remedied, but rather intensified, under state socialism, because, where the State is the only employer, there is no refuge from its prejudices such as may now accidentally arise through the differing opinions of different men.  The State would be able to enforce any system of beliefs it happened to like, and it is almost certain that it would do so.  Freedom of thought would be penalized, and all independence of spirit would die out.