Another is Blight the solicitor, who goes about bewailing the fact that we writers are "holding out false hopes of higher agricultural wages after the war." But these are both exceptions.They are held to be remarkable people even by their own class.The mass of property owners and influential people in Europe to-day no more believe in the sacred right of property to hold up development and dictate terms than do the more intelligent workers.The ideas of collective ends and of the fiduciary nature of property, had been soaking through the European community for years before the war.The necessity for sudden and even violent co-operations and submersions of individuality in a common purpose, is rapidly crystallising out these ideas into clear proposals.
War is an evil thing, but most people who will not learn from reason must have an ugly teacher.This war has brought home to everyone the supremacy of the public need over every sort of individual claim.
One of the most remarkable things in the British war press is the amount of space given to the discussion of labour developments after the war.This in its completeness peculiar to the British situation.Nothing on the same scale is perceptible in the press of the Latin allies.A great movement on the part of capitalists and business organisers is manifest to assure the worker of a change of heart and a will to change method.Labour is suspicious, not foolishly but wisely suspicious.But labour is considering it.
"National industrial syndication," say the business organisers.
"Guild socialism," say the workers.
There is also a considerable amount of talking and writing about "profit-sharing" and about giving the workers a share in the business direction.Neither of these ideas appeals to the shrewder heads among the workers.So far as direction goes their disposition is to ask the captain to command the ship.So far as profits go, they think the captain has no more right than the cabin boy to speculative gains; he should do his work for his pay whether it is profitable or unprofitable work.There is little balm for labour discontent in these schemes for making the worker also an infinitesimal profiteer.
During my journey in Italy and France I met several men who were keenly interested in business organisation.Just before Istarted my friend N, who has been the chief partner in the building up of a very big and very extensively advertised American business, came to see me on his way back to America.He is as interested in his work as a scientific specialist, and as ready to talk about it to any intelligent and interested hearer.
He was particularly keen upon the question of continuity in the business, when it behoves the older generation to let in the younger to responsible management and to efface themselves.He was a man of five-and-forty.Incidentally he mentioned that he had never taken anything for his private life out of the great business he had built up but a salary, "a good salary," and that now he was gong to grant himself a pension."I shan't interfere any more.I shall come right away and live in Europe for a year so as not to be tempted to interfere.The boys have got to run it some day, and they had better get their experience while they're young and capable of learning by it.I did."I like N's ideas."Practically," I said, "you've been a public official.You've treated your business like a public service."That was his idea.
"Would you mind if it was a public service?"He reflected, and some disagreeable memory darkened his face.
"Under the politicians?" he said.
I took the train of thought N had set going abroad with me next day.I had the good luck to meet men who were interesting industrially.Captain Pirelli, my guide in Italy, has a name familiar to every motorist; his name goes wherever cars go, spelt with a big long capital P.Lieutenant de Tessin's name will recall one of the most interesting experiments in profit-sharing to the student of social science.I tried over N's problem on both of them.I found in both their minds just the same attitude as he takes up towards his business.They think any businesses that are worthy of respect, the sorts of businesses that interest them, are public functions.Money-lenders and speculators, merchants and gambling gentlefolk may think in terms of profit;capable business directors certainly do nothing of the sort.
I met a British officer in France who is also a landowner.I got him to talk about his administrative work upon his property.He was very keen upon new methods.He said he tried to do his duty by his land.
"How much land?" I asked.
"Just over nine thousand acres," he said.
"But you could manage forty or fifty thousand with little more trouble.""If I had it.In some ways it would be easier.""What a waste!" I said."Of course you ought not to /own/these acres; what you ought to be is the agricultural controller of just as big an estate of the public lands as you could manage--with a suitable salary."
He reflected upon that idea.He said he did not get much of a salary out of his land as it was, and made a regrettable allusion to Mr.Lloyd George."When a man tries to do his duty by his land," he said...
