THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT HAND.
[Report to the King.]
SIRE When we see these
men of the Libre Échange audaciously disseminating
their doctrines, and maintaining that the right of
buying and selling is implied by that of ownership
(a piece of insolence that M. Billault has criticised
like a true lawyer), we may be allowed to entertain
serious fears as to the destiny of national labor;
for what will Frenchmen do with their arms and intelligences
when they are free?
The Ministry which you have honored
with your confidence has naturally paid great attention
to so serious a subject, and has sought in its wisdom
for a protection which might be substituted
for that which appears compromised. It proposes
to you to forbid your faithful subjects the use of
the right hand.
Sire, do not wrong us so far as to
think that we lightly adopted a measure which, at
the first glance, may appear odd. Deep study of
the protective system has revealed to us this
syllogism, on which it entirely rests:
The more one labors, the richer one is.
The more difficulties one has to conquer, the more
one labors.
Ergo, the more difficulties
one has to conquer, the richer one is.
What is protection, really,
but an ingenious application of this formal reasoning,
which is so compact that it would resist the subtlety
of M. Billault himself?
Let us personify the country.
Let us look on it as a collective being, with thirty
million mouths, and, consequently, sixty million arms.
This being makes a clock, which he proposes to exchange
in Belgium for ten quintals of iron.
“But,” we say to him, “make the iron
yourself.” “I cannot,” says
he; “it would take me too much time, and I could
not make five quintals while I can make one clock.”
“Utopist!” we reply; “for this very
reason we forbid your making the clock, and order you
to make the iron. Do not you see that we create
you labor?”
Sire, it will not have escaped your
sagacity, that it is just as if we said to the country,
Labor with the left hand, and not with the right.
The creation of obstacles to furnish
labor an opportunity to develop itself, is the principle
of the restriction which is dying. It is
also the principle of the restriction which
is about to be created. Sire, to make such regulations
is not to innovate, but to preserve.
The efficacy of the measure is incontestable.
It is difficult much more difficult than
one thinks to do with the left hand what
one was accustomed to do with the right. You
will convince yourself of it, Sire, if you will condescend
to try our system on something which is familiar to
you, like shuffling cards, for instance.
We can then flatter ourselves that we have opened
an illimitable career to labor.
When workmen of all kinds are reduced
to their left hands, consider, Sire, the immense number
that will be required to meet the present consumption,
supposing it to be invariable, which we always do when
we compare differing systems of production. So
prodigious a demand for manual labor cannot fail to
bring about a considerable increase in wages; and
pauperism will disappear from the country as if by
enchantment.
Sire, your paternal heart will rejoice
at the thought that the benefits of this regulation
will extend over that interesting portion of the great
family whose fate excites your liveliest solicitude.
What is the destiny of women in France?
That sex which is the boldest and most hardened to
fatigue, is, insensibly, driving them from all fields
of labor.
Formerly they found a refuge in the
lottery offices. These have been closed by a
pitiless philanthropy; and under what pretext?
“To save,” said they, “the money
of the poor.” Alas! has a poor man ever
obtained from a piece of money enjoyments as sweet
and innocent as those which the mysterious urn of
fortune contained for him? Cut off from all the
sweets of life, how many delicious hours did he introduce
into the bosom of his family when, every two weeks,
he put the value of a day’s labor on a quatern.
Hope had always her place at the domestic hearth.
The garret was peopled with illusions; the wife promised
herself that she would eclipse her neighbors with
the splendor of her attire; the son saw himself drum-major,
and the daughter felt herself carried toward the altar
in the arms of her betrothed. To have a beautiful
dream is certainly something.
The lottery was the poetry of the
poor, and we have allowed it to escape them.
The lottery dead, what means have
we of providing for our proteges? tobacco,
and the postal service.
Tobacco, certainly; it progresses,
thanks to Heaven, and the distinguished habits which
august examples have been enabled to introduce among
our elegant youth.
But the postal service! We will
say nothing of that, but make it the subject of a
special report.
Then what is left to your female subjects
except tobacco? Nothing, except embroidery, knitting,
and sewing, pitiful resources, which are more and
more restricted by that barbarous science, mechanics.
But as soon as your ordinance has
appeared, as soon as the right hands are cut off or
tied up, everything will change face. Twenty,
thirty times more embroiderers, washers and ironers,
seamstresses and shirt-makers, would not meet the
consumption (honi soit qui mal y pense) of
the kingdom; always assuming that it is invariable,
according to our way of reasoning.
It is true that this supposition might
be denied by cold-blooded theorists, for dresses and
shirts would be dearer. But they say the same
thing of the iron which France gets from our mines,
compared to the vintage it could get on our hillsides.
This argument can, therefore, be no more entertained
against left-handedness than against protection;
for this very dearness is the result and the sign of
the excess of efforts and of labors, which is precisely
the basis on which, in one case, as in the other,
we claim to found the prosperity of the working classes.
Yes, we make a touching picture of
the prosperity of the sewing business. What movement!
What activity! What life! Each dress will
busy a hundred fingers instead of ten. No longer
will there be an idle young girl, and we need not,
Sire, point out to your perspicacity the moral results
of this great revolution. Not only will there
be more women employed, but each one of them will
earn more, for they cannot meet the demand, and if
competition still shows itself, it will no longer be
among the workingwomen who make the dresses, but the
beautiful ladies who wear them.
You see, Sire, that our proposition
is not only conformable to the economic traditions
of the government, but it is also essentially moral
and democratic.
To appreciate its effect, let us suppose
it realized; let us transport ourselves in thought
into the future; let us imagine the system in action
for twenty years. Idleness is banished from the
country; ease and concord, contentment and morality,
have entered all families together with labor; there
is no more misery and no more prostitution. The
left hand being very clumsy at its work, there is a
superabundance of labor, and the pay is satisfactory.
Everything is based on this, and, as a consequence,
the workshops are filled. Is it not true, Sire,
that if Utopians were to suddenly demand the freedom
of the right hand, they would spread alarm throughout
the country? Is it not true that this pretended
reform would overthrow all existences? Then our
system is good, since it cannot be overthrown without
causing great distress.
However, we have a sad presentiment
that some day (so great is the perversity of man)
an association will be organized to secure the liberty
of right hands.
It seems to us that we already hear
these free-right-handers speak as follows in the Salle
Montesquieu:
“People, you believe yourselves
richer because they have taken from you one hand;
you see but the increase of labor which results to
you from it. But look also at the dearness it
causes, and the forced decrease in the consumption
of all articles. This measure has not made capital,
which is the source of wages, more abundant. The
waters which flow from this great reservoir are directed
into other channels; the quantity is not increased,
and the definite result is, for the nation, as a whole,
a loss of comfort equal to the excess of the production
of several millions of right hands, over several millions
of left hands. Then let us form a league, and,
at the expense of some inevitable disturbances, let
us conquer the right of working with both hands.”
Happily, Sire, there will be organized
an association for the defense of left-handed labor,
and the Sinistrists will have no trouble in
reducing to nothing all these generalities and realities,
suppositions and abstractions, reveries and Utopias.
They need only to exhume the Moniteur Industriel
of 1846, and they will find, ready-made, arguments
against free trade, which destroy so admirably
this liberty of the right hand, that all that
is required is to substitute one word for another.
“The Parisian Free Trade
League never doubted but that it would have the assistance
of the workingmen. But the workingmen can no longer
be led by the nose. They have their eyes open,
and they know political economy better than our diplomaed
professors. Free trade, they replied, will
take from us our labor, and labor is our real, great,
sovereign property; with labor, with much labor,
the price of articles of merchandise is never beyond
reach. But without labor, even if bread should
cost but a penny a pound, the workingman is compelled
to die of hunger. Now, your doctrines, instead
of increasing the amount of labor in France, diminish
it; that is to say, you reduce us to misery.”
(Number of October 13, 1846.)
“It is true, that when there
are too many manufactured articles to sell, their
price falls; but as wages decrease when these articles
sink in value, the result is, that, instead of being
able to buy them, we can buy nothing. Thus, when
they are cheapest, the workingman is most unhappy.”
(Gauthier de Rumilly, Moniteur Industriel of
November 17.)
It would not be ill for the Sinistrists
to mingle some threats with their beautiful theories.
This is a sample:
“What! to desire to substitute
the labor of the right hand for that of the left,
and thus to cause a forced reduction, if not an annihilation
of wages, the sole resource of almost the entire nation!
“And this at the moment when
poor harvests already impose painful sacrifices on
the workingman, disquiet him as to his future, and
make him more accessible to bad counsels and ready
to abandon the wise course of conduct he had hitherto
adhered to!”
We are confident, Sire, that thanks
to such wise reasonings, if a struggle takes place,
the left hand will come out of it victorious.
Perhaps, also, an association will
be formed in order to ascertain whether the right
and the left hand are not both wrong, and if there
is not a third hand between them, in order to conciliate
all.
After having described the Dexterists
as seduced by the apparent liberality of a principle,
the correctness of which has not yet been verified
by experience, and the Sinistrists as encamping
in the positions they have gained, it will say:
“And yet they deny that there is
a third course to pursue in the midst of the conflict;
and they do not see that the working classes have
to defend themselves, at the same moment, against those
who wish to change nothing in the present situation,
because they find their advantage in it, and against
those who dream of an economic revolution of which
they have calculated neither the extent nor the significance.”
(National of October 16.)
We do not desire, however, to hide
from your Majesty the fact that our plan has a vulnerable
side. They may say to us: In twenty years
all left hands will be as skilled as right ones are
now, and you can no longer count on left-handedness
to increase the national labor.
We reply to this, that, according
to learned physicians, the left side of the body has
a natural weakness, which is very reassuring for the
future of labor.
Finally, Sire, consent to sign the
law, and a great principle will have prevailed:
All wealth comes from the intensity of labor.
It will be easy for us to extend it, and vary its
application. We will declare, for instance, that
it shall be allowable to work only with the feet.
This is no more impossible (for there have been instances)
than to extract iron from the mud of the Seine.
There have even been men who wrote with their backs.
You see, Sire, that we do not lack means of increasing
national labor. If they do begin to fail us, there
remains the boundless resource of amputation.
If this report, Sire, was not intended
for publication, we would call your attention to the
great influence which systems analogous to the one
we submit to you, are capable of giving to men in power.
But this is a subject which we reserve for consideration
in private counsel.