sStore-Pay,' &c. for Labor.
{"character_count": 2855, "word_count": 518, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9736999869346619], "ccnet_perplexity": [1008.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}



To the Editor Of TIE Tribune:


Being constant reader of your paper and strict
adherent to Wing principles notice in your daily
paper Of the 25lh ult. communication from some
person, who appears to be moved by phianthropc
motives in favor of the Working Glasses; and re-
commends law to regulate prices between the en-
ployer and the employed. respectfully agree with
you in your opinion Of its inexpediencv. The price
which manufacturers OF iron in this and die neigh
boring States agree TO pay their hands is sufficiently
high provided they paid it in cash, and required no
more labor than they agreed for. But when man
utactur exacts twenty-five per cent more work than
his agreement, and pays in supplies at from two 10
three hundred per cent profit the situation of poor
wood-chopper is wretched indeed, particularly when
he has wife and six eight children to support
his best efforts will barely sustain life. The proper
remedy, and the only one which can accomplish the
desired end, is a law obgng all manufacturers,
contractors and others employing number of hands
to pay in cash instead of trade, and leave the price
to be agreed upon between the parties. Any infu-
entail man or set of men who would procure the
passing Of such law would do more for the poor
and laboring classes than has ever been done by
their pretended friends, who are constantly pro-
claiming their anxiety for their relief.


Yours, &c. &c. PRoTECTIOS


u We heartily approve of the purpose aimed
at by Our spondent-namely, the abolition
of the abominable system Of Store pay for labor.
We have suffered some and witnessed more Of
its pernicious effects III our time and will gladly
do any thing in our power toward its abolition.
But is our correspondent sure that compulsory
law on the subject would do any good We
doubt it. For in the first place, we have known
instances in which, from the absolute scarcity of
money there was no choice but to pay in provi-
sions and goods or stop work; and in the next
place, we do not see how such law could be
enforced. For instance, A. B. hires hundred
men at given prices, with an understanding that
cash is scarce, but he will pay them The money
at the end of the job meantime, he will supply
them with such pay as he can command-Grain,
Pork, Goods, &c. They 60 to work accordingly,
and take up their pay fast as they earn it, or
little faster.-How are you going to stop this by
law? and are you sure it would be right and
beneficial to do so For our own part, we wish
Industry could 60 on with less working for wages,
every man working for himself; but where that
cannot be, we think payment in money or vol
unfairly chosen equivalent should be the univer-
sal rule, though there may be cases in which it is
temporarily suspended to mutual advantage. Is
there not some other way to put this matter right
than br law? Ed Ir.
