<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>Report on profit-sharing and labour co-partnership in the United Kingdom</title>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt />
      <sourceDesc>
        <bibl>
          <msIdentifier>
            <idno>1016336950</idno>
          </msIdentifier>
        </bibl>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <text>
    <body>
      <div>46 
II.—PRIVATE FIRMS AND COMPANIES. 
might (as will have been seen) at any time refuse to vote the 
bonus. 
Among the reasons for the workpeople’s dissatisfaction with 
the scheme appear to have been the facts that the initial 
rate of dividend reserved to the shareholders before any division 
of profits in favour of the employees could take place was raised 
by 50 per cent, when wages advanced, but no proposal appears 
to have been made to reduce it when a reduction in wages was 
proposed; that in 1873 a sum of .£30,000 was taken out of the 
last year’s profits and invested in a new mine, the shareholders 
getting new shares in respect of the purchase, but the employees 
losing £15,000 of bonus, which would otherwise have come to 
them as their share of this £30,000; and that the employees’ share 
in profits was further diminished, because (as it is stated) “ large 
sums were placed to depreciation and reserve funds, altogether 
out of proportion to what is usual, and the men were thereby 
deprived of the share which ought to have come to them as bonus. 
In the two years 1873-4, the reserve was increased by £26,600; 
and in the three years 1873-4-5 ‘ stores, repairs, renewals, and 
depreciations ’ were credited with £151,377.”* 
Limited. Partnership by Employees. 
Under the provisions of an Act recently passed (the Limited 
Partnerships Act, 1907), it is now possible for the employees of 
a private firm, as a body, to acquire an interest in its business, 
their responsibility in respect of the debts or obligations of the firm 
being strictly limited, and no rights of interference in the manage 
ment of the business being conferred upon them. The Act, which 
came into operation on .January 1, 1908, enables the formation of 
limited partnerships, by virtue of lyhich one or more individuals 
can, as limited partners,” enter into partnership with other 
persons who are called “ general partners.” A body corporate 
may become a limited partner. The limited partners contribute 
to the partnership capital in cash or in other property valued 
at a stated amount, but are not liable for the debts or obligations 
of the firm beyond the amount so contributed. The Act further 
provides that “ a limited partner shall not take part in the 
management of the partnership business, and shall not have 
power to bind the firm,” but he “ may by himself or his agent 
at any time inspect the books of the firm and examine into the 
state and prospects of the partnership business, and may advise 
with the partners thereon.” 
The first firm, it is believed, to avail themselves of the oppor 
tunity of making arrangements with their employees under 
this Act was Messrs. Gilbert Brothers, boot manufacturers, of 
Nantwich, a firm employing 92 workpeople. This firm began 
by introducing in 1907 a scheme of Profit-sharing, under 
which a fixed proportion of their profits was allotted to the pay 
ment of bonus to their employees; and in December, 1907, 108 of 
their employees received a bonus in respect of the 12 months 
ending June, 1907, under this scheme. In 1908, however, this 
* Co-operative Production, by Benjamin Jones, pp. 497, 498.</div>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>
