THE NATION AND THE LABOURER.
them the burthen of supporting these labourers. Why
the effect would be to ruin many of the employers and
to throw the businessof the town into confusion.’ Yes:
if that were the whole of the proposition and nothing
more belonged to it as a necessary part of the proposed
action, we quite admit that such an effect would be
likely to result. But why should not the mayor make
declaration, at the same time, undertaking on the part
of the town to repay the employers of labour the equivalent
 to the wages received by the additional men employed,
 out of the general municipal funds. ¢Oh | but
that would involve complication and give trouble.’ No
doubt ; but then does not all business involve complica-“ion
 and give trouble ¢ If the great object of our lives.
were to avoid complication and trouble, it would be
most reasonable to do as far as possible without business:
and to live Indian-fashion, satisfied with supplying the
bare necessaries of life by the most ready and simple
means. The question is not as to complication and
trouble, but as to whether it would be the most just,
squitable, enlightened Christian arrangement, and the
arrangement most salutary and beneficent to all parties,
or whether it would not. Why! in equity and Justice,
should not a portion of the resources of the whole town. .
of all the inhabitants collectively. . be applied to meet
such an adverse fluctuation in the prosperity of the town ?
Why should the labouring population be, as it were,
1eld responsible and made to suffer the consequences
lone? It ‘may be said, perhaps, that the employers
so suffer from such a depression of trade, or from
such unfavourable fluctuations in the prosperity of

{14