ACCEPTANCE OF NEW THEORY 139

ance of the then prevailing waste and inefficiencies of
industry, as illustrated not only by general conditions
but strikingly in specific instances, as in the overdeveloped
 bituminous coal industry, the underdeveloped
 or inadequate railway system, and the monopoly
conditions in anthracite coal mining.
Higher wages, it was declared, would make possible
greater productive efficiency of labor, increase labor’s
purchasing power, create a broader demand for commodities,
 and, furthermore, add to savings and tend
to decrease the cost of capital. On the other hand,
higher earnings would stimulate management toward
‘mproving facilities and processes, and reducing labor
and other costs of production. The net result, therefore,
 of the application of the living-wage principle,
it was concluded, would be (1) lower costs to industry,
 (2) lower prices and no exploitation of consumers,
 and (3) higher real wages to industrial workers.
Moreover, it was stated, the arguments against the
financial practicability of the living wage were in general
 unconvincing, because they assumed the permanent
 continuance of existing conditions of production
and distribution, and did not admit the possibility of
advantageous changes. The same arguments, it was
shown, had been advanced in past years against the
:stablishment, successively, of a twelve, ten, nine and
eight-hour standard work-day, the installation of
safety devices in industry, woman and child labor
legislation, minimum wage laws, and other restrictive
legislation, and none of the predicted evils had been
borne out by subsequent events. The contrary had
really been true, for all past experience indicated that
the acceptance of the living-wage principle in a reasonably
 practical way would stimulate the spirit of