THE  SOCIALISM  OF  TO-DAY.

56
wages,  will  be  determined  by  the  minimum  which  it  costs  to
maintain  the  labourer,  a  minimum  which,  in  this  case,  answers
to  the  least  cost  of  production  of  this  particular  merchandise,
the  productive  force  of  the  labourer.
If  such,  concludes  Lassalle,  be  the  general  law,  those
institutions  extolled  by  Herr  Schulze-Delitzsch  can  succeed  no
better  than  the  old  methods  of  Charity  and  Patronage,  in  permanently ­
  ameliorating  the  condition  of  the  labouring  classes.
The  reason  is  this  :  so  long  as  it  is  merely  a  question  of  a
limited  number  of  working  men,  these  will  clearly  derive  an
advantage  by  obtaining  the  commodities  they  require,  at  a
cheaper  rate  and  of  a  better  quality,  from  a  co-operative  society  ;
but  if  the  majority  of  working  men  profited  by  these  institutions, ­
  the  consequence  would  be  that  they  would  live  in  the
same  way  as  they  now  do,  only  with  less  expense  ;  the  minimum
cost  of  living,  that  is,  the  minimum  cost  of  production  of
labour,  would  be  lowered  ;  and  since  this  minimum  is  the  level
towards  which  competition  tends  to  reduce  all  wages,  it  follows
that  wages  would  be  lowered  in  proportion  as  the  cost  of
maintaining  the  labourer  became  less.  It  is  thus  that  Lassalle
endeavours  to  show  the  futility  of  the  efforts  of  Herr  Schulze-Delitzsch
  and  other  bourgeois  philanthropists,  who  hope  to
better  the  condition  of  the  labouring  classes,  without  altering
the  actual  organization  of  society.  All  those  attempts,  inspired
by  the  goodness  of  their  hearts,  come  to  grief  against  the
“  iron  law.”
This  reasoning,  based  upon  the  generally  accepted  principles ­
  of  orthodox  Political  Economy,  brought  upon  Lassalle
the  most  virulent  attacks  from  the  national  Liberal  papers.  He
replied  to  them  no  less  violently.*  He  had  no  difficulty  in
proving  that  the  theory  of  wages  described  by  him,  however
disheartening  it  might  seem,  was  merely  that  of  the  masters
of  Political  Economy,  of  Adam  Smith,  J.  B.  Say,  Ricardo,
J.  S.  Mill,  Rau,  Roscher,  Zachariae,  and  of  all  their  disciples.
Even  before  them,  Turgot  had  formulated  the  same  idea  in
that  wonderful  language,  clear  as  a  crystal,  of  the  eighteenth
*  Zur  Arbeiterfrage,  Rede  zu  Leipzig,  am  16  April,  1863.  Rede  zu
Frankfurt,  am  17  und  19  Mai,  1863.