claims. It was proved that Mr. North engaged his architect, and signed a written agreement as to the commission to be paid. Mr. Cutler asked for instructions as to the sort of house his employer wanted, but, apparently, could get none. At last, he went to him with a plain request that he should state definitely what was to be done, and was repulsed with the contemptuous answer, “ I pay for your brains, and you cannot expect me to find brains for you.” This, by the way, is not an original witticism. The amateur of bad manners will find it, with variations, very popular among low-bred speculators, who delight to employ it when talking with professional men. Mr. Cutler, with commendable patience and good-nature, made plans, such as he thought would suit the magnate, and submitted them to him. It does not appear whether he even understood them ; at all events, he seems to have made no criticisms upon them, but coolly went off to Chili, leaving Mr. Cutler to build the house according to his best judgment of what his client would like. When the latter returned, all went well until the time came for paying the bills. Then the rich man found that the house had cost more than he intended to spend. He had never told any one, apparently, how much he intended or wished to spend, and it looks as if he did not know himself until the bills came in; then nothing would satisfy him short of helping himself out of the architect’s and builder’s pockets, to the difference between his ideal of the cost and the reality. When the architect’s suit came to trial, the Nitrate King denied that there had ever been any agreement between him and Mr. Cutler as to the latter’s pay. Having been shown the written contract, signed by himself, he threw it aside, and said, “ I don’t call that an agreement.” The court remarked that it was an agreement, nevertheless ; and Colonel North next said that he had never seen any plans of his house. On second thought, however, he concluded that he had seen them ; and he seems to have been driven backwards, by cross-examination, from his various other assertions and opinions derogatory to the architect, until the court terminated the discussion by ordering judgment for Mr. Cutler for the full amount claimed.
THE United States has a useful representative in Austria, in the person of Mr. John B. Hawes, consul at Reichen
berg. One of Mr. Hawes’s latest contributions to the series of Consular Reports is a paper on “Workmen’s Committees ” in the great industrial establishments abroad. For many years, it has been the custom in such establishments in Germany to have a part of the wages, usually increased by a regular contribution from the proprietor, set aside as a fund for relieving the sick, or other charitable purposes. Recently, the German Government has made the creation of such provisions compulsory, but the habit was fixed before that. Usually, these charitable funds are managed by committees of the workmen, the proprietors taking part in some cases, and, naturally enough, the habit of communication between the proprietors and the workmen’s committees having been established, it was found occasionally useful to call such committees into consultation on other matters. At first, some proprietors selected the candidates for the committee, but it seems to be now most common to confide the choice entirely to the workmen, and the committees are admitted more and more into the counsels of the proprietors in matters relating to the business, and are entrusted with increasing authority in the management of the details of the work. In some establishments, these “ Factory Counsellors,” or “Colleagues,” as they are gracefully called, keep a strict discipline over the little community of workingpeople, punishing infractions of the factory rules, as well as private misconduct, checking extravagance among the young, and visiting drunkenness, carelessness and quarrelsomeness with severe penalties; while they are ready to consult with parents on the improvement of their children, on the best modes of saving and investing money, and so on. The German and Belgian manufacturers, who are not given to enthusiasm, speak in the highest terms of the result of this mutual intercourse and confidence between the employers and the representatives of working-men. Real or imaginary grievances are publicly discussed by both parties, with the result that an understanding is generally soon brought about; and many valuable improvements in administration have been proposed by the men through the committees and have been carried into effect. Naturally, these improvements usually relate to the conduct of the manufacture, and so great is the practical skill and ingenuity of the workmen that in one or two great establishments the
direction of the execution of the work is left entirely to the representatives of the men. It may be imagined that the blatant labor-reformers, whose principal object in life is to be supported in idleness, on the pretence that they are doing something, or about to do something, “ to place the heel of labor on the neck of capital,” look with anything but favor on the mutual interchange of ideas and confidences between the men who plan and the men who execute industrial work. So far, however, they have not ventured to interfere, and the industrial population of Germany is so advanced in intelligence that it is doubtful whether they could gain a hearing if they did.
ANOTHER contract labor controversy has broken out in Pennsylvania. The great carpet-weaving firm of John
and James Dobson has been charged, before the United States authorities, with importing certain weavers from England, at a rate of compensation fixed beforehand. The agreement as to wages to be paid clearly brings the case within the Contract Labor Act, and the Messrs. Dobson do not deny that they brought the weavers under such an agreement, but they claim that these men were skilled in a branch of industry new to this country — that of weaving velvet, and the Contract Labor Act expressly permits the importation of persons who introduce a new process of manufacture. On the other hand, the weavers previously employed by the Messrs. Dobson, who have been on strike for some time, aflirm that they have themselves learned this branch of the trade in England, and that, although they acknowledge that they have not been very successful in their practice of it here, they attribute their inferior work to the ignorance of the “loom-fixers” and assistants. The singular part of it is, that the men who appeal to the authority of the United States to protect them from the competition of “ alien labor,” are themselves, by their own statement, recent arrivals from England, who want their brothers and cousins, who happened to arrive a little later, kept out by force.
W
E generally think of Germany as a place where alcohol
circulates without restraint, and it is certain that Amer
ican ideas of temperance are generally incomprehensible to a German ; but in Prussia a practical step has been taken toward preventing the intoxication of building-workmen while on duty, which is worth remembering. Not long ago, according to the Deutsche Bauzeitung, Herr Franzius read to the Association of Architects and Engineers of Bremen a paper on the repression of drunkenness among workmen, which met with great favor in the eyes of the Prussian Minister of Public Works, and the latter soon afterward issued a circular to the officials in charge of building and engineering matters, requesting them in their respective districts, to take measures for giving effect to the recommendations of Herr Franzius, not only in the interest of the workmen themselves, but of the public, which has a right to be protected from the effect of the dangerous blunders of which a drunken workman is capable. As means to this end, the circular advised: 1. That all official building inspectors should be required to set an example of temperance to the men whose work they had to supervise, and that any misconduct in this respect should be immediately and severely punished. 2. Unsparing enforcement of the provision, which is generally included in German contracts, that drunken workmen may be immediately removed from the premises, without notice to the contractor. 3. Prevention through the police of the bringing of liquor to the building, both by keeping out of the vicinity the travelling venders of “ schnaps,” and by laying strict injunctions upon the proprietors of canteens and inns in the neighborhood. 4. Provision of hot coffee, or other harmless stimulants to take the place of alcoholic drinks.
ANOTHER recipe for an application for removing old paint and varnish from woodwork is given in the Bayerische
Gewerhezeitung. Two parts of ammonia are shaken up with one part of spirits of turpentine, forming a permanent emulsion,-which is applied to the paint to be removed. In a few minutes, the paint will be softened, so that it can be scraped or rubbed away. This application is said to have been successful in removing old paint which had resisted the action of strong lye.
THE United States has a useful representative in Austria, in the person of Mr. John B. Hawes, consul at Reichen
berg. One of Mr. Hawes’s latest contributions to the series of Consular Reports is a paper on “Workmen’s Committees ” in the great industrial establishments abroad. For many years, it has been the custom in such establishments in Germany to have a part of the wages, usually increased by a regular contribution from the proprietor, set aside as a fund for relieving the sick, or other charitable purposes. Recently, the German Government has made the creation of such provisions compulsory, but the habit was fixed before that. Usually, these charitable funds are managed by committees of the workmen, the proprietors taking part in some cases, and, naturally enough, the habit of communication between the proprietors and the workmen’s committees having been established, it was found occasionally useful to call such committees into consultation on other matters. At first, some proprietors selected the candidates for the committee, but it seems to be now most common to confide the choice entirely to the workmen, and the committees are admitted more and more into the counsels of the proprietors in matters relating to the business, and are entrusted with increasing authority in the management of the details of the work. In some establishments, these “ Factory Counsellors,” or “Colleagues,” as they are gracefully called, keep a strict discipline over the little community of workingpeople, punishing infractions of the factory rules, as well as private misconduct, checking extravagance among the young, and visiting drunkenness, carelessness and quarrelsomeness with severe penalties; while they are ready to consult with parents on the improvement of their children, on the best modes of saving and investing money, and so on. The German and Belgian manufacturers, who are not given to enthusiasm, speak in the highest terms of the result of this mutual intercourse and confidence between the employers and the representatives of working-men. Real or imaginary grievances are publicly discussed by both parties, with the result that an understanding is generally soon brought about; and many valuable improvements in administration have been proposed by the men through the committees and have been carried into effect. Naturally, these improvements usually relate to the conduct of the manufacture, and so great is the practical skill and ingenuity of the workmen that in one or two great establishments the
direction of the execution of the work is left entirely to the representatives of the men. It may be imagined that the blatant labor-reformers, whose principal object in life is to be supported in idleness, on the pretence that they are doing something, or about to do something, “ to place the heel of labor on the neck of capital,” look with anything but favor on the mutual interchange of ideas and confidences between the men who plan and the men who execute industrial work. So far, however, they have not ventured to interfere, and the industrial population of Germany is so advanced in intelligence that it is doubtful whether they could gain a hearing if they did.
ANOTHER contract labor controversy has broken out in Pennsylvania. The great carpet-weaving firm of John
and James Dobson has been charged, before the United States authorities, with importing certain weavers from England, at a rate of compensation fixed beforehand. The agreement as to wages to be paid clearly brings the case within the Contract Labor Act, and the Messrs. Dobson do not deny that they brought the weavers under such an agreement, but they claim that these men were skilled in a branch of industry new to this country — that of weaving velvet, and the Contract Labor Act expressly permits the importation of persons who introduce a new process of manufacture. On the other hand, the weavers previously employed by the Messrs. Dobson, who have been on strike for some time, aflirm that they have themselves learned this branch of the trade in England, and that, although they acknowledge that they have not been very successful in their practice of it here, they attribute their inferior work to the ignorance of the “loom-fixers” and assistants. The singular part of it is, that the men who appeal to the authority of the United States to protect them from the competition of “ alien labor,” are themselves, by their own statement, recent arrivals from England, who want their brothers and cousins, who happened to arrive a little later, kept out by force.
W
E generally think of Germany as a place where alcohol
circulates without restraint, and it is certain that Amer
ican ideas of temperance are generally incomprehensible to a German ; but in Prussia a practical step has been taken toward preventing the intoxication of building-workmen while on duty, which is worth remembering. Not long ago, according to the Deutsche Bauzeitung, Herr Franzius read to the Association of Architects and Engineers of Bremen a paper on the repression of drunkenness among workmen, which met with great favor in the eyes of the Prussian Minister of Public Works, and the latter soon afterward issued a circular to the officials in charge of building and engineering matters, requesting them in their respective districts, to take measures for giving effect to the recommendations of Herr Franzius, not only in the interest of the workmen themselves, but of the public, which has a right to be protected from the effect of the dangerous blunders of which a drunken workman is capable. As means to this end, the circular advised: 1. That all official building inspectors should be required to set an example of temperance to the men whose work they had to supervise, and that any misconduct in this respect should be immediately and severely punished. 2. Unsparing enforcement of the provision, which is generally included in German contracts, that drunken workmen may be immediately removed from the premises, without notice to the contractor. 3. Prevention through the police of the bringing of liquor to the building, both by keeping out of the vicinity the travelling venders of “ schnaps,” and by laying strict injunctions upon the proprietors of canteens and inns in the neighborhood. 4. Provision of hot coffee, or other harmless stimulants to take the place of alcoholic drinks.
ANOTHER recipe for an application for removing old paint and varnish from woodwork is given in the Bayerische
Gewerhezeitung. Two parts of ammonia are shaken up with one part of spirits of turpentine, forming a permanent emulsion,-which is applied to the paint to be removed. In a few minutes, the paint will be softened, so that it can be scraped or rubbed away. This application is said to have been successful in removing old paint which had resisted the action of strong lye.