THE STRIKER'S VADE MECUM.
Question. You think it is a good thing to strike?
Answer. Yes, when there is no other remedy.
Q. Is there ever any other remedy?
A. Never. At least, so say the secretaries.
Q. Then you stand by the opinions of the officials?
A. Why, of course; because they are paid to give them.
Q. But have not the employers any interests?
A. Lots, but they are not worthy the working-man's consideration.
Q. But are not their interests yours?
A. Yes, and that is the way we guard over them.
Q. But surely it is the case of cutting off the nose to spite the mouth?
A. And why not, if the mouth is too well fed.
Q. But are not arguments better than bludgeons?
A. No, and bludgeons are less effective than revolvers.
Q. But may not the use of revolvers produce the military?
A. Yes, but they can do nothing without a magistrate reading the Riot Act.
Q. But, the Riot Act read, does not the work become serious?
A. Probably. But at any rate the work is lawful, because unremunerative.
Q. But how are the wives and children of strikers to live if their husbands and fathers earn no wages?
A. On strike money.
Q. But does all the strike money go to the maintenance of the hearth and the home?
A. Of course not, for a good share of it is wanted for the baccy-shop and the public-house.
Q. But if strikes continue will not trade suffer?
A. Very likely, but trade represents the masters.
Q. And if trade is driven away from the country will it come back?
A. Most likely not, but that is a matter for the future.
Q. But is not the future of equal importance to the present?
A. Not at all, for a day's thought is quite enough for a day's work.
Q. Then a strike represents either nothing or idleness?
A. Yes, bludgeons or beer.
Q. And what is the value of reason?
A. Why, something less than smoke.