_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.
* * * * *