KARL MARX
THE LABOUR QUESTION
London,  Friday, November  11,  1858
Golden Opportunities, and the
Use Made of Them, is the title of one of the most  tragicomical effusions of the grave and profound Economist.101
The “golden opportunities ” were, of course, afforded by  Free
Trade, and the “use” or  rather “abuse” made of them refers
to the working  classes.
“The working  classes, for the first time, had their future in their
own  hands! The population of the United Kingdom  began actually to
diminish, the emigration carrying off more  than its natural increase.
How  have the working  men  used their opportunity?  What have they
done? Just  what they used to do formerly, on  every recurrence of
temporary sunshine, married and multiplied as fast as possible. At  this
rate of increase it will not  be long  before emigration is effectually
counterbalanced, and the golden opportunity  thrown  away.”
The golden opportunity  of not marrying and not multiplying, except at the orthodox  rate allowed by  Malthus and
his disciples! Golden morality this! But,  till now,  according
to the Economist itself, population has diminished, and has
not  yet counterbalanced emigration. Over-population, then,
will not  account for the disasters of the times.
“The next use the labouring classes should have made of their rare
occasion ought  to have been to accumulate savings and become capitalists. In scarcely one instance do they seem to have risen, or begun  to
rise, into the rank of capitalists. They have thrown  away their oppor tunity.”

The opportunity  of becoming  capitalists! At  the same time
the Economist tells the working  men  that, after they had
at last obtained ten per cent on  their former earnings, they
were able to pocket 16s. 6d. a week instead of 15s. Now,  the
mean wages are too  highly calculated at 15s. per week. But
never mind. How  to become a capitalist out  of 15 shillings
a week! That is a problem  worthy  of study. The working
men  had the false idea that in order to ameliorate their situation they must  try to ameliorate their incomes. “They have
struck,” says the Economist, “for more  than would  have
done them any service.” With  15 shillings a week they had
the very opportunity  of becoming  capitalists, but  with 16s.
6d. this opportunity  would  be gone. On  the one hand work ing men  must  keep hands scarce and capital abundant, in
order to be able to force on  the capitalists a rise of wages.
But  if capital turns  out  to be abundant and labour to be
scarce, they must  by  no  means avail themselves of that power
for the acquisition of which they were to stop  marrying and
multiplying. “They have lived more  luxuriously.” Under the
Corn  Laws, we  are told by  the same Economist, they were
but  half fed, half clothed, and more  or  less starved. If they
were then to live at all, how  could they contrive to live less
luxuriously  than before? The tables of importation were
again and again unfolded by  the Economist, to prove  the
growing  prosperity of the people and the soundness  of the
business  done. What was thus proclaimed as a test of the
unspeakable blessings of free trade, is now  denounced as a
proof of the foolish extravagance of the working  classes.
We  remain, however,  at a loss to understand how  importation can go  on  increasing with a decreasing population and
a declining consumption; how  exportation can continue to
rise with diminishing importation, and how  industry and
commerce can expand themselves with imports  and exports
contracted.
“The third use made of the golden opportunity  should have been
to procure the best possible education for themselves and their children,
so  as to fit themselves for the improvement  in their circumstances, and
to learn how  to turn  it to the best account. Unhappily, we  are obliged
to state that schools have seldom been so  ill attended, or school fees
s° ill paid.”

Is there anything marvellous in this fact? Brisk trade was
synonymous  with enlarged factories, with increased application of machinery, with more  adult labourers being replaced
by  women  and children, with prolonged hours  of work. The
more  the mill was attended by  the mother  and the child, the
less could the school be frequented. And, after all, of what
sort of education would  you  have given the opportunity  to
the parents and their children? The opportunity  of learning
how  to keep population at the pace described by  Malthus,
says the Economist. Education, says Mr. Cobden,  would  show
the men  that filthy, badly ventilated, overstocked lodgings,
are not  the best means of conserving health and vigour. As
well might you  save a man from starving by  telling him
that the laws of Nature demand a perpetual supply  of food
for the human  body. Education, says the Daily News, would
have informed our  working  classes how  to extract nutritive
substance out  of dry bones — how  to make tea cakes of starch,
and how  to boil soup  with devil’s dust.
If we  sum  up  then the golden opportunities which have
thus been thrown  away by  the working  classes, they consist
of the golden opportunity  of not marrying, of the opportunity
of living less luxuriously, of not  asking for higher wages, of
becoming  capitalists at 15 shillings a week, and of learning
how  to keep the body  together with coarser food, and how
to degrade the soul with the pestiferous doctrines of
Malthus.
On  Friday last Ernest Jones  visited the town  of Preston
to address the factory-hands locked out  of the mills, on  the
labour question. By  the appointed time at least 15,000 persons  {“The Preston Pilot102 estimates the number  at 12,000)
had assembled on  the ground,  and Mr. Jones,  on  proceeding
to the spot, was received with an enthusiastic welcome. I
give some  extracts from his speech:
“Why  have these struggles been? Why  are they now?  Why  will
they return? Because the fountains of your  life are sealed by  the hand
of capital, that quaffs its golden goblet to the lees and gives the dregs
to you. Why  are you  locked out  of life when  you  are locked out  of the
factory? Because you  have no  other factory to go  to— no  other means
of working  for your  bread. What gives the capitalist this tremendous
power?  That he holds all the means of employment.. . . The means of
work  is, therefore, the hinge on  which the future of the people turns....

It is a mass movement  of all trades, a national movement  of the work ing classes, that can alone achieve a triumphant result. ... Sectionalise
and localise your  struggle and you  may fail— nationalise it and you  are
sure to win.” 103
Mr. George Cowell  in very complimentary terms moved,
and Mr. John  Matthews seconded, a vote of thanks to Ernest
Jones  for his visit to Preston and the services he was rendering to the cause of labour.
Great exertions had been made on  the part of the manu facturers to prevent Ernest Jones  visiting the town; no  hall
could be had for the purpose,  and bills were accordingly
printed in Manchester convening  an open-air meeting. The
report had been industriously circulated by  some  self-
interested parties, that Mr. Jones  was going  to oppose  the
strike, and sow  division among  the men,  and letters had been
sent that it would  not  be personally safe for him to visit
Preston.
Written by  K. Marx
on  November  11,  1853
Published in the New-York
Daily Tribune No.  3936,
November  28, 1853
Signed: Karl Marx
Printed according
to the newspaper text