Page:Walter Renton Ingalls - Current Economic Affairs (1924).pdf/34

20 as I am aware; and until we began to get these reports of European experiences we never had any data as to the consequences of the eight-hour day en masse. A dispassionate analysis of the situation that has been produced in Germany has been given by Doctor Hoffmann, director of the Chamber of Commerce of Minden, Westphalia, in a book entitled, “Working Hours and Production in Germany after the War.’ It is written apparently without bias, and admits evidence that in certain branches or in certain production conditions the eight-hour system has done no harm. But, on the whole, the judgment is highly unfavorable.

Some of the sharpest criticism of the eight-hour working day, Doctor Hoffmann points out, comes from labor leaders and even from Socialists. An old enthusiast for eight hours and a strong Socialist, ex-Minister Doctor Mueller, lately wrote that ‘‘compensation for the shortened time by more intense production has not taken place.” The editor of Die Konjunktur, Richard Calwer, who is not only a Socialist but also a statistician and economist of recognized rank, has condemned eight-hours as “economically fatal,’ saying that the reform has caused “a great injury to production.”

In general, German working hours at present are less by one-fifth than before the war. Production has fallen much more than one-fifth. But Doctor Hoffmann says quite fairly that there is no exact proof that production everywhere would have fallen more than one-fifth if there had been no other unfavorable factors. Reduced production may partly be explained by inferior health and feeding, by disappearance in war of many first class workers, by deterioration of machines and