LORD OVERTOUN is known throughout the country as a leading promoter of modern evangelistic movements. He is also one of the foremost figures in the Free Church, and at last Assembly as a representative elder, seconded Principal Rainy’s motion in favour of the report on the Union negotiations. He is a very rich man, a millionaire, and he contributes very largely to philanthropic and religious schemes. Most of the religious schemes, however, are in our opinion not philanthropic but injurious to the highest interests of mankind as they are the medium of inserting many unsound doctrines into the minds of men. Lord Overtoun pays Mr. John M’Neil £1000 a year for his work as a preacher, and truly this is illspent money. For who that has a spark of commonsense in religion but condemns the buffooneries of that gentleman, whom members of the theatrical profession regard as a loss to the stage? Lord Overtoun inherited vast wealth from his father, who was the manufacturer of a chemical stuff called “chrome,” the precise nature of which we cannot at present define, but a stuff that is largely required in certain lines of business. He has been carrying on the same work in his own time, and is one of two partners in a company which retains his father’s and uncle’s name—Messrs. J. & J. White. His riches have been increasing, and he is highly esteemed on account of his numerous benefactions to popular objects, and the benevolent institutions he himself has set up.
This is our preliminary sketch of a rich religious man to whom at the present moment the attention of the whole country is directed. Within a couple of months back pamphlets have been issued in Glasgow, bringing serious charges against Lord Overtoun in respect of the management of his works. The chief writer of these pamphlets is Mr. James Keir Hardie, editor of the Labour Leader, a paper published in the interests of social reform. Hardie was a member of parliament. He and his present co-workers are Socialists, and therefore enemies to employers of
labour. Their religious views are mainly taken up with the relations of man to man, and as far as we can gather, they scorn the evangelical faith in all its forms. These circumstances detract from the value of their testimony against Overtoun. At the same time, it is most manifest that they have established their main charges with facts and figures that have not, and to every appearance cannot be denied. These charges against his lordship are as follows:—(1) That his men have to put in twelve hours continuous work without a meal hour. (2) Twice each fortnight his men have to work eighteen hours continuously without a break. (3) That the wages are miserably inadequate. (4) That no provision is made by the firm for sickness or old age, and only for accidents where the law compels it. (5) That the sanitary arrangements are meagre and inadequate. (6) That unnecessary Sabbath labour is compulsory upon his men. (7) That the men suffer terribly from holes in the skin, and destruction of the cartilage of the nose caused by the chrome. (8) That the only other firm engaged in the manufacture of the same product in Glasgow is ahead of his lordship in every one of these respects. It is impossible for us to state here all that is said in support of these charges or to enter minutely into the merits and demerits of the case. We are, however, in a position to say something on the subject, for Lord Overtoun himself has spoken after a long silence, and his defence is of such a character as plainly shows that his accusers are right in the main. On Monday, 18th June, he made a statement at a meeting of the Glasgow Evangelistic Campaign Committee, a Committee which has been started in order to carry out an extensive scheme of evangelistic work in every district of Glasgow during the coming autumn. The statement was an attempt to set the minds of the members of the Committee at rest. Lord Overtoun is their chairman, and the charges made against him seriously affect their work. The Established Church Presbytery of Glasgow are disposed to cease connection with the campaign.
Lord Overtoun begins by saying that during all the years of his public work he has refused to be drawn into newspaper controversy, and that it would be serious if public men were to be compelled to reply to all extravagant and scurrilous charges that might be made against them. To this, we daresay, no reasonable person would take exception. He adds that in response to the suggestions of various Christian workers, who are deeply interested in the contemplated Evangelistic Campaign, and who regard the charges as an attack directed not merely against himself personally but also against a movement in which many interests are involved, he takes the opportunity of making a statement on the subject. This he does under three heads. Under the first he affirms that the Government Factory Inspectors have quite recently surveyed the chemical works at Shawfield, and are satisfied as to their sanitary and general condition. Under the second, he states that
his partner, Mr. Chrystal, and himself have had it as their constant aim to keep Sabbath work at the lowest degree. About three-fourths of the men did not work on Sabbath. Experiments, having in view the reduction of Sabbath labour, led to a considerable reduction of it some time ago. As the result of more recent experiments, Messrs. Stevenson, Carlile, & Co. (the only other Glasgow makers) and his firm had arranged, at their first shift, to make a trial of stopping the chrome furnaces. The cessation of labour on Sabbath at Shawfield was a consummation he had always very deeply at heart, and he was hopeful that the successful progress of their experiments might eventually enable this to be practically accomplished. He admits that, in view of any Sabbath work going on at Shawfield, however necessary, he may have made a mistake in agreeing to head a deputation to the Town Council of Glasgow as to the Sabbath opening of the People’s Palace. Under the third head, he affirms that the wages and general condition of labour at Shawfield, as well as the treatment of men in case of sickness, accident, and old age, compare favourably with other works. He also asserts, in regard to the various statements in the accusing pamphlets, that there is not therein, he thinks, a single charge of importance which is not either grossly exaggerated or, as in many cases, absolutely untrue. In this summary of the statement we have inserted the Scriptural name, Sabbath, instead of “Sunday,” which invariably occurs.
Our impressions of the whole case and of this statement are not favourable to Lord Overtoun. Considering the many damaging charges the Socialists bring against the general condition of his works, we think his defence weak and unsatisfactory. The hours are long, and the sanitary arrangements are not what they should be. The Government Inspectors declare the latter satisfactory, but what comes just within the requirements of Acts of Parliament is not always what Christianity and humanity would demand. From the statements of the Socialists, which have not been contradicted, we are strongly of the impression that things are not at all right at Lord Overtoun’s works. There is not anything like the provision that ought to be made for the prevention of that destructive disease to which the men are liable. The question may be asked, Why do men go into this work? Poverty and need are the only explanation. It is said very few remain one month, while others refuse to begin when they see the inside of the works. It is also affirmed that the works have been for months past undermanned, and that so difficult is it to get men to work at Shawfield that within the past three months Lord Overtoun has taken to importing Russian Poles into the works. In regard to Sabbath labour, we feel at more liberty to speak, as the case from his lordship’s own statement is clearer against him. He affirms that he has always been concerned to reduce this work to the lowest degree, while he tacitly admits that a large amount of it had been going on until quite recently. The plain impression this
conveys is that a great deal of work was exacted on the Lord’s day as long as there was no complaint, but no sooner does an agitation get up from the outside than he is forward to introduce reforms. It is stated by the accusing party that certain furnaces were some 15 years ago only worked six days a week, but when Mr. White, senior, died, and his lordship became the ruling power, he changed this into seven days. It is also flatly denied that only a fourth of the men, as his lordship asserts, are at present working on the Lord’s day. Statistics are given to show that over three-fourths of them are still employed on the day of rest, 181 out of 226. The other firm has only 10 out of 200 then engaged, and these include watchmen. It is further stated that for years the men have been in rebellion against Sabbath work, and that three years ago when men were plentiful there was something like an organised resistance, but so many were dismissed and so many more punished by being deprived of Monday’s work and pay, that the men yielded. In fact, Lord Overtoun’s critics characterise his statement as a mass of fictions.
Our conclusion in regard to the whole matter is that Lord Overtoun has been managing his business in a way very inconsistent with the claims of God’s Word, and that his religion has proved itself to be a very superficial affair. “All things are naked and opened to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.” There is no genuine Christianity where this is not fully realised. Believers must have respect to the moral law, otherwise grace is made the servant of licentiousness. “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,” is a command unchangeably binding upon employers and employed. It is utterly vain, therefore, to make a loud profession of Christianity and charity in the world if we have no regard for the holy laws of God in our business at home. Lord Overtoun was the seconder of the Union proposals in the Free Assembly. The charges we have referred to were formulated against him at the very moment he seconded these proposals; but Principal Rainy and his brethren, it appears, are prepared to throw the cloak of their protection over any man no matter what his deeds, if he is only a zealous and wealthy supporter of their schemes. Rev. Dr. Stalker, Free St. Matthew’s, Glasgow, tries to make a defence of his Lordship in a letter to the British Weekly, but the defence is weak and ignoble.
The Synod.—The Synod of the Church will (D.V.) meet at Inverness on Tuesday, the 4th July. The Moderator, the Rev. Neil Cameron, St. Jude’s, Glasgow, will preach at 12 noon.
Communions for July.—Inverness and Lochinver, first Sabbath; Moy, Inverness-shire, and Rogart, Sutherlandshire, second; and Halkirk, Caithness, third. These are given so far as known to us. If notices of Communions are desired in the Magazine, we would be glad to insert them, if sent in good time.