Page:The Economic Journal Volume 1.djvu/316

294 THE ECONOMIC JOURNAL (Peto Brothers, Builders, Drake and Gorham, Electrical En?- neers, Hubbard's Profit-sharing Business, Builders, and Browett, LindIcy & Co., Limited Engineers), the period at which the bonus has to be ascertained has not yet arrived. With respect to CaBsell & Co., Limited, Printers and Publishers, and Sampson, Low & Marston, Limited, Publishers, the calculation of the ratio of bonus to wages would involve an amount of labour too great to be undertaken by these firms. With regard to the remaining four firms, in respect to which I 'have been unable to obtain particulars, the inference, that in all these instances the reason for reticence has been the unsatisfactory character of the results, would probably be inaccurate. l?any other causes may account for the unwill- ingness of a firm to disclose the details of its balance-sheets. TABLE II. Finn. Size of Firm. Number of consecutive years (endingwith 1890) to which this average relates. Average ratio of bonus to wages. Remarks. No. 1 Large 2'8 per cent. No. 2 Small 9'2 ,, No. 3 Medium 11'5 ,, No. 4 Meditun 5 " No. 5 Small 11'2 ,, No. 6 1?O. 7 No. 8 No. 9 Medium 6'5 ,, 5 Small 26'9 ,, 2 Small 7'6 ,, 2 Small ' over 8' 10 Turning back to Tables I. and II. (in which we will count the four estates of Mr. Grey as four separate cases), we find that our thirty-eight instances include ten cases of total failure to pay bonus (four occurring in businesses undertaken by social reformers, and four in agriculture); one case of a bonus of less than i per cent. on wages (in the only business m?dertaken by social reformers which has succeeded in paying any bonus at all); three cases of 1'2, 1'6, and 1'8 per cent. respectively; one of ' 1'5 to 3' per cent.; five of from 2'2 up to 3 per cent.; one of 3'5 per cent.; four of from 4 up to 4'7 per cent.; three of 5 per cent.; one of (}'5 per cent.; one case of 7'5, and one of 7'6 per cent. ;one of 'over 8,' and one of 9'2 per cent.; one of 10, and one of 10'6 per cent.; ? In many of these cases ' trade reasons' necessitate reticence: iu regard to one firm the customers complain, saying that a house which can afford to pay so large a bonus to its employees must be over-charging its clients.