The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1925. THE QUEENSLAND STRIKE.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 215, 11 September 1925, Page 6

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1925. THE QUEENSLAND STRIKE.

I . ■ For the cause that ta.ka asaigtanom, i For the wrong that needs resistance, j For the future in the distance, And the good that toe oan do. c . . ——_

Two days ago the Premier of Queensland, replying to criticism of the •strike settlement by the Leader of the Opposition, declared that "the strike had been one of the most orderly on record." We wonder if Mr. Gillies, when he made this statement, had in mind the happenings at Mount Morgan. When the railway men first struck, the workers in and about the mining area decided to help them, and they took charge not only of the railway line, but of the public highways as well. During the strike all the roads leading to' Mount Morgan were picketed, so as to stop all transport, with the avowed intention of preventing either the Government or the general public from falling back on any alternative to the blocked railway. This high-handed outrage apparently docs not appeal to Mr. Gillies as anything but an "orderly" expression of industrial feeling. But though the railway strike has been theoretically settled, the Mount Morgan miners are apparently reluctant to abandon the joys of industrial warfare. They have fceized the Mount Morgan Company's property, turned oufr the staff, stopped the machinery, and incidentally Warned the chief engineer that if he tries to come back they will drown him in the dam. Australia, having heard Mr. Gillies' viewß about the railway strike, : is no doubt awaiting with interest his : pronouncement ou Mount Morgan. In the meantime the people of Australia are reflecting upon what the 1 Queensland Government rather facetiI ously describes as the "settlement" of , the railway trouble. After all, it is quite easy for a politician or a private I individual to settle any sort of quarrel by surrendering everything at issue to the other side; and that is practically what the Gillies Government has done. In moving a vote of censure on the Government, Mr. Moore, the Leader of tho Opposition, charged the Ministry with "failing to uphold the law, condoning, an illegal strike, submission to intimidation, and an abject surrender on all the questions in dispute." Our own conviction is that the great weight of public opinion throughout Australia endorses this indictment, and the charges are rendered all the more effective by the fact that when the strike began Mr. Gillies emphatically declared that his Government would stand firm and would refuse to be bullied into submission. It is true that Mr. Gillies all along expressed disapproval of the strike, and that he urged the men last week to submit to arbitration; and he has now pointed out to them that if they had taken his advice they could have secured the very conditions they have now obtained "without the loss of an hour's work, and without the inconvenience and loss to the public which resulted from it." This is all very well, but nobody can analyse dispassionately tho terms of this "settlement" without feeling that what Mr. Gillies meant by "standing firm" is not very materially different from running away or surrendering unconditionally. Under the circumstance* it is impossible to dissociate the fresh outbreak of industrial violence at Mount Morgan from the deplorable collapse of the Labour Government over the railway strike. And it will be very interesting to see how Mr. Gillies proposes to deal with this new development. ' We have mentioned that the strikers have used a considerable amount of violence already, and have threatened personal injury to the officials, if the commands of Labour are not obeyed. In additionencouraged no doubt by Mr. Gillies' pacifist repudiation of "brute force" the Disputes Committee "telegraphed to the Government not to reinforce the police, and asked the sergeant in charge not to interfere with the strikers." When the strikers "asked" the chief engineer at the mine to leave his post they threatened to throw him into the dam if he came back, and the sergeant of police will no doubt take this precedent into account in considering the strikers' request. It is a significant indication of their confidence in the sympathy of the Labour Government that the strikers now actively engaged in revolt against the law of the land should appeal to the Premier not to permit the officers of the" law, the sworn defenders of social order, and protectors of the people's rights, to "interfere" with their nefarious proceedings. The sublime impudence of this request would be grotesque if the situation had not also a tragic side. Now what does the Labour Government intend to do about it all J ■■.