THE TRADE UNION BILL.

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 143, 20 June 1927, Page 15

THE TRADE UNION BILL.

TORIES AS LEGISLATORS.

CONDEMNED BY OWN

SUPPORTERS.

FETTERDT GTHB UNIONS.

(From Oar Own Correspondent.)

LONDON, May 20.

Lord Randolph Churchill, as recorded n his biography, written by his brilSant son, our present Chancellor of the Exchequer, once declared:—

"I am afraid it is an idle schoolboy's Iream to suppose the Tories can legislate, as I did stupidly. They can govern and make war and increase taxation a merveille, but legislation is ■ot their province in a democratic constitution.''

In the present struggle over the Trade Union Bill, the words are most apt and one ean follow up their condemnation of the stupidity of the Government .in its policy by just a trenchant criticism reflecting on the Tory Government of to-day. Thus the "Outlook" this week call* it a "bad bill," one "badly needing modification and a systematic attempt to amend it reasonably." Still another— "A Candid Tory"—eays "the confusion of language, purposes and sentiment involved the House in a dense dialetical fog, in which the Labour speakers alone seemed to know where they were," and he adds, further, that "it is practically impossible to remove the fundamental objections to the bill with the Government strength what It is." The "Outlook", blames it all on Labour, and Labour has, of course, been condemned all round, even by its own followers, for its stupid walk-out. It is, to say the least, uncandid to regard this as a foolishness peculiar to Labour, for Balfour himself, in 1905, was the leader of an equally futile gesture, Bonar Law, too, made use of it, and the S -arajiets hist year found it a feeble resource in political warfare. Mr. Garvin says of the debate? on this bill, that it was "a full exposure of our real lack. It has nothing to do ■with law and it is not more conspicuous on Ministerialist than oh Labour benches. What is lacking is a modern conception of trade unionism. The bulk of unionist speeches betrayed the conviction that trade unions are dangerous organisations to be so fettered as to be capable of the least possible mischief. Labour resists Tory aggression' as though its principal business were to maintain trade unions in liberty to do all the mischief they wish. The tenor and spirit of the Government's bill are momentarily, but not mainly, responsible for that absurd antithesis. Yet the true problem of the times is how to impose, not restrictions, but responsibilities upon societies that are now embedded in the constitution of the country; how to bring the employed into a new relationship with their employment and their employer; not how to establish a Hague Convention for the da*e-w»,Jrat-lioW'to abolish it." .

Vague and Doubtful Powers. Now that the Government's own amendments are known it is to be seen that they constitute what is to all intents and purposes a new bill—so far, a', all events, as the general strike is concerned. Clause 1 passed with the aid of the guillotine closure in substantially the form in which it was put before the House, but it is very much in doubt whether it brings us any nearer the desired definition. More and more it becomes evident that there is no clear line, such as the Attorney-General assumes, between the "industrial" and the "political," and that the attempt of lawyers to discover one will either tie the hands of Government unduly or give it vague and doubtful powers which will leave .trade unions in a perpetual uncertainty as to what is or what is not within the law. Looking at the clause it is difficult, to understand how the position of a Government would be improved by it, if there were another emergency such as that of last May, and circumstances ean easily be imagined in which the new provisions would be actually an embarrassment. Sir Douglas Hogg insists that sympathetic strikes are not rendered illegal, provided that they are "in the trade or industry" concerned, or, if outside it, that they are aimed at the employer and not at the Government, and are not "designed or calculated to coerce the Government either directly or by inflicting hardship on the community." But, having said this, he almost immediately raised an entirely new set of considerations by suggesting that a strike in a particular trade or industry, such as in conceivable circumstances, the chemical industry, might have such a coercive effect as to require instant action by the Government, action for which bis own clause makes no provision. Losing an Advantage. As the "Westminster Gazette" says:— "This part of the bill had from the beginning only one intelligible object, which was to advertise to all and sundry that it is an illegal and uncitizenlike act to take part in a general strike— a thing which was thought to be insufficiently understood last year. We are now in danger of losing this advantage by the distinction which is to be made between ringleaders and rank and file, for this, if it goes forward, will actually advertise the fact that the illegal and unci tizen-like act is not to be attended with any penalties, except for the few ringleaders. Needless to say, we do not contemplate penalties for the million, or suppose that the Government would commit the folly of filling our gaols with general. strikers. But it is quite a different thing when defining an offence to declare that there shall be no penalties for it except for a few conspicuous individuals. This is to undo whatever may be gained by the general Advertisement of illegality, and to offer a positive inducement to the few to conduct their operations through secret channels. Such are the results up till now of tiie combined wisdom of the Government and its legal advisers."

As a "Candid Tory" well remarked after a diatribe at the foolish obstructive tactics of the Labour party, "sonorous declarations, about the. iniquity of the general strike are all very well, but it will be a horse of another colour when magistrates start clapping workingmen, and women, into gaol, for no worse crime than withholding their labour at a time of industrial crisis."