The Press. THURSDAY, APRIL 19, 1906. UNREST IN THE LABOUR WORLD.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 12482, 19 April 1906, Page 6

The Press. THURSDAY, APRIL 19, 1906. UNREST IN THE LABOUR WORLD.

We are sorry to see signs of unrest in labour circles in this colony—or perhaps it would be more correct to say, signs of a deliberate and persistent attempt to create such unrest. The recent efforts to stir up dissatisfaction with the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, and still worse the continual girding at the Arbitration Court in which some of the labour leaders have indulged, seem to us likely to bring serious consequences if the good sense of the. workers does not come to their assistance and show them that such methods not only tend to discredit our labour legislation, but to imperil its successful operation. In framing the In-, dustrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act there wero two broad principles, both excellent in theory, advanced in its favour. Tho first was that labour difficulties were to be lifted out of the region of hitter personal conflict, that •strikes and lock-outs were to be no more, and that henceforth such difficulties were to be settled by mutual agreement, or if this proved impossible, by a legal tribunal of the highest standing, which, after being put in possession of all the facta, should measure out justice to both sides. The second object aimed at was that as the result of this method of settling these difficulties, there should be industrial peace, so that both masters and men could go ahead with their work, with their minds free from anxiety, knowing that for a certain period at any rate nothing could happen to disturb their mutual relations. The plan of settling disputes by judicial methods has been adopted, but it cannot be said that we aro at the present time enjoying the blessings of industrial peace. True, we have as yet no strikes, but they are being threatened, and immediately an award of the Court is made which is not in accordance with the workers' views, its members are grofsly attacked by officers of the Unions, and accused of unfairness. There is a disposition, in short-, to treat the Arbitration Act not as a means of dealing out justice to both sides through the medium of the Court, but as a piece of machinery for tho purpose of extracting further advantages for the workers. When it rails in this respect then apparently it is to be regarded as useless and set aside.

We have only to look at what has occurred in Christchurch during the last two days to see examples of the mischievous kind of agitation that is going on. Wo had the president of the Independent Political Labour League, himself a member of the Upper House, stating that "if the " presenl Act did not do good work for " the workers, tho less the workers had "to do with it tho better." After complaining of the Court reducing

wages certain cases, he weut on to say that "the strike clauses in the Act " were not worth the paper they were

"written on; when men wero worked "up to tho pitch at which it was " thought necessary to strike, a £10 " penalty would not stop them.'' What is this but strong confirmation of tho view long held by critics of the Act that it would last only so long as times wore good and tho Court raised wages, but that when the tide turned and wages wero reduced, it would bo repudiated by tho workers, and tho old barbaric methods would bo reverted to? Again, we have in tho report of the Executive, adopted by tho Trades and Labour Conference, a clause charging the Court with deciding against tho weight of evidence and, if we aro not mistaken, wiero is on the Order Paper waiting to be discussed a motion to the effect that the Conference has no confidence in tho Court. Hitherto tho respect shown to British law courts and their decisions has been, one of the distinguishing marks of our race. The idea of disappointed litigants banding themselves together for the purpose of abusing the judges, and passing votes of want of confidence in the courts is altogether repugnant to British traditions and British notions of what is right. Here it not only passes almost without rebuke, but presumably respectable journal- which support the Government are actually found aiding and abetting these extraordinary proceedings. That the future success, if not the oontiii'uance of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, is in peril no thoughtful observer of tho times can doubt. The chief danger lies, we believe, not. so much in a possible reversion to strikes as in an attempt- to secure by partisan methods from Parliament advantages which the Arbitration Court—-having to decide the questions before it judicially, and in accordance with t'ho particular circumstances of the'case as disused in the evidence —feels bourud to refuse. This has been done in the "bank to bank" clause in the Mining Act brought down by the present Government, and it is evident that other attempts will be made to secure, by means of alteration in the Statute law, certain advantages which no court would grant on the merits. Meanwhile it is not surprising if employers feel uneasy and discouraged, and if the investment of capital in business enterprises involving the employment of labour should be seriously checked.