OUR SOCIAL LEGISLATION.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16415, 8 January 1919, Page 8

OUR SOCIAL LEGISLATION.

an interested observer. It was with o view to discovering how far his impressions during his present visit to New Zealand of our industrial legislation corresponded with those formed by him in 1904, when our industrial experiments were more in thoir infancy, that a "Press" representative yesterday waited upon Dr. Andre Siegfried, general secretary of the French Mission, who is the author of 'T>emocracv in New Zealand, ' a standard work on the social and political ideals and achievements of the Dominion. Dr. Siegfried said he did j not find the country very much changed ; in fact, it was a little too early for hun to givo his impressions of this visit-, because ho had been only ten days in -New Zealand, and eight of those had been devoted to sight-seeing. From that point of view he had seen more of the Dominion this time than upon bis previous visit. He was, however, going to study* the working of the Arbitration Act.' "When he last studied our social legislation the Act was not exactly new. but still it was just coming into general operation. After twenty years' existence he wanted to see how it was now working. 'He did not desire to say anything too hurriedly. What he must say, however, was that our social legislation had lasted. Since lio had last investigated our industrial laws wo had had strikes in this country, and the reason for this was a matter which he particularly wished to investigate, another point being whether our Arbitra. tion Act could last with strikes, or whether strikes would kill the Act. Asked by the pressman whether there was a possibility of a similar measure being introduced in France. I>r. Siegfried said it had been suggested several times, but opposition to it cnrr.e not only from the employers, but also from the employees, there being a ''sort of feeling against the giving of the decision ra a dispute by an outsider. Of course, had in France 6uch a thing as arbitration, but it was voluntary, not compulsory. Up till 1914 there had been no talk at all about arbitration, but since the outbreak of wAr the idea of an industrial agreement most talked about had been a collective contract. Up till now, however, the old system of strikes had provided for the bargaining. The trouble under the arbitration system was that it bound the employer, but not the employee. He did not know what would be done in France after the war. An interesting preface, to Dr. Siegfried's was written by Mr W. Downie Stewart. M.P. Dr. Siegfried explained how this came to happen. He was asked by his publisher to permit an English translation. This ho cordially agreed to. He was asked to bring the book up to date, but he declined, upon the ground that he would not write ■upon any matter which he had not personally He was then asked if he would allow Mr Downie Stewart to write the preface, and lie expressed himself aa quite agreeable. Dr. Siegfried confessed that he had not yet met Mr Downie Stewart, he had tried to arrange a meeting in Paris, but both were on military service, and the appointment could riot be kept. He had, however, just that moment despatched a telegram to Mr Downie Stewart, arranging a meeting between them in and he was looking forward to this with the keenest anticipation.