A REBUTTAL.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 3, 28 September 1907, Page 7

A REBUTTAL.

UNIONS AND "PROFESSIONAL MEN.'; "■'■ REPLY TCLMIi: MILLAR. In Thursday's issue of The Dominion appeared an interview with tho Minister for Labour which ha'd been telegraphed from Christchurch. Certain statements that were uiado in the course of that interview were taken serious exception to by Mr. David M'Laren, sccrotary of fcho Wellington Waterside Workers' ; Union and tho Now Zealand Ironmoulders' Association. Conciliation Defended. - "With reference to the Minister's statement," said he, "that Conciliation Boards are an absolute failure, the consensus of opinion of organised Vorkers is that the Conciliation Boards have never had a proper opportunity of exorcising tho functions it was originally intended "they should have, and representations' of /Trades and Labour conferences from year to year to strengthen the Boards have been completely overlooked. " It is, too, a pure*mis-statement of fact," said Mr. M'Laren, ." that the Boards are developing into Lower Courts, the true position being that these bodies started at tho outset to act as Lower Courts, but during the past two yeara the mode of.procedure has been such as to really make them Boards of Inquiry in conference." This, change is.in the right direction; and it is astounding to' us to ; seo' the Government' ignore the fact;''and- seek to abolish'the Boards'at 'the timo when they are likely to be most useful. "Then the Minister states that these professional men are causing all the trouble. The timber workers in Auckland havorjust come to an agreement outside the court. . . The ironmoulders have also come to an agreement in the same way.' I'have had occasion to put,to the Minister, before ho made the uttorance, how very easy, it was to settle a matter in conference when there' was really nothing of importance- to settle, and I gave the Minister proof that that was the position in Auckland. ' the Manifesto's Signatories. _ "The Minister also said 'the principal objections'seem", to come from those unions whore the secretaries are' not members of the industries affected.' As a rebuttal of this statement, directed against thoso who issued tho Trades and Labour Council's manifesto,- the following is tho position arid occupation of the signatories to that document:— "A ParJane,,President,of the Wellington Drivers' Union—a driver. . ...,"W. T.Young,, secretary of the Wellington Seamen's Union—a seaman. "W. H. Westbr'o'oke; secretary of the Coachbuilders' Union—a coachbuilder. " A. JiCaroy, secretary of the Wellington Cooks' and Waiters' Union—a waiter. ■ '• •' .

"A.. J.- Reardbn, secretary of tho General Labourers' Union—a general labourer.

.".!'. Lightfoot, secretary of the Carpenters' Union—a carpenter. "Peter L. Muir, secrotarv of tho Wellington Tailors' Union—a tnilor. ■_ "D. M'Laren, secretary'of tho Wellington Waterside Workers' Union—a •wharf labourer. . . . ■■•' "T,. J. Lyons, secretaryof'the Builders Labourers.' Union—a builders' labourer. ■ • •■ > „"{)•■ H - Cooper, secretary of the Y\ elluigton Bootmakers' Union—a bootmaker. "I would like to say that the lastmontioned on the list, though he signed tho manifesto, has taken ! no partMn the agitation.",