The Dominion. FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 1908. THE GOVERNMENT AND THE STRIKE.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 169, 10 April 1908, Page 6

The Dominion. FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 1908. THE GOVERNMENT AND THE STRIKE.

- ; —■ « ' Most.people have suspected that the public silence of the Government during the Blackball strike has covered a great deal of private . negotiation between the Ministry and the strikers. We were given a hint of .this' some weeks 'ago, when there escaped from secrecy a portion of a telegram in which , the Minister issued a threat to the. men, and portion of the neat and defiant retort of the strikers. To-day 'we print further evidence of the Government's subterranean negotiations with law-breakers who should have been, prosecuted in public. The Government has so shamefully neglected its' plain duty, and has so completely subjected the maintenance' of law and order to the maintenance of political relations with Labour, that hardly

anything that can happen now can bring its administration of the Arbitration Act into further discredit. The circumstances of the telegram which Mr. Tregear-dispatched to the Blackball Miners' Union on March 25, however, aro so extraordinary that they demand the attention of the public. .When the strike first began, proceedings should have been immediately instituted against the offenders and the union, but there would have beotn nothing against the contemporary institution of mediatorial negotiations by the Government. The Labour Department might well have made an effort to effect a cessation of hostilities, and it could have ( discovered in two or three day's whether anything could be done in this way. Failing a rapid settlement, the : Department should have withdrawn entirely into its official shell, and thenceforward meddled with the affair only to enforce the law; ; But what was it that actually happened? The Department, continued its negotiations f(\f; days and weeks, although the law 1 had long previously been subjected to outrageous affronts of the strikers and their union. On! March 25, about a month after the trouble began, Mr, Tregear was still engaged in secret negotiations with the law-breakers. Apparently the Government had previously been negotiating witli the men behind l ' the backs of the public : and the -law for Mr. Tregear gave tlie men' notice that " the Ministers- will not move after the ■manner"in which their former approach .was m.et .without having a. guarantee of the union, through its executive,, that any arrangement made by them would be adhered to," : Mr... Tregear went on. to outline a'basis for agreement, _ and jaid great, Stress 'upon the necessity .for. .'secrecy: . '' TJif matter need not be made public, in' any ,way. In fact., it would' be an .entirely private arrangement, and one thrft would be expected to be confidential so far as the Press is •.concerned."'""'-Had-' this been Written at. the beginning of the trouble, nobody'could have'cojnplained of'the Secretary's desire' for secrecy. Indeed, ,-Secrecy; would have beenjwise and proper in 'such circumst'ances ; but it; Has an ugly and- unsatisfactory l , look in' a "telegram dispatched • weeks after the ' beginning, of'the strike , find ;';the reduction of the Act to ajnullity. Especially •. is <it unsatisfactory in conjunction with the 'subsequent sentences of ? this extraordinary.'telegram.:^'• .The Government, Mr.': Tregear said, would give " very easy' .terms;'' for' the, payment of.the fine, And,-as if thaf';wer6: not - sufficient to . a'sgurpi. the men ''thai' they,had the warmest sympathy of the Department, .law-breakers though they were, \ lie ' continued" Personally, I urge you to accept because I not only feel that you will gain;nearly all.the benefits for' whicli', the strike was instituted," but also because he believed impossible that the mine would'be shut down. .' . The'passage last quoted was a plain assurance to the-strikers that: tlie Government, 'ora| any rate the Dep'artliiental head of -an important - State Department, was desirous that the men should /reap' profit from their revolt' against the law. That the official re3poiisible. for thd of tl\e' la\v, which proscribes".a strike a's. an offence should have allowed himself to use language- implying that \a ' strike could liave a defensible object is bad enbiigli; it 'is -worse- that he should commit the Government to coopefation with the strikers 'in • achieving the' object for, .which they broke the ■ law. It is small wonder, -if this was the attitude of the Labour Department throughout it's seci-et endeavours, that the: men should!'have cfist -aside' every consideration''iii- their obstinate defiance of the Act : and.their arrogant refusal to be J content, with anything short of an -'abject;' surrender, by the Company. If the determined, silence of the Government in the face of the strongest censures of an outraged public opinion left the strikers unconvinced of the . fidelity of their friend the Government, the last doubt must liave been dispelled, when Mr. Tregear. secretly assured them in, effect that their, defiance of the haw 'would have the desired object. Mr. Tregehr'a tele-1 gram was a: model of . indiscretion .in so: far as it encouraged the <m'en'to palter'with a law that had been dethroned in favour of surreptitious negotiation. In so far. as f it. contained no word, of reproof,' but an actual admission, by inference; that the Department, apprdved; that 'the strike' should. succeed 1 in its object, the telegram was' simply scandalous. If Mr.' Tregear was acting under Ministerial instructions, either general or particular, it iflalc'es tlie position so much the worse. Fur,'their revelations may •be expected as time goes on, but we can'think of non'e ■that can much further' increase the heavy btirden of the Government's'discredit. What more could possibly be 'required than this latest; evidence that the custodians of the law have not only unprotestihgly witnessed a gross revolt against justice and public order, but have given the law-b'reakers encouragement under the rose?