OUR AUSTRALIAN LETTER

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 276, 14 August 1908, Page 9

OUR AUSTRALIAN LETTER

— NEWS AND NOTES ON THE WEEK. THE "UNION LABEL." ' (from our special correspondent.) " 1 Sydney, August B.' ' The "Union Label" has gone the way of the" "New Protection"—it has been thrown out by tho High Court this week. These two decisions constitute a severe blow to the Labour party, as well as to tho'Deakin Government, which is supported by that party. Tho Federal. Parliament has under the Constitution tho right to pass trade mark legislation ; but the question ■ at issue in this second case was whether those provisions of the Commonwealth Trade 1 Marks Act which provide that goods manufactured by labour unionist workmon should be so labelled, is constitutional, The High Court has now decided' that they are not.

The,case, which was argued at great length, before tho Court in March and. April last, was. brought by tho Attorney-General of New South Wales at and by relation of four brewory companies carrying on business in this State, the companies being joined as plaintiffs, while the defendants were the Brewery Employees'. Union. The plaintiffs appealed for a declaration that tho workers' label was not a trade mark within the meaning of tho Act. In a long judgment on Tuesday, Sir Samuel Griffith, the Chief Justice, having explained what is meant by the term "trade mark," said that Parliament could not, by calling something else by that name, create a now and different kind, of industrial property. It was contended by the defendants that any. individual worker was entitled to acquiro a right to a trade mark as a pro-, prietary right, and was free to use the mark or not to use it upon goods upon which ho wprked, as ho thought fit, subject to any express contract between him and the owner of the goods. His Honour did not think that the enactment in Section 75 that tho association should be deemed to be the registered proprietor of the workers trade mark was effectual to create a new sort of property. It. was not suggested that the respondent Union was a trading body,'- and it had never been decided that a trade union could engage in trade. The unions might perhaps stipulate that no persons other than members of the union should be employed in the production of certain goods, and that the mark should bo put by tho owners upon the article before sale; but this was entirely different from tho right of dominion involved in the concept of a trade mark. The workers' trade mark merely indicated _ that certain persons— namely, non-unionists —had not been engaged iii tho production of tho articles, just as a itiark might indicate, that no Asiatics or coloured persons had been so engaged. Such a distinction, however desirable ,in itself, could not have been'effected by a trade mark'' as the term was Understood in 1900. Tho Chief Justico further considered that these provisions of tho Act not only did not conform in any r'cspect' to the concept of a trade mark as used in the Constitution, but that tliey represented an attempt to regulate the internal trade of the. States. In his opinion, tho whole of part 7 of tho Act was invalid. Justices Barton and O'Connor concurred, /but Justices Isaacs and Higgins dissented:- By a jriajority, therefore, the Court set aside the union label as unconstitutional. Now some of. the members of the Labour party are talking of amending)the Constitution, just as they suggested this after the New Protection decision;

THE POWERS OF THE INDUSTRIAL COURT. Has Parliament, even though it is supposed to bo a law unto itself, tho right to give an inferior Court absolute jurisdiction, conferring upon its judgments an immunity from challenge' by appeal -to a higher Court? This is the important question involved in a case before the Full Court of New South Wales, the tribunal • which corresponds to tho Appeal Courti in> Npjy^.Zealand,jon-.Thurs-.! day. The no^-jndpstml^.Court, ji'hicli/hijg ■been- established',,to iiia'ke:F,ti]"o l Court of Arbitration is constituted under an Act,. the: 53nd section. of which is as follows:—...V .. .V 1,:...: ... 1 .... Any decision'of the Industrial Court' shall bo final, and shall not bo removable to any othor Court ,by certiorari "or ' othonvise ;.'and no award, order, or proceeding of the Court shall be vitiated by reason'only if any informality or want of form, or be liable to be challenged, appealed _ against, reviewed, quashed, or called in question by any Court of Judicature on any account whatsoever, and the validity of any decision shall not be challenged by prohibition or otherwise.

The last part of this section, " and tho validity of any decision shall not be challenged by prohibition or otherwise,"' were inserted as an addition to tho original clause of the old Act constituting the Court of Arbitration, when the new Bill was before Parliament, and the object attempted to bo thus gained was to put a stop to tho delays which have attended the work of adjusting' industrial disputes by reason of tho frequent appeals from tho decisions of' the' Arbitration Court. But the question that now arises is whether Parliament has not gone too far,, arid exceeded its rights under, the Constitution. This, at any rate, was the point raised by tho Chief Justice and another of the Judges in this case. The Shore Drivers and Firemen's Union, having applied to the Industrial Court last month for tho appointment of a Wages Board without election to consider matters affecting their industry, counsel for -the colliery proprietors of Newcastle, tho respondents, objected that the Court had no jurisdiction to grant such an application. Judgo Heydon, the President of the Court, overruled this objection, deciding that ho has jurisdiction, and fixed Auglst 10 as tho date on, which tho application would bo hoard. Against this decision the colliery proprietors now appealed to the Full Court. Mr.'Justice Print* expressed tho view that as the words alluded to took away the King's perogative, they wore absolutely ultravvires. The Bench camo to' the conclusion that the Court could not deal with the application, in view of the terms of the Act, and tho appeal was therefore dismissed. As to tho main point involved, -however, namely, whether it is competent for Parliament to pass such a law, the Judges preferred to give no definito ruling at present. But it' is a subject which is sure to crop up again later on, and it will have to bo decided. Perhaps the colliery proprietors will take the matter to the High Court.

THE BOXING MANIA. Boxing is no cloubt. a very desirable and healthy accomplishment, but when, may it bo asked, does the Australian propose to roL things into their right proportion?' Tliii week, in Sydney, we had a public welc'omo to Squires, a pugilist. Ido iiot know Squires, and probably lie is in his way an' estimable citizen—so far as citizenship goes nowadays; but why a public welcome ? There are numberless other men who are more entitled to one, and have not yet got it. One of tho Rhodes scholars, for instance, returned to his State the other day, but the State did not turn out and meet him with a motorcar at tho railway station, and bring him to a city hotel, to be talked to in eulogistic phrases by well-known citizens. Squires has come to Sydney to fight Burns, and for tho purpose a huge stadium, covering an area of about 70,000 square feet, and said to bo the largest of its kind in the Southern Hemisphere, is being constructed at Rushcutter's Bay. This big building is to be used for various amusements, but high prices are to be charged for the Bums-Squires exhibition —£5, £3, £2, and £1. Hence the gathering will be quite exclusive. Incidentally, it was mentioned by Mr. O'Sullivan, M.L.A., at tho reception to Squires, that when ho was Minister of Public Works he found billets for no less than seven champion, athletes. So that boxing appears to bo not only desirable generally, but an important qualification for a . man seeking to enter tho public service. ; Altogether muscle is a better asset than brains. On landing at Fremantlo on Tuesday Burns was greeted by the Mayor of the town. Meanwhile, with these two stars, ■ Burns and Squires, on Australian soil, the American Fleet is suffering a temporary eclipse.

THE STRIKE OF JOURNALISTS. The representatives of the Press who refused to rouort the proceedincs of tho West

Australian Parliament until thoy were given some satisfactory piacs in which to do their work have stood to their "uns, with the result that the reports of the present session appearing in the daily newspapers have been tho shortest oil record., for which relief perhaps the general readers, on their side, may exclaim "'Much thanks!" Anybody who has had to wade through tho report of an Address-in-Reply debate knows what a fine, interesting story it generally makes. Moreover, . the session is to finish very quickly, apparently another desirablo result of tho strike. It may be that members of Parliament are very pinch like other human beings, and cut their speeches short when they find they are not being reported. : Anyway, there is the fact, that the session is to come to a speedy end. . As a result of the hubbub they have caused, the Press representatives will probably gain next' session what thoy have asked for. : The House Committee, which has so far refused their request, ivas elected only last week, but' tho Premier, Mr. Moore, has given a clear indication that its personnel will bo' altered when the opportunity occurs. • Some amusing messages from fellow-journ-alists have been received by. the strikers. Ono from F romantic expresses. cheerful sympathy "as sorrowful readers of the debates 011 the Address-in-Reply," and continues:— "You may draw upon us for any amount, but wait till Friday." From Port Hedland, in the north-western corner of West Australia, where there is a small weekly paper, comes the telegram: "In sympathy with your strike; we have gone • ut, and refuse to report local meetings.—(Signed) Staff of tho Port Hedland 'Advocate.' " The staff of the paper is believed to consist of fully one man.