Untitled

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 5949, 30 September 1890, Page 2

Mk G-koeuk HowEii has been a consistent defender of trades unions, and his work " The Conflicts of Capital and jbnbor," as

an exposition of the principles of trades unionism, is the recognised text book on the subject. Now what does he say a.s to the coercion of uou-uuionieU '( On page If Swe

rend; —"Tho first essential principle of trades unions is that they whiill bo purely voluntary—upon no other basis could they legally or possibly exist; a man must have perfect liberty either to join or refrain from joining any such society according_ to his taste or inclination, aiid'no justification can be offered for any attempt to violate, tho first condition of luomborship. Coercion is uot only a violation of law, but it w also contrary to morals: the Imv is jealous of any interference with tho personal liberty of the subject, and rightly so, for absolute freedom is tho right of every citizen m a free state." Again at page 3ob he says :— " Tr-icle unions are voluntary associations of workiiiKMon for .special and specific pur,,oxes and if they, by their pickets or by • ny o'lher me«iw, iranKgress this voluntary principle, it becomes ut our.o an infraction ~f tho'very m-inoiplo of their existence, and ■ t violation of tho iirat element in their rharaoter. Coercion omd>t never, therefore, W form a part of their mode of i.iw.-odlire, or be U«d as * weapon in 1 heir labor r u'-k«" On page -Ml we ft.-.d the follvTwin-'—"lt bewwjM i<» intoleriu.lo re < Mvrauuy m tho,o who u l,«uor l<.r ust and enual W, aud who arc so sensive eve v ant on tho part of the Uovernm«,t or of LpUw if they .seek to impose ■onditions by coercive means upon those £XU *»* r h ° h n an Tf right with tl.fin.s.Jv C e to <lo or forbear to do ami winch tho law anil tho constitution finction and coniiuun seuso approves." As lviriinlH unionist* refusing to work with uon-uuiouJßts the writer speaks hie

mind as follows on page 366:— •' Tho refusal to work with a non-unionist workinau is ono of tho rocks (ahead) of trade unions. Tho practice cannot 'bo defended either on social or political grounds, and the sooner it is altogether abandoned tho botter. It is a strange faot, but true nevertheless, that some of those who prate the loudest; about political freedom are tho stoutest defenders of this anachronism. The common sense of tho majority of unionists will noon consign a policy of this kind to tho limbo of the mst, us it has dono in the caso of opposition to machinery and many other matters." Here, tho most sympathetic writer on tho subject, ono who i.s recognised in England, tho home of trades unions, us the highest authority, lays down the law, and yet we find the edicts of tlw Maritime Council are totally opposed to tho leading principles thus enunciated. We Hee that in those colonies wo havo departed from tho fundamental principles which resulted in trades unions bninjr v power in England. We havo scon that our no-called .unionist lu'ulurs here aim n Mow at civil liborty.