SYNDICALISM IN BRISBANE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 65, 16 March 1912, Page 2

SYNDICALISM IN BRISBANE.

THE CASE OP THE PRINTERS. There were many stiealcs of pathoa about the wretched general strike at Brisbane, but about the thickest odo concerns the men of tho Government Printing Office (remarks a writer in tho Sydney^ Bulletin). They were fairly wellpaid, und 3or>io of them wero well up in years, with a long record of service. These had accumulated oertuih rights, such u& leave of abseuoo and retiring allowances, lind tho younger uiutnbere of tho Bervioo had prospects of tho same son. They had no quarrol with thoir omployor. Thoy weren t renponsible for tha doings of Tramway Manager Badger and his priyato enter jinse trams. They couldn't influence him, esoept by walking home instead of patronibing his vehiolea. There wasn t the slightest reason to believe that anything they oould do would suppt-ass ™ m any way, or help his employ eon. Badger was a stubborn private oiusen managing a private company, and the idea that pressure could be brought to bear on him because the Government printer* stopped the publication of Hansard and the Government Gazette and tho electoral rolls was Utterly childish. A. sort of general pressure may be brought to bear on the community by Stopping its supply of bread and beef— it may be made Tb angry that it will either kill tha strike leaders or kill Badger—but the idea of driving it to desperation by stopping its Government Ganetfce was the la6t possible folly. Still the printers were "called out" on an utterly purposeless campaign, and thereby the money they might otherwise have been able to subscribe to help other strikers was lost. Even those who were toO old to have much hope of finding new employment elsewhere were ordered to throw up their billets, and sacrifice not only their wages, but the benefits on which they depended for their declining years. They opuldn't have much hope of future conciliation, for the act of dropping their tools without any grievance of their own, and simply because one private employer had a row with his own private employees, was a, purposeless ttnd exasperating declaration of war. They, woron't consulted per medium of tho ballot as to whether they wanted to go out} they wero simply bidden to' go as if they were dogß or worms or slaves. If Digby Denham had attempted such a gig&ntio act of autocratic rule hx this 20th century— well, his Tory friends 'would have said that it wgs just the way they would like to rule If the thing wero possible, but all the same thoy would probably have deoided that Den' ham was very mad indeed, and would have fldd from him to avoid sharing his downfall. Yet if the printers had refused to come out they Would have ranked as "soabß" and suoh-like unpleasant things. They loft work, and tney had hardly left before' the tutiie Strike Committee realised that it was all a mistake— that they wero doing no good by being out, and that the best thing thuy could do was to go back, again. It had no strike pay to offer thsfli, and no valuable advice to tenuer. It doesn't teem to nave had the common decency to tender an apology. Now a lot of the printers are back in ft casual sort of way, but their position Booms temporary and indefinite They haven't oven tho satisfaction of knowing, as did the Victorian rauway men", whose .movement failed so untortunately a few years ago, that they came to grief 'in pursuit of their own legitiraftto quarrel. They rushed into trouble through their magniiictmt but misguided loyalty to leaders who were so unspeakably incompetent a» to think they could coerce a very high-handed private boss by stopping tho publication of dry official htatißtics. They wont down because these leaaert ttruolc the brilliant idea that the best way to promote unionism it to make the employer 6f union labour the tirst victim, ana to make him a victim *eVon thoUtfh he may observe union conditions to the letter, and give no cause for complaint whatsoever. . , , The Government printers have now two chances before them. One is the advent of a Labour Government, which will put them back? on thßir old footing. The ' other is that Digby Denham may not be so harsh a produce merchant as many people imagine. And the case is on<s in which it would certainly pay 'Denhum not to bo a harsh produce merchant.