TOPICS OF THE DAY

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 90, 13 October 1914, Page 6

TOPICS OF THE DAY

Last night the Opposition had a notion that it was a detective who Seamen’s had caught the Minister Votes. for Marine in an attempt to smuggle a “ Fisher Preservation Bill” through an unsuspicious, unsophisticated Legislature. However, there was not much concealment in the bud of the Bill, of which one feature reveals itself plainly to Wellington citizens without a finger-sign. In introducing this Legislature Amendment Bill, Mr. Fisher explained the provisions by which seamen would be obliged to cast their votes in the electorates which contain their shore homes, and if they are not so “ doiijiciled ” in any electorate, they must vote in the district containing the Customhouse at their home port. Opposition critics contended that Mr. Fisher, fearing the vengeance of seamen, was trying to push them into Wellington North. In their eagerness to heckle the Minister, the impetuous banterers overlooked the bad basis of the law which demands amendment, even if the right method has yet been •found. In 1911, Mr. W. T. Young (secretary of the Seamen’s Union), a candidate for Wellington Central, was able to play a part of petty potentate with a loose law which suited his purpose., Numbers of eeatueii were privj-

leged to register for any one of the six electorates in and around Wellington, and, of course, Wellington Central was the harbour for many a mariner whose interests there were solely of a personal or political kind. Since, then much has happened—including the waterside strike of • last year. In the public interest, the Shipping and Seamen Act had to be suspended to enable paralysed transport trade to regain vitality.. Seamen, who have the benefit of special legislation, decided to strike in “ sympathy ” with watersiders who broke their agreement. Seamen, with no grievance as. an excuse, inflicted much loss and inconvenience on the community by allowing themselves to be lured into idleness; and when they had the ships tied up to wjiaryes or anchored off shore they called maledictions on the Minister who did his duty to the general public in helping to restore full activity to the mercantile marine. Threats of retaliation at the next elections were made, and apparently arrangements were in train to concentrate a maximum’ of votes on Wellington Central. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Minister has no desire to be a meek victim to his enemies’ passion for revenge. He naturally wishes to prevent an unfair massing of seamen's votes in one constituency; he does not pretend to' be indifferent to the deliberate attempt to “ smudge him out ” by the use of that peculiar power of vote-manipulation permitted by the present law. Can he be blamed for that attitude? Is there any reason why he should be ashamed of an endeavour to defeat the machinations of the voteconcentrators? We can hardly imagine a difference of opinion among reasonable men as. to the need of- reform, although variance can occur on proposed methods. Mr. Fisher is inclined to approve a suggestion, made last night, that the seamen in question should record their votes in the districts where they signed their articles. This plan may have its own disadvantages, but it seems to be preferable to the proposed amendment of a defective law.

Within a year of the day, 22nd October, 1913, when the waterWatereide side strike began, memLabour bers of the old union Groups. have regained complete

control of the new union, which was built up on a foundation of arbitration. The struggle for the mastery has never slackened, but supremacy has not. come to the ex-strikers as easily as their leaders predicted when the “stop-workers” returned to the wharves. There is one comfort for tho public in the present turn of events. Observers who speak with knowledge of the waterfront say that the power will be held by moderates of the original union—men who have satisfied themselves, by a try-out, that reckless, unreasoning Red Federalism is a nuisance and an injury to Labour as well as to the whole community. It was a common belief—not disproved—a. year ago that moderates of the Waterside Union had allowed themselves to be dominated by a noisy, truculent minority, and that the manipulation of the union was a mockery of democracy, a travesty of majority rule. That strike should be a life-long lesson for men who are more interested in steady, honest , work, at a fair wage, with good conditions, than in tiresome irreconcilable militancy. They have learned the danger of apathy, or indifference, in regard to the management of their union affairs, and they nave paid dearly for that foolish neglect by which the .control passed x to extremists, with a fatal ability to antagonise the public as Well as the employers. Events have prov- - ’ ed forcibly that moderate Labour has to be on guard against certain types of leaders who seem to have a keener zest in industrial war, without honour, than in peace, with honour.