"THE SPIRIT OF THE ACT"

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 39, 15 August 1921, Page 8

"THE SPIRIT OF THE ACT"

TO THB EDITOR,

Sir,—Our attention has been drawn to a report of a case heard by the Court of Arbitration at Invercargill, which appears in Wednesday's Post under the heading "The Spirit of the Act," and to an article under the same heading appearing in your issue of the following day. The report and article are based en so serious a misconception of the facts that we,deem it necessary, in justice to the Judge of the Court and to ourselves, to depart from the unwritten rule under which, members of a Court refrain from replying to press criticism.

In the first place, the Court has not laid down any new principle, nor has it departed from its former practice. The War Legislation and Statute Law Amendment Act, 1918, provides that cost-of-living bonuses are to be granted in' accordance with any increase in the cost of living "since the date of the award." Now, awards are being made every week, but cost-of-living statistics covering all groups of commodities and services are available only at lialf : yearly intervals. ( It was obviously impossible to calculate increases over broken periods, and it therefore became necessary to base all calculations on the halfyearly figures. This method, moreover, had the advantage of preventing an undue weight beini; given to. purely tern-, porary and seasonal fluctuations in prices. A. literal interpretation of the Act would have rendered its provisions unworkable, and Mr. Justice Stringer, wh,o at the time it was passed was Judge of the Court, consulted a number of- the Judges of the Supreme Court \on the matter. They agreed that a strictly literal ; eSect could not be given, to the Act, but they also agreed, that the practice then and^now adopted by the Court was the correct practice, and carried into effect the intention of the Legislature. Briefly, the practice is as follows :■— Bonus increases for the p.eriods ending on 31st March and 50th September are effective from Ist May and Ist November following respectively. In any new award made between Ist May arid 31st October, or between Ist November and 30th April, the basic rates and bonuses calculated by reference to the ascertained cost-of-living figures for the half-yearly period that ended on the preceding 31st March or 30th September, as the case may be. In effect, for the reason that movements in the cost of living are not ascertainable from day to day, the Court is compelled to work on the ascertained cost-of-living figures, which, as' already mentioned, are available' only at half-yearly intervals. This practice has been in operation since the passing of the legislation of 1918 under Mr. Justice Stringer and Mr. Justice Frazer, and is thoroughly understood by the representatives' of the employers and of the workers in the centres; Apparently it has not been understood at Invercargill. In the case in question, the award was made on 28th October, 1920, a few weeks before the November, 1920, bonus was ascertained and declared. Accordingly, it fell within the category of awards in/which the rates had been calculated on the basis of, the May, 1920, rates., The Court, when making award, did not attempt to guess at the actual movement in prices between Ist April, 1920, and the date of the award; but fixed the basic wages and added a cost-of-living bonus at the May, 1920, rate. In other words, the Court, on 28th October, 1920, fixed the remuneration of the workers at the sahie rates as if, the award .had been made on Ist May, 1920, nearly six months'earlier. The • workers, having; had their rates fixed independently of any increase since the declaration of the May, 1920, bonus, were accordingly entitled to the November, 1920, bonus, and would have had it granted to them as from Ist November, 1920, if they had not omitted to make application for it'aft the proper time. Their application was not made within the six-monthly period, and the bonus v was therefore awarded from Ist May, 1921, only. The Court's/policy in regard to basing^ ite bonus calculations on a six-monthly 'moving average. has remained unchanged, since the War' Regulation Act was passed in 1918, and was reaffirmed, under Mr. Justice Stringer, in December, 1920, when the method of calculation of the November. 1920, bonus was "the subject of a considered judgment of the Court.

At the recent sitting of the Court at Invercargill, when > the application in question was being heard, Mr. Justice Frazer went out of his way to explain the practice of the Court to Sir. Grilmour, who opposed the application on behalf of the ■' Invercargill newspaper [proprietors. He made it 'perfectly clear thit no ne^ practice had been introduced, and that the existing practice had been designed to ensure a fair, uniform, and workable application of the Act.' A reasonable construction of the section demanded that the word " ascertained " should be read into it before the words "increase in the cost of living," and the Court had interpreted the Act accordingly. We are completely at a loss to understand how, such a misconception of the facts can have arisen. The views of the Judges of the Supreme Court have been garbled, and the remark regarding their opinion, attributed to Mr. "M'Cullough (the workers' representative on the Bench), was, in fact, never made by him. Mr. Scott (the employers' representative) said; however, that the Judges who had been consulted agreed that a literal interpretation of the Act was unworkable, and that they practice of the Court was the correct practice to'adopt. The impression conveyed by the report upon which your article was based is so entirely erroneous, and the suggestion that our Court has flouted the opinions of Judges of the Supreme Court is so contrary to fact] that we deem it a matter of duty to take the earliest opportunity of correcting it.—We are, etc., WM. SCOTT, •, ! Employers' Representative. J. A. M'CULLOUGH, f Workers' Representative. Arbitration Court, Christchurch, ■ 3,3 th August. i [The report referred to in the above letter was written by a reliable' journalist, who is thoroughly acquainted with legal procedure, and who was present during the hearing of the case. Before it was published we took the precaution of asking that the istatement should be corroborated, and, on receiving that direct assurance, the report was inserted, and our comments were based thereon. We are glad to publish the full statement of t!fr*Court's position on such an importa\tfmatter.—Ed.] ; . .

Strange coincidences arising out of the Great War are still mounting "up. One of the latest to 'come to light has local interest. Before he left' New Zealand the late Corporal Arthur „E. L. ("Midge") Latimer was presented with a wristlet watch inscribed : "Presented to Corpc-ral A. Latimer by the Hon. J. iA. Hanan, on behalf of the residents of Kaiwarra-. 22/3/15." Corporal La-timer was killed on Ist October, at ■ the first battle of the Somme. Recently the deceased soldier's mother ua» advised that the watch had been found in Great Win-chester-street,- London, Ivy Miss IC. Williams, of the Western Union Cible Company. The watch has since been ■ forwarded to Mrs. Latimeu by the Conimissioiier of Police. London. 'Die coincidence lies in the fact that Mrs; Laf inter is a resident of Winchester-street, Kaiwarra.