THE OSBORNE JUDGMENT

Evening Star, Issue 14524, 28 November 1910, Page 1

THE OSBORNE JUDGMENT

Whether the coming G-eneral Election will or will not give Mr A.«quitli the right io introduce on behalf of llic Government, and the power io put thiough Parliament, his pro]x)sa!s lor meeting tlie deadlock that threatened between the Liberals and the Labor party, they are probably the best that could ho made .shoit of complete submission to the truculent demands of the extremists who march under Mr Keir Hardie's banner. What (he Government were called'upon to do was lo make such provision as would enable trade unions lo include in I heir object.- the right of seeming their own parliamentary and municipal representatives, and to pay for their support out of their own funds, and, at the same lime, to gnu id the rights of those members who objected to subscribe towards the maintenance of parliamentary representatives wiih whose political views they disagreed or. in the language of 'The Times' and the 'Spectator,' detested. Mr Asquilh bad an exceedingly difficult task, and he appears to have met. it fairly well, (hauling the right of Trade Union representation in Parliament (and no one seriously questions such right I, and granting, 100, the further right of the individual trade unionist lo give or lo withhold financial aid towards a purely political claim, it. is obvious that the mere payment of members does not solve the whole of the problem. What ihe kibor paity generally demand is the right to use trade union funds as the majority shall decide; what the minority, and equity, and common fairness, and, finally, the law, as set forth in the Osborne judgment, contend is that ii trade union has no such light. It is apparent, therefore, that this notorious judgment involves considerations of public policy as well as pure law. Jt must also be rememljercd that -no two of the six famous Judges who were responsible for the judgment reached their decision in exactly the .same way. All were agreed that compulsory trade union levies for the return and support of membeis of Parliament were illegal, but, the conclusion why they were illegal was ailived at by different routes. Sober critics of the judgment are at one a.s to its soundness, but some, like the members of the Asquilh Government, go a step or two further—thai is to say, they regard it from Ihe standpoint of public policy, and conclude that it ought to be amended by legislation. The Labor view, as represented by the Labor Congress, Mr Ramsay Macdonald, Mr Keir Hardie, and their .special Press organs, is wild, undisciplined, and anarchic. They bounced ami hectored in too characteristic a fashion, and were as ruthless as the most maligned of Russian Czars in the pains and penalties thev promised to mete out to all trade unionists who dared lo dissent from their ultimatum. This spirit is plainly and significantly expressed in a lecent number ui ihe •Labor Lead-".' -sV.-u < r-mriienling on the resolutions approved by the Trade Union Congress: It may therefore be taken as read that, if signs of redress are not speedily _forthcoming, the Judge-made law will be delied'; (hat, injunctions or no injunctions, the funds of trade unions will be utilised for political purposes. If incarceration should result, then so much the belter for the Labor jurly, and so much ihe worse for their opponents. Should the persecution of l,abor leaders and representatives take place, it may be predicted with confidence that the whole Labor movement won id be worked up to the hist pilch of wrath, that the organised army of Labor would advance as one man. and that the next election will show some striking results, especially in view of the militant spirit of unrest now manifesting itself in the industrial sphere. When ihe atmospheie is charged with electricity it requires but the slightest meteorological < lunge to bring <jj. a thunderstorm. We have little doubt that (he next election will show some "striking results." but h.tidly of the kind that the writer of this bombastic, lawless fustian assumes. Since his effusion was given to the world there has been a bye-election at Walthamslow—the verv source and centre of the events 1 hat led" ii]i to the Osborne judgment and WalUnunstow returned by an increased majority the candidate who would not pledge, himself to the Labor party's demands. 'lhe Congress committed itself to a serbs -i-l statements that could not be maintained when judicially tested. It had allirmed thai the Osborne judgment:l) Makes il impossible I'oi trade union blanches to join in the work of the local liade councils, and strike* at the. freedom of discussion enjoyed by the Tiade Union Congress when taking political action in tin-'interest of wage-eanieis : (2) denies the right, of Hade unions to carry out their nominal statutory purpose of icgu- [ biting the ivlations between employer i iiud employed by parliamentary action; and '7>i deprives trade unions of a right enjoyed for nearly fifty years, and ouly exi'icised with the approval of their members and io tin: advantage of the community, and it demands the restoration of these rights. The judgment, we need not say. does nothing of the kind, trade unions have still tin- same power to attempt lo induce Parliament to legislate according lo their wishes as ail oilier corporations and individuals have, but they have never had the power lo regulate Ihe relations; between employers and employed by parliamentary action. Their lliiid claim, if true, has oi.lv been so lor ten, not fifty, years, though as a matter of fact the Courts have never accepted it. Such is a. summary of the. legal answers lo the chums of the J.<abor jKirfy and the Trades Union Congress, and if the legal weie the final decision there would be nothing more lo say. Put it is not. What has been termed "public jioliey" enters largely into the effect of the judgment, an<l constitute.* the disturbing and serious luetov. Ii such he the law, says the leader, then we will defy ;!•; and when, in less omphalic but equally determined tones, this is echoed by some forty-six members of Parliament, with a distinctly noticeable, sympathetic feeling among the more radical elements of the Government's own following, somo sort of remedial legislation has to I>© brought down. Therefore, while Mr Asquith says that Ihe judgment must stand, he adds: Trade unions may establish a separate fund for political purposes by means of a separate levy, and apart from the general fund. What Mr Hai'die imagines he could gain had his own rash counsels been accepted by his fellowmembers only Mr Hardie knows. His party were wise in their day and gvnera-

lion when they approved the Prime Minister's oifer. ]n any event they cannot Joee, and should the balance of parties after the election lie much the same as it i< now they may. a.s the ' Daily Mail' observes, succeed in making these optional levies eompul.sory. They made the C'amp-bell-Banneiman Government swallow the leek over their Trade Disputes Hill, and they may repeat the operation with equal success mxt year. Whether their amendments are in the interests either of the nation or the individual i.». however, another matter. We should >ay that the victory gained in the House of Commons in 1906 on behalf of "peaceful picketing"' is, if its pradiea.l exposition in theßhondda Valley and the village of Ton-y-pandy can be accepted as a eriterion, one of which the Government thai made it po>sible haw reason to be ashamed.