The Evening Star THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1911.

Evening Star, Issue 14689, 5 October 1911, Page 4

The Evening Star THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1911.

The Minister of Labor made a very important—we might alConciliation most say a momentous—and statement when the FstiArbitration. mates of his department were under discussion in \ the House of Representatives on. AVedr.esf day morning. Ho intimated that he lad \ arrived at the conclusion that the system of Industrial Arbitration would soon be-* come a de.'.d letter unless the Supreme Court Judge who now presides in the Arbitration Court were to give way to a layman of industrial experience. Needles* to say, Mr Millar did not countenance the charges of bias and unfairness which violent partisans have directed against the President, whose conscientious desire to administer justice in an equitable spirit cannot be impugned with the slightest show of reason. He dwelt mainly on the undue etrera which, according to the Labor organisations, the President is inclined to lay upon legal technicalities; and he did not disguise hid conviction that there was come ground for this complaint. He also pointed to the unmistakably significant fact that the industrial unions, one after . another, were either cancelling their registration under the Act or debating the desirability of mtch a step; and he even Trent the length of declaring that the ■ C<mrt» a» at present constituted, was held ! i«a derision. Now, these are not the utter-

anccs of a passionately one-sided Minister (*uch as may be met with, in Australia) who virtually takes his orders from a section of the community. As Minister of Labor ho has displayed singularly judicial qualities; it is notorious that his attention to economic principle and the dispassionate way in -which he has held the balance- between opposing forces have offended many people who hoped that ho would be a partisan; and it is safe to assume that it was sorely against his will that he pronounced what may be termed the conditional doom of the Arbitration Court. Tho facts of the situation must be faced without blinking and without prejudice. Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that the industrial unions have no substantial ground for withdrawing their confidence from the Court, and that the complaint about the President's exaggerated insistence upon legal points are altogether fanciful. The .fact of the widespread and increasing disaffection still remains, and. aho the additional fact that it is hopeless to try to convince the recalcitrant unions that Ihey are in the wrong. Indeed, it ia futile to discuss the rights and wrongs cf the matter, in view of the practical certainty that within a few months (unless the present tendeney is arrested) the occupation of the Arbitration Court will practically be gone. What is to bo done?-—that is the one imperative question. It would be a thousand pitios if New Zealand's famous .mid beneficent system of Conciliation ar.d Arbitration, which has admittedly done so much in the interests of industrial peace and procrross. were to bo allowed to disappear without an earnest effort to preeerve it. Such a backward development would be specially unfortunate and incongruous when predominant opinion in the United Kingdom, among politicians of all parties, as well as among industrialists, seems tending to the adoption of a moro or lojs similar svstem. After the Minister',; candid statement wo are reluctantly constrained to admit that tho reconstitution of the Arbitration Court with a layman " of industrial experience" as President affords the only likely or possible- means of saving tho system and averting the chronic peril of strikes. We cannot profees to be confident that it would be a sure means—for it were idle to deny that tho dissatisfaction of the unions is connected with matters more fundamental than the quceiion of legal technicalities — but we think that there is a fair chanceuf succoft:, and that the experiment is worth trial. The President enjoys tho status of a Supreme Court Judge, and if his retirement from, the Arbitration Court, could b n . amicably arranged he would lose nothing either in emolument or in honor, and (if tho Government acted wit.li vigorous conviction) there should not be. much trouble about the necessary legislation. It might be difficult, but should not be impossible, to find the right man for the position. The Labor member for Wellington East appears to have spoken with shrewdness and moderation. Mr M'Laren denied that the leaders of labor were opposed to Arbitration and Conciliation. The position was that tho majority of tho unions were opposed to tho constitution of the Court and to tho formal disabilities with which, it was invested. In order to secure a.n industaial court that would be of value to tho country the basis of judgment must be equity and good conscience, and not the principles of jurisprudence. The circumstance i,j almost forgotten nowadays, but when Mr Reeves tirsrt introduced tho Conciliation and Arbitration scheme animated discussions took place en the question whether a judge or a layman ehould act as President of tho Court, and it would bo found on reference that many people who at that time advocated a legal appointment have, changed their opinions—and vice versa. We may just add that, whether the suggested attempt to save the Arbitration system iis. made or not, Mr Millar should bo encouraged to use his utmost endeavors to preserve, and extend the activity of the Condlialion Commissioners. Even if Arbitration had '. to go. Conciliation might still survive, on official as well -as informal lines.