INDUSTRIAL PEACE MOVEMENTS.

Evening Star, Issue 19778, 31 January 1928, Page 6

INDUSTRIAL PEACE MOVEMENTS.

In the course of an address at Melbourne a few days ago Sir Robert Horne reviewed the economic pioblems in Great Britain, showing how greatly industry had been affected by strikes, and how prosperity in the United States followed tho recognition of the economic fact that the interests of Capital and Labor were identical. Sir Robert Horne is one of the greatest authorities on industrial questions. He is a director of some big commercial corporations in London, and in bis political capacity lias been respectively Minister of Labor, President of the Board of Trade, and Chancellor of the Exchequer. There is nothing new in what he said, but be reiterates what other speakers and writers have proclaimed in a way that is likely to command attention. His remarks are particularly appropriate at a moment when the effects of peace in industry are being revealed. At a meeting in London recently of the Associated Chambers of Commerce the speakers strongly emphasised the need of the curtailment of expenditure and costs of production, dwelling on tho handicaps to trade through taxation, high freights, higher wages, and shorter hours. This is good counsel, but there are other factors that need stressing as well, such as conservative methods among British manufacturers and traders that give unnecessary opportunities to their American and Continental rivals. At tho meeting referred to the opinion was expressed that tho people of the Empire might look forward to a time of flowing trade. There arc certainly indications of much improved conditions during the coming year. The chairmen of two of the big banks have spoken in optimistic terms of the prospects for 1928, and the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, in the course of a speech in London, declared that the activity in the home markets was greater than it ever had been before, and the export industries were successfully meeting foreign competition. He added that there were probably more people employed in Great Britain to-day than ever before in the history of the country. On occasions previously it seemed as if Britain was about to extricate herself from tho difficult position in which she found herself in the post-war years, but the strike# that intervened were an effectual bar to progress. It may be that tho futility of these great industrial upheavals has been brought home to the workers, and realisation come that more can be gained by conciliation and negotiation than by the crude method of direct action. Certainly a more reasonable spirit now prevails, and from what has occurred recently at Home, and in some degree in Australia, the Labor extremists of the type of Mr A. J. Cook now carry less weight than those of the more moderate section, of which Mr J. H. Thomas is an indefatigable representative. According to figures quoted by the British Minister of Labor, the number of working days lost last year in Great Britain through industrial disputes was the lowest for the whole of the period of forty years for which statistics are available. The Minister added that there were 500,000 more men and women employed in tho insured trades than there were four years ago, and there was an immense increase in

the number of days worked.’ To this satisfactory state of things may be attributed in no small degree the improved trade position to-day, which was tersely illustrated by the Prince of Wales in his speech at Birmingham: “ Despite the handicap under which work was started at the end of 1926, when many markets were temporarily lost, we have really wiped out all the deficit, and started on the up grade again.” Strong efforts are being made in Great Britain to maintain peace in industry, one of the most notable being the conference of employers and trade unionists at Burlington House, at which the proceedings were described as being frank and friendly. Mr A. J. Cook was responsible for the only jarring note by expressing the cramped view so familiar with men of his typo: “I declare that co-operation and good-will are impossible while the workers are victimised.” Die-hards, irreconcilables, and Communist propaganda make the task of maintaining industrial peace one of the greatest difficulty; but if the moderate leaders among the men can combine with fair-minded employers it should be possible to devise methods which would greatly reduce the risk of serious industrial conflicts.