The Lyttelton Times. WEDNESDAY, DEC. 13, 1893.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXX, Issue 10219, 13 December 1893, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. WEDNESDAY, DEC. 13, 1893 .

When- Lord Jersey, in the course of a paper read at the Imperial Institute the other day, said a word on behalf of Boards of Conciliation, he made no original suggestion, hut simply spoke what is in most men’s minds at present as to the solution of a puzzling problem. The applause which followed his Lordship’s remarks showed that his audience had been thinking out the problem, and bad agreed as to the method of solution. It is a proof of the tardy march of reform that the solution so universally approved as correct in method has not yet been put into practice. Nova Scotia has an "Act to Provide a Tribunal of Arbitration in Certain Cases,” hut it applies only to some coal mines, and its working has not yet been practically tested. In New South Wales there is also an Arbitration Act in force, the object of which is to secure a prompt and amicable settlement of industrial disputes. This Act, though of Universal application, has not yet been called into operation, though there have been several bitter and prolonged strikes in the Mother Colony since the measure became law. There is, therefore, no positive evidence of tho efficacy of legislative enactments as aids to conciliation in disputes between employers and employed, The reaeon why the New South Wales Act has been fruitless of results ia that it can only bo called into operation by both parties to a dispute agreeing to refer the matters at issue to the decision of the tribunal provided. Bor an exactly opposite reason there has been no need to call the Nova Scotian Act into requisition. We understand that either party to a dispute can there call in the aid of the Arbitration Court, and the result, as stated by the Premier of Nova Scotia, is that the very existence of the measure has prevented acute disputes arising, and has disposed the miners and j their employers to accept friendly intervention of a less formal but equally effective character. It would thus seem to be established that a measure for voluntary submission to arbitration is a dead letter on tho Statute-Book, whereas one providing for compulsory reference to a legal tribunal is an active force tending

towards conciliation- So much being proved negatively by the experience of Now South Wales and Nova i Scotia, there should be no diffi- ■ culty in arriving at the conclusion that any system of conciliation ought, in order to cover all eventualities, to have behind it compulsory arbitration at the call of either party to the dispute. In Victoria a Joint Committee of the Melbourne Chamber of Commerce and Employers’ Union has conducted a lengthened inquiry into the subject, with the result that no recommendation was arrived at. The representatives of the employers were altogether opposed to compulsory arbitration; the Committee as a whole recognised the futility or voluntary conciliation; and though the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Bill laid before the New Zealand Parliament was in some respecte recognised as a sound solution of the problem, the Committee could not agree upon recommending that measure for Victoria. It is thus left, for New Zealand to lead the way in industrial reform by carrying into effect the proposals of the Minister for Labour. There are no constitutional grounds upon which Parliament can refuse to pass the Conciliation Bill next session, and there is no reason to apprehend that the experiment will involve either risk, hardship or injustice. Human nature is the same all the world over, and if a partial measure has had the effect in Nova Scotia of preventing industrial warfare, results at least as good may be confidently expected from a more complete and comprehensive measure in New Zealand.