THE ARBITRATION LAW.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVI, Issue 14428, 19 July 1907, Page 3

THE ARBITRATION LAW.

VIEWS OF THE ATTORNEYGENERAL. [From Ottr Correspondent.] - WELLINGTON, July IS. The feature of yesterday’s proceedings in the Legislative Council was the Attorney-General’s contribution to the Address-in-Reply debate. After complimenting the Son J. Barr and the Hon J. Rigg on the views expressed on labour matters. Dr Findlay said that personally he would approach the subject of labour from an academic point ■cf view. He was not afraid of being charged with academicism. One had to recognise the .broad principles underlying the question, and he emphasised the point that the rights of the individual had to stand secondary to those of the community and the State. The two latter were paramount. We would never have a true commonwealth of labour until we looked beyond labour as a commodity, and took into account the interests of the workers themselves. No employer should be allowed to' engage help at a rate of pay that 'would destroy the moral wellbeing of the workers. In trade disputes there were not two parties, but three—the master, the man, and the State; and when the State stepped in it was not taking sides. It merely desired to protect its owe interests. Mr Rigg had said that it was without precedent that men should be imprisoned for striking. Mr Rigg : “ Where striking was made an offence, I said.” Dr Findlay said that the illustration he proposed to quote would meet Mr Rigg’s contention in every way. An Act, passed in England in 1875 governing the conduct of men employed in the municipal gasworks, gave power to imprison them where they interfered with the community or the interests of the community. This was the only reason for giving such power. He did not uphold the’ putting of men in gaol because they refused to work. Mr Bigg had said that he could not suggest a means for enforcing the awards. In his (the speaker’s) opinion there was a way out of the difficulty without resorting to imprisonment, and he believed hie view would be accepted when the time came to state it, and, at the same time, if it was absolutely necessary to enforce obedience, even by imprisonment, it should be done where the interest of the community demanded such a course. Obedience was so essential that it should be enforced. Mr Rigg: “ Can you enforce it?” Dr Findlay replied that obedience could be enforced. England had done it with the rich, and he admired tho labour man who stood next and said strikes should Cease. A man should not he compelled to work until the full measures of justice had been done to him, but when ho had received that, obedience should be looked for. The

Arbitration Act had its faults, but what Act of an experimental nature had not? The delays of the past, so far os the Court was concerned, would disappear, and with them a great deal of the dissatisfaction which existed. And what was- to bo the basis of an award? Somebody had suggested pro-fit-sharing. Then, what of the losses. There was no other basis than that suggested by Dir Barr, namely, a standard which allowed the worker to live in decency and comfort. The lining wage was the only wage that could be fixed as a minimum, hut here again he showed that difficulties arose, and a living wage for a single man was not a living wag© for a married man with a family. Some distinction, he did not know when or how. would have to he made. He hdieved a solut’on of this difficultv would yet be arrived at. He mentioned it to show the complex! tv of the whole question. People had suggested that young children should not be allowed to cell newspapers in the street. Who were these children? Often the children of the struggling journeyman or labourer, with “broken time.” Care had to be taken that nothing which would press unduly or i justly on anybody would he agreed to. The labour legislation of this country bad done more to quicken the humanitarian instincts of its inhabitants ..nan anything else. They did not want to raise class distinctions. hut to work . out , a scheme that would be for th« benefit of the great mass of the people.