THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, APRIL 27, 1903. MR. JUSTICE COOPER'S JUDGMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XL, Issue 12252, 27 April 1903, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. MONDAY, APRIL 27, 1903. MR. JUSTICE COOPER'S JUDGMENT.

THE judgment of Mr. Justice Cooper on the complaints brought by the cabinetmakers' union against the Tonson Carlick Company and the D.S.C. is confined to the narrowest possible point—namely, that the complainants have not proved that the action of the two defendant companies in discharging certain of their employees was a breach fof the award given by the Court. This His Honor would no doubt say was all that was required. But the decision is a very important one. The Arbitration Act is still in the experimental stage, and many communities are looking to see whether this colony will solve a problem whic/h has hitherto puzzled the world's ablest intellects. The quest-Jon was a very awkward one to place before Mr. Cooper, for in reality it asked him to say that the judgments of the Court hitherto, instead of.' being hard and fast, could to a certain extent be modified if either of the parties were reasonably dissatisfied. It asked him to say that this award of his could be readjusted as respects a number of the men engaged in the cabinetmakirig trade if the employers were convinced that these men could not profitably be employed at the full wages which the Court awarded.

But at the same time it was quite impossible for Mr. Cooper to give any other decision than he did, for it would have been monstrous to decree by the judgment of any Court having the whole force of the colony at its back that an employer Was bound to keep a number of men at work at a loss. This was the only alternative Which Mr. Cooper had, and naturally he shrank from it. And here Ave may remark that the parties to this case carry on litigation on a very different footing. When a union considers there is a breach of an award they appeal to the Registrar to prosecute. A prosecution is commenced and is carried through to the end at the public cost, with the whole prestige of the Government on its side. The defendants have to bear their own costs, and they can obtain no costs as against the prosecutor, whatever may be the merits of the case. This is certainly an infraction of justice. Here the political influences, which are never lost sight of in the working of this Act, come into view. We doubt if the Registrar ever could resist the political pressure that could be brought to bear upon him if there was the faintest show of a case. He would have to commence proceedings, which, of course, he would do with a light heart, because the public paid all the costs on his side.

There are various immediate results of the judgment of Saturday which ought, to be considered. First, there is the case of the men who have been thrown out of work. Everyone must feel sympathy with them, because they have been misled. They appealed to the Court for a rise of wages, and they received it, and now they find themselves out of work. "And ' we believe that several of those who were discharged were not even members of the union and had nothing whatever to do with the proceedings which have placed them in the most unenviable position which a workingman can occupy. Who is to remedy their grievance 1 The Government may find some of them employment, and certainly the Government, being chiefly responsible, ought to do what it can in that direction, but it cannot accept, the task of finding occupation for every man who is thrown idle by the action of the Arbitration Court. The nonunionists are also injured in another way. No employer can give them work except at the rates specified by the Court in the recent award, and certain employers have declared that they cannot be profitably employed at that rate. These men cannot take employment at their trade under the clause in the Act which provides for the employment of men under certificate at less *than the awarded rate, because the secretary of the trade union would refuse to have anything to do with them, and would not grant them the certificate which they must have if they are to get work at a reduction on the rates obtained by the union from the Arbitration Court. For this wrong there is no remedy, and the Premier proposes to add to the hardship and wrong by; making it compulsory on every employer to give preference to unionists.;

One of , the things which appeared during the trial of the ease was the wholesale way in which the Act is evaded by the granting of certificates by. the secretary of the union to men to work under the rate fixed by the award. The secretary, of the union has been compelled to grant these freely because the men could not otherwise obtain work. ; But surely this was a result never.contemplated by theframersOf the Act. Besides ;[ the terrible position in which it J places all those not belongong to the f union, it gives an autocratic popery a i power almost of life and death to the | secretory. Two men may be badly ,| off for work; they may have employi ment offered, to them at a rate I slightly under the award. They may ! be eager to accept: But it lies with I the (secretary of the union to say {which man shall be permitted; to accept, and in which man it shall be a i crime to accept. And then those who do accept, in order to earn | wages at all, must in writing acs knowledge .themselves to be i" incompetent workmen." The secretary of

a union may J ' say to the President of the Court: "I am the ■ power which ultimately settles the rate of wages." Another evasion, is one of which several examples ;may now be found in Auckland, and that is that tradesmen, such as carpenters, engage themselves to work; as labourers at labourers' wages. They must either do this or remain unemployed. , -, The Judgment of Saturday may have one good result if it renders unions less eager than they have been to rush into litigation. ,In all probability the incessant agitation has been owing not so much to any desire on the part of the men as to the activity of those— numerous and influential— manage the business and make a living by it. These appeals may cost them very little directly, as they have the active assistance of the officers of the Labour Department and the law officers of the Crown, but there are other risks which they must learn to lake account of. One thing is most important. Every rise of wages, every shortening of hours, every restraint placed on employers tends to reduce employment. That must be evident to every man of common sense who looks around him. It will be plain enough when dull times come. It is all very well for_ the Premier to prove by official statistics that the number of factories has enormously increased, and the figures make a great show in London, but we know that that is done by reckoning as factories what have never hitherto been taken into account. It is well that the whole working and scope of the Act should be fully discussed, including the point which has recently been gone into in Christ-church, namely, how far it is responsible for the increase in the cost of the necessaries of life, which is now felt by all classes. The "statute, as we have already said, is on its trial, and how much of it may be permanently retained in force is still uncertain. The decision of Saturday adds something to our knowledge of its scope, and the lessons" taught may profitably be reflected on. The more so as it is likely to open up a rapid series of developments, the nature and outcome of which will be watched with anxiety by all who have the best interests of the country at heart.