THE INDUSTRIAL WAR.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXII, Issue 4594, 24 February 1902, Page 4

THE INDUSTRIAL WAR.

Throughout the world there are evidences that the warring forces of industrialism are in a state of agitation at present. In the industrial struggle of the future, a few great countries will grapple with each other for supremacy, while one or two others will await the result in order to join issue with the conquerors in a subsequent conflict. The Russian Minister of Finance, M. de Witte, recently discussed the relative positions of the great nations in the world-wide industrial contest. “ England,” he declared* “has been hit hard

by the Transvaal war, but is still the richest country in the world; France is without initiative, satisfied with returns on past achievements; Germany shows the greatest energy and initiative in Europe, but has travelled too fast; America has an unparalleled combination of natural resources and initiative, and will go on to greater achievements.” This is perhaps as fair a sum-ming-up of the relative positions of these countries as it is possibly to form on the evidence cf their past achievements, their present condition and future prospects. But the fact that Groat Britain has consumed something like throe hundred millions sterling in the South African war, has had, indirectly, a disastrous effect upon enterprise and trade in most European countries. The general depression in Germany is attributed to the withdrawal of English loans to German firms. In Russia, to some extent, a similar state cf affairs is existent; and the war in China, involving tho raising of loans to meet the indemnity, has contributed further to the embarrassment of European industrial affairs. Along with all this there, have been strikes and lockouts on the Continent of Europe, while industrial rioting, assuming the proportions of civil war, has boon reported from various Spanish centres of industry. In Australia at the present moment the carrying trade is likely to bo impeded by a dispute raised by tho lumpers, some of whom have “ struck ” ou account of a steamer being worked by non-unionists. The unionist versus tho non-unionist is always a case difficult of satisfactory adjustment; for while the unionist is perfectly within his rights to use combination to protect his individual privileges, the non-unionist cannot be denied the right to work, provided he is capable, simply because be has held himself free from, combination with his fellows. ' Tho non-unionist seems to bo a living protest against the coercive tactics of some labour organisations. But many working men believe, rightly or wrongly, that it is only by combination they can protect themselves from the practices of unscrupulous employers; and they are ready to anathematise and obstruct tho men who dignify themselves with tho title of “ free workmen.” While the lumpers are on strike against tho shipping companies, the shearers are threatening tho Australian pastoralists with a strike unless their wages are raised. Of course, tho attitude of workmen has induced employers to form themselves into combinations, and tho fighting has frequently resolved itself into a test of monetary strength and endurance. Wherever strikes occur, disorganisation of trade and loss of capital and business invariably result. This has been tho experience of those engaged in industrial pursuits . everywhere, and in many cases it is only when employees have exhausted their resources, and boon forced to yield, that operations have been renewed. Meantime, orders placed with certain firms may have been withdrawn, and as has been shown in tho case of Great Britain recently, orders intended for British workmen have been given to foreign nations. These industrial disputes have disturbed business, contracted enterprise, and played into tho hands of Britain’s rivals in tho ’world’s trade. In those countries, like America, where trades unionism has not the same hold upon workmen as in England, industrial progress has been phenomenally rapid.

It is claimed that the conditions which unionism has imposed upon captains of industry in this country are responsible for the decline in our exports, as compared with our imports. Mr Caldwell, the retiring chairman of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, attributes this phenomenon to “ the effects of unionism and labour laws, which, however erhically right, could not fail to restrict manufacturing interests when placed in competition with other countries.” It may be argued that' those commodities which cannot bo manufactured in this country, under conditions favourable both in regard to pay and hours of labour to the workman, had better be made by foreigners and imported from abroad. But that appears to be like capitulating to rivals, and is not at all in keeping with current ideas of maintaining the British people’s industrial supremacy. Strife between capital and labour seems to be interminable. Combination is met by combination. As if to wage further war against the encroachments of unionism, the leaders in colonial industry are being urged by the Employers! Association of Christchurch to form a New Zealand federation, and adopt a common platform. What the end will bo no on© can ponfidontly predict. Industrial conciliation and arbitration, as established in this country, is in theory the tmo solution, though in practice it would seem to bo only a palliative and not a radical cure. Both employers and workmen in New Zealand have every reason to be satisfied with the condition of affairs here, when they contrast it with that prevailing elsewhere. Our labour laws may not bo perfect, but the annoyances suffered under them are but small matters contrasted with the suspension of" industry that takes place in other countries, with occasionally such concomitants as starving men into submission or training cannon upon them and shooting them down in the streets.