The New Zealand Times. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1913. THE HUNTLY STRIKE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8558, 22 October 1913, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1913. THE HUNTLY STRIKE

Tho fashion is growing amongst those not engaged in manual labour of regarding every strike, no matter from what cause it may arise, as frivolous and unreasonable. It would be a mistake to adopt this attitude towards the trouble that has arisen between tho Taupiri Coal Company and its employees until tho public mind is satisfied, by careful and disinterested investigation, that the company was fully warranted in the course it has pursued of dismissing sixteen of its employees. The men allege victimisation as the reason why five hundred of them have suddenly ceased work and stopped operations at the mine. On the other hand, the Chairman of Directors absolutely denies victimisation, and asserts that the men have been dismissed solely because there is no work for them; that with the approach of warm weather there is a diminishing demand for coal; and that in reducing hands the company is simply following its practice in former years. This certainly sounds very reasonable and moderate. If it is correct,- and there is no victimisation, the sympathy of the public will certainly be with the Tanpiri Coal Company. But the story of Mr Alison only stands good until the other side has been told, and then it is entitled to equal weight, and certainly no more and no less. Now, it is somewhat unfortunate for tho statement put forward by the Chairman of Directors that tho men allege that since sixteen of their comrades were dismissed fourteen new hands have been taken on. This may or may not he true, hut if it is a fact the suggestion of victimisation becomes conclusive evidence. Under such circumstances, if further new hands were engaged after the sixteen were dismissed, we say unhesitatingly that the Huntly miners were compelled to resort to the extreme measure of a strike. There are certain other statements on tho side of® tho miners that are entitled to some weight. It is alleged that three of the men dismissed were officers of the union j that one of them was the check inspector, whose duties were to see that proper precautions were taken to protect life and limb; and that some of them have had many years of service, one having been employed as long as thirteen years. There is direct conflict of testimony between these two statements of the case, and, in view of the momentous issues involved, we put it to the Minister for Labour that the situation is one calling for personal consideration and intervention on his part. The dispute is a serious one, threatening farreaching consequences. Already, it has involved five hundred men, who have voluntarily relinquished their employment, and may lead to a deplorable dislocation of trade, besides the possibility of eventually extending to other branches of industry. For these and other reasons, not the least of which as the hardship and privation that may he caused to the wives and children of those most immediately concerned, we sincerely hope that prompt inquiry will be made into the grievances of the men with a view to a peaceful settlement before the breach has widened too far to admit of diplomatic and equitable intervention. It is fitting that this inquiry should be made in the first instance by tho Prime Minister, who is also the Minister for Labour, because the district in which the trouble has arisen is on the boundary of his own electorate, and also because he has undertaken to see that Labour in future shall receive a square deal. If the statement of the case made by the Chairman of Directors of the Taupiri Coal Company is a correct one. tho grievance of tho men cannot be regarded as so serious as to warrant a strike, although there is still much to explain in the fact that hands who had served the company for a period of years were singled out for dismissal. But if the statement of the Chairman is not a correct one, and if fourteen now hands were engaged after the dismissal of tho sixteen, it becomes the duty of tho authorities to interfere in the interests of these men and their families. There is a sound principle of justice at stake in this matter. These men who have struck are either right or wrong in the statement they have made. If they are right, it is

difficult to see what other course they could have followed than tho extreme one they have adopted. It must bo remembered that their 'circumstances are exceptional. Tho only industry at Huntly that offers employment to these men is the Tenpin coal-mine. To them, dismissal means separation from their friends, eviction from their homes, and banishment from tho town. That being so, they are entitled not only to fair play, but to all tho protection that the law allows. It in for this reason also that wo are appealing to Mr Massey that he should give this trouble his personal and immediate consideration. There is, in certain quarters, a disposition to jump to tlie conclusion that every strike is unwarrantable. In this particular case, provided always that the contention of the men is borne out by tho facts, this view of the matter would bo inconsiderate and unreasonable. It may be alleged that it was open to the union to take proceedings before the Arbitration Court, but a moment’s reflection is calculated to convince anyone that this course would have been a futile one. Tho men have their families to maintain, they would bo required to vacate their homes at once, and it would be useless and impossible for them to await the leisurely progress of the law, even if the law wore able to provide them with redress. Wo deplore strikes, with their disastrous consequences, as much as anyone does, and have no sympathy whatever with labour disputes arising from vexatious or frivolous imaginary grievances, but in this particular matter we believe the interests of justice demand an immediate, disinterested, and impartial inquiry into the dismissal of those sixteen Huntly miners.