EMPLOYERS

Otago Witness, Issue 2811, 26 August 1908, Page 23

EMPLOYERS

"A GHEAT VICTORY." CHBISTCHTJRCH, August 21. "It was a great victory," said Sir H. D. Acland, who represented the sheepowners during the hearing 1 of the dispute, when asked his views on the court's decision. " The judgment of the court and the award are a triumph for us and a vindication of the attitude taken up by the farmers and cheep-owners of Canterbury. The award in -the musterers' dispute is one which the court would have been bound to give in any case, as & similar award had been •made in the south, and the court could not have done anything else without (shifting its own position. I have always considered, and have said in court, that the demands pi the union were simply an

attempt- by agitators in' Chris tchurch to try to organise country labour for political purposes. It was an attempt to prostitute the functions of the Arbitration Court to assist them in a new political propaganda. In this they have ignominiousJy failed. Anyone who investigated the demands and understood country life could see that they were obviously intended to bring the Arbitration Court and regulation into the homes of the settlers and small farmers. That is the reason why this case has been so strongly contested, and we are glad that the court has refused to allow itself to be used in this way. The farmers throughout New/ Zealand will be jubilant over the result. The ease had a more than local significance. The decision of the court has stopped at the very beginning a principle which, if adopted, might have half-ruined the country and interfered very seriously with settlement and the means of production." " The judgment gives a very lucid exposition of the whole • matter,"' said Mr Henry Broadhead, who is a member of the Conciliation Board which dealt with the dispute and reported to the court. 1 " The farmers will naturally be very pleased with the result. The court recognises that it would be a very risky matter to attempt to regulate the farming industry, and I know of no other place in the world where any serious attempt has been made to do what the court has refused to do. The Commonwealth Arbitration Court, and also the recent Now South Wales Dispute Act specially exempt the farming industry. It will be seen that the court would- have undertaken a very great responsibility if it had started to introduce any regulation in New Zealand. I think the decision must be regarded as a very satisfactory one. It says a great deal for the court that it had the courage, in view of all the machinery brought into operation to cause an award to be made, to refuse to make an award. It shows . th"c .wisdom of the employers relying on the Arbitration Act for a strictly judicial decision."