WHERE LAWYERS DIFFER.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 12789, 14 June 1912, Page 2

WHERE LAWYERS DIFFER.

""~ i', 1 * 7 . ' — '— (Pcr 1 Press' Association.) 1 • ■ ■ '■ WELIrrN T (JTON-- ; last night. Mr J. Glover, secretary of the J^ew Zealand Federation of , "j^abor, to-day received the following legal opinion from Mr P. J. O'Regan, attorney to the Federation: "In answer to your inquiry this morning, I may state that I have/ noticed m the newspapers that certain unions who are bound by • awards have •demurred to making a levy for the relief of the men at Waihi, on the ground that being bound by the Arbitration Act they would; be guilty of "an. offence if they did so. I. noticed an opinion expressed rather emphatically quite recently m one of the Wellington newspapers, the Auckland, correspondent of which regretted a. strong Government' was not m office to, punish the men who have 'broken the law' at Waihi. ' This is > quite "iri. accord with the standard of accuracy observed by the great majority of the newspapers where the actions of working . men are m issue. The 'legal- opinion, is quite plain. A strike is : unlawful only when the strikers are bound by an award of industrial agreement; that is to say,' W/hen they are members of an indus-' trial union, and consequently under the 1 jurisdiction of tlie Court of Arbitration.; The Waihi miners are not under the' jurisdiction, of the \Court of Arbitration, and hence their strike is not an unlawful strike. Consequently it is not an offence for a union, whether bound by an award of the Court or not, to donate funds for the relief of the men on strike." • ' ; •'* ; ■ '