The Star. MONDAY, FEB. 27, 1893. Put Them to Death?

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4579, 27 February 1893, Page 2

The Star. MONDAY, FEB. 27, 1893. Put Them to Death?

Thb General Labourers' XJnion of Australasia haa brought very prominently before its members the advantages of the system of co-operative work now in vogue in New Zealand. The statement issued by the Creswick branch of the Union is very explicit. It is as follows :— " The General Labourers' Union will now be going in for contract work, at wbich only financial memberß will be employed. All profits derived from the contracts will go direct into the pockets of the workers, instead of going into the hands of the Union. Cooperative worka have been started both in this Colony, New South Wales and South Australia, and the men employed will have averaged B_, 9s, and 10a per day all through the job. Too long have we been working for the sweaters and nonproducers, hence it is high time that we woke up and made a move for the benefit of those who toil. It is not necessary for na to work for other people. We hnve tbe power in our hands to take the work ourselves, and by doing so we will be able to share the whole of the profits amongst those who have to do the work, and who are justly entitled to all they prodnoe. We cannot do this unlesß all the workers roll np and join together in the bond of Unionism." It will be seen from this statement that the Union is, very naturally* anxious to use the co-operative system bb an inducement to free labourers to join it. We bave again and again pointed out tbat nntil free labourers become bo few that their existence cannot interfere with the success of Unionism, the capitalist and the sweater will ever be masters of the labour market. The capitalist and the Bweater are well aware of this,' and will not allow the cooperative work to spread without making desperate efforts against ifc. Hence, they ralße the cry^batthone-vr system is more expensive to the taxpayer than was the old system of contracts, and that the latter had the advantage bf making every man earn his money before he got it. The opponents of co-operation B .em to fancy that no one can remember the enormous profits that have, in times past, been made by contractors. No one will Bay tbat a man who brings special knowledge to bear upon the carrying out of public works should not be well paid for giving his services to the public. But reasonably good pay is one thing apd exorbitant profit is another. Ib is the fact that the profits of contractors have not been reasonable that has brought about the reaction which asserts itself in the adoption of co-operation. ■ The present Government: of New Zealand deserves credit j for setting an example to the reßt of the world in this matter. It is not surprising, therefore; to see the Opposition endeavouring tb lessen that credit by insinuating that what has been done haß been pandering to the working man for electioneering purposes. Of cofirse, the Liberal Government . shapeß its' policy iwith a view/ to, secure the . welfare of the working mien, to whose votes it undoubtedly owes -its existence. But while the Opposition accuses the Government of pandering' to the working: men, it seizes upon the first opportunity that offers itself for disproving the accusation. The Hon A. J. C adman, at the Thames the other day, spoke of the Government finding profitable employment for prisoners. At once the Opposition writers, forgetting their previous allegations that the Ballance Government was pandering to the working. men, raised an outcry that the honeßt - labourer was about to be deprived of work by the rogues in gaol. What would the opponents of the Government have? Were the prisoners allowed to be idle there would at once be complaints, and very just ones, that criminals were being supported out of the taxes paid by honest men. To meet both the objecjections — that prisoners when working deprive honest, men of employment, and when idle live on the taxes paid by honest men— the only course would be to put every criminal to death, a revival of an ancient practice whioh modern ideas would scarcely sanction. • •