The Star. WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 1901. CONCILIATION BOARDS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7087, 1 May 1901, Page 2

The Star. WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 1901. CONCILIATION BOARDS.

Of recent years it has been the fashion among a certain class of people to ridicule and condemn as useless the work of th& Conciliation, Boards. This kind of criticism has emanated partly from ignorant ipeopla and partly from individuals whose aim has been, either by fair means or foul, to discredit the labour legislation, of th* present Government. We hops that both these- sections of -the community will rea^l the remarks made in the Arbitration Court yesterday by the President of the Court and certain employers of labour. We will not advise them to peruse the statements oi the Union representatives for the reason that although every word which these gentlemen said was true, we are afraid they will nob carry conviction to people who are predisposed against Union® and every, thing pertaining to the organisation, of labour. But the utterances df the N President of the Court were necessarily those of a partial observer, while those of. Mr S. Brown, the arbitrator for the employers; Mr Frosticfc and Mr Coles were the opinions of large employers of lafbour, and as such, mrosb surely cany some -weight even in' -the mind of the mosb prejudiced, opponent of the Industrial Arbitration Act. Mr Justice Cooper is reported to -have said that he thought his colleagues would agree with him that the Canterbury Board oi Conciliation had done very good "work, and he added that for his part ho would 'be sorry to see the Boards abolished. "They were the means of bringing parties to a dispute "together and of carrying out what after," aH was the primary object of the Act, that was, a conciliatory settlement without intervention or compulsion on the part of the Court." Mr Frostick was quite as emphatic i» testifying to the value of the Aofc in general and the Conciliation Boards in, particular, and Messrs Brown and Coles, as we have said already, 'both added their tribute. Surely such testimony should go a long -way towards disposing of the assertion that the Conciliation Boards and the Industrial Arbitration. Act have done more harm flhani good.

It -will be noticed that nearly all the gentlemen w© have quoted consider that the functions of Conciliation Boards would be strengthened if the Boards -were presided over by persons trained in- law. In certain quarters it has 'been- urged that the difficulty might be" overcome 'by the appointment of a skilled clerk, such, for instance, as the Clerk of the Awards,/ and on the other hand it is contended tbat^he Clerk of the Awards cannot apare the time necessary to devote to this woric In- our opin|bn the "problem might be solved by appointing Stipendiary Magistrates as chairmen of the Boards. Here in N<|rth Canterbury the want of another Stipendiary Magistrate is seriously felt, and if another one could be appointed with the object of acting also as chairman of the local Conciliation! Board, the Government would have succeeded in killing two 'herds with one stone.