THE ARBITRATION LAW.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 8984, 18 July 1907, Page 2

THE ARBITRATION LAW.

VIEWS OF THE ATTORNEY- | GENERAL. [Fkom Our Corrkspon-dkn-t.] WELLINGTON, July IS. The feature of yesterday's pix>ceedings in the Legislative Council was the Attorney-General \s contribution to the Addrc^s-in-Reply debate. After complimenting the Hon J. Barr and the Hon J. Rigg on the views expressed on labour matters, Dr Find lay <?aid that personally ho would approach the 1 subject of labour from an academic point of view. He was not afraid of being charged with academicism. One had to recognise the broad principles' underlying thy question, and he emphasised tli© point that the right;? of the individual had to stand secondary to these of the community and the State. The two latter were paramount. We would never have a true commonwealth of labour until we looked beyond labour as a commodity, ami took into account the interests of the. workers themselves. No employer should be allowed to engage help at a rats of pay that would destroy the moral wellbeing of the workers. In trade disputes there were not two parties, but three — the master, the man, 4and the State; and when the State stepped in it was net taking sides. It merely desired to protect its own interests. Mr Rigg had said that it was without precedent that men should be imprisoned for striking. • Mr Rigg: '' Where striking was made an offence, I said.'' Dr Findlay said that the illustration he proposed to quote would meet Mr Itigg's contention in every way. An Act', passed in England in 1875 governing the conduct of men employed in the municipal gasworks, gave power to' imprison them where they interfered with the community or the interests of the- community. This was the only reason for giving such power. He did not uphold tho putting of men in gaol because they refused to work. Mr Rigg had said that he could not suggest a moans for enforcing the awards. In his (the speaker's) opinion, there was? a way out of the difficulty without resorting to imprisonment, and he- believed his view would be accepted when the time came to state it, and, at the same time, if it was absolutely necessary to enforce obedience, even by imprisonment, it should be done where the interest of the community demanded such a course. Obedience was so essential that it should be enforced, Mr Ric' T : " Can you entoico it. Dr JJindlay replied that ob «b«nee could be enforced. England had done it with the rich, and he «*»***££ labour man who stood next and said strikes should cease. A man should not be compelled to work until the lull measure's of justice had been done to him. but when he had received that obedience, should be looked for Ihe Arbitration Act had its faulty but what Act of an e sponment al na tuie had not? The delays of the past e| far as the Court was concerned, would disappear and with them a great deal of the dissatisfaction which .existedAnd what was to be the basis of an award* Somebody had suggested prontsntring. Then what of the losses There w f no other ba« tb-n^h.l SMh atwed the worker £ 11-i^rHhel^^eth^^Jd be fi"od as * .minimum, but here again rot a livin? wage for a married man not a "y"^., "some distinction, he did not kS lr whe« «r how, would have to beside. He believed a sointron of ; difficulty would yet be arrived at. h" ntioned it to show the co,mS?-*- of the whole question. People ftd Justed that young children should not be allowed to 6ell "f^ L taken that nothing which won d oe taken y'' 1 ull iustlv on anybody ! of ?ts inhabitant cnan anything else. , Thrift not want to raise <^ . tinctions. but to work out a schema ■ that would be for the benefit of the