The Wanganui Chronicle "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1911. "HOW TO END STRIKES (?)"

Wanganui Chronicle, Issue 12824, 16 October 1911, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle "Nulla Dies Sine Linea." MONDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1911. "HOW TO END STRIKES (?)"

We have before us a London paper containing a lengthy article, the second oi a series, in which the Hon. W. Perabor Jteoves has endeavoured to show the people of the Mother Country the way to industrial peace. The article under notice is headed " How to End Strikes/1 and the fact that Mr Pointier Reeve* was the originator of the New Zealand system of compulsory conciliation, and arbitration is sufficient to indicate the romody to which he points. By way oi preface, Mr Pembor Reeves traces a similarity in tho conditions prevalent in the United Kingdom at. the'present time and those which obtained in Australasia prior-to the passing of the Arbitration Act by the New Zealand Parliament, his point being that it was a series of strikes, including the holding up of transport, facilities, which led tc Stato intervention. He says: In the year 1890 the industrial position in Australia and New Zealand had become very difficult. Trade unionism had been developing, had become acutely conscious'of its strength, and was resolved to use it. The spirit of the now unionism and the employment of the sympathetic strike in Groat Britain had reacted on the Antipodes. A somewhat yaguo sentiment of socialism was aitecting middle classes asi well as workpeople. Organised Labour was about to enter politics, and was insisting with success upon direct representation there. But Organisod Labour still thought less of political action than ot salvation by strikes. Tho condition of wage-earners was very uneven. Some of the colonies wore prosperous, some Avere depressed. Hero the wages of male adults were high, there they had fallen, and were to fall, further. The factory system was growing, and was bringing in its train tho employment of under-paid women and' sweated children. Labour felt itself strong—was, indeed, strong—yet saw tho industrial evils of older cdun^ tries sprouting, up before its eyes. Factory laws and labour regulation either did not exist or were crude and feeble. The immodiate remedies which Labour declared for were the extension of trade unionism, and, wherever possible, the exclusion from,employment of non-union workmen. A series of widespread strikes followed, involving shearers, wharf lahourers, seamen and miners. There was very little serious disordor. From a European standpoint the violence would seem ludicrously small. But tho extent :>f the disturbance and certain attempts bo "hold up' transport alarmed and exasperated many among the farming md trading classes. Employers, confilent of victory, refused to accept any jort of arbitration. Everywhere the uon were beaten. In some cases the ight was largely knocked out of trade mionism. But the invasion by Labour >f tho field of politics went on ; was >yen quickened. Soon there was a reiction in favour of conciliation and arutration. It was argued that the puljic, which bad to nay for industrial c'lisurbances, had a light to make dispuants uso the resources of civilisation nther than the methods of barbarism. \> this end half-n-dozen measures wore aid before colonial Parliaments. The inly one of theso to succeed when >rought into operation was the Indusrial Conciliation nnd Arbitration Act f Now Zealand. This, after a prolong'l struggle between the two Houses of \'irlinmr-vit there, became law in A\i■ust, 1804. Vs -Mr Pombor Reeves jjoos'on' to say t is stiJl law, though it has boon f.r«luently and freely amplified and aincml•d. A considerable inirtion of the artile is taken up with an explanation oi ho scope and powers of the Conciliaion Councils and the Court of Arbitraion. As might be expected, this in-crma-tion is presented by our ex-High 'ommissioncr to his English readers in i poricise and interesting way. The amiliarity of colonial readers with the acts stated by Mr Reeves makes their epetition here unnecessary. His decription of the Arbitration Court is, imvever, of peculiar interest to New loalanders at the present moment, i hen responsible ministers—themselves i.c the Government which created the 'ourfc—arc publicly confessing their !k> ief that the system from which they toped so much has proved at any rnto ', partial failure." The Minister of Laxiur baa endeavoured to place the' responsibility for failure on tho shoulders >f tho Court, and has expressed the opi- ■ ion that its constitution Mill have to >o altered, a it.! its procedure simplified. Ur Reeves, on th.c other hand, is cviVntly satisfied with tho Court and its Kocedurc:—• n default of n .settlement by the Coun■ils the dispute goes without delay to he Court of Arbitration. This body -orisists of throe persons, a president itting with two assessors. The ■ president is well paid, and holds a position •ompletely independent of the Governnent of the day. His Court is not fet-. :ered by precedent or bound by rules »i evidence. Nor, so long as it does not outside the scope of its jurisdiction, •fin tho ordinary law courts interfere *vith it. Its methods are simplicity itiolf. It determines its own procedure. It is cheap, and nowadays docs its work

with ■ dispatcjh; .Barristers' are seldom; used in ordinary arbitration cases, so little time is wasted over quibbles and technicalities.. The assessors who sit with the president are selected for a term of three years by federations of employers and workers respectively. They are paid £500 a year each. The Court having heard the. parties to a dispute, they or their agent give an award which has the force of law. Or it may direct the disputants to enter into an industrial agreement which, when registered, is legally binding. Liko the president, the position of the assessors is made as independent of pressure as possible. '/■/•.:'' "'') So unprejudiced person would think of affirming that the Court in operation has not confirmed to this description. It is as impartial and independent a tribunal as human ingenuity can devise, and it is as competent as it is impartial. Nevertheless, it is a fact that it has failed to achieve the purpose for which it was established. It has not promoted industrial peace. It has not prevented strikes,, and at this very moment the country is in doubt as to whether to-morrow will not witness the commencement of another serious maritime strike, such as that which, with its kindred industrial disturbances, led to the- enactment seventeen or eighteen jears ago of the industrial laws which Mr Pember Reeves is' now recommending to the representatives of Capital and Labour in the Mother Country.