STRIKES AND THE LABOUR QUESTION.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIX, Issue 28, 10 April 1891, Page 16

STRIKES AND THE LABOUR QUESTION.

HESE are interesting and perplexing questions, on which a great deal may be said, and has been said. It is so now, has been so in the past, and in all probability will be so in the future. We are not silly enough to flatter ourselves that anything we can advance will settle these questions, or, indeed, that we have acquired the ri^ht understanding of them, or possess the key to their solution. But there are

certain points iti reference to matters of fact so far as the present is concerned on which wo may bo permitted to say a word or two. htrikes and unions seem to be the fashion just now, and we are of opinion th-it instead of settling these knotty questions, their only effect will be to aggravate the evils they are intended to redress. Capital can, as it were, retire within its own boundaries and live, but labour, without capital,

cannot do so. Any attempt in that direction must result in starvation. Capitalists can hold out ; workmen who are not capitalists cannot. This is self-evident ; and is it not, we ask, something akin to profound folly, therefore, for labour to provoke capital to close the purse, and wait, as it can, for its opportunity ? What, in the meantime, is labour to do ? It cannot wait, for to do so is to starve. Men have only to consider for a moment the state of things which is now rampant in all our cities, and, indeed, elsewhere. There is no work, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say there is a great dearth of work. And why ? Is it because there is no money in the country ? On the contrary, the bank returns show there is an abundance of money. Let us take the building trade, for example. Nothing is doing in this line, not because men are unwilling to build, or have not the means to build. No, this is not the reason ; but it is because men will not submit to bounce, and begin works which they may be compelled to discontinue half way before completion owing to the interference of strike bosses with their employees. This is really the true reason of the want of employment so sorely felt just now. Then, again, there is deeply-seated indignation amongst the public at the tyrannical action which prevails to such a laige extent in regard to free labour. It is said, and felt, that no man should be prevented from making use of his liberty and right to dispose of his labour as he pleases. The attempt to coerce free men, and to compel them to join unions, under the penalty of no work for such, and consequent starvation, revolts the public mind and conscience, and takes from unionists the sympathy of people generally. The conduct of the shearers in Queensland is pointed to as a shocking example, and forces men to consider whether it is not better for capital to withdraw than subject itself to the tender mercies of such men. There are capitalists in these countries who are seriously considering whether they had not better take away their capital to other lands, and be satisfied with even two-and-a-half per cent, with peace and security, than subject themselves to the tyranny, as they call it, of unions, with the very probable risk of losing it all. This is a serious state of things, and for none more co than unionists themselves. Even supposing that labour in these countries does not now fully partake of the profits arising from the combined use of labour and capital, is not, it may be asked, half a loaf better than no bread ? And this is the question which reasonable men will ask themselves, which, indeed, they are now being driven to ask themselves. As we said above, capital can wait and live, but labour without capital can do neither. It appears to us that in every light bptween labour and capital, capital must win, and consequently it is by rational discussion and the enlightenment of the public mind that amelioration is to be sought, not by childish and obstinate sulk. We do not think, whatever may be said of European countries, that labour has had very much to complain of in these new communities ; not so much, at all events, as to justify the recent conduct of the unions. We say this not because of any want of sympathy with labour, but on the contrary. We have, and always have had, the deepest sympathy with labour and the working classes, and have always thought that the working clashes have not boen sufficiently remunerated for their labour. But it is precisely because we entertain the deepest sympathy with them, we so much regret a line of proceeding which is bringing on these classes such terrible calamities as must inevitably arise from the want of employment. We are convirced tuere are faults on both sides, but are also persuaded that the way to cure those faults is not the road on which unionism is now advancing. It is to be sincerely hoped that, instead of a spirit of defiance and warfare, a spirit of conciliation and give and take may henceforward prevail on both sides. Unless this should come to pass, it is greatly to be feared that terrible suffering will be the result — suffering felt by all, but particularly by the working classes.