Labour Notes.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XX, Issue 42, 5 August 1892, Page 2

Labour Notes.

The manifesto issued in reply to the directors by the Broken Hill strikers stateß the case of the men very strongly. Provision was made in the|documents drawn up in 1889 and 1890 for terminating the agreement, and the men pertinently ask why the directors, sup. posing them to have good and sufficient cause for the course adopted by them, refuse to submit the matter to the arbitration agreed on— especially since a judge of the Supreme Court was to be appointed empire. The miners had asked tor information respecting the scheme of contract proposed—expressing themselves at the same time as willing to abide by the arbitration agreed on— but the reply givea them was evasive and insulting. Thoy, however, again asked that the question should be referred to arbitration, but were curtly met by a warning that the agreement would be terminated by the companies on July 30. The men characterise as absnrrt the statement that the mines are not able to pay. For every £100 paid for material and labour, they say, £200 has been paid the shareholders. They repudiate the charge that a fair share of work was not being done. •• We claim and can prove," they say, " that the miner works harder and does more work in broken Hill than elsewhere ; the output and men employed will prove it. Let that be published, and the eyes of the shareholders will be opened." They charge the directors with a systematic attempt from the beginning to evade the agreement. They further charge the directors and managers with forcing on a strike to cover bad management, and give a very deplorable account of the condition of the mines. They conclude as follows :— " The workers only desire fair and honest treatment at the hands of the directors, and they can only again reiterate that they are prepared to submit the matter in dispute to a board of arbitration with any unprejudiced man as umpire ; and whether the award is in their favour or against tbem, they are prepared to abide loyally by the result."

Apropos of the struggle at Broken Hill, and the determination of the men there to keep up the rate of wages— already by no means extravagant— rather the contrary, in fact, everything considered, the following passage from Professor Thorold Rogers seems to the point :—" Employers will get labour cheap if they can; it is the business of the State lo prevent them getting it so cheaply that they imperil the future of the race by the process ; and it is the business of particular crafts of workmen to sell their labour at as good a price as they can. They never have ruined, and they never will ruin, the capitalist employer by the process, for they may be trusted not to ruin themselves, Bince they are quite as acute as their employers in discerning what price the market will bear." This last statement seems to receive a proof in the calculation made by the men at Broken Hill as to the profits of the shareholders.

Nothing, again, more conclusively shows the necessity for th^[ appointment by law of boards of conciliation than this tronbJe a 9 Broken Hill. The manner in which the directors have departed without scruple from their agreement proves the imperfect protection afforded toworkingmen by agreements that are not legally bfpding. If any settlement of this difficult and pressing question is to be arrived at by means of such agieements, neither party mast be, at

liberty to depart from them— the capitalist no more than the labourer.

A letter from Mr Cann, M.L.A. for Broken Hill, to the Sydney papers throws light on the nature of the work required of the miners and of the charges brought against them. Take, for example, the following. He contrasts the work of the coalminer with that of the silverminer, showing how much easier tbat of the former is :— " Coalminers are not slowly poisoned, silverminers are. I can find you hundreds in Broken Hill who have been disabled for months at a stretch, and some of them for life ; in fact, no man should be allowed to work in those mines longer than two years— many die suddenly, some in as many months. Therefore the harder they work— and that is what contracting means, or why introduce it ?— the moie poisonous fumes and lead dust they inhale, which is simply shortening their lives or killing themselves. Again, from 18 months' experience as president of their acoident relief fund, I found that in comparison to the numbers engaged in the contract to day work there were 10 contractors injured to every one engaged on day work, and the contractors working in all the safest places. Therefore it will be ahnndred times worse if they start contracting in the stopes." The writer also denies that the men loaf and sleep. " During the summer months at Broken Hill," he writes, '• the temperature remains at 120 through the whole week, with thousands of flies, that will keep you wide awake through the day. Now place those men in places in the mine where no man can work more than half an hour without a similar time to cool down, or what we call two men on the pick, would you not sleep that half hour I Yes, and longer if your ' mate ' didn't wake you. This is only a faint description of night work at Broken Hill. Then why under such a paltry pretence introduce so ruinous a system ?" It is not only the mothers and wives of the fishermen who may make their complaint, as the mother of the drowned lad does in the "Antiquary." It is not only thosa wbo pleal on behalf of the London seamstresses who may also complain that the fruits of human labour represent the waste of human life. It is not only silver ore these men are hewing out, but their own coffins, and yet more work is wanted from them. Mr Oann's concluding advice is pertinent' <• If," he says, " the directors wish to retrench let them start the other end, screw down their own fees, and then the men with £4,000 £3,000, £2,000, and £1,000 salary, and then only erect their reduction and other plants once instead of two or three times, and I promise better results.''

And why should not the rich man take less in order that the poor man might have more 1 It ia certainly his duty to do so. The Holy Father writes as follows :—"'lt: — " 'lt is lawful,' cays 8t Thomas of Aquin, for a man to hold private property, and it is also necessary for the carrying on of human life. 1 But if the question be aeked — How must one's possessions be used 1 The Church replies without hesitation in the words of the same holy Doctor . Man should not consider his outward possessions as bis own, but as common to all, so as to share them without difficulty when others are in need, Whence the Apostle saith — Command the rich of this world .... to give with ease, to communicate."

The Barrier Miner explains that false reports respecting the strike originate with the Melbourne Argus. It is from the columns of this paper, he says, that news is taken for the intercolonial telegrams. Thus much that is falsa and injurious his been spread abroad,

Some of the Cape papers have recently published a correspondence on the Labour Question that would seem to show that there are worthies in those regions also who have a taste for slavery Strong objection is made by them to the education given to the Kaffirs, and the sensible manner in which these people were dealt with by the Boers is commended. But we know from other sources a great deal respecting what that manner was. Approving reference to it is, of itself, sufficient to condemn the men who make it. For the credit of the British settlers, these devil's advocates are not left without contradiction.

Several members of the Opposition, during the financial debate, have taken exception to tht co-operative work given by the Government. We have already referred to the Hon Mr Fergus. Notable, also, amongst these gentlemen has been the Hou Mr Mitcbelson. Is it not a little to the prejudice of the workingman that the workingman himself should be hardest on him ? The Hon Mr Mitchelston, himself an ex-mechanic, and who, no dcubt, has made his profit of wages, is offended because the Government, in the manner referred to, enables labourers to earn high wages :—": — " He strongly condemned the co-operative system, and said it simply meant taking men away from useful work in the country to work for the higher wages held out to them by this co-operative system. It also meant bringing shoals of unemployed from the other colonies to participate in the work offered by the Government." — Bat are[the workingmen such fools as not to perceive that, if the matter were overdone, the wages

mast fall ? Professor Thorold Rogers, wbo has made a special study of the workingman, eeema to think he knows very well what he Is about, as we have seen. Mr Mitchelson, however, who has himself been a member of the class, may have the advantage of the Professor — who has ha* not been so— and let as not recall that old proverb that defines the ill bird.

<• They tell hs tbat wages shou'd be reduced; And when we ask why, they tell us that wages are exorbitant and that in order that industry may be carried on it must be conducted at a wage-Tate which will not amount to more than the ' value ' of the work accomplished after a ' reasonable ' profit has been made by ' Capital.' The inference being, whether it is actually stated so or not, that ' Labour ' is now claiming snch an excessive bigh wage that it is simply impossible for ' Capital,' withont which Labour cannot work at all, to make any profit by employing it. I believe that lam stating the claim of the capitalist fairly and dispassionately. He practically asserts to us that until men will work for him at wages which it will be profitable for him to pay, he will not employ Labour at all — but will wait until hunger has starved Labour into taking the reduced wages at which he says he is willing to ' boom ' production." This is from the Brisbane Worker.

Now, let us hear what Prbfeisor Thorold Rogers has to say on the subject : — '' It is quite possible to pay too little for labour. Low wages, as economists have frequently demonstrated, do not always mean cheap labour. What Young says about land, that you cannot give too little for poor soil or too much for good soil, ii true of your workmen. Some few years ago an eminent agriculturist of mj acquaintance told me that he preferred to have union men on his land, and bcre testimony to their sobriety, steadiness, and integrity. Discontent with one's lot is not always a vice ; it m*y be the prelude to many virtues, the parent ia the end of that which its timid or jealous critio wonld be the first to welcome. It seems that the foolish and frantic calumnies which have been told about labour partnerships have this foundation. They who utter these statements are uneasy at the supreme utility of labour, and are afraid that it will destroy public prosperity. Labour knows the conditions of£its existence and continuity better."

Reports, which the cable informs us have been published in the) Hobart Mercury, relative to a failure of the strikers at Broken Hill and the desire of a large body of them to make terms for themselves with the companies are probably of the nature of those which the Barrier Miner declares to have originated in the Melbourne Argus, with the design of preventing aid from being sent from outside to the men on strike. Still the likelihood is that, although assistance is being generously sent from various places, as from Sydney where the Trades and Labour Council have voted £350, and from Ballarat where the miners have voted £500, the strikers must eventually give in. After all, no equivalent of the wages eirned can be subscribed, and these seem to have been little enough to support the men and their families. It may be doubted, meantime, as to whether these strikes terminated only by the necessities of the strikers, and leaving the dispositions of the men disturbed and indignant, tend to a final settlement of the general question. We may venture to suggest that the effect is a contrary one, and that a greater Btore of violence is thus laid up, to break forth disastrously in the end.

Professor Thorold Rogers evidently bases s'rong hopes on the unions. "It remains to be seen," he says, " whether thty have not been a benefit in the past, an * are a principal hope in the future, not of tbat labour merely for whose ends they have been severally e<tablisbed, but of labour in general, of human progress; and lastly, whether they do not form the readiest means, perhaps the only means, by which the gravest social and political problems may be stated and solved." Still, so far, even the unions seem to be worsted in the conflict.

Bat the Pope tells as that to form snch unions is the natural right of man. "Particular societies," he writes, •• although they exist within the State and are each a part of the State, nevertheless cannot be prohibited by the State absolutely and as such. For to enter into society of this kind is the natural right of nan ; and the State must protect natural rights, not destroy them ; and if it forbids its citizens to form associations, it contradicts the very principle of its own existence ; for both they and it exist in virtue cf the same principle — viz, the natural propensity of man to live in society." May we, without presumption, argue from this that something more than a negative duty devolves upon the State ? If it is the natural right of the society to exist as such, is it not also its natural right to fulfil the ends of its existence, that is, the protection and assertion of the interests of its members 1 Finally, is it not the duty of the State to assist it in doing this ? If this be so, for the State to leave it, in a just cause, tv the uncertain issue of a strike apDears a doubtful proceeding.

Bat aa to the interference of the law, v authorised by the Pope, Cardinal Manning is very decided. Writing in reference to the London strikes, " Leo XIII," he says, " in such cases goes beyond the intervention of peacemakers in a voluntary effort to reconcile contending parties. He affirms that tbe State may intervene. < If,' he says, ' by a strike or other combination of workmen, there Bbould be imminent danger of disturbance to the public peace, or if circumstances were such that among the labouring population the ties of family life were relaxed ' . . . ' finally, if health were endangered by excessive labour, or by work uasuited to sex or age, in these cases there can be no question that within certain limits it would be right to call in the help and authority of the law.' So little does the Encyclical recognise the absolutism of employers, and so fully does it justify tbe action of Parliament in the Commission on Sweating, in the Committee on tbe Hours of Labour, and now in tbe Commission on Labour in all its relation to Capital. Leo XIII gives to legislators a supreme counsel : * The laws should be beforehand and prevent these troubles from arising, they should lend their influence and authority to the removal in good time of the causes which tend to conflict between masters and those whom they employ.' " The Cardinal assmes that the " voluntary tribunals of arbitration, composed of employers and employed in their respective unions or associations," recommended by the Pope, should be legally authorised bodies, whose decisions, therefore, would be binding in law.

Socialism is said to be one of the factors in the Pittsbnrg strike. To thia is attributed the attempt on the life of Carnegie's manager. Some brntal treatment appears to have been inflicted, by the officers of his regiment, on a soldier who expressed sympathy with ths wouldbe murderer. Mr Carnegie, meantime, declares that he has had nothing personally to do with the busioess for three years, having had confidence in his managers — a confidence that would seem to have been, in some degree, misplaced.

At a meeting of the Dunedin Labour Day Committee held on Wednesday evening, July 27, officials were elected as follows :— President' Mr J, A. Millar ; vice-presidents, Messrs J. Cockburn and B. Slater ; treasurer, Mr G. Parches ; trustees — Messrs Pinkerton, Slater, andCaradus ; secretary, Mr B, Clark.

All the Auckland factories, excepting one small one, are now connected with the newly-formed union, and that one is expected to come in at aa early date.

The Otago Daily Times publishes an interview between its Wellington correspondent and Mr Tregear, head of the Labour Bureau. This gentleman declares that the number of the unemployed shows a marked decrease. The greatest number of applications, he says, come from the South Island, where, in the winter months, tbere is no work for casual hands, Mr Tregear also gives it as his opinion that the bureau will result in a saving to the country : "To show that there will be a saving let me point out to you that we sent up to Hunterville and to the Government works at Pahiatua about 120 men, who in tbe first six months sent £8000 to Wellington for their wives and families, so that the general taxpayer was spared the payment of charitable aid to that amount, and so much money was put into circulation." The bureau, we are told, has 200 agents throughout the colony who keep it informed of urgent matters. A particularly useful office performed by it, we may add, is that of directing men in search of work, but not in need of money for the road, as to the particular district in which they are likely to find it.

In an interview with a representative of the Barrier Miner, the Bißhop of Wilcannia. who had formed one of a citizen's deputation from Broken Hill to Adelaide and Melbourne, expressed himself as little gratified at the reception which he and his colleagues had met with from the shareholders. His Lordship thought, however, that good had been done by their making the state of the case better understood — especially in Melbourne. In Melbourne an offical interview with the directors was refused to the deputation, unless the defence committee consented to withdraw the pickets. The picketing and the slight excesses which it had led to in tbe first few days of the Btrike, tbe Bishop added, were the chief difficulties the deputation bad to encounter. Public feeling was against the system in question, although it was admitted that the miners had a Btrong case with regard to the agreement. His Lordship thought that, if tbe directors gave a guarantee not to introduce non-union labour, the defence committee might consent to withdraw the pickets. Otherwise he could see little hope of a conference.