The Akaroa Mail. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 6.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume 3, Issue 249, 6 December 1878, Page 2

The Akaroa Mail. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 6.

Continuing our review of the legislation of last Session we find several Acts which have passedwithout any flourish of trumpets, which have not been made the occasion for £he display of senatorial oratory and which are yet of considerable importance in n social point of view. One of the first of these is the_" Act for the prevention of cruelty to animals." It appears that till now we have had no colonial enactment on the subject. Two Ordinances of the Province of Otago and one of that of Nelson were in existence, which are repealed by the present Act. In other parts of the Colony the English law known as " Martin's Act" was relied upon to check offences of this nature. The present Act, however, goes further than its English prototype. The latter only extends its protection to domestic animals, whereas the New Zealand enactment defines " animal" to mean " any beast or bird of any kind or species whatever, and whether of domestic or wild nature." The case of that amiable gentleman who amused. himself by roasting rats would therefore have been met by this Act. Crueltyjs punishable by fine up to twenty pounds, or by imprisonment without the option of a fine for any time not exceeding six months. The latter we consider a very necessary provision for cases of an aggravated" nature. Whilst in the majority ot instances a pecuniary penalty will no doubt act as a sufficient deterrent, there is no doubt that aggravated cases may arise where a fine would prove an altogether inadequate penalty, and it is refreshing to learn that such,cases can be visited with summary punishment. The next enactment which we come to of importance is the " Trade Union Act." This is the creation of the Hon. Mr Stout, and is, as far as it goes, a very useful and necessary measure. We say advisedly as far as it goes, for it appears ts us to stop very far short of what members of trade unions might reason - ably have expected. It seems singular that in this late period of the nineteenth century a special•" legislation should be necessary to exempt workmen from criminal penalties for doing what every other class of the community does as a matter of course and of uudisputed right. Bankers combine to sell their money, shipowners to regulate their freights, manufacturers to arrange the wages they will "pay, even butchers and bakers to fix the price of their commodities, and yet till now workmen have been liable to criminal disabilities if thoy united to sell their one staple, viz., their labor, to the best advantage. Sections 3 and 4 of, the, Act before us remove this anomaly and provide that trade unions shall* not be criminal nor unlawful. But sections goes to neutralize the effect of>. the measure of toleration thus accorded by declaring certain trade union contracts not enforceable. These contracts are :— 1. Any agreement as to. the terms on which any members shall. • -. . transact business, employ or be employed. 2. Or the payment of any subscription or penalty. . : > 3. Or to apply the funds of a union (a.) To provide benefits to members. (b.) T© furnish contributions to any employer or workman iv consideration of his acting in conformity with the rules or resolutions of any such union. (c.) To discharge any fine imposed on any person by a Court of Justice. 4. Any agreement made between one trade union and another. 5. Any bond to secure the performance of any of the above-mentioned agreements. -j It wil! be seen that these agreements cover nearly, if not all, the ground where trade onions could possess any real, efficacy. The section goes on to declare that none of the above-mentioned agreements shall be unlawful, but at the same time it expressly prohibits any Court of Law from enforcing them. It may be fairly contended that an agreement to pay a fine inflicted by a competent tribunal is contrary, to public policy, and should therefore be voidable, but with this single exception, we see no reason whatever why the remaining agreements should be placed in the same category with gambling debts. We cannot see, if it is to be held lawful for workmen to enter into these agreements with one another or with their employers, on what principle of justice it can be maintained that they are not to be allowed to enforce them. Some of the objects excepted are eminently praiseworthy, for example", providing benefits for members. Others are necessarj' for the proper discipline of the societies, as the enforcement of subscriptions and penalties. Members contract these obligations with their eyes open, and they will be morally binding on such of them ',■ as are of honorable dispositions. Why, then, should the unprincipled be' furnished with a means of sneaking out of them ? On the other hand, numbers of men join these societies and devote a portion of their wages to the subscriptions payable, on the understanding that they are to be entitled to assistance from -the funds when out of employment from causes beyond their own control. According to

this Act, an unprincipled-society will be able to repudiate any obligations of the kind, and though we do not think such cases are likely to occur, still the principle which tolerates acts of repudiation cannot be justified except in cases, .where some greater public injury ; would be inflicted by the fulfilment of the obligation than by its breach. "TThe remainder of the Act is devoted to Jmere matters of detail, as to registration of rules, &c. It is provided that Trustees and Treasurers shall be liable to account for funds which may come into thefr T han<jls r . There is the inevitable clause giving power to the Governor to make *•■ regulations," and a schedule is appended showing the matters to be dealt with in the rules of such bodies. The gist of the Act, however, is • contained in the sections which we" have referred to. ,