The Press THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1903. INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11512, 19 February 1903, Page 4

The Press THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1903. INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION.

The difficulties that attend a£H attempts to regulate from outside the course of trade and industry are being exemplified in the case of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Acts. Parliament has repeatedly been called open to modify the details of the original measure, and even now, after many changes, the most important of which is tie almost compJeto subordination of the principle of conciliation to that of compulsory arbitration by allowing; either of the parties to a dispute to pass over tbe Conciliation Board and appeal directly to the Arbitration Court, there are st£l abundant signs that nothing like finality has been reached. The measures by which it was intended to settle industrial differences in New Zealand without strikes or lockouts have advanced steadily towards greater regulation of industry. The Prwri<kftt of the Arbitration Court m sow

called upon to perform many of the organising functions formerly carried oat by the oombined operation of the -tars of supply and demand, of the business capacity of employers, and of the influence of unions. He has in the ket remit to act as referee in drawing up schedules of wages and boon of labour in the various trades, and in fixing eandry conditions under which businesses are to be conducted. Our industrial iegpsuutkm makes heavy demands upon the man Who ia virtually 4he pivot of the eywtemW2l fee, will the Court over which he presides, be able in tie long run to carry out successfully the large and increasing tack laid upon them?

This question is suggested by the serious attacks which have bees mate upon tfos Aibitratkm Court and ite President recently, and especially during the past two or three weeks in Wellington, by unioniete who have been 'disappointed at some of tha awards given. It 'has frequently been said thatjhe arbitration system would not be fuEy tested until the employees found awards going against them. In a> few instances this has happened, and immediaMy there has arisen an outcry against tihe presiding judge. This occurred in the case of the northern miners, it occurred again when Mr Justice Cooper gave the employers a working suggestion which seemed to vary slightly, from the technical standpoint, the original award in the Wellington painters' case, and now there has been more grumbling than ever over the award just given for tie carpenters and joiners of that city. . At a meeting of the trade on the 27th tilt, it was resolved—"That this meeting is of "opinion that the award given by the Ar- " bitration Court is entirely contrary to the " weight of evidence adduced while th« "case was being heard, aod considers that " tlw Court, as at present constituted, is "unworthy of our confidence." Mr Seddon, to whom the resolutions of the meeting were forwarded, replied with a pertinent rebuke, and he subsequently hinted to a deputation from aggrieved painters that if such attacks were made on the President of the Arbitration Court it might be necessary to separate that Court from the Supreme Court. It is true that Mr Seddon a fevr days later considerably modified this statement when addressing another deputation of Unionists who professed satisfaction with the Court, but even this could not remove the impression that he takes a serious view of these attacks upon tihe presiding. Judge. If, to bia onerous duties' as industrial regulator-in-chief, the President of the Court must add among his burdens liability to such attacks .and to the political pressure oi Unions, there will be grave risk of the arbitration system breaking down by its own weight. The Premier's proposal to appoint inspectors of awards with possibly, as one of the deputationists suggested, power to examine employers , books, to see they are not breakifg awards, illustrates forcibly how one piece of regulation leads to another. Even the most ardent supporters of our legislation for the settlement of industrial disputes must recognise this tendency and tie tremendous responsibility now laid upon the Arbitration Court.