"PASS-IT-ON!"

Press, Volume L, Issue 149814, 30 May 1914, Page 2

"PASS-IT-ON!"

an open letter to the prime minister.

(Per favour of "The Press.")

"If the Legislature establishes a principle at with the nature ol things, the "State will never cease to be agitated till tho principle is expelled and invincible Xature has resumed her sway." —Koussea.il.

Dear Mr Massey,—ln my latest letter I endeavoured to show, first, how, after living for nearly twenty years under the delusion that by means of the great beacon of our Arbitration Court we were showing the rest of the world the way to prevent strikes, we had found ourselves in the position of having to ■retrace'our steps and borrow from benighted. Canada a lantern by which to guide our faltering footsteps; second, that by our system of State-regulation t>f industry and statutory wages, with their inevitable corollary of "Pa-ss-it-on," we are not even trying to untie the Gordian knot of the Labour problem, but ' are merely cutting it with the two-edged sword of Socialism, whilst tho inscrutable Sphinx is watching and waiting; and third, that if we continue in the way upon which we are now travelling, we must inevitably flounder farther and farther into the '-•og of Socialism, and that it is for this veiy reason the (revolutionary) Socialists of the United Labour Party, as well as the Syndicalists of the Ignited Federation are showing so much zeal for the Arbitration system: they fully realise its potentialities as an instrument of nationalisation of industry.

Many people seem to be under the impression that the system has received a great •accession of fresh life and ■strength by reason of tho immense increase in the membership of the unions caused by the policy of compulsory unionism found necessary for the settlement of the recent strike. -But there .ould be no, greater mistake; for the result has been that the uiyons' have lost the last trace of real .trade unionism, and have become simply political organisations in which the Socialists and Syndicalists are rapidly gaining the upper hand «with the view, of manipulating the system as a means of attaining their nefarious purposes. The true spirit of association that formed the cement of real trade unionism.has disappeared, and the great body of the members have ceased to take any part in the control of the unions. In this respect, as in so many others, the system has produced results tho very opposite of those intended. But my purpose in writing you on ■Ms occasion is once more to invite your special attention to tho question if excluding farming pursuits from ho jurisdiction of our legislative (Arbitration) Court. As you no doubt, remember, the original Act (of 1894) did not apply to rural permits at all. The change was introduced in 1900 by means of a slight alteration in the. definition ofj the term "worker" in the ■consolidation Act of that year—so slight that it attracted little attention. J find, however, on looking up "Hansard" that Mr'Allen and yourself referred to the question. But at that time few realised % that the title of the Act was (and still remains) a misnomer, and that our so-called Court of Arbitration is really a legislative body whose principal function is not the settlement of disputes and the prevention of strikes, but tho regulation of industry, and, specially, the' fixing of a minimum wage for each and every industry and trade. Now, what I desire to point out is that if'the Act were merely what its title would and, did lead, not merely ordinary folks,. but even legislators to suppose, there would bo some ground for extending its provisions to agricultural and pastoral pursuits; but there was absolutely no justification for plac,ug them on the same footing as manufacturing and other industries .and trades, and rendering them liable to he subjected to all kinds of regulations apd restrictions as to rates of wages, hours of work, overtime, and.other cbnditions. As everybody now knows from experience, every increase in wages in such industries and trades means increased cost of pro'ductißn, and such increased cost is passed on to the consumers, jf whom the workers themselves form the great majority. But there is nothing in common between town industries and/pastoral farming and dairying work; in the former what are really artificial rates of wages can be imposed because the community, including the farmers, submits to taxation*in the supposed ■ interest of such industries and trades But in the case of tho rural pursuits named, no Act of Parliament oould enable the farmers to pass on the increased cost, for the simple reason that tho prices of their products are not regulated by th&.local .market, but by the markets of the world to which they have to send them, and they would be heavily hmdicapped in these markets if they were compelled by law to pay rates of wages and submit to restrictions such as are undreamed of by their competitors in Argentina, Canada, Russia, and Denmark. Rural workers should be exempt from the operation of the Act, and left free to form real trade unions as distinct from the Industrial Unions recognised by the Act. It would follow that they would have the right to strike, subject, of course, to the provisions of the Industrial Disnutes Investigation •Act. ' .. ■■■ . : '•'•- , A few days ago we were informed by telegraph that the Waikato farmers are establishing a fighting fund to combat any attempt of the farmworkers to obtain an Arbitration Court award. It is to be hoped that the Court will take the same view of the situation as it did in Canterbury some years ago when it refused to make any award- although some thousands of pounds had been spent over the fight; but why should the farmers be left exposed to such harassment and expense? I started:this letter with the intention of directing your attention to a case now before the Arbitration Court, which throws a good deal of light on the real nature and working of tho system. I refer to an application for an award made by the Boilermakers' Union; but it occurred to mc that the editor would probably refuse to publish tho letter on the ground that the application is still before the Court (sub judice), and this circumstance affords mc an opportunity of bringing Tinder your notice another of the anomalies of tho system—namely, the absurdity that it should oven be contended that the rule which forbids discussions in the Press regarding, the merits of actions and criminal prosecutions pending before the ordinary courts, applies to applications .to the Arbitration "Court" for the exercise of its legislative powers! I have an impression that you promised a deputation some time ago that you would consider the question of making .provision in the Act for the addition to the Court of a fourth member, whose function it should be to watch, the interests of the public; 1 would suggest that, instead, you should distinguish between the legislative and the judicial functions of the Court, bo as not merely to allow, but to invite, tho fullest discussion, and criticism of non-judicial matters in which legal rights are not involved.—Yours, etc., . J. MacGREGOR. Dunedin, May, 1914.