SERIOUS OUTLOOK.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1464, 12 June 1912, Page 5

SERIOUS OUTLOOK.

GENERAL TRANSPORT STRIKE. DIVERSE RESPONSES FROM OTHER PORTi. STRIKERS' MANIFESTO. By Association-Copyright. (Rec. Juno li, 11.35 p.m.) London, Juno 11. The Transport Strike Committee has issued a manifesto stating that before calling the men out it exhausted all means to prevent a strike, and vainly endeavoured for eight months to enforce tho contracts with (iho employers. The latter had mostly failed to cany out their contracts honourably and invariably federated to defeat organised labour. The employers had now refused tho security of a money guarantee. The manifesto appeals'to the men in all the other ports to join the strike, and also asks for financial support from other trades unionists. Mr. Wright, chairman of the Sailors' and Firemen's Union exeoutivo, has warned tho members of his union against obeying the transport workers' call until a ballot has been obtained. The Barry dockers have unanimously refuged to obey the summons for a general strike. The Manchester dockers are enthusiastic for a strike. Mr. Miller, a delegate of the National Union of Labour, sneaking at Newcastle, said they had not been consulted in the dispute, and.had no quarrel with the employers. Mr. Gosling had no authority to include the North-East Coast in a national strike. POLICE PROTECTION, ' HOME SECRETARY'S ATTITUDE. London, June 10. The Shipping.Federation has protested to the Premier against Mr. M'Kenna's refusal to protect free labour, a refusal which it looks upon as Government encouragement of lawless interference with the rights of citizenship. In the House of Commons, the Prime Minister, Mr. Asquith, replying to Mr. Bonar Law, Leader of tho Opposition, promised to arrange for an early date for discussion on a motion of censure in connection with Mr. M'Kenna's alleged refusal to protect men desirous of obtaining work. (Rec. June 12, 0.25 a.m.) London, June 11. Many large employers, besides the Shipping Federation, have protested against the refusal of the Home Secretary to give police protection. Mr. M'Kenna, in the House of "Commons, has stated that, so far as the resources of the police extend, protection will be given to unionist and non-unionist workers alike, in such manner and under such conditions as appear least likely to load to a breach of the peace. AN IMMEDIATE STOPPAGE. EMPLOYERS FIRM. London, June 10. The latest development in connection with the transport strike is that the national executive of the Transport Workers' Federation has telegraphed to all centres, recommending , ' immediate general stoppage of work. The employers have rejected the Government proposals for the settlement of tho dispute. The shipowners have decided that it is impracticable for the demands of the men tio be gone into further at present, and that a return to work must precede negotiations for a settlement. The Transport Workers' Federation is making an appeal for funds. The Federation declares that there are one hundred thousand men concerned in the dispute, and that three hundred thousand children nnd one hundred thousand women need maintenance. Several relief committees have already been organised. At a meeting at Tower Hill a thousand strikers who have served in the Regular Army or the Torritorials, volunteered as a strikers' civilian force. Mr. Ben Tillett advised them to arm themselves with the biggest cudgels they could find. EMPLOYERS REPLY. DEFECTS OF GOVERNMENT PLAN. (Rec. June 11, 9.20 p.m.) London, June 11. The employers' representatives have conferred with members of the Cabinet, to whom they handed a collective reply to . the Government's proposals for the settlement of the transport strike. It was stated in the reply that while the employers recognised that the provision of a substantial cash deposit would afford.a better safeguard than had formerly been provided, the scheme would not achieve the end the Government proposed, as it was absolutely impracticable to federate the employers efficiently as 'a whole or in sections. Even if legislation was obtained, the foreign shipowners, who constituted a large element in the trade of the Port of London, would under their treaty Tights bo unaffected, and therefore the British shipowners would bo at a disadvantage. The scheme also did not provide for tho representation of non-unionists. The Port labour question was so complicated as to require an exhaustive discussion to ensure its permanent settlement. This would only be possible after work bad been resumed. The employers were not prepared to make counter-proposals, and wero unable to agree to the principlo underlying the Government proposal.