The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1912. LABOUR & THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1626, 18 December 1912, Page 6

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1912. LABOUR & THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT.

A legal decision, interesting by reason of certain changes which arc pending in the personnel of the ' Australian High Court, as well_ as by reason of the important principle laid down, was reported in a cabled decision of Saturday last. In a judgment by the Federal High Court the objections raised by the shipping companies to the award of the Commonwealth Court of Arbitration in the Merchant Service Guild dispute, are held to be valid, and an order of prohibition against the enforcement of the award by the President of the Court .and the Guild has been granted. The circumstances, which gave rise to the appeal to the High Court are worth noting as an example of the strife-raising propensities of some of the Labour organisations. The principle objection to the award was that with regard to some of the firms affected, no dispute actually existed beyond the limit of one State, and the Commonwealth Court of Arbitration could therefore have no jurisdiction in the matter. This point was upheld by the High Court. The Chief Justice, in dealing with it, laid it down that "a dispute must be actually existing and actually extending, beyond one State before the Federal powers are exercisable," and that "mere mischief-makers cannot by the expenditure of a few shillings in paper, ink, and stamps,- create such an occasion." The purpose of the Guild was, of course, to make it appear that the dispute extended to other States than New South Wales, and thus secure a Commonwealth instead of a State award. The unfairness of this to those in the States where no dispute actually existed is too obvious to require emphasising. _ His Honour, in the course of his judgment, also commented upon the "absurdly inadequate" time of notice which was given by the Guild to the shipowners to enter into an industrial agreement or convene a conference. Such a notice, he said, could only bo regarded as an ultimatum. The suggested conference was illusory, and could not be regarded as a real opportunity to discuss the claims of the Guild. There was, further, no evidence to show that the shipowners had not adjusted the differences between them and 'their employees the date of the notice. In other words, tho Chief Justice quite rightly dissented from the proposition that union secretaries, by laying their heads together, could convert a State dispute into a Commonwealth dispute and secure their ends by holding a pistol at the heads of the employers and ordering them to stand and deliver. The merits of the claims of the Guild in the 'case of the State where a dispute actually appears 'to have existed, we know nothing about. The men may have had a legitimate ground of complaint. But that does not in any way justify the tactics pursued nor the attempt to make parties to the dispute those in other States where no dispute existed. It is this sort of sharp practice that promotes ill-feeling between employer and employee, and arouses ncedlcDQ antagonism to tho quite legitimate claims of Labour. It is_

interesting to note that in the judgment of the High G'mirt, Snt SAMina tliiii'i'iTiis, Chief Justice, unci his Honour, Hut ICdmi;nd JJaiitok, were in agfccnient,' wliile Mr. Jubtick Higgiks, wlio is President of the Arhitration Court, dissented. The award which was bing appcalutl against had been granted by Mit. Justice Hiooiks, whoso utterances from the bench have at times been considered to show strong Labour leanings. Some concern is said to he felt in the Commonwealth at the present time regarding the constitution of the Federal High Court Bench. The law now provides for five Judges, and the Labour Government proposes to increase the number to seven; which, with the present constitution of the Court, would give the nominees of Labour a majority on the bench. This, under ordinary circumstances, would occasion no concern, but unfortunately Labour has not been particularly successful in its appointments, and there is. a fear that its selection for the High Court Bench may not be a wise one. It docs not seem to us at' all likely that the Federal Labour Government would be so unwise as to deliberately attempt to secure a partisan High Court. Bench, but the very fact that any fear should exist of such a thing being possible is suggestive of the distrust which has been aroused by the tactics pursued by the Labour party.