The Dominion. SATURDAY. NOVEMBER 1. 1918. A DANGEROUS WEAPON.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1895, 1 November 1913, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY. NOVEMBER 1. 1918. A DANGEROUS WEAPON.

* — '' Prior to a strike every reasonable effort should be mado to prevent these breaches and troubles developing into a position, of tho strongest winning after a protraefced_ struggle." It iB to be hoped that this sensible remark in the otherwise most unfortunate and un'called for utterance of the Leader of the Opposition in the Bfouse of Representatives on Thursday during the discussion of the strike question will not be forgotten, by himself or his followers when the Arbitration Bill is under consideration. Tho obvious and only effective way of giving practical effect to tho principle enunciated by Sir Joseph Ward is to make -it unlawful for either side to an industrial dispute to establish a strike or a lock-out until some impartial tribunal shall have had time to go into the merits of the case and to endeavour to bring about a settlement by mutual consent. Such a_ truoo, without taking away the right to strike, would enable the prcssuro of public opinion to be brought to bear, and when the public know the truo facts thoy can be relied upon to use their influence in favour of fair play to both sides. There is a growing feeling among tho ablest and best section of the labour leaders of Great Britain and Germany that tho strike is a very dangerous weapon for the workers, and should only be made use of when ovory reasonable method of effecting a peaceful settlement of a dispute has failed. No one in his senses can accuse Mr. Philip Sitowden, the well-known English Socialist and Member of Parliament., of any lack of sympathy with the working classes; yet Mr. Snowden deplores the revolutionary methods of a certain typo of labour agitator which is onb too well known in this u&rt,

of the world. His long experienca as a labour leader has proved to him how little gain there generally is to set off against tho misery and loss, the malice and uncharitableness which every strike must evoke, and ho naturally prefers an appeal to reason to a resort to bruto force. He recently declared—and he can speak with first-hand knowledge— that the irresponsible section of the trades unions exercises an influence far greater'than is justified by their numerical strength, and he is convinced that tho policy of militancy will certainly ruin trades unionism if- it is allowed to go on unchecked. He advocates the more excellent way of State arbitration and trades boards, and vigorously opposes tho readiness of a certain class of agitator "to enter on a, strike without any effort being made to secure a settlement, to exasperate the employers by every mean 3, and indulge in wild sanguinary language." Mb. Bnowden does not stand alono in urging that labour disputes should be settled by an appeal to right and reason rather than to passion and prejudice, and there is an Increasing body of opinion among the most intelligent section of British and Continental labour leaders that tho general strike is an extremely dangerous measure from the point of view of • the worker. At the German Socialist Congress held at Jena lately Herr Bernstein declared that tho only result of tho strike in Sweden in 1809 was the decadence of the trade union movement. It was easy to begin a strike, ho said, but nobody could know how it would end. Another speaker, Dr. David, expressed the opinion that tho faith in a general strike was madness, and that tho only result of it would be a catastrophe for the German labour movement, The crude and obsolete views and methods which are now being advocated and practised by the revolutionary section of the New Zealand labour organisers are in marked contrast to the opinions of the great European experts in industrial warfare who have made quit© a scientific study of the subject. It is pitiful to see working men moving to inevitable disaster owing to their blind confidence in incompetent and ignorant leadership, and it is to be hoped that they will como to their senses before it is too late to avert a catastrophe. It is well known that the more level-headed and responsible men among those engaged in the present strike in New Zealand- realise that they are the helploss victims of the recklessness and ignorance of others. These men are only too well aware of the sheer folly of the whole thint, and that they have everything to lose and nothing to gain by the strike which is now paralysing tho trade of the country. Probably they do not see thoir way out at present, but are waiting and watching as patiently as they can for a convenient chance of dissociating themselves from the revolutionary tactics in wbioh they have become unwillingly enmeshed. The opportunity may como with the .restoration of law and order, and the full protection of every citizen in earning his livelihood in a lawful manner. The prober attitude in the matter, of industrial disputes is laid down in the clearest terms by Mr. James Sexton, secretary of the National Union of Dock Labourers, _ in a recent article'in the Morning Post. He states that "the right to strike or lock-out. . . seems to be generally accepted. But in the light of experience every sane.person will admit that every effort should be made to avoid exercising the right, and that all means should be exhausted before "it should be resorted to." He emphatically rejects the foolish policy of striking first and thinking about it afterwards, and he insists that if are entered into they must be strictly regarded on both sides, for it is only by this means that the trades unions can be depended upon. After argu» ing the point at some length Mft. Sexton sums up the position in the following words;— Surely, then, a moment*a oalm consld L eration should prove to the most militant new Trades Unionist that the methods of tho general strike havo littlo _ ohances of success, and that the only possible method of conducting his Trades Unionism is by the saner methods of reason and argument, and that tho weapon of the strike should not be so lightly resorted to, and never without having exhausted all the mothods of argument and reason. Tho opinions which we have been quoting throughout this article are not those of political economists, capitalists, or Conservative politicians; but the views of intelligent men who are prominent members of. and in whole-hearted sympathy with, the labour movement. They are opposed' to appeals to bruto force and reckless revolutionary methods, because thoy have learnt by actual experience that in the lon£ rim such tactics must inevitably injure tho cause of the working olasses. The present strike in New Zealand can only teaoh the Baroo lesson. It may involve serious annoyance, loss, and inconvenience to the whole community, but the loss will undoubtedly press most heavily upon the strikers and their fellow-workers in other trades. The industrial classes can never hope to better their oonditioii by methods of violence. Lawlessness will bring its own retribution, for it is the Taw that protects the weak from tho strong, and the poor from the oppressor. T!t enables right to prevail against might, and to set law aside means a return to barbarism, with the tyranny of the "strong man armed, and a going back to

tho etinplo plan That they should take who hare the power, And they should keep who can. A man does not require to have a very deep knowledge of history to know how terribly the labouring classes suffered in the bad old times when "tho simple plan" was in general operation. The scenes of violence which have been witnessed in Wellington during the last few days are a most impressive object lesson of what the community might expect if a certain typo of revolutionary agitator should ever gain oontrol of tho Government of tho country, and be a deciding factor influencing any party with which it might Be temporarily associated.