DISFRANCHISEMENT.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1922, 3 December 1913, Page 6

DISFRANCHISEMENT.

The proposal is being made that the punishment for striking should involve the possibility of disfranchisement for municipal and Parliamentary elections. Presumably it is not proposed to rob the individual of the .right to refuse to work, but merely to provide a penalty for ■illegal strikes. Under the Amendment of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, introduced by the Massev Government prior to the present strike beginning, it is proposed that before a strike can legally take place an effort _ must first be made to settle the dispute by conciliation. The parties must meet and confer, and endeavour to arrive at an agreement. Should they prove unsuccessful in this respect, the union must then take what is termed a Eccrct ballot of its members on the ouestiou of striking, an offices' of the Court to be the returning officer. Should the ballot prove in favour of striking the- strike becomes a legal strike. The purpose of the proposed amendment of the law, which applies to all unions, whether retristcred under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act or not so registered, is, of course, to prevent, hasty and ill-considered action, and nlso'to remove the risk of the intimidation of the majority by a noisy and aggressive minority. It is plainly in the interests of all concerned that before the extreme, step of striking is resorted to there should be opportunity for calm reflection of the consequences. Many of the greatest iiKlustri-.il struggles have arisen out of hasty decisions come to in the heat of the moment, and repented in calmer moods. Mi). Massey's Bill was bitterly attacked by the Labour extremists of (he Red' Federation variety, and they were encouraged by Opposition newspapers and Opposition members of Parliament. The measure was misrepresented as an attack on Labour unionism, and every possible effort was put, forward by the opponents of the Government to make nolit.iV.nl < capital out of it. Now in the light of the present industrial crisis the soundness and wisdom of the proposals in the Bill are made plain to everyone. It is now made abundantly clear that besides the two principal parties to all industrial disputes th«re is a third partv to be considered— Hie general Public. It- is in th« interests of this, 'the created, of all the parlies, that it should be made impossible for a dislocation of trr.de and commerce to occur without due deliberation, and the fullest- opportunity for settlement of the dispute, bv sane and reasonable methods. The penalties! provided under M«. Masspv's Bill in connection wiili illegal strikes «w mainly in the nnlur" of fines. The smrgesUnn now »ut forward that disfivnieliisoiiifnt for a fivou period slionld be added, or made an nHoviiaiive. seems lo us in li" oik> which '-lioubi commend ifself to tlx, majority of tlm public. It would not in any w.»,y interfere with ihn right to strike, but it wiiii'd Jiff as a wry real dotcrre'M. iijr.'iiiirt illegal strikes--, and would assist lo "ivmro Hint before e strike

was decided on die men would have cv.'i'v opportunity to oilm'y consider dm coPSTiunnces of Hicir aeI ion. _ Til" objection will, of course, be raised that rlkfrßndiLse.mc.nt is;

a form of punishment which rubs ;'. man of his rights of citizenship, mi!) is only applied in very extreme cases. Tint is perfectly true. Hut, on ih? other hand, it lias to Ik home in mind Hint a strike is a most serious thing, and imperils more ov less the interests of the whole community. Why should the quarrels of two parties be allowed lo cripple or ruin trade and business, and throw nut of employment- possibly hundreds or thousands of innocent peopie who have no interest in the questions in dispute or voice in deciding them? The _ weapon of the strike hits in all directions, indiscriminately, and before it is legally possible to use it there should be no doubt that every other means of settling the trouble has been tried and failed. That is nil Lli.ifc is being urged. Surely ibis is not unreasonable: nor is it unreasonable that any individual or set of individuals who refuse, to study the public interest to that extent should suffer the penalty of disfranchisement as a punishment for their offence. We would ourselves_ go further than this. In our opinion the penalty of disfranchisement should be applied also in cases of intimidation, where strikers attempt to rob men of the right to work by threats or by acts of violence.