Manawatu Herald. THURSDAY, NOV, 24, 1892. "The Side the Sun's Upon."

Manawatu Herald, 24 November 1892, Page 2

Manawatu Herald. THURSDAY, NOV, 24, 1892. "The Side the Sun's Upon."

o The present Liberal government rose to power by the votes of those it calls, as it pleases them, the labouring classes and in exchange, the government during the two last sessions of parliament framed and carried two of the most one-sided Acts that were ever passed, and they have treated the colonists of New Zealand to an apt illustration of Moore's " Peace be around thee " , As half iv shade and half in sun This world along its path advances, i May that side the sun's upon i Be all that e'er shall meet thy glances ! ; As iar as the two Acts referred to ' are concerned, " The Truck Act 1891 " and " The Contractor!*' and Workmen's Lien Act 1892 " the \ only glimpse the colonists get is that j side the sun's upon, as the whole wording presupposes that the labourer is worthy of his hire, whether he acts honestly or not, and the employer is the biggest possible rogue, the contractor the \ next, and the sub-contractor the next in order of dement. " The Truck Act " suggests that the employer would not pay his employees if he could find the slightest loophole of escape, and he is not allowed to stipulate in any way how the money he pays is to be expended, thus entirely cutting the ground away from any attempt that might be made to help a spendthrift or drunkard. The money must be paid in cash so that he can easily take ifc and " booze " it right off, the only slight consideration shown to the employer being, that he may pay the wage by cheque, but for the sake of the " labourer " no precau tion to make him pay it into the bank can be taken, as it must not be crossed. This is the opinion of the " labourer " by the labourer's repre sentatives ! The employer, should he be rash enough to assist his employee in his first start at work by supplying any goods, is debarred from any action for the cost of the goods supplied, if his honourable employee objects to pay for them, and as though this was not enough of a loop-hole, the section of the Act further recites that, nor shall 11 any person supplying goods to the workman under any order or direction of such employer or agent, be entitled to maintain any action in any Court for or in respect of any goods supplied '• by any such order. The punishment for any breach of this -\ct is, for the first offence a penalty not exceeding £10 ; for the second offence £25 i for the third offence £50. The most noticeable part of this piece of legislation is that there is not a word about the offences of the employee. If the employer has parted with his goods and the employee wants his wages at the end of the month, whether there is in equity anything due to him or not, and if there is the slightest demur to this extortion, the employer must be made to pay, and must also be fined for his stupid good nature. The rogue for which the Act seems specially framed in favour of, can go his way ready to vote at the next election for men of his own kidney who so smooth his path through life.

" The Contractor' and Workmen's Lien Act 1892 " is an improved addition to the first named Act, and adds to the misfortunes of jiu employer of labour by making him, and his estate, liable for the payment of wages by the contractor he employs on any work in connection with any land building or other structure or permanent improve--1 uient upon !;-ud, nob only up to the j time of the conclusion of the contract but for thirty days after. The employer is permitted to retain onefourth part of the money payable under the contract until the expiration ot thirty one days after the completion of the work, and the " lien " by the workmen can only be for thirty days earnings. It is difficult, until the Act has been in operation some time, like " The Truck Act " has been, to point out the very many ways some particular sharp " workmen " may be able to live without too much hard work under this friendly law, but it is easy to see that it means to the employer of labour the exercise of a very large amount of caution. We are not inclined to believe that there have been sufficient cases of such dishonesty on the part of employers, to make such legislation necessary, but supposing there has been we can confidently assert that the employees have been far more glaringly unfair. Legislation to be useful and acceptable should be framed so as to be fair to all sides, but the two Acts under notice " protect " the workman, but leaves the employer powerless to insist on the workman fulfilling his part of a contract. Any amount of opportunities are given to the " workman " to sue and incur costs, but no security is demanded that the losing " workman " shall be able to pay, if his claim proves unfounded. This Act does not come into force until the new year, but it is one we commend to the attention of our readers as being on a par with "1 he Truck Act." We are certain that the genuine working man will demand either a withdrawal of these Acts or most material alterations in them, as their existence will seriously ' cripple tmiployees getting work The Acts are a foreshadow of the heavenly time the idle and dissolute would prepare for themselves whilst represented in the Government of the colony by their sympathizers aud friends, and therefore in this way useful to the genuine settlers, as a caution what to guard against.