Labour Legislation.

Manawatu Herald, 28 October 1893, Page 2

Labour Legislation.

The Hon. Mr Rolleston delivered an address at Sotithbridge last week and from the long report published in Truth we extract that portion bearing on the heading appearing above : — Now, ladies and gentlemen, I 01113 to another matter and that i 3 the labour legislation. Ido not hesitate to say that the labour legislation has been a complete fiasco. What have the working men or the industrial classes gained by it ? Is there a Labour Bill that has done them any good up to the present time ? Can anyone name any such Bill ? If there is one then it is a Bill which is simply the modification of an existing Act. The Factories Act is a modification of an Act I brought in some twelve or fourteen years ago. I don't know of any Bill brought in by the present Government that has done the industrial classes any good at all. What they want is the removal of those restrictions which cripple trade and commerce, they want the security of what they have reaped by their own labours, and the power to work out their own destinies. What have they got ? They have got a Minister for Labour, and, according to the papers, they are giving him a pretty hard time. They have a number of crude and ill-con-sidered Bills that were brought down and played with on the floor of the House, and some were sent to the Upper House for the purpose of being destroyed. They have, I say, a .number of ill-considered and crude measures as vexations to them as the Noxious Weeds Bill would have been to the farmers had it become law. Take the Conciliation And Arbitration Bill, for instance. What is it ? It is coercion, not conciliation. It is not conciliatory in the least The Upper House considerably modified it, and I think considerably improved it. I fail to believe — I cannot believe, that we are to be taught by men who have had no experience, a new creed and a new theory that is wiser and better than what has been arrived at by the most thoughtful people at Home in respect of the solution of the great question of strikes. Mr Bradlaugh says that — " Parliament should only nterfere in the industrial pursuits of

adults where necessary to protect lifo and limb, including iv this sanitary legislation." Neither the working men nor the employers at Home have accepted anything like compulsory arbitration. It would be a most one-sided thing. Mr Bradlangh again says, ♦• It would be idle to attempt to tax officially that which can never be enforced officially except among a nation of slaves." Then we had the Shop Assistants Bill. It was to enforce the Saturday half-holiday throughout the colony, but capable of having the day altered by the several municipalities. If that Bill had passed its operation would have been that not a single man who advocated it would have been returned for Christ • church. But there was a prudent provision in it, and it was that it should not come into force until January next. That would be after the election. The Workmen's Bill, which is another crude measure, became law. It has the provision that an employer of labour has to pay his wages on a Saturday night or once a week whether he likes it or not. If he does not then he is liable to a penalty unless he protects himself by a written agreement. That is law now. I pay my men their wages periodically and at any other times when they are asked for, but to have a vexatious proposal of this kind continually in front oi one is to make one's daily life a burden for we now have the policeman and the Statute Book at every turn. Why cannot we be left alone. Meddlesome interference is running riot at the present time. I have done my best to stop these Bills, and I partially succeeded. If I had consulted jny own interests and the interests of my party I should have said " take your Bills and let the public see what yon are doing." I hope I have enlightened you.