The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, March 12, 1914. NOTES AND COMMENTS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 1219, 12 March 1914, Page 2

The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, March 12, 1914. NOTES AND COMMENTS.

Thk butchers' strike in Australia, which has just been settled, illustrates the disposition of a section of workers to use arbitration pro ceedings merely as a weapon supplementary to the strike. A sound principle was laid down by the President of the Federal Arbitration Court (Mr Justice Higgins) at Melbourne a few days ago. The Arbitration Act, said His Honour, was meant as a substitute lor strikes, and the men must be content to have one thing or the other. He was not going to allow arbitration and strikes too. That principle has been recognised in the settlement of the Sydney butchers’ strike, the union having pledged itself to refer all future disputes to an industrial tribunal without cessation of work. The Auckland Herald rightly points out that no impartial student of recent industrial development in Australia and New Zealand can maintain that the altitude of workers towards the arbitration system has been uniformly fair and honourable. If advantages could be obtained through the Court they were accepted ; if the Court refused the concessions desired it was reviled and defied by a section of labour and words and acts of lawlessness followed. This conception of the Arbitration Court is altogether untenable. When workers voluntarily decide to seek the protection of the Court they agree to surrender the right to strike for a given period in return for the guarantee that a competent and fair tribunal will fix their rate of wages. A time of industrial peace has been agreed upon, and neither party to the truce may violate it with honour. If employees claim the privilege ot ceasing work in concert during the currency of an Arbitration Court award, the privilege of a lock-out cannot be denied employers, and the Court becomes a sham and the arbitration system a delusion. In New Zealand we had recently an example of how certain sections of workers may attempt to use the Arbitration Court and the strike indifferently as a means of gaining their ends. The atmosphere of unreason and intimidation then prevailing may be some palliation of the conduct of men who ceased work without notice and without the shadow of a grievance although they had accepted awards, but it Is no real defence. If workers intend to use the Arbitration Court as long as it suits them and when it does not revert to the strike weapon, there can be only one upshot. The arbitration system will go. The sentiment of the working classes in New Zealand is in fapour ot the arbitration system, but Mr Justice Higgins’dictums should be remembered. It must be one thing or the other.