THE BANK-TO-BANK CLAUSE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2812, 5 February 1908, Page 36

THE BANK-TO-BANK CLAUSE.

STATEMENT BY SIR J. G. WARD.

WELLINGTON, January 28.

Sir Joseph Ward, who wa6 interviewed to-night by a New Zealand Times representative regarding the Denniston trouble, 6aid : "It is quite evident to me that some of the critica of the situation which recently developed are in complete ignorance of the position, otherwise it ie not possible to imagine that such views as I have seen, expressed since my return here could have been given utterance to. First of all, it was not possible for me to have taken any action .in the matter until I did. for the reason that I was not asked by either side to interfere. Secondly, the miners themselves who wore immediately concerned had the question before them on three separate occasions in order to consider reroposals which, by unanimous decision, they rejected. I proceeded to. the West Coast, and asked my colleague the Minister of Labour to join mo there, because of information in my possession of a confidential 1 character of a situation which would havo arisen that would have been very farreaching in its effects foiling a settlement of the difficulty, and which would have affected every household in thie Dominion and people elsewhere had not immediate mediation taken place. The statement that any fuss has been made is quite contrary to face. No hiss of any kind was made either before X. vieited the West Coast or whilst there, or since my return. As Prime Minister, I deemed it best in every interest to personally make myself acquaint ted with the roal situation, and, having done so, to visit the seat of the trouble and endeavour to have he matter settled^ without in any way reflecting upon. the-Arbi* tration Court or doing anything injurious to the reputation of the miners or to- tho company immediately concerned. But for the fact that the miners were told by mo that the meeting was a private one between themselves, myself, and the Minister o£ Labour, an-d that it would be a breach of confidence without their full conouxrence to publish the speeches made by myself and) Mr Millar to them, we ehoukL both. have> no objection whatever to the full publication of everything that transpired. I may. however, say that instead of hypercritical fault-finding the well-wishers of the coun.« try will recognise that an industrial caJamity might have followed as the outcome of a strong and unanimous feeling on the part of the miners, who believed that the Act of Parliament was not actually being violated and that it gave them a. moral right to take the stand they did. For my own part, I consider that both the miners and the company have acted with, remarkable forbearanoe in a very diffioult and critical pesition, that would necessarily, have become acute unless I and my colleague had intervened. One, of course, is not at all surprised at the attitude of those who, though not in possession of the facts, believed they could have done very much better. That is one of the weaknesses of human nature which men in responsible positions have to recognise." It has been said that in this situation, the Arbitration Court was on ita trial and! failed? " I disagree entirely with that,' replied the Prime Minister, " and from' those who cannot take an unprejudiced view of a very extraordinary and difficulty situation. For my own part, I may add that I am entirely ascainst the present condition in the arbitration law which provides for the imprisoning 1 of men in certain ca?e<s that may arise under this law. There is a very much better and more effective way of ensuring tho complete working of the arbitration law than as at n resent provided in that respect, and that, I hope, will be effected in the next session of Parliament.. He is no friend of his country who suggests the abrogation of tho arbitration system and the substitution o±. the barbaric method of physical force versus capital, with all its attendant horrors to those concerned and prolonged industrial strife, to say nothing whatever of other industries affected and the loss of productive and earning power that must be seriously affected under the old system of strike, against that of mutual agreement under well-defined leofielation- Whatever anyone may say detrimental to mveelf and my colleague in connection with the situa" tion that had arisen is a secondary matter. What is of first consideration and of Brratu fication to myself is the fact that trouble, the end of which no one- could foresee, has happily been averted by the good sense of the miners themselves and the employers in this particular case."'