THE SHEARERS’ DISPUTE.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXII, Issue 2035, 24 December 1907, Page 8

THE SHEARERS’ DISPUTE.

The following circular has .been issued by the President, Mr J. G. Wilson, to all branches of the Farmers’ Union; — “This dispute has been filed, and the Conciliation Board have announced that they will hear the case at Wellington on 31st instant, at Mastarton on 13th January, Napier 15th, Palmerston North 17th, and 'Wanganui 20th. When the Union was formed disputes with workers in connection with Agricultural and Pastoral pursxxits were not contemplated, and therefore it was never anticipated that the Farmers’ Union could be drawn into one. Without registering as an industrial Union! they can, however, take upon themselves the whole arrangement of the case, as has been done in Canterbury. There is this difference in the two cases in our present dispute;' viz.—lt has been filed in the Office of the Conciliation Board; in the Canterbury case it was filed in the and referred by that Court to the Conciliation Board to take evidence. So the case bad to be taken there or else go by default. In the Otago and Southland case (Musterers, etc.), the employers did not appear before the Conciliation Court, but said they would appear before tbe Arbitration Court. It is obvious that our organisation forms tiie best means of uniting tbe Agricultural and Pastoral Employers and to make a counter move; and I should advise (pending tbe decision of the Executive, who have not yet met to consider the question), that we appear at the first meeting of the Conciliation Board, and state that we entirely object to the Conciliation Board as a tribunal, some of the members of which have fostered, as far as lay in their power, disputes of a similar nature, and in the case of the shearers one member has been the prime mover. I can arrange that we should be represented at the first meeting (and all meetings, if necessary), and a statement made that employers do not intend to appear before the Conciliation Board, but will do so when the case comes before the Arbitration Court. This all means an expenditure of a considerable amount of money, and the funds of the Union could not be used for this purpose. As in tbe case of other districts, tbe sheepfarmers have subscribed, and funds have been provided for the special purpose of appearing in these disputes. I would therefore appeal to all sheep-owners to subscribe for this purpose, acording to the number of sheep they have. The Sheep Tax has been abolished, chiefly through our efforts, and the money might well be spent in defending Agriculturists and Pastoralists in this and similar disputes. It will be seen that the dispute is upon us immediately, and action must be taken at once, so that a meeting of th branch should be held and active means taken to provide the special fund to fight tbe question. I therefore appeal to one and all to assist. ’ ’