Rangitikei Advocate. MONDAY, APRIL 13, 1908 EDITORIAL NOTES.
MR Tregear and the Kaiser would easily take champion honours in an open class for indiscreet letter writers. It is true that Mr Tregear’s field is more limited than that of the German Emperor, but no one can deny that he makes the fullest use of his opportunities. The latest exploit of the Secretary of the Labour Department is the telegram to the Blackball Union, which was published in Saturday’s issue. Under ordinary circumstances there could be no objection to Mr Tregear using his influence to settle differences between workers and employers, but the position at Blackball was not at all an ordinary one. The Union had broken the law, and in the natural course a penalty had been inflicted by the Court which the men had refused to pay. The men were therefore defying the law which it wasMr Tregear’s duty to support. Yet we find him bargaining with the men, that if they will carry out his wishes he will employ the Minister of Labour to obtain terms for them “which will gain nearly all the benefits for which the strike was instituted”, and he further states that Government will give easy terms for the payment of half the fine. Knowing Mr Tregear’s methods, we did not suppose that he had obtained the sanction of Ministers, for these statements because by acting on his own responsibility he could leave a loophole for Ministers to disavow his action, which they have already done. But he knew that success in his endeavour would be welcomed by Ministers who are above all anxious to ‘save the face’ of the Arbitration Act. Dr, Findlay has given an opinion sthat a strike is not a continuing act, and that it is not possible to prevent private persons or Unions subscribing to assist strikers. On this possibly valueless interpretation of the Act, Ministers have decided to maintain a policy of masterly inactivity, hoping that somehow providence will come to their aid and prevent them losing labour votes. Mr Skerrett does not agree with Dr. Findlay, but the Government is not at all anxious to find out what the law really means, as if the matter were referred to the Court for interpretation, some energetic action might have to be taken.
AT a recent meeting of the Society of Arts in London, an interesting discussion took place on the Asiatic question. Mr Richard Jebb, who a short time ago made an extended tour of the colonies, r advocated general adoption of the Natal Act, which prescribes an educational test for all Asiatics desiring to enter the colony. The Hon. Lyttelton, who was Secretary for the Colonies after the retirement of Mr Chamberlain, agreed that the self governing colonies were firmly resolved not to admit effective competition from Asiatics, but proceeded to utter a grave warning. He pointed out that at present we demand the right to exclude Asiatics, while also claiming the privilege to compete ffreely with Eastern nations, in their own lands. If the races of India or indeed in the whole of the East were to combine to resent this state of affairs it would prove a very serious matter for Britain, not perhaps immediately but within the next twenty or twenty-five years when the awakening of Asia has produced its full development. To a statesmen the prospect cannot be regarded without serious forbodings. The Post, we note, settles the whole matter off hand. “A combination of the races of India “would involve the immediate grant of independence to India.” “So far as the colonies are concerned, they fully recognise the right of an Oriental country to the same exclusive policy which they desire for themselves. If the Britishers’ house is his castle, let the Chinaman enjoy a similar privilege.” The surrender of India and the exclusion of Britons and British trade from India, China and Japan, might it is possible seem too great a price to secure the approval of a few noisy colonial agitators. Then New Zealand and Australia would have to rely on their own defences, which hitherto have hardly progressed beyond the stage of infancy.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RAMA19080413.2.10
Bibliographic details
Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9120, 13 April 1908, Page 4
Word Count
694Rangitikei Advocate. MONDAY, APRIL 13, 1908 EDITORIAL NOTES. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9120, 13 April 1908, Page 4
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.