AN INTERESTING POINT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 59, 21 March 1907, Page 2

AN INTERESTING POINT.

Unci the move of the Labor Department to enforce the penal clauses of the Arbitration Act in respect of the Souther i butchers proved unsuccessful, there 13 little iloubt that the Arbitration Act would have been utterly worthless so far as employers of labor are concerned. In giving judgment in the ChriateUuvii eases Mr. Justice Cooper observed that it was "well that the public should understand that nil classes of persons who

came within the scope of the Act, and who committed breaches., were liable, if they did not comply with the orders of the Court, to be attached to the Supreme Court; or, in other words, that: failing to pay u tine inflicted by tfie Arbitration Court, a party could be sent to gaol. Few people thought, until the Attorney-Cencral gave a Hid, that cither Parliament, or tlu unionists, or the employers realise,i thai the effect of tile clause against strikes in the Act of l!IO,"> would be to rend.'!' tiie strikers liable to imprisonment. Nor ar' mailv people aware that an individual striker, whether he belongs to a union or not, rcndcra himself lialde to be lined or imprisoned, This point is quite a new one to us. It has cropped up in a controversy between the ' Wellington newspapers. The "Times" explains the operation of the section dealing with Oio point, and says: "The Legislature has expressly declared that the individual striker, apart from his union, mav, if he commits all ofl'cnce. be punished' by a line. This was a new departure in industrial law, anil carried with it. to everyone understanding the law, (lie corollary of a penalty of imprisonment if the fine were not paid. There ale very good reasons why the imposition of heavy responsibilities upon imio.is

cannot by itself achieve what the exis:;iiij< law rail achieve. In the place, ; only ii si'ciioii of (lie workers bound oy an award arc unionists-it freuucnlly happens thai tin- men in ail •■mploy.TV, works arc all non-unionists. Should a Strike take place, the removal of lh> just ullirmcd special virtue of the ordinal Act would have made it impossible to lix responsibility anywhere. as seven worker.-* m'a\ cunslitiile a iiiiij i' and provide an award Idudiii"' llie whole trade, it would tie for unions lo keep themselves practically penui'ess and yet secure all the advantages of ibc Act. There is no u>e in making union,, completely liable unless all the workers engaged in a trade, or, at least, a -'lib. stantial number of them, are compelled to be members of a union, and this Die lias all aliui<{ refrained from doinny" It is ijuite true, as our coiitempofary H ocs on io say, that, on the oilier hand, employers are liable to penalties whether the)' belong to au etuployers' union „ r not,'and the individual employer may lie imprisoned if he does not, pay his line. Why should not the individual worker share the same peril';