LABOR CONFERENCE

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 310, 9 February 1910, Page 5

LABOR CONFERENCE

1,481,308 MEMBERS REPRESENTED. AN IRKSOME JUDGMENT. j By Caole.—Press Association.—Copyright Received February 8, 0.15 p.m. London. February 8. Five thousand delegates of the Labor party are attending a conference at i Newport. They represent 1,481/308 members. The executive's report states that M the Osborne judgment remains, unionism will suffer a greater impediment thaa from the Tail Yale decision. The report regretted Mr. Robert Blatchford's " absurd and wicked outbursts" against Gerj many. The report declares that the new Parliament as unlikely to have ia long ! lease of life, and labor must prepare for another contest shortly. (A digest of the first of Robert Blatchford's striking articles, which created an enormous amount of interest in England and on the Continent, is published i on page 7 of this issue.) I What is, referred to as the Osborne judgment is the finding of the Judicial ! Committee of the House of Lords on the appeal lodged by the railwaymen against the decision of the Court of Appeal, given on November 28th, 1908, by the Master of the Rolls and Lords Justice Mouiton and Farwell in the appeal ease Osborne v. the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants. Vn this eas'e ihs plaintiff and appellant, the secretary of I the Walthamstow branch of the defendant society, alleged that sucli application was not within the objects of the society, and that alteration of certain rales was invalid. On the original test case, Mr. Justice Neville decided that trades union funds could be employed to influence legislation by securing representation in the House of Commons', and that a union had as much right to support Socialists as it had to support Unionists or Liberals. The Court of Appeal quashed this decision, holding that it was not competent, under the Trade Unions Act for a trade union to provide for Parliamentary representation by means of a compulsory levy, and that the alterations in the rules' were invalid. The judgment of the Judicial Committee was unanimous iii affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal. Lord Macnaghtcn,. concurring in Lord Halsbury's remarks, held that there was nothing in tin? Trade Union Acts conferring the powers of collecting and ad J ministering funds for political purposes. Lord James of Hereford declared that the application of money for the maintenance of a member whose act was regulated by a rule requiring membership of the Labor party was ultra vires. Lord Atkins'on held that such application was oppressive. Lord Shaw considered the imposing of conditions on a member of the House of Commons was contrary to public policy.