JAPANESE SHIPS.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 October 1920, Page 2

JAPANESE SHIPS.

MR. P. FILACER'S QUESTION AND SBAMBN'S RESOLUTIONS.

Says Wednesday N.Z. Times: Mr. Eraser's question in the House, which the Prime Minister answered yosterday, was obviously a protest against the arrangement made for bringing coal to New Zealand from Newcastle (New South Wales) in Japanese ships. Mr. i'raser said, that this is unfair to steamers employing British seamen. Now, Mr. I'raser, like everybody else, must earn his screw, and that ha was earning it in the only way opefi to him was proved yesterday by. the resolution passed by the stop-work meeting of the Seamen's Union. The resolution strongly protested against the employment of Japanese steamers with Japanese crews in the intercolonial trade, and called upon the union headquarters to take immediate action in the interest of the whole membership. As Mr. Massey pointed out in his reply to Mr. leaser, the employment of these ships is not against the Shipping Law of New Zealand, as the ships are not engaging in the coastal trade. Therefore, we trust that "headquarters" will -be better advised than to paralyse the maritime trade of the Dominion at the request of a stop-work meeting in Wellington. Mr. Fraser may have been quite right to earn his screw, as we have said. But there is another obligation incumbent oil all fair-minded men. It is to play the game. The men who voted yesterday's resolution are not playing the game. The trans-action they, protest against is lawful; but let that pass. The circumstances, however, are such as make this assertion of privilege disastrous to the public. The Japanese ships are not competing; they are doing work which other ships available cannot do, and the work is of vital necessity to the public of this Dominion. The use of these ships is obviously temporary, as well as a much needed relief. Moreover, it makes no difference in the status, wages, and prospects of the local seamen. The resolution, therefore, asks for the bare assertion of a right, with certainty of a widespread, grievous suffering, which assertion can in no way benefit the seamen, whom it will, at the same time, deprive of wages. By no process of reasoning can - anybody call this playing the game. If the resolution means that the scarcity of coal, on which certain people depend in industrial disputes, is likely to become accentuated, then it is masquerading under a false pretence of defending a priviloge, which, moreover, is not attacked. In that case, of course, the English language has not words strong enough for adequate condemnation. If, on the other hand, the resolution is a mere protest which, when made, is considered no more than a precaution against a bad precedent, and is intended to go no further, then the resolution satisfies the condition of "playing the game." °