THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1907. JUDGE AND AGITATOR.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9017, 2 January 1908, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1907. JUDGE AND AGITATOR.

The position assumed by Mr Andrew Collins, the workers' representative on the Wellington Conciliation Board, is intolerable, and unless the law is speedily amended, making it illegal for every member of a Board to take an active part in the organisation of industrial unions, or in fomenting discontent among oragnised or unorganised labour, all confidence in the Boards will be lost. Under the present law it appears that there is nothing to prevent a member of a Conciliation Board from enacting the role of labour agitator, or becoming a remunerated or gratuitous stirer-up of industrial strife —nothing to prevent him from advocating unionistic ciaims for higher wages and then sitting on the Conciliation Bench as a jjdge of the claims of the men j whose cause he may have favourably pre-judged. The employers' representatives possess equal liberty with the representatives of the workers, and if they chose to act as Mr Collins has done there would soon be an end to conciliation. The Legislature, in passing the Act provided for ordinary causes of disqualifications —insanity, bankruptcy, etc., such as apply to members of Parilament and judges of the Supreme Court—and also that a member of the Board shall not incite a breach of an award; but there is nothing to prevent a member j inciting to apply for an award or ex- I pressing an opinion as to the claims j that should be set up before the i Board. Parliament never contem- j plated the possibility of such ,perver- 1: bion of obvious duty upon the part of

any appointee to the honourable position of public conciliator, and therefore did not provide against it. It is only to be expected that partizan ship should be more or lesj conspicuous in a body set up to adjust conflicting: industrial interests where two of the conciliators have personal interests more or less opposed to each other; but the Board sitting as a semi-judicial body can come to a fairly equitable decision upon the basis of compromise. Anyhow, that has been the rule in the past; but how is the spirit of equity to have any chance when a member of a Board, sitting as a conciliator, {joes out of his way to raise discontent throughout portions of die country where industriai ppace reigned and contentment with present wages was a marked characteristic of the workers. This is what Mr Andrew Collins, Arbitrator and Conciliator. ha& done, and which it may be assumed lie is likely to do again, seeing that he considers his attitude to be perfectly justifiable. This week, when the Shearers' dispute was formally commenced at Wellington, Mr Cooper, a vice-president of the Welingtnn branch of the New Zealand Farmers' Union, stated that the owners did not wish to tender evidence because one of the members of tne Board had taken an part in the formation of the Shearers' Union, and the confidence of the employers in the Board, as at present constituted, had in consequence ben lestroyed. A condition of things, he said, had been brought about which they as scandalous. Mr Collins boldly admitted his action in regard to shearers. It appeared to him, he said, that the only way in which the shearers could obtain better conditions was by organising, and he had assisted to organise them. He declared that he was not present when the demands were formulated* but added, with cynical candour, that "if he had been present he would certainly have urged the shearers to adopt the samd course as the shearers in Australia had and demand 24s per 100 instead of 205." Here, then, we have a distinct judgment by one at least of the judges before the case came before the Board. Can anything be more improper, more subversive of the principles of justice! No wonder the owners prefer to go before the Court for an adjustment of the dispute. It is to be hoped that similar troubles will not arise in regard to the administration of that judicial bench. The tone adopted by one of the recent appointees tc the Arbitration Court is such as to somewhat impair the confidence hitherto felt in it. The Legislature should hasten to amend the law, so that confidence in the bodies having jurisdiction over the labour matters should be as full and complete as it is in the judges of the Supreme Court. Meahwhile it would be but decent if Mr Collhs absented himself from the Conciliation Board during the hearing of any dispute which he'has aided in establishing.