THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. MONDAY, JULY 6, 1908. A DEPLORABLE MANIFESTO.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9134, 6 July 1908, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. MONDAY, JULY 6, 1908. A DEPLORABLE MANIFESTO.

If the manifesto issued by the Parliamentary Committee of the Wellington Trades and Labour Council represents at all accurately the "views" of organised labour on the economic problems of the Dominion, then we must confess that, in our opinion, every enlightened, broad-minded man who genuinely sympathises with Labour will regard the statements made in the manifesto as deplorable in the extreme. Apart from discussion of the manifesto itself, it may be remarked that Labour candidates for Parliament with such a platform would be doomed to inevitable disappointment. No right thinking voter, whether he be an employer or an employee, could vote for nlen with such avowed principles. The "New Zealand Times" describes the "methods" of the Trades and Labour Council as "arbitrary, unconstitutional and dishonest," but it might have suitably continued the description by adding that they are utterly foolish; and.what is worse still the framers of the manifesto display a bitter and utterly unreasonable spirit towards employers. The Committee referred to have, in their report, criticised Dr Findlay's recent speech in Wellington on the Arbitration

Act, and have pointed out several weaknesses in the learned doctor's speech; but the importance of these criticisms lies in the fact that they show how widely divergent are the views of the Government and the Trades and Labour (buncil. The Government are, undoubtedly.anxious to conciliate Labour, but desire to see something approaching reasonable relationships between capital and labour in order to avoid those industrial upheavals that result in the injury of all classes. The Wellington Trades and Labour Council, however, appear to favour "red-flag" Socialism, which would be just as good for the constitution of the country as a condition of "hlueflag" anarchy. The manifesto declares that Labour should endeavour' to',bring about "the gradual Socialisation of all industries." This declaration, although intensely foolish, is intended to be absolutely hostile so far as employers are concerned. Everyone knows that the Arbitration Act was passed in order to prevent strikes, and in the hope that the awards of the Court would be loyally observed by both employers and employees. The Trades and Labour Council urge that "no body of workers should be forced to accept conditions antagonistic to their feelings"; and that the workers should not be deprived of their right to strike. We quite concur in this view. Striking is the natural method, so to speak, by which Labour fights Capital, and to compel men to work against their wish is to institute a condition of slavery, but if the workers set up a tribunal—to wit, thd Arbitration Court —and ask that the awards of the Court shall be binding upon employers they should loyally observe those awards, for the employers are, practically, deprived of their right to strike, or to agitate for alterations in awards. But the Trades and Labour Council want the Arbitration Act; they want the awards to bind employers, but not employees. The Labour party in effect says, "Let us keep the Act, let us use the Court as a means to crush the employer, let the Court make awards galore, and let us have the right to strike whenever we wish, and in face of whatever the Court may have decided in ourfavour." We do not know, but we are inclined to take it that the propounding of such a view is a step in the direction of "the gradual socialisation of all industries." Of this, however, we are certain that a few more manifestoes of the kind discussed will considerably retard the progress of tha Labour party by alienating the sympathy of many ' whom the Labour party could probably count amongst its ranks to-day.