CHECKING BOYCOTT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 83, Issue 48, 27 February 1939, Page 8

CHECKING BOYCOTT

STATE HAS NO POWER DIFFICULT MATTER TO DRAFT LEGISLATION * K. ~ PRACTICE HAS VARYING FORMS ( Per Press \s-oeiation.) CHRISTCHURCH, Feb. 25. “Existing legislation is not sufficiently comprehensive to enable the Government to prevent, or restrict, a boycott.’’ This point was discussed by the Minister of Housing (Hon. H. T. Armstrong) in an interview to-day. The practice of boycott could not be approved by anyone, he said. The problem had confronted him a few months ago, when he held the portfolio of Minister of Labour, and he found there was no means by which the Government could proceed against offenders. Additional legislation would be necessary before a boycott could be outlawed. It was open for a business man to proceed against an individual if he could prove that his business had b**en injured by a boycott, but there was no means by which the State could proceed against organisations. Mr. Armstrong added that it would not be easy to draft legislation, because a boycott was carried out in many forms and was extremely difficult to deal with. It could be carried out by registered and properly-consti-tuted organisations, and also by sections of the community that had no oorganisation in name or standing. Housewives of New Zealand, if they wished, could carry out a boycott of considerable proportions. Business firms, or even individuals, who had to contend with an organised effort of that sort would suffer greatly, and it would be extremely difficult for the Government to check the movement. The Minister also said that boycott was common practice in business circles. Many retailers knew, if they sold certain articles below a fixed price that their supplies would im-

mediately be cut off. This was another aspect of the problem that would have to be taken into consideration if additional legislation was being Introduced.