The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE. TUESDAY, MAY 24, 1892.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 3098, 24 May 1892, Page 2

The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE.

TUESDAY, MAY 24, 1892.

Equal and exact justice to all men, Of whatsoever state or persuasion, religious or political.

Lord Salisbury is reported by cable to have stated that Parliament is powerless to remedy the evils which result from labour disputes. His meaning no doubt was that the legislation was powerless to prevent strikes. The Times has charged him in consequence with inconsistency, no doubt basing the accusation on the fact that his Government caused tho appointment of the Royal Commission still sitting to enquire into the state of the different trades, and suggest if possible means, which by their enactment would improve the position of the workmen, and at the same time not cause the withdrawal of capital from industries, with the inevitable result that employment would be more scarce and the trades fall into the hands of foreign competitors. It may be assumed that liability to strikes would be lessened in proportion to the utility of the measures adopted. Some of the evidence given before the Royal Commission discloses facts which cannot fail to produce in the mind mixed feeling of wonder and horror. Wonder that such a state of affairs should have resulted from our boasted civilization, and horror that vast numbers of our fellow creatures should be condemned to a state of existence which it is pitiable to contemplate and from which, under existing circumstances, no exertions of their own are capable of raising them. It is possible that legislation might improve the condition of many of these people, but as we have pointed out there is the danger to be avoided of depriving them of employment altogether, with the result that they would become a burden on the State. As to the prevention of strikes by legislation, we go the whole length with Lord Salisbury. The idea is as difficult, not to say as impossible of realisation as the dream of those who look forward to the time when the settlement of all international disputes will be by arbitration. This is so for the reason that no possible means can be suggested to enforce the decision of any Courts that may he instituted. It is manifest that no legislature would enact penalties for refusing to work or refusing to employ. In the absence of these, the court could only review the facts and advise in conformity therewith, and appeal to the sense of right of those against whom, an adverse decision is given. Arbitrators, mutually agreed upon, can do all this, and the modo of their appointment renders their decisions move morally binding upon the disputants than there is any reason to hope would be the case with, those of a legally constituted body to whom reference was made compulsory. It may be relied upon that so long as human nature remains unchanged, those who believe themselves strong enough to enforce their claims will not hesitate to use their strength in the form of wars or strikes, as the case may be, or by any other means that suggest themselves. English statesmen have a very difficult question to solve. Free trade has had the result of rendering farming, if not altogether unproductive, such a precarious industry that large uumbers are gradually withdrawing from it. This is mainly the case in consequence of the freely imperied food supplies from the other countries, which owing to their climate or other conditions can afford to sell at prices which on an average of years are unremunerative to the Home farmer. The result is the payment of exceedingly low wages in the agricultural districts and the flocking of labour to the commercial and manufacturing centres. The supply being in excess of the demand, the labourers' position is often in consequence worse rather than better. England being a manufacturing country, to impose duties on the food supply would be to hamper her industries, as the cost of living would be increased, and as a natural sequitur the rate of wages. This would, of course, reduce still further the chance of her manufactures competing successfully in the markets of the world. It is no doubt consideration of these facts which has led to Lord Salisbury's proposition to resort to a retaliatory customs tariff, he excludes food supply but instances wines, silks, aud other luxuries. The customs duties levied at the ports of the continental nations which export these articles aro very heavy as against English manufactures, whereas England's froo trade policy enables foreigners to compete in her own markets. His idoa is to compel reciprocity, which implies a return to a policy of proteeti m, excepting as regards food supply and raw material. This would be a measure in the interests solely of the urban population, and would render the position of tho

landholder worse and that of the farmer still more untenable. The proposal has naturally been condemned on these grounds, and in addition it is exceedingly problematical if it would have the effect of lessoning either the number or virulence of trade disputes, That these will ever cease is beyond hope, in the ordinary course of events the prices of commodities fluctuate, and a rise or fall in price suggests a reduction of wages on the one hand or an increase on the other. It appears impossible that any measure of Parliament could supply the machinery which would point out or provide a royal road to agreement as to what is the medium which would be just to both parties, or what is of equal importance compel obedience to the decisions arrived at.