THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2220, 18 June 1908, Page 3

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL.

SPEECH IN WELLINGTON. [Press Association.] WELLINGTON, June 17. Tlio Hon. Dr. Findlay delivered a speech in Wellington to-night, sup; plementing bis recent Wanganui speech and replying to criticisms thereon and to a statement that sweating bad been abolished by the Factories, not the Arbitration, Act. He pointed out that the wages of tailoresses and factory bands wore raised by -the Arbitration Court years before the passing of tlio Factories Act in 1901. • During thirteen years there had ■ been eighteen strikes, all really small and short-live'!, and only twelve of these has been illegal. In these strikes less than one per cent of the total wage-earns had been involved, while tlio flays of idleness due to them were few in number. In Britain, in a- given decade, 20 per cent of the workers were at some time or other directly involved in labor conflict, and the average days of idleness were 39 per man. Dr Findlay repeated and amplified his argument at Wanganui that tho increase in the cost of living was due only in a very small degree to tho Arbitration Act, but to enhanced prices of foodstuffs in foreign markets and the great increase in the unimproved value; of land and the cost of building material. The speaker admitted that the Conciliation Boards had entirely failed to achieve the results anticipated by Mr. Reeves. Conciliation really had no place, and the Boards became a kind of fifth wheel in a coach. Some effective method of enforcing fines, short of imprisonment, was urgently required. He thought the provision in the Act preventing victimising needed amendment. Dr. Findlay quoted statistics compiled from income tax figures, showing that the various trading and industrial concerns are assessed on £7,775,579, but allow; aucos for interest and rent would considerably reduce these profits, inasmuch as at least £40,000 was invested to produce tlieso profits. Ho did not assert tfiat the great body of workers were receiving wages which justified no increase, but unless more wealth was produced by increased effort and co-operation on the part of both employers and employed, there was not much prospect of any marked increase iir the general level of the workers’ wages. Dr. Findlay then askerl what was to guide the Arbitration Court in fixing wages. Ho dismissed the pro-fit-sharing principle as impossible in his belief. .If compulsory. arbitration rvas to continue it must continue, to be' a wage regulator, and the best standard for its guidance was a doublo or rather a primary and a supplementary . standard. The primary standard should be the needs of the worker, and tho wage based on it should be not a bare subsistence wage but one which would allow enough for all conventional decencies essential to a worker’s self-respect-. The needs wage should be supplemented by an exertion wage providing for extra payment- for extra work. The practice of paying a premium wage to one or two operatives in order to force Lie pace bad been rightly condemned bv tlie trade unions, -but it bad never been tried under a compulsory Arbitration- Act with power to_ prevent abuses. Where a progressive wage for individual workers was impracticable. a collective progressive wage could be paid. To give all workers, fast or slow; . skilful or careless, the same payment tended to degrade the labor system. . . A resolution of confidence in the Government was carried at the conclusion of Dr. Findlay’s speech,