April, 1913. 



History of the fHonin. 



1 iie [X>.sitioii ol tii«' tiaiii\\a\ iiitMi is 



The Tramway humiliating. Tiiey have l)eeii 



Men. graiitcil the opportunity of wearing 



union badges, by the award of Mr. 

 Justice Higgins. but their work has gf>ne. And 

 public o|jinion will feel generally that they deserve 

 the situation created. For the decision come to 

 would have lieen arrived at without a strike, and all 

 its attendant jlis. An appeal could have been m.ule 

 to the Arbitration Court with just as much forc:-, and 

 with far more puiilic sympathy. .\s it was they for- 

 feited ])ublic resjiect, and put themselves entirely 

 out of court as far as any practical result is con- 

 cerned, for they now have no uniforms to display 

 their badges on. In principle and in practice the 

 position of the men would have been in no wise 

 whatever affected, if the men had temjKjrarily ac- 

 cepted the condition of the com|)any as to the 

 wearing of badges, and had then referred their com- 

 plaint to the Court. In hours of working, in pay, 

 in general conditions, they would ha\c suffered 

 not at all. 



.\Ir. Justice Higgins has given his 

 The award in favour of the men, decid- 



Award. i,,jr th^t none of the c':!mpanie.s con 



I'crned have a legal rigiit to dictai' 

 to till- <niploytes as to what they .should wear. Tlie 

 decision is to g<i l)efore the High Court, .so that 

 comment on it is out of the question. But aside from 

 the actu.il verdict, there are some observations of 

 the judge upon tiie question at large tiuit might be 

 jiriifitably discuN^ed. It is the learned judge's 

 opinion that the badge is not the cause of bitter 

 fwling. which, he says, is caused bv the class feel- 

 ing behind it, ami that if employers did not .seek 

 to crush unionism, there wouhl be no trouble. As 

 a j)rof)osition stated in general terms, that may be 

 said to \h' thi- [Niint of view of probably every 

 unionist. But tin- dilTiculty goes back farther th.ui 

 that, and lies in the bitter feeling anil class hatred 

 that ha\e been cultivated in the hearts of men who 

 h.ne l)een taught 10 look upon the men who employ 

 tliem as highwa\nien. Under a liberal diet of this 

 kind of thing, bl.itant iniioni.sm has gone forth ujKin 

 .1 kind of civil n.irfare. preying not only upon the 

 employrs. but npon the communit\ in general, and 

 Iwiking upon itself as the supreme dictator. 



Dfstlnctive -^'"l ''1*-" question ari.ses as to how 



Incilenicnts f.n' <*ni|)loyers slioulil go on striving 



l» t') prevent a distinction betwe<Mi 



Disorder. .mitions of the wfirkmen who are s<i 



flistinctly opjxtsed in their methods. be<-omiiig njipa- 



rent to such an e.vtent as to i)rovok<- trouble Mm 



mav rliffer wiilelv in religious ln-liefs. They may 



fe«-l wj strongb that if the |X)ints at issue wer<- 



raised it would create instant trfuible, but .so long 



as it is not oldriid' d they work side t)y si<le amicably. 



But if each wor^ distin<"tive colours, and used the 



badge as an op|)f)ri unity to rail at each other, an em- 



pl<)_\er slioulcl lune tne rigm to sa\ , " What vou 

 [>elievt.- religiously makes no difference to me. Be- 

 lieve what you choose, but do the work I pay you 

 for, and as long as you work for me, cease wearing 

 the emblem that means the stirring up of strife." 

 The same argument api)lies to a political belief as 

 api)lies to a religious one. An employer surelv has 

 the right to say. " Vou shall not wear anything 

 when engaged in ni\ work that is going to cause 

 strife becau.se of its indications of the political be- 

 lief you hold. Vou come here to work. Leave 

 your religious and political differences outside." It 

 would, of course, be urged that the union badge 

 affects the things that the men are engaged ujxjn, and 

 should be considered apart from such questions as 

 .sectarian i.ssues. But the fact that the matter is 

 one that concerns the everyday work of the men 

 inake.s it more neces.sary that e\ery cause of friction 

 should lie removed. And when men on trams are 

 insulted both by their fellows and the general jiub- 

 lic for not wearing union badges, it is time that the 

 outward and visible sign of offence should be 

 removed. And if anyone wants convincing as to 

 the Lalx)ur Party being a distinct political ,lx)dy, h© 

 must move about both, blind and deaf. 



Mr. Ju.stice Higgins does not like 

 Unwise unions other than tho.se of the 



Distinction. jy^,]^^ Hall type, and regards them 

 a^ enemies of Trades Hall union- 

 ism. a\erring that the law has recogniseil unions, 

 and that an Arbitration Court would be unwork- 

 able without them. That is true, but it seems a 

 wrong \iew to take to discriminate between unions, 

 and to try to insist that they all should be of one 

 type. .An Indeiiendent Unionist is just as true a 

 worker's representative as a Trades Hall unioni.st. 

 In fact, he is a more worthy reijresentative than 

 th-* other, for he proclaiins the common interests of 

 employer and employee, and puts out of his pro- 

 gramme the .strike sjjirit. He seeks higher thinors 

 thaji the Trades Hall unionist, who is concerned" 

 only with better wages, thinking nothing of the 

 general uplift of man. He recognises that if he 

 has any difliculty with his employers, it should lie 

 sKtled by friendly argument, and th.ii it is a matter 

 of the tra<le concerned alone, and not of a score of 

 other trades too. It is quite conceivable that if the 

 unionism which Mr. Justice Higgins derides were 

 widespread, there would lit; no .Arbitration Court. 

 For Inrlependent Unionism is preaching a doctrine 

 of equal rights between employer and employee, and 

 laughs at the suggestion of employers of labour lieiiig 

 lufessarily highwavmen. or employees as Esaus, 

 selling their birthrights for messes or pottage. 

 In the same wav Mr. Justice Higgins puts 

 th<> s4'al of his disapproval on what are 

 termed "compaiu unions," on the ground 

 that the compain likes them better than 

 Trar|c-s H.ill t nions. But is it anv wondi-r? 



