HE TABLET.
A W eek ly N ew sp ap er a n d R ev iew .
DUM VOBIS GRATULAMUX, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS OT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEAT.S.
From, the B r i e f of H i s H o lin ess P iu s I X , to T h e T a b l e t , June 4, lisfo .
V o l . 9 2 . No. 3 0 6 0 .
L o n d o n , D e c e m b e r 3 1 , I 8 q 8 .
P r ic e sd., by P o s t 5%d,
[R e g i s t e r e d a t t h e G e n e r a l P o s t O f f i c e a s a N ew s p a p e r .
C h ronicle o f t h e W e e k : Page
Arbitration and Industrial W a r— The New Zealand Precedent— Mr. Balfour and the Liberal Leadership— Prince Bismarck and the Culterkampf — The F i f t h Funeral of Columbus — Second Class Duels— The Dreyfus Case — British Explorers and Jesuit Missioners— Excitement in Johannesburg — Storms of Wind and Rain — Christmas Work of the Post Office—England and France in China— The Panama Canal— Fighting in British East Africa . . 1037 L e a d e r s :
E n g l a n d ’ s Responsibility to
Africa .................................... 1041 Ladies and Gentlemen . . . . 1042 The Anglican Crisis . . . . 1042
CON 7
L e a d e r s (Continued) :
Page
Fra Girolamo Savonarola ..1044 Straight from Rome . . ..1047 N o t e s . . . . _ _ ..1049 Armenian Benedictines at Venice ..1051 Jubilee o f the Bishop of Newport 1051 The Present Distress in the Church of England . . . . . . ..10 51 C o r r e s p o n d e n c e :
Rome :— (From Our Own Corre
spondent) . .
— —1053
News from Ireland _ -1054 News from F rance.. . . ..1055 L e t t e r s t o t h e E d i t o r :
A Short W ay With D r. Horton 1056 The Word ‘ ‘ Protestant ” . . . . 1056 Purgatory in Hindu Philosophy 1057 The Leighton-Buzzard Burial
Board . . . . . . ..1057
: N 7 S
L e t t e r s t o t h e E d it o r (Con
Page tinued) : An 111 W in d .. .......................... 1057 The Indian Famine . . ..1058 English-Speaking C o n f e s s o r s
Abroad . . . . . . . . 1058 Company-Promoting in Ceylon ..1058 R ev ie w s :
St. Thomas o f Canterbury ..1058 The Minor Prophets . . ..1059 L'Education Nouvelle . . ..1060 Benedictine . . 1060 The Duenna of a Genius.. ..1060 Mrs. Carmichael’s Goddesses ..1061 Some New Editions . . ..1061 The Ritual Controversy . . ..1061 Gifts to South Kensington.. ..1063 O b it u a r y . . *. ~ —1063 So c ia l a n d P o l i t i c a l ..1064
SUPPLEMENT. Page N ew s from t h e S chools :
The School Boards and Secon
dary Education.. . . ..1069 St. Ignatius’ College, Stamford
Hill . . . . . . ..10 71 Prize D ay at St. Joseph’s College,
D um f r ie s .................................... 1071 Wimbledon College _ . . . . 1072 Training for Catholic Secondary
Teachers . . . . . . ..1072 Football . . . . . . ..1072 N ew s from t h e D io c e se s : Westminster . . . . ..1072
Southwark . . . . ». ..1073 Liverpool . . . . . . — 1073 Salford »• . . ... ...1074 Newport . . . . ..1074 St. Andrews and Edinburgh ..1075 Glasgow . . . . ... —1075
Rejected MS, cannot be returned unless accompanied with address and postage.
CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK.
--------- »--------
TH E Bishop of Hereford being much concerned, as a Bishop should be, i n d u s t r i a l w a r . for the suffering and distress caused by strikes and lock-outs, has suggested that both parties to an industrial dispute should be obliged to submit to arbitration. Sir Edward Fry points out that to begin with the term “ compulsory arbitration ” is an odd one,implying, as it seems to, that a man can be compelled to act of his own free will. But at any late the words indicate with sufficient clearness what is meant. Sir Edward Fry puts the case with simplicity and accuracy thus : “ By compulsory arbitration is meant a right in an employer or body of employers to say to a workman or a body of workmen, ‘ You shall work for wages to be settled by a judge,’ and the corresponding right ot a workman or a body of workmen to say to an employer or employers, ‘ You shall carry on your business and find us employment and pay us wages at a rate to be fixed by a judge.’ Now, consider what results from such a remedy as an arbitration of this sort. By some means or other, by fine oi imprisonment or damages, the master must be liable to be compelled against his will to carry on his works and pay his men, though by so doing he may be losing money, may be kept at work when he desires leisure, or when sickness or languor or old age make business toilsome and difficult. And, in like manner, the workman must be compelled to labour whether he will or no ; he must be prevented from leaving his work and seeking employment in other quarters of the world.” To understand the proposal is to recognize its absurdity. What power is there to compel all the members of a great trade union to continue to work for a wage with which they are dissatisfied ? On the other hand, is a man to be compelled to carry on his business at a loss or under conditions which he believes will end by bringing him to bankruptcy ? Again, if the dispute is not about wages, but about the rate for piece work, or overtime, or fines for unpunctuality, or the dismissal of a foreman, would a decision in the favour of the union make the employer liable to imprisonment if he tried to engage other men to whom his proposals were not distasteful ? And how would it be possible, if the decision were in favour of the employer, to punish a crowd of labourers who preferred to take employment elsewhere. T o these objections the Bishop has no real answer. He contents himself with falling back on generalities about the lawabiding qualities of Englishmen, and asks: “ Is it possible that the alleged spirit of lawlessness among the clergy is affecting the lay mind and exercising a baneful influence on the English character ? ” Curiously enough he seems to think that the case is made simpler by multiplying the numbers on each side. He tells us, as if it were a great point on h's side, “ that such a Court would deal not with the particular employer he quotes, or his 10,000 particular workmen, but with combinations of capitalists and unions of workmen, both easily reached by the arm of the law.” The idea that the law could constrain half a million tradeunionists to go on working their best for wages they regarded as unfair is certainly novel. If the State cannot coerce one employer or one set of workmen how shall it fare when it tries to coerce vast combinations of workmen or employers ? In fact the Bishop does not seem to have thought out the difficulties of the case.
The Bishop cites the case of New Zealand, — t h e and tries rather ingeniously to shift the onus Npre c e d e n t !D probandi by asking his opponents to explain why a system which has worked with “ the happiest results ” in the Colony should not be successful in Great Britain. In the first place the New Zealand law, applicable to a small scattered population and a country in which manufactures have hardly begun to be developed, has been in force less than four years. The law provides that no award shall he in force for a longer period than two years and no process shall issue for the enforcement of an award by payment of a greater sum than ^500. Such a fine would of course excite a smile if imposed upon any important body of trade-unionists. But apart from the fact that the experience of a small population, chiefly devoted to pastoral and agricultural occupations, would be ot small value to an industrial society such as exists in these islands, there is reason to doubt the accuracy of the Bishop’s statement that the colonial law has been attended “ with the happiest results ” even in New Zealand. Many contend that it is driving capital from the country, is checking enterprise and begetting litigation, and is altogether disastrous. One of the men who helped to pass the Act, now associated with the name of Mr. Reeves, the Hon. J. MacGregor says : “ Not only has the action of the Court been the theme of much adverse comment, but it has caused alarm among employers and capitalists, and grave misgivings
N e w S e r i e s . Vol. LX . , No. 2,369.
