The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-05-18
NEW zEALAND's HINT.


New Zealand, in tho view of Henry
Demorest Lloyd, has evolved system of
government under which trusts do not
thrive and strikes are unknown.
MIR. Lloyd may fairly be accepted as nm
authority or industrial subjects. His
book wealth Against Commonwealth"
has attracted 70 it's author much attention
on the rart Of students of economic ques-
tons ana bis recent work, "a Country
without Strikes" must enlarge his repu-
tation. In this latter work Mr.. Lloyd ex-
plains tho system in New Zealand by
which that colony has escaped the dire
consequences of trusts and strikes from
which the older States have so long SUI
fered and are now suffering.
New Zealands system is accredited TO
tho genius OF Labor Commissioner w, =.
Reeves, who in and out OF parliament in
sisted upon the enactment into law OF
compulsory arbitration until finally his
method was put in vogue.
/ Mr., Reeves method or law has passed
beyond tho stage OF mere experiment, In
asmuch as there has not been a strike in
( the British colony since January 1895
when the system went into effect Mean
while New Zealand has enjoyed an indus
trial development as pronounced as that
of any European or American country OF
proportionate resource and population
The essential features OF the law as pre-
scented by MIR. Lloyd are these:
.Trsa
which there are organized trades unions,
- It does not prevent private eonoIlia-
ton or arbitration.
90 Cancellation IL exhausted by tho State
before IL resorts to arbitration.
/ - Ii Cancellation is unsuccessful the
disputants must arbltrate.
-. Disobedieuce of the award may be
punished or not at the discretion OF the
court"
Mr. Lloyd adds;
1.-THE compulson OF the law is threefold.
Compulsory publicity compulsory reference
to a disnterestGd arbter-provided the dis
putants will not arbitrate voluntarily, COM
pulsoy obedience TO the award.
1T does not forbid nor prevent disputes
but makes the antagonists nght their bat.
ties in court according 70 the legal code In
stead OF the ordinary rules Of war.
There ia no mixing men work hy law
and no liking wages by law The law says
only that if they work Il must be without
strikes or loekouts aud that, Il they can
]
left TO come impartial person. and not fought
out"
\ contemporary, discussing these essen.
tial provisions of Mr. Reeves CAREFUL,
thought out law, declares that In spite Of
the wide character OF the government,
work IN New Zealand e is regulated b,
principles simple In application and thor,
ough in effect, No trusts exist, because
as soon as combination has been formet
to centralizc some Industry under on,
agency tho government steps in with tn,
determination and the ability to prov,
Itself the only worthy agent, On tn,
other hand. where thers Is still force II
competition. industry is left in priyat
hands. but these hands ara not permitted
to trespass upon the rights OF the EN-
ploye." Is there any reason why III,
same character OF system should not b,
tried in this country? At any rate thor,
:. is food Tor thought and perhaps spur Il
beneficial action In tho New zea'snd law
Our statesmen and law givers should lool
into II with courage and conscience,