the powers that can be given for the establishment of permanent boards of arbitration that are consistent with the principle of freedom of contract. These boards have authority to fix future wages or prices, and power to enforce their awards by legal process. But the act only gives improved facilities for carrying out Mr. Kettle's plan, and awards can only be enforced as breaches of contract.

It is unnecessary to enter upon the question of whether an arbitration council under this act is a better mode of procedure, for either workman or employer, than the county court or the court of petty sessions; probably most persons would agree with me in thinking it worse than a county court or stipendiary magistrate, and probably not better as a court of justice than the court of petty sessions presided over by the ordinary justices of the peace. But this is not the difficulty. The real difficulty is, that most of the awards fixing rules or making contracts for a future period are subject to a very short notice. Therefore the contract is limited by the notice.

In the building trades, for example, the board

may settle the wages and conditions of labour for six or twelve months, but as the men and the employers are entitled to terminate the hiring at a minute's notice, payment being generally by the hour, there is nothing to prevent the employers from discharging the men, or the men from leaving their employment, whenever they choose to do so. If an award were given which the men thought unfavourable, there would be nothing to prevent them striking for better terms. Unless, therefore, the men and masters contract for a considerable time, or, which is the same thing, agree to lengthen the required notice, there is no legal means of enforcing the award. Moral means are in fact the true protection against such breach of faith. It is better, therefore, not to depend on legal means, but for both sides to rely solely on moral means and to endeavour to strengthen that in every way. By trusting to legal redress, I cannot but think that an obstacle is put in the way of the development of the mutual trust between employers and employed which is the only real reconciliation. The statute gives a very excellent form of contract, and may

possibly be used in some industries, but will have little practical effect, as the opinion of both employers and employed, confirmed by experience, is against legal and in favour of voluntary arbitration outside the law. Here, as in so many other parts of our social life, we find the legal system becoming inefficient and antiquated. Legal remedies and the legal system were created by the past. The law and the lawyers have been the instruments of part of the human progress, and they have still a great and noble work to do. But it is a work that must constantly diminish. Professional lawyers naturally exaggerate the importance of their own profession, and judges will inevitably attempt to arrogate to themselves a moral authority which they do not possess. On labour questions they have shown how utterly incapable they were of grasping the conditions of the moral problem. The history of their action in the Labour Laws and in the Law of Conspiracy ought to be the most valuable warning to the working classes not to trust to law for the solution of these great industrial and social difficulties. The law and our tribunals,

L

admirable and worthy of veneration as they often are, cannot be the means of reconciling capital and labour. 1

1

See statute 35 & 36 Vict., chap. 46, Masters and Workmen (Arbitration), in the Appendix.

NDUSTRIAL conciliation is an economical success. This is a mere truism, as far as the putting a stop to strikes

or lock-outs is concerned. Industry,

instead of being subject to constant interruptions, is continuous. The waste and misery consequent on stoppage, even for a short time, are avoided. Objections are, however, drawn from the truths of political economy to invalidate the position of the advocates of arbitration and conciliation. Some of these have no real foundation; others, which have a very narrow foundation, raise important questions for our consideration.