Although they had been called upon to suffer this reduction so early in the era of conciliation, the Federation Board did not lose faith in it as an advance in wage settlements. They said:
It may not be out of place to allude to a feature or two of the newly adopted method of dealing with wages regulations as disclosed by recent applications, and we may modestly, yet rightly, claim for it a superiority of character and practice over preceding modes. As already stated, it has by its earliest results confirmed the conviction previously held, that the standard relation of wages to prices governing previous methods was not correct, and established the increased average amount obtained by the negotiations of the past years.
At the next meeting of the Board the owners made another application for a reduction. When the July meeting took place the claim was brought forward. It was objected to at first, on the grounds that there had not been sufficient time, seeing the three months had not elapsed. The notice was withdrawn and renewed. The reasons assigned were the declension in the markets and the inadequacy of the previous reduction. These reasons were not accepted, and the umpire was again called in. His decision, after two days' hearing, was a reduction of two and a half per cent. In spite of this adverse circumstance the Federation Board were still strong in their belief in the utility of the system. They said:
We are not going to say that its course, so far as it has gone, has been pleasant, for there have been two reductions, but these do not shake our confidence in it. It is an unfortunate coincidence, the initiation of a new system when circumstances are unfavourable and its changes are downward. The true test of institutions, as of men, is their action in a variety of conditions. No arrangement can make trade prosperous. They are dreamers who think so, and are liable to a rude awakening. Wise men recognise the ever-recurring changes, and employ the means which are most expeditious, easy, and equitable in their responses. Friction between employer and employed is a foe to any trade, uncertainty is a sure and hurtful detriment, hastening and enlarging the times of adversity. Our opinion is that, if we have not the best system, we have one which will ward off friction, allay uncertainty, and induce steadiness in the trade of the county.
That clear and bold statement of their confidence in the Board was not effective in maintaining it, for at the Miners' Council held on November 16th it was resolved to take a ballot to test its continuance. The Federation Board, on being informed of that action, resolved to take it of all the sections. They at the same time advised their members to keep it intact. They did not find fault with the decision to take the ballot. Their advice was therefore not prompted by a spirit of complaint. It was right that these matters should rest on the will of the members. Their duty, however, was to guide the members and advise, even on subjects that were unpalatable. In October they placed before them their views in as clear a manner as possible. Those views they adhered to, and did not swerve from their belief in conciliation as the best system yet tried. It was condemned, because there had been reductions. If advances had come there would have been loud praise. Would wages not have been reduced if the Board had never been formed?
"Without hesitation we tell you that, in our opinion, he is a foolish or a designing man, or ignorant of commercial relations, who attempts to teach such a doctrine. We have never told you such an absurdity. When we asked you in the spring of the year to adopt conciliation we never dreamt of it as a fixed, immovable machine. To us it was (and is) a more mutual, closer, and smoother principle than we have ever had, taking within its comprehension other and important matters outside wages."
In spite of this pleading on the part of the Federation Board the voting was: for the Conciliation Board, 11,974; against it, 29,000; neutrals, 17,000, as a result of the miners' vote. The whole Federation vote was: for, 14,894; against, 30,587; neutrals, 20,000.
On the strength of that vote notice was given to terminate the Conciliation Board in accordance with rule.
1896
The Conciliation Board—Death of Mr Patterson