Page:Life·of·Seddon•James·Drummond•1907.pdf/273

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
Concilition and Arbitration
251

as a whole, or with any item, it can refer the whole case, or the disputed point, to the Court, and the Board’s connection with the dispute is then at an end.

In practice, however, the Boards, useful though they proved themselves to be, have been thrust aside. They are still brought into requisition occasionally, but, as has been shown, they failed to do what was expected of them, and the bulk of the business that ought to go to them is now passed straight on to the Court. As some recompense for the treatment they have received, the opinions of the Board, by an amending Act, instead of being mere recommendations, are given legal force, in default of an appeal against them to the Court. The Boards, therefore, have in a way been made courts of first instance.

Before leaving the Boards it will not be out of place to quote the words of Mr. Justice Cooper at Christchurch, after an attack had been made on them. He said:—

“I would be very sorry if there was any impression in the public mind that the Boards are not a necessary part of the Act. They are very necessary. They are capable of bringing the men and the employers together, and in many instances they have succeeded in conciliating.”

Continuing, he said that he thought his colleagues would agree with him that the Canterbury Board of Conciliation had done very good work, and he, for his part, would be very sorry to see the Boards abolished. He spoke for his colleagues as well as himself when he said that the Boards were an inherent feature of the Act, and, as far as he knew, they had done their work faithfully and well.