Resisting the squatters' new agreement

*THE WORKER*

Brisbane July 7, 1894

THE EDITORIAL MILL.

Our Motto: “Socialism in our times.”

The letter of Mr. William Hampson in another portion of this journal is worth the perusal of all who desire to understand the true feeling and spirit of many of the men “out back” regarding the present dispute with the federated squatters. Mr. Hampson's letter has apparently been written by a man who has had considerable bush experience, and knows what he is talking about. It is an epistle which would do credit to men who make literature their profession, contains much sound wisdom undeteriorated by a passionate or revengeful spirit, and is particularly welcome at a stage when certain designing persons desire to reap a political advantage by proffering a fund of cheap sympathy to a large body of injured and insulted men whose existence, as Mr. Hampson puts it, at other times never occasions even a passing thought.

* * *

One thing is evident, and that is the majority of the bush workers are in favour of resisting the squatters' new agreement, and raising the rouseabouts' reduced wages to 30s. per week. The Queensland bush contains probably as large a percentage of good and true, level – headed unionists as are to be found in any part of the world – men who can reason intelligently and who think twice before arriving at conclusions; men who have been educated in the university of hard graft; men who know what it is to suffer, who have made mistakes and profited by them; men of the world, in the good sense of the term. And a majority of these men appear resolved to resist the cruel and tyrannical terms of a band of heartless business men who desire to conduct their stations on commercial principles, i.e. principles which embody no ethical considerations, and contain nothing to prevent the average pastoralist from reducing the wages of his employ'es to Chinese level.

* * *

Given a fair show the bushmen ought to win easily, for there can be no doubt there is not the number of unemployed in the province there was in 1890. The Courier, when urging the pastoralists to confer, admitted this, and Mr. Bell, M.L.A. (a pastoralist), lately gave it as his experience that he had not met so many men out of work as in past years. The main hope of the squatters is not so much the unemployed outside the unions, as the want of unanimity amongst the unionists. It is plain the pastoralists think the unionists will not hang together long enough to win the strike. They are well aware of the privations endured by the average bushman so eloquently described in Mr. Hampson's letter, and think the weak unionists and the blacklegs will break up the spirit of the rest. But they never made a bigger mistake. Weak unionists and blacklegs generally only give in when a large number of scabs are available. Where are the scabs to come from? Are they in Brisbane? Are they in Sydney, where now there are tens for the thousands of unemployed there in 1890-91? Are they in Melbourne? Or are they scattered throughout New Zealand, West Australia and the prospecting district of New South Wales? I firmly believe, and it is the belief of many sterling unionists, that if the bushmen preserve anything like unanimity the squatters can't fill their places. Some men will no doubt want to blackleg, but these men must be gently but firmly impressed with the necessity of refraining from cutting the ground from under the feet of their fellow men who can see further into the designs of the squatters than the weak ones. Every man is amenable to reason if the views of those who wish to convince him are vigorously and eloquently expressed. As a rule a blackleg is a moral as well as a physical coward, and usually deserts the field rather than bear the righteous indignation of men who pour out with warmth their surprise and wrath at the actions of a foolish knave who would assist a small band of Fat Men to compel thousands to work on their terms or starve.

* * *

Much has been written against strikes, but it is a great mistake to discard the old weapon of the strike until the “bright steel blade” of the ballot – box has been proved to be effective. Parliament will undoubtedly emancipate the wage – earners from the thraldom of Capitalism eventually. Until, however, we have a majority of Labour representatives in Parliament pledged to Socialistic legislation, the strike is our only weapon of defence. We have in Parliament 17 Labour members now, but they are powerless when opposed to the remaining 55 anti – Socialist representatives of the capitalistic system and an Upper Chamber composed of a number of irresponsible old gentleman who would rather “bring down their gray hairs in sorrow to the grave” than pass a measure likely to give real relief to wage – earners in the shape of a legal right to work at a minimum rate of wages. Until we get a majority of Labour delegates in the Lower House, and abolish the Upper Chamber, we must strike or accept employers' terms. There is nothing else for it. We may delude ourselves into thinking that if we accept lower rates now prosperity will soon return, and then we shall receive an increased rate of pay. But before prosperity can return the people must have higher wages, and they won't get a higher rate unless Parliament decrees it or they strike for it, or in other ways convince the employers they are entitled to them, the latter being a very difficult matter. It doesn't appear to me to be a hard task to demonstrate this.

The mass of the people (90 out of every 100) are wage earners, brain or hand workers who toil for wages; they are the consumers on whom the generality of business people must rely to purchase their goods. If the consumers have high wages, trade is good and prosperity general. If the consumers have low wages, trade is bad, and the only men who prosper are a small number of large capitalists who will avail themselves of the general wreck and the people's misfortunes to become wealthier still. Now the only real cause of depression should be famine or similar disaster. If the country suffers from drought or excessive rainfall destroying flocks and herds and food stuffs, then one might reasonably expect a depression in trade. But Queensland on the average has excellent seasons, and is the most fertile province of Australia. Gold, the medium of exchange, the means whereby we exchange a bullock for a suit of clothes without leading the animal round by the nose, is produced in large quantities. Sheep and cattle increase abundantly. Agricultural and horticultural products flourish in every way. And yet there is depression!

* * *

There is depression because a comparatively few men have possession of the land and capital of the country, and are engaged in a mad struggle for wealth. And the squatters comprise a section of these men. As remarked last week, there are a number of the squatters who may be in the hands of the banks and other financial institutions, but then at the worst, as a rule, the squatter who has sufficient credit to get into the hands of the banks is put on to mange his late station at a salary of £5 per week. He doesn't roam the country “bluey up,” as the workers are compelled to, in search of employment. Work is found for him, and it is doubtful whether; his deposition from squatter to manager costs him anything but a slight retrenchment in his luxurious living. The majority of the squatters are able to pay the rouseabouts 30s. per week, and the condition of the pastoral industry doesn't make it necessary that the Queensland United Pastoralists should force the unionists to sign a one sided agreement this year preparatory to a reduction in rates next year. As the Maranoa Advocate stated last week in an admirable article supporting the unionists: “ In Queensland in 1892 less than 300 pastoralists owned 19,000,000 of the 22,000,000 sheep in the colony.” Are those men not able to pay a fair wage for a fair day's work – men who own an average of over 60,000 sheep a piece?

* * *

Unionists, the WORKER hopes you will stand by one another. Public opinion is not in favour of a strike, but what is public opinion, anyhow? By whom is it manufactured in Queensland? By Mr. F. W. Ward, editor of the COURIER and Mr. Woolnough, editor of the TELEGRAPH, after conversation with a few of the less ignorant squatters and business men in the city of Brisbane. Public opinion won't help you any. The public who would – the real public, the people – can't help you. They have no money. You must rely on yourselves. You must fight your own battle this time, as you have had to fight them before. And where the large majority of shearers and rouseabouts in the bush are unionists, if you decide to make a determined stand, all the scabs in Australia wouldn't think of taking your places. Above all keep cool, and remember '91.                                                               

W.G.H.