Antistrike and industrial conciliation legislation relative to public utilities, by countries-Continued. Legal machinery for the adjustment of disputes. There is no legal machinery, strictly speaking, for the adjustment of wage disputes on the railways, but effective machinery is in existence which is quasi official, consisting of an agreement between the railroads and their employees, which was originally negotiated by a representative of the Board of Trade in 1907. It was amended as the result of conferences and the report of a royal commission in 1911. These changes were the outcome of the railway strike in 1911. By this agreement boards are created, with equal representation of railroads and employees, to perform the conciliation work not settled by direct negotiation between the parties. If a settlement can not be reached, a neutral chairman or umpire, selected by the conciliation boards from a panel prepared by the Board of Trade, is called in and his decision is final. Conditions under which lockouts No legislation. The only qualification as to complete freedom of action in the railway service is that any engineer, fireman, or trainman shall not desert his post during the progress of a journey. Postal employees and employees in shipping service controlled by the Government are prohibited from striking. Penalties for enforcement of antistrike legislation. No legislation. Desertion of trains between terminals is punishable with imprisonment ranging from 6 months to 2 years. Postal and other civil employees may be dismissed or suffer losses in pay. The monopoly privilege may be withdrawn from the shipping service on which a strike occurs. Remarks. The adjustment of disputes on other public utilities and in the mining industry is provided for in the conciliation act of 1896. Conciliators or boards of conciliation are appointed by the Board of Trade. Arbitrators are also appointed on the application of both parties, selected from panels of employers, employees, and "persons of eminence and impartiality" established by the Board of Trade. For conciliation proceedings the Board of Trade acts on its own initiative or by the request of either party; for arbitration on the application of both parties. In all occupations except those mentioned the right of employers and employees to take concerted action in a peaceful manner with a view to cessation of work has been officially recognized since 1884. On Oct. 2, 1910, the National Federation of Railway Employees of France and the Federation of Unions of Railway Engineers and Firemen called a general strike on all the railroads of the country. The Government, using its full authority under military laws, called for a Strikes and lockouts are practically No specific penalties for engaging Strikes in railway service are pro- Imprisonment or fine. Strikes are prohibited in railway Fine and loss of employment.. Legislation prohibiting strikes was Legislation relative to fines and loss Antistrike and industrial conciliation legislation relative to public utilities, by countries-Continued. Legal machinery for the adjust ment of disputes. In the case of a dispute relative to wages or working conditions, a conciliation board is organized, composed of six members, three representing employers and three representing employees. The boards are presided over by an official appointed by the Government. The agreements reached by these boards are enforced by the Government. If the parties to the dispute can not agree, the employees are free to stop work, but nothing must be done by them opposed to freedom of action. The Canton of Geneva has established a system of conciliation and arbitration. Conciliators Strikes are prohibited in public Imprisonment and loss of employ- No employee of a public utility can ment. join a trade-union without the are elected directly by the two Law providing for the conciliation No legislation by the Federal Gov- No penalties against strikes. ernment. The Transvaal law is based, as re- It will be seen at once from this statement that among the Australasian countries the general tendency of legislation is to place a limitation, and with practically one exception, a prohibition upon the right to strike upon railway and practically all other classes of industrial workers. Complete machinery, however, has been provided for the settlement of controversies. Another group of countries, on the other hand, such as Canada, the Transvaal, Spain, and Portugal, have not denied employees the right to strike, but have made the exercise of this right contingent upon certain conditions-a notification to the Government of the intention to strike or after a governmental investigation and report. In the case of other countries, as Russia and Roumania, the right of railway workers or other public-utility employees to strike is absolutely prohibited, and no machinery is provided for ventilating grievances. Belgium and Holland also prohibit strikes but have devised methods for employees to take up grievances or requests with railroad managers. Štrikes are not formally prohibited in Germany or Austria among railway workers, but are practically prevented by the control of the authorities over the trade-union affiliations of employees. In Germany, however, administrative machinery has been provided through which transportation workers may have a vent for their grievances. Strikes are not prohibted by formal legislative enactment on French railways, but are practically impossible, because of the policy of the Government in calling employees to the colors and placing them under military orders in the event of a strike. Italy depends upon the same policy to prevent industrial conflict on her railways. In Great Britain and the United States there is no abridgment of the right to strike. Both countries have provided official machinery for the adjustment of wage and other difficulties between the railroads and their operating forces. In Great Britain the opportunities for conciliation and arbitration under the conciliation act of 1896 have also been supplemented by a general agreement between railway officials and employees which makes provision for compulsory conciliation of matters in dispute. STUDY BY THE BOARD OF TRADE OF GREAT BRITAIN. During the year 1912 the labor department of the British Board of Trade made an exhaustive analysis of the text and operation of laws in the principal countries of the world relating to strikes and lockouts, with special reference to the public utility service. There has been no legislative change of any consequence since the publication of this report, and its general conclusions afford an exceedingly valuable insight into the situation at the present time. The following extracts are, therefore, quoted in considerable detail: The differences in the character of the legislation (antistrike legislation) — the report states— turn largely on general scope and aim, and more specifically on the machinery set up under the various acts, on the penalty they impose, and as to their bearing on what are known as the "public-utility services." It may be observed that this expression has no exact definition. Primarily the services of water, gas, and electric lighting, and those of public locomotion, transport, and communication are connoted, but, when recognized at all, the |