Antistrike and industrial conciliation legislation relative to public utilities, by countries-Continued. Strikes and lockouts are practically No specific penalties for engaging in strikes, but workmen are for- Strikes in railway service are pro- Imprisonment or fine. Strikes are prohibited in railway and public service. Fine and loss of employment.. Antistrike and industrial conciliation legislation relative to public utilities, by countries-Continued. 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. Strikes 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 |