TRADE UNIONS.

3925

to the great difficulties confronting the movement, which make the employment
 of a proportion of outsiders inevitable. In some cases victimisation,
 and more frequently the fear of it, gives an additional value
to the outsider. The claim to be allowed to deal only with *“ one’s own
men > is frequently little more than an endeavour to secure that the
case of the men shall be presented by persons who are not likely to prove
assertive. In every country much of the active work of trade unions,
particularly in their relations with employers, is carried on by persons
whose livelihood does not depend on the employers’ will. We recognise,
as do outsiders themselves, the weaknesses of the position of persons
who have no direct experience of industry. But this again is mainly a
question for the unions themselves, and we shall deal with it in that
connection. As we have already indicated, the objections to outsiders
are steadily diminishing, and there is every hope that the unreasonable
attitude adopted by a number of employers a few years ago will soon be
anknown. There 1s, however, still a disposition in some quarters to
object to particular outsiders, and especially ez-employees and
politicians. The dismissed employee, whose energy is whetted more by a
sense of his own grievances than by a desire for the welfare of others,
can be a severe trial to the most sympathetic employer ; and the desire
to prevent him from securing a position of influence is natural and
intelligible. But in actual experience the attempt to suppress such
individuals by repressing their organisations or by insisting on their exclusion
 has seldom been successful ; several such men have gained
notably in strength as a result of the employers’ antagonism. The
politician who hopes to divert a union to political ends can be equally
trying, and it is frequently the case that his exclusion would be in the
best interests of the men. But the employer, however pure his motives,
is in a weak position when he attempts to protect his workmen by keeping
their leader at arm’s length. The leader who is not honestly working
for the good of a union is not likely to have a long innings, unless he is
assisted by persecution. The less healthy traits in a union are more
likely to be eliminated bv toleration than by repression.
Registration and Recognition.
The question of insistence upon registration stands on a different
footing. As the law stands at present, registration generally involves no
obligations that a bona fide union should not be willing to undertake.
It necessitates a regular constitution, a periodical audit, the composition
of the executive so that a majority may be workers, and the separation
 of political funds, which can be collected only from those members
who are willing to contribute. In return for compliance with these
provisions, the union receives definite advantages. There is, therefore,
a presumption (though no certainty) that a union which declines to register
is not a bona fide organisation. Similarly -the fact of registration creates
a presumption in favour of the genuineness of the union. The desire to
secure recognition has been a motive underlying registration, and registration
 has led in many cases to recognition. In a number of instances,
emplovers have declined to recognise unions that are unregistered, and