Non-Free Members.

Reply.—Previous to 1866, non-free members were exempt from all levies, but at the Manchester Delegate Meeting the rule as amended took the form which it still retains in Rule 8, clause 5, namely:—"Non-free members shall be subject to all fines and levies to which free members are liable, except during sickness or want of employment." This rule was in force for six years before local levies were adopted in our society, and the four members of the E.C. who recorded their votes in favonr of the decision referred to, did so in the belief that they were providing for a contingency not contemplated by the framers of the rule. They knew that many newly admitted members have heavy entrances to pay, and that if they were also required to pay local levies as soon as they were admitted, the effect would be that candidates would be deterred from joining our ranks during the period when a local levy is being enforced. They therefore considered that the society's interests would be best served by deciding that the payment of local levies is not compulsory on members admitted after the levy comes into operation.

The London District.

Reply—If the Vauxhall Branch has a complaint to make, why is it not stated in specific terms which can be comprehended? We fail to understand whether the E.C. are blamed, or some unknown persons are censured. It is stated that the delegates were not allowed to record their votes at the delegate meeting according to their instructions. Who prevented them from voting in accordance with their instructions? This statement may not be intended to be sarcastic, but it will hardly be regarded by the delegates as complimentary. Our experience of London men has not induced us to regard them as being likely to be easily prevented by anyone from doing that which they consider to be just and right. The fact is that at both of the meetings referred to the delegates were put in possession of information relating to occurrences which transpired subsequent to the dates of the summoned meetings at which they were appointed. They acted as sensible men should act. They said, "We now know what our constituents could not possibly know when they elected us. We will modify our policy in accordance with the facts laid before us, and act as we believe our members would have wished us to act were they in possession of the information we have received, and which we shall lay before them at the earliest possible opportunity." This action is strictly in accordance with the spirit and intention of our rules. If argument and reason are to pass unheeded at London District delegate meetings, at the next revision of our rules we can with advantage curtail our expenses by eliciting the opinions of our branches by voting papers, instead of paying members for their attendance at district delegate meetings.

Members Leaving the Society.

Reply.—The E.C. gave no orders in this case. They advised that a member should be expelled, in conformity with Rule 4, clause 7; not for resigning his membership, but for bringing discredit on the society. At a special summoned meeting of the Toronto Branch, held on April 18th, 1877, it was resolved, without a single dissentient:—"That no member of this branch work for less than 17½ cents per hour from and after May 1st." A member of the branch in receipt of 17 cents per hour was, on July 3rd, by resolution of his branch, requested to leave his employment. He refused to comply, and for thus setting his branch at defiance and bringing the society into discredit, the E.C. advised that he should be legally expelled, in accordance with rule.

Actions at Law for the Recovery of Wages.

Number of votes recorded in favour of the resolution, 54; against, none.

Reply.—There is not a single line in our rules which authorises the expenditure of the society's funds in legal proceedings instituted for the protection of our members in cases of dispute with their employers. But in the early history of the society an unwritten law gradually came into operation, which made it the duty of the society to bear the legal expenses of members who in a court of law might defend and maintain the privileges of the trade. The E.C., some years ago, saw that this custom, if not strictly regulated, might lead us into great expense, and might sometimes entail mischievous results. They therefore announced their intention to reserve to themselves the power of sanctioning or refusing to sanction the institution in any law court of legal proceedings at the society's expense. For their own guidance, they decided that whenever any branch could show that one of their members had a fair case, likely to be substantiated in court, of an attempt on the part of an employer to reduce wages, or to encroach on any of the recognised customs of the trade, the case should be taken into a court of justice at the society's expense, and that legal assistance should be secured whenever the case proved to be sufficiently important to warrant the adoption of such a course. But they have always regarded unpaid wages, whether for daywork or piecework, as a debt, which it was no part of the society's duty to recover. If this decision had not been steadfastly adhered to, we should frequently have been involved page 75 in intricate and costly questions connected with cases of liquidation and bankruptcy. But each succeeding E.C. has been consistent and unanimous on this point. They have agreed to sue for justice in any encroachment on the privileges of the trade, but not for the recovery of debt. In the case cited by the Birkenhead Branch, if it could be shown that the member had any reasonable chance, in accordance with local customs, of obtaining ten days' pay for the ten days during which he was kept waiting for his wages, the E.C. would have been willing to sanction legal proceedings for the recovery of the ten days' pay, but not for the recovery of the wages originally due. Such is the policy which the E.C. have pursued. They may have been obstinate in adhering to the lines laid down in the society's interests, but they certainly have neither been ambiguous nor inconsistent. There has been no more ambiguity in the policy of the E.C. on this question than there is in the wording of the various compliments paid to them in the pages of the present Monthly Report.

Tool Benefit.

Reply.—He can claim what he chooses, but his branch cannot legally grant him what he claims. Surely Rule 36, clause 3, is sufficiently explicit, when it says," Should tools be borrowed from a non-member, or should they be borrowed by a non-member from a member, and the same be lost, either by fire, water, or theft, the society shall not make good such loss." If the word "non-member" has been construed to mean non-society man, it is a mistake. It includes every person who is not a member of this society.

Remittance of Money.

Reply.—The money was duly ordered by the E.C., and the Silver Cup Branch has documents to show that it was applied for in proper form, sent, and its receipt acknowledged. Such being the case, they have no justification for withholding their March quarterly report from the G.O., and thus compelling the G.S. to publish an incomplete statement of the financial position of the society, in consequence of not knowing the exact balance held by the Silver Cup Branch. As soon as the quarterly report is sent to this office, the Silver Cup Branch will be supplied, through the Monthly Report, with the explanation asked for; but we shall certainly refuse to furnish any information when the demand for it is accompanied with a threat of withholding financial reports.

Suspension from Benefit.

Reply—It was the duty of the member to have reduced his arrears below eight weeks on branch meeting night, June 14th, 1878, when he had been 52 weeks a member of this society. Having omitted to do so, he became legally suspended from benefit through arrears, in conformity with Rule 8, clause 5.

Local Levies.

Reply.—Rule 17, clause 8, states that it is the duty of the B.S. to "bring forward every quarter all fines and levies which have not been paid, and enter them as arrears of contributions." In giving instructions for the guidance of officers and members on a silent point in the rales, the E.C. have decided that in bringing forward unpaid fines and levies, every shilling shall be treated as one week's contributions. The members of the Chelsea Branch have a perfect right to express the opinion that this is an erroneous decision, but they must remember that it is legally given in strict conformity with Rule 28, clause 1, and as such must be respected and adhered to until it is overruled by a superior authority.

Reply.—The E.C. have decided that the words "local purposes" and "district" in Rule 9, clause 2, are elastic terms which can best be defined by the members who assemble in summoned meeting to determine whether they will by a voluntary act on the part of the branch contribute for the assistance of others in need of relief. Undoubtedly local levies produce dissatisfaction; so, also, do voluntary subscriptions; in fact, some men are always dissatisfied whenever they are called on to put their hands in their pockets. We have to the best of our ability endeavoured to give a straightforward answer to the question proposed; and if the members in their wisdom think fit to relieve us of our duties and entrust them to the care "of our best men leaving the society" to avoid the payment of a local levy imposed by a vote of their own branch, we shall cheerfully bow to the decision.