August 28, 15>14.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

473

restriction of employment at some of the collieries.
A levy of 6d. per man and 3d. per boy is proposed.

Nine men were injured on Wednesday at the
Lofthouse Colliery. Wakefield, as the result of a
cage accident.

We regret to have to record the death of Lord
Merthyr, whose connections with the industries of the
Principality are so well known to our readers.

The removal of the embargo upon
Financial. large steam coal and the abandon-
Handicaps. ment of the triple bond have
materially eased the situation, so far
as the shipment of coal is concerned. The trade,
nevertheless, is still beset with many difficulties,
chiefly financial in character. In the first place, the
freight market remains very jumpy/’ and the
temporary holding up of tramp steamers on mani-
festations of “liveliness” in the North Sea and
elsewhere and mine-laying scares have not served to
facilitate trade on the short-sea routes.

On the other hand, the financial barrier remains.
Merchants have to face the dual difficulties of
fulfilling their contract obligations and of getting
paid. As regards the first point, the Advisory
Committee to the Newcastle Exchange have made
an important announcement with reference to
contracts for the delivery of coal under what is
known as the Stockholm Contract Note. Buyers on
the Continent are insisting on the delivery of coal as
usual, despite the difficulties caused by the war, and
the Advisory Committee has taken legal opinion on
the question, and the opinion is as follows: —

Section la of the general conditions adopted on
September 3, 1908, declares that sellers are not
responsible for delays arising, or inter alia, from
European wars, in which the country and the buyer
or the seller are involved. Delay arising from such
cause would entitle the seller to suspend month by
month the deliveries to be made by him under the
contract. Each delivery is in the nature of a separate
contract, and time in a mercantile contract is con-
sidered the essence thereof. Therefore, at the end of
each month, but not before, the seller is entitled to
cancel the month’s quantity which he has been
prevented from delivering through one of the accepted
causes. The time for delivery under the contract
cannot be extended unless the parties mutually agree.
Under this decision sellers may cancel their deliveries
month by month as long as the war lasts.

But, although traders are acting wisely in taking
steps to ascertain the exact nature of their legal
responsibilities in regard to contracts, their main
purpose is to devise means, not of evading, but of
fulfilling such obligations. The arrangements made
by the Government for the discount of bills payable
abroad, drawn by British subjects before August 4
and accepted by their foreign customers, has done
something. The proclamation issued on August 6
gave liberty to postpone till September 4, with some
exceptions, all payments due and payable before
August 8, all cheques and drafts on demand drawn
before August 4, and all payments in respect of any
contract made before August 4. The exceptions
were ships’ freights, wages, payments for workmen’s
compensation and national insurance, dividends on
trustees’ securities, rent, and rates and taxes. Thus,
colliery owners must pay wages when due, but may
postpone payment on their contracts for pitwood,
stores, and, possibly, railway tolls. Exporters must
pay ships’ freights, but may postpone payment for
coals bought before August 4.

It will be readily seen that the moratorium, whilst
affording relief to some people, has, on the contrary,
operated to the disadvantage of others. The latter,
whilst unable to collect the moneys due to them,
have been compelled to meet all current charges.
Thus the case of the colliery, such a large proportion
of whose expenditure comes under this last category,
owing to the “preponderance of labour costs, is
somewhat unfortunate. It should not be a matter
for surprise, indeed, that the Chancellor has
received so many conflicting replies to his question-
naire as to the desirability of extending the term of
the moratorium. Beyond this we have the moratoria
that have been proclaimed abroad, not only by
belligerent but by neutral States also.

The point that urgently demands recognition at
the present time is the fact that the fundamental
object of financial expedients of this nature is to
enable people to live. We fear this is a point that
has not been properly evaluated by some people.
Indeed, Mr. Lloyd George’s outspoken denunciation
of certain banks echoes feelings that have been
gradually gaining strength in commercial circles.
These banks have sedulously committed the very
evils that they have enjoined the public against ;
instead of promoting the free interchange of money,
they seem to have been imbued with an obsessing
desire to hoard it up. The original aim of the
Government in guaranteeing the discount of bills of
exchange was stultified by the banks interpreting it
as a measure of relief to the financial houses, but not
to the trader.

The banks have now told the Chancellor that
they have come to the conclusion that they can
finance business much more liberally than they were
in a position to do during the first fortnight. This
is satisfactory, because the banks can play a great
part in maintaining the commercial and financial
stability of the country. It has been urged that
they might follow the example of the German
trading banks and advance money to customers on
the security of orders. Although, as a system, this
mode of financing industry has its disadvantages in
normal times, it has much to commend it in existing
circumstances.

Eor some time, we fear, we must resign ourselves
to the dislocation of foreign trade. Whatever
measures may be taken, it must still be difficult
to carry on as before, without any real guidance as
to rates of exchange. At the meeting of the Cardiff
Chamber of Commerce, on Monday, Mr. T. E-
Watson, the chairman, stated that there was over a
million sterling outstanding abroad to the credit of
Welsh traders, and this cannot be collected in a
hurry. So far as the coal trade i^ concerned, the
greatest promise is afforded in the urgent needft of
many of our foreign customers. Italy, we know, is
almost entirely dependent on this country for supplies.
The Swedish Government, it is said, are about to
establish a scheme for insuring Swedish tonnage,
and Russia is taking steps to safeguard the passage
from the White Sea. If traders in these countries
are urgently in need of fuel and other materials, it
should not be impossible for them to persuade their
Governments to set up machinery for the settlement
of debts. We believe that we can rest assured that
the British Government will be ready to co-operate
in any measures of this sort which, at the same
time, would assist the introduction of valuable
foodstuffs and raw material into this country.

The attention which is just now
German and being bestowed upon the capture of

Austrian German trade brings into promi-
Patents. nence the question of German

patents. It will be remembered that
one of the early performances of Mr. Lloyd George,
then President of the Board of Trade, was to compel
foreigners, seeking the protection of their manu-
factures under our British Patent Laws, to work
them effectively in this country either by themselves
or by means of agents. This step was universally
approved as fair and reasonable, and it has
undoubtedly led in many cases to the desired result
that British protection should only be given in cases
where our own country receives material benefit
from the transaction. The war, however, has shown,
up certain points in the Act which required amend-
ment, and what is known as the Patents, Designs
and Trade Marks (Temporary Rules) Act, 1914, has
just been passed to enable the Board of Trade to
avoid or suspend proceedings under the Patents Act
either by reason of the proprietor of a patent being a
subject of a State at war with this country, or
because a British applicant has been prevented from
filing any document owing to his absence on active
service on his country’s behalf.

The latter provision will naturally commend itself
as reasonable and just, but we should like to make
a few remarks about the continued validity of
patents possessed by enemy subjects. It is provided
in the new Act that during the continuance of the

war no patent will be granted to such subjects, and
the term includes any firms controlled by enemy
subjects, any companies registered in the enemy
State, and any company registered in this country,
and controlled by enemy subjects.

A subsequent amendment provided further that
the Board of Trade should have power to deal with
all patents, licences, and registered designs wherever
their benefit might accrue to an alien enemy. The
intention apparently is to enable the Board of Trade
to grant licences during the war for the manufacture
of these products by British manufacturers.

The intention is good enough, but it is not so far-
reaching as it ought to be, if it is to serve any useful
purpose in capturing German trade. In most cases a
temporary suspension of a German patent would not
induce British firms to undertake its exploitation. It
would not be worth while to laydown plant, to organise
a market, and to incur commercial risks for the sake of
a temporary licence which may expire when the war is
over. To accomplish the desired end the patent
rights must be abrogated absolutely. We are aware
that this would amount to the confiscation of the
private interests of enemy subjects, but the morality
of such a proceeding is quite as sound as the con-
fiscation of merchant vessels.

It may be objected that it will lead to retaliation.
This is, however, quite a feeble argument, because
we have no doubt that, whatever we may do in this
respect, there will be very little mercy shown in
Germany to British patentees.

War, to be successful, must be waged seriously,
without regard to private interests. The whole
business is immoral, but there is not much to be
gained by squeamishness on one side or the other,
when once the arbitrament of shot and shell is
sought. We trust, therefore, that Mr. Runciman
will do this work thoroughly, so as to give British
manufacturers a real inducement to capture some of
the German interest in those patented goods and
appliances which are protected in the United
Kingdom.

As we write, however, the position has now been
clearly defined. Mr. Runciman stated last night in
the House of Commons that although the Govern-
ment did not propose at present to confiscate
completely the rights of aliens in British patents,
they would be empowered to suspend them and
to hold the royalties pending the conclusion of
the war, when future action would depend
upon the treatment of British patentees in the
enemy countries. With regard to licences to British
subjects, he proposed to grant these for the full
period of the patent. The result appears to be, in
a word, that the British Government is now
empowered to take up all patents granted to enemy
subjects, and deal with them as the best interests
of the country may dictate.

One of the most intricate problems
Trading with attaching to a state of war in modern
the Enemy, times is the scope and definition of
the term alien enemy. Until the
outbreak of this war there existed a considerable
school holding the view that the complex network of
international trade, and the vast commercial interests
that would thus become involved, would in them-
selves be an overpowering factor making for peace.
This view has been rudely shattered by the Potsdam
clique, who have thrown over the whole future of
German commerce in favour of an insensate appeal
to arms.

The result has been to place this country in a
somewhat difficult position with regard to certain
persons domiciled among us, and enjoying all the
rights and privileges of British citizens, carrying on
it may be, a profitable trade in competition with
ourselves, and yet in some cases, by both birth and
sympathy, to be classed among our alien enemies.
The law, as it seems to stand, is very obscure
regarding the status of enemy subjects trading in
our midst. From the strictly national point of view
the mere fact of trading with an alien may be a legal
and even criminal offence amounting to treason.

The Royal Proclamation prohibiting trading with
Germany, however, provides that commercial trans-
actions with Germans resident in this country,