220

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN.

July 30, 1915.

Sir D. Goddard asked whether f.o.b. contracts would be
included.

Sir A. Markham thought the President of the Board of
Trade had met a difficult position in a generous way, as he
had produced an amendment which would be of real benefit
to the consumers at large during the coming winter.

Mr. Watt also thanked the President of the Board of
Trade. • He asked for information, however, on two points
which were rather disturbing to corporations. The first diffi-
culty was that of the purchaser from an agent or a factor,
and it was the difficulty of forcing the original purchaser to
give the required two months’ notice under this clause. It
might be that the purchaser at the pit’s mouth was not
desirous for some reason or other of giving the notice, and
under those circumstances those who had bought from him
afterwards had no power to compel him. The second point
was that some explanation was needed of the words “ at the
time of the delivery thereof.” Suppose a contract spread over
six months, and deliveries were made of 2,000 tons per week.
Was the price to vary with each delivery of 2,000 tons, or
was there to be some arrangement whereby the price would
be the price fixed for the whole run of the contract, and there
was to be no variation in connection with each delivery?

Mr. Wardle also raised the question of co-operative
societies or workmen’s coal clubs or large corporations giving
notice and having their contract revised. How could the con-
sumers compel those factors who had arranged contracts
with the colliery companies to revise their contract so that
they could get the benefit of the lower prices?

Coal Owners and the Bill.

Mr. Laurence Hardy said the coal owners had undoubt-
edly felt that the Bill affected them prejudicially, and especi-
ally that if the question of contracts was entered into they
would be somewhat hardly used. He thought that the
general body of coal owners would like to take that oppor-
tunity of saying that they were grateful to the right hon. gentle-
man for the great courtesy and attention he had given to the
objections which they had raised on the Bill. They believed
that he had honestly endeavoured to arrive at a settlement
in the nature of a compromise which would give as much
satisfaction as they could expect to get.

Mr. W. Thorne thought the last seven lines of the amend-
ment were dangerous, because they gave the coal owners the
right to appeal to the Board of Trade. On that appeal to
the Board of Trade, if the Board thought that the coal owners
had made out a very good case, they could extend the period,
which would mean that the Board of Trade could extend the
period to another three months. If that was so, it seemed
to him that the later part of the amendment would nullify
the early part. Again, a very large number of local authori-
ties were not in the habit of making contracts direct with the
coal owners. Where the local authorities were making con-
tracts with the coal factors, he could not see how that would
come under the definition of making contracts at the pit head.
There was nothing to prevent colliery owners setting up
dummy merchants, so that coal might be purchased from the
dummy merchants, directly or indirectly.

Sir E. Cornwall thought the President of the Board of
Trade might rightly feel gratified at the compliments paid
to him on his having steered a very difficult Bill with so
much success. They must recognise that this amendment
which the President of the Board of Trade had put down did
interfere with contracts. It was no use passing these Bills
into law if they did not have friendly co-operation between
the people who were carrying on the business affected. Now
that Mr. Hardy, on behalf of the coal owners, had expressed
his gratitude to the President of the Board of Trade, he took
it that the coal owners were going heartily to accept the
measure. If they got difficulties and got into the law
courts, neither this Bill nor any other emergency Bill would
hold water. The coal owners, the coal merchants, could
drive through this Bill. In regard to the question raised by
the hon. member for West Ham (Mr. William Thorne) as
to dummy merchants, he knew that that had been very
carefully considered by the Board of Trade. He had had
conversations with the President and officers of the Board,
and it was understood that they were well within this Bill.
They could not have a dummy or a bogey merchant coming
in between the working of this Act and the pit mouth prices.
He hoped that was so, because, if it was not, it would be
a real danger.

Mr. T. M. Healy said the clause as it now stood made
it absolutely imperative that the ridiculous proposal with
regard to Ireland should be knocked out of the Bill.

Mr. Roch pointed out that in certain conceivable circum-
stances the original holder of the contract might not,
perhaps, wish to take the benefit of the revision, while the
subsidiary people might, and if the original holder of the
contract did not seek to get a revision, then the subsidiary
people could not set the clause into motion.

The amendment to the proposed amendment was
negatived, after which

Mr. White proposed, in the amendment, to leave out the
words “ two months,” and to insert instead thereof the words
“ one month.” As consequential to this amendment he
proposed lower down to delete the words ‘‘ three months,”
and insert instead thereof the words “ two months.”

Mr. Runciman said he had no objection to one month being
taken at the beginning, but would point out that the period
of three months lower down was inserted by way of com-
promise. The proposal originally was made that six months
would be a fair period, and it was only after a very long
discussion that they finally arrived at the period of three
months. He hoped, therefore, that the House would not
wish to disturb that arrangement, but he should be very glad
to accept one month at the beginning.

Mr. White withdrew his amendment.

Subsidiary Contracts.

Mr. Mackinder : I beg to move, at the end of the second
paragraph of the proposed amendment, to insert the words
“ and any purchaser under any such subsidiary contract shall
have the same right to give notice to the owner of the coal
at the pit’s mouth as the person who has made the original
contract with that owner, and any person who has sold the
coal shall, if required, communicate to the purchaser the
name of the person from whom the coal has been bought.”
This was to meet the case of an agent standing between the
purchaser for consumption and the coal owner at the pit’s
mouth. If he was an agent he was probably paid by a
percentage, and obviously the amount of his remuneration
would be greater if the price was kept high. Therefore it
might well be that he might refuse to make a demand for
readjustment of the price under this Act, and as the clause
now stood the ultimate purchaser would be helpless to
enforce any revision of the contract.

Mr. Runciman did not think that in practice there was
really much need for the amendment which had been
proposed, but, in case there was any doubt about it, there
was no reason why these words should not be inserted. He
therefore proposed to accept the amendment of the hon.
member, adopting some changes in drafting which had been
suggested.

The proposed amendment was inserted in the Bill.

Mr. Healy moved, in sub-section (3), after the word “ to,”
to insert the words ‘‘ coal raised in,” and this was accepted
also by Mr. Runciman.

On the motion for third reading,

Sir A. Markham again raised the question of Admiralty
purchases. He said the Admiralty had used the provisions
of the Export Committee very largely in obtaining coal at
a reasonable rate. Still, even with the action of the Com-
mittee they would obtain coal considerably cheaper under
the provisions of this Act than they would otherwise obtain
it. He therefore wanted to know why the Government
refused to avail themselves of the provisions of this Act.
In his humble judgment this Bill would be of real advantage
to the consumer during the coming winter and next year,
and he hoped that the Government would now see that they
also were going to get the benefit of its provisions.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of
Admiralty (Dr. Macnamara), said he understood that the
reason why the Admiralty were not coming under the Bill
was that it did not quite fit their particular case. To apply
the 4s. basis to pre-war contracts might mean, where they
took large quantities at most favourable prices, a rather
rigid obligation. They were taking, in many cases, perhaps
the whole output of collieries producing the best class of coal,
irrespective of pre-war contracts, and whether they were
small or large quantities. Therefore, they were not quite in
the position that the merchant occupied, and the Admiralty
preferred, having regard to the general structure of the Bill,
to conduct their business by negotiation on lines that suited
the circumstances of each case. He could give the assurance
that if they found that they could not obtain favourable terms
for the Department and the Empire as well, then certainly
they should not hesitate to come to Parliament.

The Effects of the Bill.

Mr. Booth thought the Admiralty were quite right in the
conclusion to which they had come. They could not, by
passing bits of paper, dispose of a complex system connected
with a large industry; nor could it be thought that members
had solved a very intricate problem. In bis opinion, this
Bill would not accomplish what the House thought it would.
In some cases the Bill was doing severe injustice. He had a
number of collieries in his mind that had not paid for the
last 12 months, and this Bill hit them more severely still.
They would endeavour to keep the pits going, but if the
collieries were closed down, it meant a less output of coal.
It. seemed a somewhat hard case that because of the retail
prices charged in the back streets of London they should
immediately try to remedy it by going to the pit head. He
had not much confidence in this Parliament, or any legisla-
tive body in the world, being able to interfere with well-
known economic laws by legislation in a hostile spirit.

Mr. Radford was also pessimistic as to the effect of the
Bill. He said it was “ a long, long way to Tipperary,” and
it was a long way from the pit’s mouth to the consumer’s
home, and, if they wanted to know how far it was, they
could consider the difference in price as measured by distance.
He did not think it at all likely that the poor would have
much advantage by this Bill, and he wished the Govern-
ment had had the courage to destroy sanctity of contract not
only at the pit’s mouth, but in the back streets of London.

Mr. Anderson said if this Bill did not effect any improve-
ment in the situation, then he was quite sure that next
winter the working people of this country were not going
to allow themselves to be exploited by any powerful private
interests. If this attempt to regulate prices did not have
the effect of bringing cheaper coal into the homes of the
poorest people, then they should have to ask themselves
whether it was in the best interests of the nation at any time,
and most of all at a time like this, that the coal mines of
the country, and that a basic necessity like coal, should be
in( the hands of private people whose private purposes were
against the common weal.

Mr. Watt expressed surprise at the attitude that had been
taken up by the Admiralty on this question. His hon. friend
the member for Mansfield (Sir A. Markham) informed him
that the price which the Admiralty was paying for coal in
South Wales was 25s. per ton, and that the corresponding
price under similar conditions of similar quality coal last
year was from 15s. to 18s. 6d.

Sir C. Cory said as far as South Wales was concerned,
up to about two or three months ago the coal owners were
receiving for Admiralty list coal Is. less than what the current
price was before the war broke out. The hon. member (Mr.
Watt) stated that the price before the war broke out for con-
tractors on the Admiralty list was 15s. He wished to correct
that statement. The price they were receiving was going up
to over 21s. per ton. Therefore, if they took the contracts
under this Bill, the price that they could get would be very
much more than what they were getting possibly. The
Admiralty list contractor was receiving a very moderate
price. Up to a few months ago they were receiving Is. less
than the prices before the war, and since that they were
only getting about 2s. more, so that the price would be 23s.
There was another thing to be considered, and that was that
the Admiralty were taking practically the whole output of
those collieries. Those collieries were in this prejudicial
position, that they were losing the whole of their customers
and the people writh whom they usually have contracts.

The Bill was read the third time, and passed.

The Bill Passes the Lords.

In the House of Lords on Wednesday, the Duke of
Devonshire moved the second reading of the Bill.

Lord Strachie, after observing that the Bill was to receive
the Royal Assent on Thursday, said it was impossible
to amend it in any way. He expected it would be found that
the poorer classes in the East End would derive no benefit
from the arrangement made by the Board of Trade with
coal merchants. The Board had not even attempted to make
arrangements for the benefit of the provinces. If the
Government once began to regulate prices there would be a
demand for the regulation of prices of other things than coal.
He believed, in the long run, the Bill would be likely to do
more harm than good.

The Bill was then read a second time and passed through
its remaining stages.

Text of the Act.

An Act to provide for the limitation of the Price of Coal.
Be it enacted by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and
with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament
assembled, and by the authority of the same, as
follows :—

1.	—(1) Coal at the pit’s mouth shall not be sold or offered
for sale directly or indirectly by the owner of the coal or on
his behalf at a price exceeding by more than the standard
amount per ton the price of coal of the same description sold
in similar quantities, and under similar conditions affecting
the sale at the pit’s mouth at the same coal mine on the
corresponding date (or as near thereto as, having regard to
the course of business, may be practicable) in the twelve
months ended the thirtieth day of June nineteen hundred
and fourteen (in this Act referred to as the corresponding
price).

(2)	The standard amount shall be four shillings : provided
that the Board of Trade may, by order, if they are satisfied,
as respects any class of coal mines specified in the order or
the coal mines in any district so specified, that owing to
special circumstances affecting those mines the standard
amount of four shillings should be increased, substitute for
that amount such higher sum as they may think just in
the circumstances; and as respects those mines this Act shall
have effect as if the higher sum so substituted were the
standard amount.

(3)	If any person sells or offers for sale any coal in con-
travention of this section he shall be liable on summary
conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds or, at
the discretion of the court, to a fine not exceeding treble the
amount by which the sum paid or payable for any coal sold
by him in contravention of this section exceeds the maximum
sum which would have been paid or payable for the coal if
there had been no contravention of this section : Provided
that a person shall not be liable to a fine under this provision
if he shows that he had reasonable grounds 'to believe that he
was not committing an offence.

(4)	This section shall apply (both as respects the price at
which coal is sold or offered for sale and as respects the corre-
sponding price) to a case where the owner of coal at the pit’s
mouth has sold or offered to sell that coal at a price which
includes the cost of railway or other incidental services
besides the actual value of the coal at the pit’s mouth, as if
he. had sold or offered to sell it at the pit’s mouth at that
price reduced by an amount representing the cost of those
services.

(5)	It is hereby declared that nothing in this section shall
affect the rights or obligations of any person under any con-
tract or agreement for the sale of coal except, in cases where
the sale is in contravention of this section, as respects so
much of the price as exceeds the maximum price which could
have been charged for the coal if there had been no contra-
vention of this section.

2.	—(1) Where coal is conveyed from the pit’s mouth over
any railway in trucks not belonging to a railway company,
the seller of such coal shall not be entitled to charge for
the use of the trucks any sum exceeding by more than 50
per cent, the sum which the railway company conveying the
coal was actually charging for the provision of trucks at
the commencement of this Act.

(2)	If any person charges or attempts to charge for the
use of any trucks in contravention of this section, he shall
be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding
one hundred pounds.

3.	—(1) If in any proceedings any question is raised as to
the corresponding price of any coal, or as to the cost of rail-
way or other incidental services, or as to the sums charged
for the use or provision of trucks, the court shall refer the
question for determination by the Board of Trade, and the
decision of the Board shall be final and conclusive for all
purposes.

_(2) If for any reason there are not adequate data at any coal
mine from which to ascertain, in accordance with the fore-
going provisions of this Act, the corresponding price at that
mine, the Board of Trade may fix that price having regard
to data afforded from sales of coal at other mines.

(3)	The Board of Trade may require the owner of any coal
mine to furnish such information as appears to them neces-
sary for the purpose of carrying into effect this Act; and if
any person refuses to furnish any such information when so
required, or furnishes information which is false in any
material particular, he shall be liable on summary conviction
to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds.

(4)	The Board of Trade Arbitrations, etc., Act, 1874. shall
apply as if this Act were a special Act within the meaning of
the first-mentioned Act.

4.	—(1) This Act shall not apply to any sale of coal for
export, or to any sale of coal for the manufacture of patent
fuel for export, or to any sale of coal to be used on any ship.

(2) This Act shall not apply to the sale of coal supplied in
pursuance of a contract made before the commencement of
this Act :

Provided that where any contract has been made on or
after the first day of April, nineteen hundred and fifteen, and
before the commencement of this Act, for the sale of coal
by the owner thereof at the pit’s mouth, coal delivered under
that contract after the expiration of the period fixed under this
provision, and shown to be excepted coal within the meaning
of this provision, shall, if the other party to the contract
within two months after the commencement of this Act gives
notice in writing to that effect to the owner of the coal at
the pit’s mouth, be deemed for the purposes of this Act to
be sold at the time of the delivery thereof.

If in consequence of this provision the price to be paid
by any person to whom coal is delivered is reduced by any
amount, the price to be paid by any person to whom the coal
is delivered in pursuance of any subsidiary contract shall be
reduced by an equivalent amount; and any purchaser under
any such subsidiary contract shall have the same right to
give notice to the owner of the coal at the pit’s mouth as the
person who has made the original contract with that owner,
and any person who has sold the coal shall, if required,
communicate to the purchaser the name of the person from
whom the coal has been bought.

For the purpose of this provision “ excepted coal ” means
coal supplied for domestic or household purposes to any
person and coal supplied for any purpose to any local
authority, or to any undertakers supplying gas, water, or
electricity in any locality in pursuance of authority given
by an Act of Parliament, or by an Order confirmed by, or
having the effect of, an Act.

The period fixed under this provision shall be a period of
three months after the commencement of this Act, but the