December 22, 1916.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN;

1221

shire. Reports from South Wales indicate a more
buoyant tone. The market in Scotland appears to
be quiet.

Very little new chartering is being done, and
quotations show no material change.

The Prime Minister has announced that the
Government contemplates taking over the control of
all the coal fields in this country. The executive
committee of the Miners’ Federation passed a resolu-
tion expressing concern at the prospect.

The Prime Minister yesterday received a deputation
from the executive council of the Miners’ Federation
of Great Britain. The proceedings were private, but
it is understood that the Prime Minister pointed out
that the miners would not be brought under the
Munitions Act, and that State control, in effect,
meant control of the coal output at the pit-head.
The delegates expressed themselves as pleased with
the interview.

A report from South Wales states that the Board
of Trade has decided to establish a branch office at
Cardiff, which will take over the control of railways,
docks and collieries in South Wales. The intention
is to co-ordinate the services in order to ensure better
transport arrangements.

Last week representatives of the owners and the
miners waited on the Board of Trade in order to
obtain some clear statement as to their respective
positions, and that all contractual relationships
between coal owners and the workmen under the new
regime should be maintained in all matters of local
administration under the Conciliation Board.

The new regulations governing the export of coals
to Italy are in operation. The main features are
that in future all applications for licences to
export coals must be made through the local com-
mittees at the ports, instead of, as hitherto, direct to
the War Trade Department, and that all licences
will be general licences, valid for periods of from one
to three months.

Sir J. Compton Rickett, who is well known in the
coal industry, has been appointed Pay master-General
in succession to Mr. A. Henderson.

The Coal Conference in Australia has ended in a
compromise on practically every point in dispute.

The Rt. Hon. Joseph A.. Pease, M.P., has been
created a baron of the United Kingdom.

The difficulties surrounding the
Distribution control of coal distribution in France
Of Coal are well illustrated in a report
in France, recently presented to the Chamber
by M. Durafour on behalf of the
Commission of Mines. This report is intended to
explain the text of a Bill recently introduced for the
purpose of regulating the sale and distribution of
domestic coal. The Law of April 22, 1916, merely
sought to limit the price of coal both at the port
and at the pithead, and practically left the small
consumer to the mercy of the coal merchant. As is
known, an agreement was arrived at by which
freights from Great Britain were fixed and a check
was imposed upon the constant upward tendency of
freights. By this means the price of British coal in
French ports was reduced from the high level of
145 fr. per ton in May last to 129’50 fr. in August.
At the same time the quantity imported showed an
advance to 2,019,433 tons for the month of August,
which compares favourably with the monthly imports
in the earlier part of the year, when they had fallen
to nearly 1| million tons. The Senate did not view
with favour the scheme for the “perequation” of
prices originally devised ; and, although the Law of
April 22 had a considerable effect in steadying the
market, it had little influence upon the large
divergence in price between French and British coal,
and, so far as retail prices were concerned, this
difference had even become more pronounced. The
position threatened the small consumer with dis-
astrous consequences during the winter.

The original plan, as we have explained at length
on former occasions, was to fix an average selling price
for all coals, whether British or French, by taking
the mean cost price at port and pithead respectively
of each quality of coal, the resulting loss on the more
expensive imported coal being defrayed by the State.

This plan having been rejected, the present Bill
seeks to apply a modification of this method of
averaging the price to domestic fuel only. The
modification suggested consists in establishing, in
place of a national average, a departmental average,
the effect of which would be to vary the statutory
limitation of price in different areas. For this
purpose the several departments are classified under
three heads, viz., (1) departments in the neighbour-
hood of the coal fields, consuming chiefly French
coal; (2) departments consuming approximately
equal quantities of French and British coal ;
(3) departments in which the consumption of British
coal preponderates. The latter group, comprising
districts on the coast, the greater part of Brittany,
Normandy, Aquitania, and the neighbourhood of the
Pyrenees, all far removed from the French coal fields,
would be practically dependent upon imported fuel.

The proposed perequation scheme would be
applied as follows;—In the first group, in calculating
the average selling price, the relative quantities of
French and British coal consumed w'ould be taken
into account. Thus, supposing a department in this
group used 75 per cent, of French coal, costing, say,
40 fr. per ton, and 25 per cent, of British coal,
costing, say, 80 fr., the uniform statutory selling
price would be fixed, not at	= 60 fr., but at

(75 X 40) + (25 x 80) = fr

100

In the case of group 2, the uniform selling price
would obviously be the first of these figures—viz.,
60 fr. So that group 1 would retain its geographical
advantage due to its proximity to a coal field.

Coming now to group 3, and taking the case of a
department consuming 25 per cent, of French coal
and 75 per cent, of British coal, if the same method
is adopted, the average would be 70 fr., and the
departments in this group would be penalised on
account of. their greater dependence upon imported
coal. It is, however, proposed to make the statutory
price the same as in group 2, the deficiency being
made up by a tax, not exceeding 5 fr. per ton, on the
whole output of French coal, the effect of which
would naturally be to raise its price in proportion ; so
that the amount of the tax would, in fact, be borne
by all users of French coal, whether for industrial or
domestic purposes. It is calculated that not more
than 7,000,000 fr. per month would be required to
defray the expense of the perequation scheme, and
as the French output is roughly about 2,000,000
tons per month, it is estimated that the full tax of
5 fr. per ton would probably never be required.

In any consideration of the above-mentioned
scheme, it must be remembered that the conditions
in France are exceedingly complicated owing to the
wide difference in price between British and French
coal, and the absolute need for putting all consumers
on a footing of something like equality. The Bill
also seeks to set up the necessary machinery for
regulating distribution. It is not enough to restrict
the coal merchants in the matter of selling prices.
It is needful also to afford them the means of
replenishing stocks. To this end new departmental
offices are contemplated. The prefects of the
departments would preside over these, and they are
to be assisted by the presidents of the chambers of
commerce as representatives of the consumers, and
six other members selected by the prefects. There
would be included in the latter, two representatives
of the coal trade. In case of difficulties arising in
the replenishment of stocks power would be given to
appeal to the Minister of Public Works for assistance
in securing supplies.

Without entering into further details of the
scheme, and especially its financial aspect, it is
interesting to note that the French coal merchants
are not generally in favour of the proposal. Their
criticisms are based upon the view that the proposed
Law is founded upon a wrong assumption. They say
that the present coal crisis is due primarily not to
cornering and speculation, but to shortage in supplies,
which alone is responsible for the high prices now
ruling. The proposed Law does little, if anything, to
remedy this defect. They suggest that the Govern-
ment should set about increasing the supply of coal
by improving transport conditions and sending

miners back from the front to increase the output.
Complaint is also made of the abuse of requisitions
and rights of priority of supply, which greatly
deplete the quantity of coal available for general
distribution. With regard to the perequation of
prices, they maintain that the 5 per cent, tax on
French coal will not be enough to make good the loss
involved in working the scheme. Difficulties are
foreseen in arriving at the fixed average selling
price on account of the irregular supply both of
French and English coal, which makes it impossible
to fix any definite proportion between them. One
grave difficulty is the question of delay in discharging
at the ports, and the high charges for demurrage and
other harbour dues. Thus the fate of the Bill can
scarcely be foreseen, but the discussion is none the
less interesting at the present time as illustrating
some of the difficulties of Government control in the
face of economic realities. We may learn a useful
lesson from it on this side of the Channel.

The war is throwing a strong light
Bunker upon the important place occupied
Coal. by British coal in the various coaling
stations of the world. It is not
surprising, therefore, that it should be found neces-
sary to place some restriction upon the supply of
British coal to vessels engaged in neutral trade. It
is natural that priority in bunkers should be given
to vessels employed in the interest of Great Britain
and her Allies. There must necessarily arise, through
the exigencies of the war, some amount of disturb-
ance in the maintenance of normal supplies at coaling
stations widely distributed over the world. In the
meantime the Indian Government, in prohibiting the
export of the better qualities of Indian coal, is, to all
appearances, accentuating the disturbance in bunker
supplies. The exports of Indian coal have risen
considerably. In 1915, the total exports of those
coals reached the amount of 751,801 tons, which is
more than double that of the preceding year. Of
this quantity 554,885 tons went to Ceylon, and was
destined mainly for the coaling station at Colombo.
The reason for the recent prohibition is believed to
be the great impetus which has lately been given
to the industrial activity of India, and the conse-
quent increased consumption of coal.

One of the probable results of the prohibition now
in force will be that Colombo will be forced to
replenish stocks with coal of lower grade, which will
react unfavourably upon the steaming capabilities
of liners coaling at that port. This would be dis-
advantageous to those British and Allied vessels
which have been accustomed to rely upon the best
Indian coal. It is to be supposed that this result
has been fully considered by the Indian Govern-
ment, but the question remains whether a certain
proportion of inferior coal would not be equally
serviceable in some Indian industries; in which case
it might be possible so to arrange that at least
British and Allied steamships might still be able to
procure satisfactory bunker coal at Colombo. Nothing
should be done at the present time to retard, even by
an hour, vessels doing any kind of work bearing
upon the satisfactory conduct of the war. Doubtless
there are conflicting interests, and the only true
solution would appear to be the adoption of the
principle of the lesser evil viewed from the stand-
point of the exigencies of the war. As might have
been expected, the export of British coal to India
has been reduced practically to zero. In 1915 the
imports were 30,149 tons only, as compared with
156,863 tons in the previous year.

Bunker coal shipments from Great Britain, for the
11 completed months of this year, were only
11,973,652 tons, as compared with 17,287,364 tons
in 1914. The difference has to some extent been
adjusted by the increased quantities supplied by
other countries. Amongst these, South Africa has
benefited by a marked expansion of export trade,
both in bunkers and coal cargoes ; and hopes are
entertained in that country that this trade will be
further increased and placed upon a permanent
foundation. The prospects of such a result cannot
at the present time be foreshadowed. After the war
there will certainly be a long struggle for the
restoration of normal conditions, and the end no one
can predict.