July 16, 1915.

THE COLLIERY GUARDIAN

123

ment during the week, but this is not the case in the
east where lack of orders causes values to decline.
At Cardiff, with the labour question so acute, busi-
ness has been much hampered, and prices, outside
Admiralty demands, have become irregular, and are
more or less a matter of individual bargaining.

Elsewhere will be found the text of the Bill intro-
duced into the House of Commons by Mr. Runciman
to provide for the limitation of the price of coal at
the pit’s mouth. The owner will only be allowed to
charge 4s. above the price he obtained on the corre-
sponding date in 1913-14. Punishment for contra-
vention is in the nature of a heavy fine. The Act is
to remain effective for six months after the termina-
tion of the war.

The annual meeting of the Society of Chemical
Industry commenced in Manchester on Wednesday,
and will conclude to-morrow (Saturday). A paper
on “ The Economic Utilisation of Coal and the Pro-
duction of Cheap Power” will be read to-day by Mr.
W. F. Reid.

The executive of the Northumberland Miners’
Association has made several general conditions to
be observed in case of a suspension of the Eight
Hours Act. Such suspension, they state, must be
only for the war period, and extra hours worked to
be paid for at the rate of one and a-quarter time, the
minimum also to be raised in proportion.

The national conference of the representatives of
the mining industry, which was to have taken place
in London on Wednesday next to discuss the output
question, has, we understand, been indefinitely
postponed.

A series of tables, giving details as to shipments
of coal abroad, coastwise, and as bunkers during
1914, has been issued by the Board of Trade. The
total exports for 1914 were 59,039,880 tons, the
figures for the previous year being 73,400,118 tons.

Representatives of the Northumberland Miners’
Association and the Coal Owners’ Association met at
Newcastle on Saturday last to consider a request by
the miners arising out of the selling price of coal for
the quarter ended May. The men claim that to the
65 per cent, maximum under the sliding scale scheme
the 15 per cent, war bonus should be added, and
that the percentage on wages on the prices just
ascertained should be 76 per cent. The meeting
met with no success, the owners stating that they
refuse to grant more than the maximum, i.e. 65 per
cent. A deputation of the Miners’ Federation will
wait upon the Prime Minister to secure his definition
on the point.

About two weeks ago Sir George Askwith granted
the Scottish miners an advance in wages of 12| per
cent, on the 1888 standard. The men have now put
in a claim for a further increase of 25 per cent, on
the standard rates.

Nearly all the pits in South Wales were laid idle
on Thursday. On Monday last, at a conference of
the South Wales Federation, the Government
proposals for settling the dispute were rejected, and
on Tuesday Mr. Runciman issued a proclamation
placing the district directly under the provisions of
the Munitions of War Act, whereby disputes must
be referred to compulsory arbitration.

Yesterday the South Wales executive decided to
continue the strike, 180 delegates, representing
89,850 workpeople, voting for this course, against
113 delegates, representing 47,450 workpeople, who
took the contrary view. A General Munitions
Tribunal for Wales and Monmouthshire has now
been set up, as follows :—Mr. Robert Wallace, K.C.
(chairman), with Sir Griffith Thomas and Councillor
Tom Griffiths as assessors.

The South Wales colliers who
South yesterday laid idle the pits in the
Wales. Principality can lay the flattering
unction to their souls, if they have
any, that they are being anathematised to-day
through the length and breadth of the land. It is
not necessary to examine their grievances, because if
these were a hundred times more weighty than they
are, they would hardly move the balance against the
infamy of this disgraceful step; nor is it necessary
to enquire how great is the material damage that has

been done to the cause of the nation, because no loss
of shells or ships can equal the loss in prestige to the
country and the consequent heartening of our enemies.

In the process these miners of South Wales have
dealt a death-blow at trade unionism, just at a time
when trade unionism had its fairest opportunity.
The Cabinet have with the greatest promptitude set in
operation the Munitions Act, from which Mr. Lloyd
George allowed the miners to be exempted provi-
sionally because their leaders pledged themselves that
such a thing as has now happened should never
take place. We now find those self-same leaders
endeavouring to palliate the offence. The “ eleven
stalwart executive members who so energetically
managed to influence the meeting (the Cardiff con-
ference of the South Wales Federation) in securing
the rejection of the Government’s proposals/’ have
their like in a wider and more influential ambit, and
the executive of the Miners’ Federation of Great
Britain were unable to conclude a reprobation of the
miners without expressing the sentiment that the
“ South Wales owners are mainly responsible far the
deadlock.”

This latter statement is utterly false, and we do
not believe that it will go down with the British
public. The owners in South Wales submitted them-
selves unreservedly to the arbitrament of the
Government, and all who have followed the negotia-
tions in their later stages must acquit them of the
charge of having been responsible for this culminating
crime. Even now the apologists of the miners do
not seem to know what they are fighting for: first it
is the ambiguity of Mr. Runciman’s proposals, then
it is wages and profits, and Mr. Barker, that arch-
apostle of peace, even goes so far as to suggest that
it is the demand for payment for small coal, which
was never included in the terms demanded by the
miners. But no question of wages was involved,
and it does not need a strike to remove an ambiguity.

The radical fact that emerges is that the South
Wales miner recognises no law but himself. If he
agrees, it must be on his own terms, unmodified by
employers or State. This was an attitude of mind
that could not be tolerated, and the Government will
receive the wholehearted support of the people in
driving the lesson home. The powers of the
Munitions Act are ample, and if financial penalties
do not suffice, other sterner measures lie in the
background.

If it be necessary to proceed to extremes, this
spurious trade unionism will have to be stamped out.
We have no room for those who openly preach treason
at the pithead. It is certain, moreover, that the
Government will now be able to appreciate the
invidious distinctions and disabilities created by the
Trade Disputes Act. Failure to enforce the Muni-
tions Act now will mean the downfall of the
Government and chaos in the affairs of the nation.
Possibly the simplest and most efficacious measure
would be to intern some of the graduates of Ruskin
College who are willing to drive the country to
destruction in the furtherance of their nebulous aims.

The Bill which the President of
Price Of Coal the Board of Trade introduced
(Limitation) into the House of Commons on
Bill. Tuesday without preamble, is patent
enough in its intention, but its
meaning is very far from being clear. Briefly, the
main provision is that—

Coal at the pit’s mouth shall not be sold at a rate
exceeding by 4s. per ton the price charged at the corre-
sponding date in the 12 months ending on June 30, 1914.
In special circumstances affecting any class of mines
the Board of Trade may authorise the standard
amount of 4s. to be exceeded.

As we have said, the intention here is fairly
obvious, but some of the clauses of the Bill are very
indefinite, and until we have the official exposition
on Monday or Tuesday of next week, the real
incidence of the measure must remain obscure; even
then some amendment will be necessary in order
that the Bill shall have legal binding effect.

Uncertainty chiefly centres round clause 3 (2),
viz.:—

This Act shall not apply to the sale of coal supplied in
pursuance of a contract made before the commencement
of this Act.

Technically, the use of the word “ supplied ” may
imply that the Act is not to apply to deliveries
of coal under contract that have been made prior to
the date of the Act, and, consequently, that the
terms of contracts already entered upon will have to
be modified so far as they relate to quantities not yet
delivered. On the other hand it has been rather too
hastily assumed that the Act will not operate in
regard to contracts now in force. This uncertainty
cannot fail to prejudice business until the position is
definitely explained.

So far as we can judge, either interpretation may
coincide with the intentions of the Government, since
either is beset by grave difficulties. In the first
place, let us assume that all contracts are excepted;
at the present time the collieries have disposed of a
large proportion of their output of house, manufac-
turing and gas coal at prices 5s. and upwards above
the prices obtained last year under contract; this has
not been due to any anxiety on the part of the
collieries to defeat the acknowledged intentions of the
Government, but to the latter’s delay in coming to a
decision. The coal trade is wholly based upon the con-
tract principle, as being the only system that enables
working capital to be expended with adequate security.
Coalowners and merchants could not be expected to
postpone their arrangements indefinitely until the
Government had made up their mind. From the
consumer’s point of view the main objection to this
course is that ostensibly the merchants who have
held back will be able to purchase coal in the open
market at a lower price than that sold to their
competitors under contract; this would seem to be
distinctly unfair and a discouragement of providential
trading, although it largely rests upon the fallacy
that the contract price represents the market price at
the date when the contract was fixed up. It would
probably be found that even with an addition of
some 6s. on the previous year’s rates the sale price
of deliveries under contract during the winter months
would not be greatly, if at all, in excess of the open
market price at the same date limited to an advance
of 4s. on the corresponding price 12 months
previously. That is why the sliding scale contract
is not so wicked as it seems ; it is generally
settled at a price, in the first instance, con-
siderably below that at which a fixed contract
for the same supplies could be arranged.
Nevertheless, the tendency, no doubt, would be to
deprive such places as London, which are not
popular with producers when coal is scarce, of all but
the contract supplies, and, consequently, the object
of the Government would be very largely defeated.

Turning, secondly, to the alternative interpreta-
tation—namely, that the Act is to apply to deliveries
under contract fulfilled after the date of the Act—we
have the paradox that while this may seem to be the
literal meaning of the text, and, in some respects, the
more logical, the difficulties are even greater. These
can be discerned most easily by a series of questions: —

1.	Is the delimitation to be based on the .price at which
a precisely similar contract was made in, say, June 1914,
or is the price on any particular delivery, say, in
December 1915, to be fixed on the basis of the market
price for the particular class of coal in, say, December
1913?

2.	If the first hypothesis be correct, what is to be the
procedure in the case of a contract in 1915-16 for which
no parallel is to be found in 1913-14 ?

3.	If the second reading be right, what is to be the
procedure in the case of contracts where no definite rate
of delivery has been specified ? And, in a market such
as Leeds, where two distinct lists of pithead prices are in
force for house coal—for London and local use respec-
tively—which is to be taken as a guide ?

These are a few random points that can only be
settled with great difficulty, and it is clear that
almost every contract will be prolific in questions to
enquire into which a stupendous and costly organisa-
tion will be required. This, indeed, is one of the
most alarming features of the Bill, for the Board of
Trade is saddling itself with multifarious duties that
not only will involve a great waste of public time
and money, but may hamper business to such an extent
that the good intentions of the Bill will be com-
pletely nullified. Drastic penalties are provided for
contravention of the Act, and all questions as to
prices arising in any proceedings for the recovery of
a fine will be determined by the Board of Trade; the