The Press Tuesday, October 14, 1919.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16653, 14 October 1919, Page 6

The Press Tuesday, October 14, 1919.

The Nationalisation of Coal-mines

In his statement of policy the Prime Minister referred to the nationalisation of the coal-mines as o proposal upon which he had an open mind. If Mr Massoy means by this that ho will bo glad to ljtear anything that can be said in favour of nationalisation, and to give it full consideration, his position is exactly the same as our own. We have positively never hoard a single good argnment in favour of tho proposal, although we havo made « diligent search for. one, and have begged tho friends of nationalisation to speak up. But if tho Prime Minister means any more thhn

this, we trust that he will reconsider

the matter and definitely set his face , against any suggestion that he should >. purchase immunity from present trouhlo J? by surrendering to an agitation which, it succeeded, would cause far more >» ftprious trouble than is dreamed of by |j tihose who are supporting the movement. ||f the establishment of. a State coal I a monopoly to a substantial I § Increase in the output and a.reduction f |f the present high prices, this result r might be regarded as • some set-off I fgainst the serious risk attaching to | |po addition of another considerable army of men ranks off the State's j? employeesi But there is no reason >%. whatever to suppose that coal would bo P cheaper or more plentiful if "the State took over the industry. Why should it bccomo cheap and plentiful? It will be nobody's business to keep down expenses j- the administration will be as much, more costly than management by

private enterprise as State administration has always been everywhere. At the same time the politicians will be under a constant temptation to increase the pay of the miners, and so give them less and less cause to produce plenty of coal. The miners' leaders say, of course, that the men would work very hard if they were no longer weighed down by the thought that they are working for private profit; but is anybody really expected to believe that? What is tho State but the people at large, and havo the miners shown any tender regard in the past" for the people? Have they not again and again fought for higher wages, and secured arrangements which they declared were satisfactory, although they knew, and did not attempt to deny when it was expressly declared, that the people, and not the owners, would have to pay? In tho face of this fact, tho suggestion that the miners will work hard for tho people if the State buys out the present owners cannot be regarded as anything hut shcor humbug.

Mr Lloyd George's statement on the subject, recorded in a cable message printed yesterday, should bo studied by tho people of this country. His Government have rejected the idea of nationalisation after the most mature reflection. "Nationalisation," he said,

" would not save expenses in wages. " The experiment in State control of " the railways had increased expenses "enormously, and it was doubtful whe- " ther the output would increase. He " was not aware of any case where the "men worked hotter for the State than " for a private employer. The output "of the national workshops, generally, " compared very unfavourably with "privato yards." No reason, that is to say, has been shown why the State should embark upon an experiment which everything indicates would be an extremely bad bargain. Of course, if a majority of the people desire it, nationalisation must come, , and the British miners are said to have decided upon a peaceful campaign for the conversion of the people' to their views. In this country the miners are seeking to secure nationalisation by reducing output and making matters as uncomfortable as possible for the mine-owners and the people. Their tactics have had the desired effect upon timid and opportunist politicians. With the opportunists, of course, one can do nothing, for they are not concerned with. the question whether this or that policy is wise, but only with the question whether there is political profit in advocating it. To the timid politicians, and all those persons, not politicians, who are weary of the present unsatisfactory condition of things—which is due to the fact that the miners are so well paid that they can afford to restrict output in order to enforce. their wishes—to all these people we would say that before lending any support to the idea of nationalisation they should insist upon having a ease made out'for it. If they do this, as obviously they ought to do, they will discover that the nationalises can give no' guarantee, cannot even give ■ any reason to suppose it possible, that from the point of view of the coal-user nationalisation will not make matters worse than ever.

The Irish Problem, " After all," said Mr Devlin during one of the discussions of the Irish situation! Jin July, "the glory of thiß problem is "that it is a difficult one." The British Government, and the majority of people in Britain, howeyer, would! be very glad indeed if the problem were one of so humdrum a kind that no glory could come to its solver. They will pay unlimited homage to Mr Lloyd George if the effort he is now making to lay) the Irish ghost is'successful, but they are hardly likely to feel very hopeful ihat anything will come of the proposals which are about to be made. There are grounds for hopefulness, of course, in the widespread and. intense desire of men of all parties in England for a settlement satisfactory to Ireland, and in the abandonment of some of the old prejudices against any kind of interference with the Union. But this gain is counterbalanced by the development of the &inn Fein movement, and the swallowing up of the old Nationalism in the desire for an Irish Republic. What Sinn Fein's activity means is made clear enough by the terrible record of outrages which has just been issued. As the Sinn Fein movement developed, many people supposed that its purpose was nothing more than the creation of a position* which would force the concession of a large measure of Home Rule, but the Sinn Feiners are at the present moment more violent than ever in their repudiation of any settlement short of the granting to Ireland of complete independence. This is a most ttertous obstacle in the way of eettle>memt, but it is by no means a fatal one, for if any scheme were' devised which would satisfy the regular Nationalists and we Ulster Unionists, 'the Siiin Feincrs would not be long in realising the folly of fighting, for something that will never -be granted. "There arc plenty of young idealists " ready to die for Ireland," it was truly said by Mr St. John Ervine on one occasion, "but very few who are ready to " think for her." They will begin to think, however, as the world settles down to its normal state again. The .Ulster difficulty remains almost as formidable as ever, and it is now generally enough agreed that Ulster must not be brought against its will under a 3>ublin Parliament. Until recently the only method of getting over the Ulster difficulty has been thought to bo partition, but the case against partition has been urged with so much force by Home llulcrs and Unionists alike that it has ceased to be regarded as feasible. Undeterred by these enormous difficulties, "The Times," after a long and notable campaign in the interests of a settlement, produced! a scheme of its own. Its proposal is that there should be two Legislatures, one for Ulster and one for the rest ofi

Ireland, upon each of which would be bestowed full powers of legislation in all matters affecting thefa - internal affairs. In addition to these two Legislatures there would be an all-Ireland' Parliament, to deal with matters of national concern, the Crown reserving its present authority in respect of such questions as the fighting services, foreign affairs, and so ffirth. This scheme was declared by Mr Lloyd Georgo to be impracticable, and it is to be hoped that he has a better one.

City Council Offices. The committee of the City Council- ■ which has been considering tho ques-' tion of office accommodation, reported last night- in favour of erecting municipal offices on the open space upon' which the statue of Captain Scott is standing. Apparently the report was brought down mainly with the object of raising .a discussion upon the city's lack of adequate offices and of a Town Hall. It can hardly be said that the discussion was a useful one. Some councillors are entirely opposed to any encroachment upon the ground opposite the Council's building, but others appear to thing nothing of spoiling what is one of the ploasantest open spaces in the city. As to the building of a Town Hall, opinion is equally divided. It is high time that some definite decision was come to regarding a Town Hall, the lack of which is not only a reproach to the city, but a positive inconvenience. If it were decided that a Town Hall should be built, the problem of office accommodation might jwell stand over for tho present, Tor wo assume that, as is the case in Wellington, tho Town Hall tuilding would contain the city offices. But if there is to be a long delay in equipping the city with a Hall, some provision must be made for tho growing needs of the Corporation's staff. There is no doubt that the public will greatly dislike any encroachment 1 upon the land opposite the Council 1 building, not only because a new structure on the corner would spoil tho whole space, but because such an encroachment would be only the beginning of a movement that would end with the disappearance of the whole of the lawn. It would be far better to extend tho present building northward, and if any part of the city's river-bank property is to be used for the purpose, this is the part that should be used. If a Town Hall had been built years ago, as it 1

might well have been, the present difficulty would not have arisen. But the difficulty having arisen, the Council ought to find some less extravagant way out of it than the spoiling o'f one of tho charms of the city.