CRISIS IN THE COAL TRADE

Evening Star, Issue 17154, 22 September 1919, Page 2

CRISIS IN THE COAL TRADE

Mr .Tae. Connor writes to us as follows:—“I was reading lately in the ‘National Review,’ London, an article headed ‘ Command and Government,’ which, while not dealing directly with the coal output, shaws a sidelight on matters pertaining to tho minincr industry. lam connected with a coal-mining company in a small way, and, as far as I can find out, the •go slow’ policy is not by the experienced miner, I have Keen informed that very little is required to cause a revulsion' front this policy, forced, in most eases, upon the miners by those who run the federation. I have been intimately connected with coal-mining in districts outside of Glasgow; I understand the conditions in which the men work and live; have been down the deepest pits and altogether have a little more idea of conditions of coal-mining than a good many who write from what they have read, or, in other words, have only the theory and not the practical knowledge required to thoroughly understand the question.” COMMAND AND GOVERNMENT. [By Lieutenant-colonel Sir Alexander Banneeman, BE, in the * National Review.’] Among those who look forward with the greatest apprehension to the future behaviour of Labor (with a capital L) are to bo found many who hope that the returning soldiers will have a steadying influence owing to the habits of discipline which they have acquired whilst in the Army. These hopeful persona night, with advantage read an article which appeared in the ‘Contemporary Review’ for November, 1918, under the name of Sergeant Rudy, 8.E., and entitled ‘Concerning Tommy.’ Although the present writer served' in the Royal Engineers before transferring to the line, he never had the pleasure of meeting Sergeant Rudy, ano in common with a number of others he would like to thank the sergeant for putting into print things which they have long known, but never ventured even to speak about. Chief among these is tho change in the attitude of the soldier towards the so-called •■governing classes,” not excepting the very highest in the land. Unctuous flatterv makes no impression on i him; he feels that he is as good a man ; as anybody else, and he is determined that privilege shall be abolished. In future he . will allow nobody to claim a position er superiority who has not proved his title to it. Tim word "privilege” sums up, as nearly an possible, all the foes at whom he means to run a tilt. Privilege is defined in the dictionary as “a particular and peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person, company, or society beyond the common advantages of ether citizens.” This definition would seem to show that there are various kinds of privilege besides that bugbear of Labor, hereditary legislation, which is now almost extinct.' There is the privilege which, in apite of petrol shortage, allows the friends of those in office to go to a civic bancmet in their own cars, whilst others have to go to their work in a hits. But there is also the privilege of striking, which is claimed by that* small section of tho working classes styled Labor, although tne majority of the workers are so situated that tbev cannot strike. It must be admitted that in claiming privilege for itself, while protesting against it in others, Labor is flagrantly unreasonable. The manufacturer who protests against disclosing ,his vast war profits, and the wealthy woman who jrroans over the restrictions on petrol and boasts that ahe has never gone into a tube and cannot possibly ride in a bus, are _ no more unreasonable than the coal-miner who demands a privileged position among the already privileged class of Labor. The'claims, of all are unreasonable; but whereas the law has the means to deal with the manufacturer, and the good ladydoes very little harm beyond setting a had example, the coal-miner, having the vower t'- Id'll industry, may from bis privileged position do so much, damage that all eternity will prove too short a time to repair it. Consequently the same public which tolerated profiteers and privileged users of motor cars looks upon the miners, when they threaten to strike, as a gang of tmreasonablo “Those terrible miners.” says the lady of the motor car, seeing a prospect of fireless grates, worse even than only three-quarters of n pound of sugar per week. But are these rnon by nature unreasonable and terrible? The writers privilege, durum the first three years of the war, was to train at home, and in France, two different units of our New Army, including no small number of coalminers, and the two characteristics which were most surprising among the men were their reasonableness and gentleness. Fiercely jealous of their rights, and insisting upon every penny of their just dues, they submitted without question to necessary discipline, and: quickly recognised its advantages. Fearless as wiki boars where their own safety was concerned, they would do anything for a comrade, and had a tench ‘as tender as a woman's for a wounded man. They would make a pet of any dumb animal which they could,get hold of. Jollier and more troops one could not imagine, and out of something like 2.000 men in wll only on© proved reallv difficult to manage. Hi? trouble was "that he was nearly 40. and could not j stand being hustled about by non-commis-sioned officers young enough to be his sons —wherein one must admit- that he was not unreasonable. Moreover, bo belonged to the class of small traders, and not to Labor with a capital L). Now, these soldiers were in no sense picked men, excepting, perhaps, those who joined first in August- and September, 1914. On the contrary, those who came up at the time when the Derby scheme was dying its welcome death were below - the standard of those who came later under tom pulsion, showing that we were no longer getting a fair average from the nation.

The Aitov has been described repeatedly ns representing the country, and this is a truth which very few would attempt to deny. Why. then, does it happen that men of the'class which in the Army were perfectly willing and reasonable, in civil life are Outrageous brigands and Bolsheviks? It is not correct to say that those who stayed at home were all wastrels, and that it is they who make the trouble, for moss those who stayed at home were all the older men, And these ought to act as stabilisers to such young shirkers, cowards, and agitators as have managed to evade their duty; and there were also a large number of really first-class middleaged men, who would have gone if they could have been spared. Moreover, we had fn the Amir a number of men who were there only on Account of compulsion in on# form or another. It is therefore unite impossible to make a distinction between those who reived and those who did not. Ivor is it altogether correct to gay that it was the Army discipline which did it, because the men were reasonable when they joined, and we had scarcely any of the machinery of discipline as it existed before the war. True, there was always the Army Act in the background, but it liad rarely to be invoked The discipline was duo to qualities inherent in the men themselves, and to ■correct treatment by their commanding officers. And here we see a very good reason forth® difference between the behaviour of tha men in the Army and of those out of it. The writer has no hesitation in appealing to every experienced commanding officer for support when he says that it any military mat. whether company or army, were'treated by its officers in the way in wheih Labor is treated by our politicians there would bo a mutiny in a month, and that the home-coming soldiers are far more likely to be a source of trouble than an influence for good it they are to receive from politicians the treatment which has been given to Labor in the past. There is no mystery about successful commajxd. Of course, there are men gifted with special qualities who are born commanders, as there are men who are born horsemen; but just as a horseman must learn to ride, so must an officer leam to command; and just as there are certain well-known rules which a horseman must observe, so a commanding officer, greatly though he depends upon his personality, must work on certain rigid lines if he vtjfthes to keep his unit happy and cou-

tented. One heart people speak ol the ** art ” of command j rather is it an isact science in which likie canses must produce like results. It is governed by six immutable laws, but to simple are the laws that they can be applied by rule of thumb, and the veriest dutfor can command, after a fashion, merely by observing them, even though he bo lacking in those magic touches of sympathy and imagination which go to make the really successful officer. In dealing with Labor, our politicians flagrantly violate every one of the laws which conduce to the successful command of men, and if their violation must lead to trouble among a body of a hundred,' a thousand, or ten thousand soldiers, equally must it lead to trouble among the millions of Labor.

Below are enumerated the six laws. They cau be divided and subdivided into many branches, but on the observance of their main principles depends success in command and, by analogy, in government :—>

Law I.—Never let those under your command think that you arc afraid of them; a maxim so obvious that it would appear superfluous were it not that one often finds officers making requests instead of giving orders. Law 2.—Always support authority. Back up your non-commissioned officers through thick and thin, and, unless forced by some act of injustice on their part to take public action, do any reprimanding which may be necessary in the Strictest privaov. Law 3.—Never break a promise. This is almost equivalent to saying “Never make a promise,” and, Indeed, a refusal 'to promise anything is always the safest line of conduct. If, after your, refusal, you can see your way- to granting the request. you vvill get the credit of having been hotter than your word. If, however, yon fail once—only once—to carry out your promise, you will lose the men’s condence, and probably never get it back. Law 4.—“ Be consistent.” Men dislike nothing more in a commanding officer than “ not knowing where they have him, - ’ and weakness, or attempts to conciliate them, they heartily despise. For instance, at Home “ crime ” consists largely of overstaying leave, and when dealing with it you must steel your heart against the most pathetic tales of domestic bereavement, and accept only documentary evidence, such as a death, certificate. Otherwise the biggest liar comes off best, which is just what you wish to avoid. Severity one day and leniency the next will surely lead to trouble, whereas consistent severity is never resented in the least.

' Law 5.—-"Get the good men on your side.” They are in an enormous majority, and need no bribing. See that misconduct inevitably lends to forfeiture of certain advantages, and it is then unnecessary to offer any reward for good behaviour. Tae well-conducted men will be. perfectly satisfied, mid you can ignore the few truiihlcseekera,; public opinion will be against them, and sooner or later they can be rendered harmless. But be careful to make your action as automatic as possible. For instance, in order to ensure absolute equality of treatment, it is a good plan to have a printed scale of punishment for certain offences, and'to allow no departure from it. Otherwise, there may be suspicion of favoritism, which is a violation of Law 4, and absolutely fatal.

Law 6.—'Explain the reason for unpopular orders. This is quite different from asking men to do things instead of ordering them, a line of conduct forbidden by Law* 1. Our people are wonderfully reasonable. All you have to do is to show them a sound reason for doing what they dislike. They will then do it cheerfully. Naturally an unpopular order is never issued unless it is necessary. We are only human. Faithfully to observe the above laws is not easy, and, moreover, it is necessary to remember that the men also are human, and, while treating them with inflexible firmness, to let them feel that you can sympathise with them They respond wonderfully to sympathy; but'discipline and contentment you cannot maintain” unless you observe the laws of command.

Let us now apply these laws to civil government, aud see how our politicians have treated, are treating, and propose to treat the same men who behaved so admirably in the Army. We meet a difficulty right at the start t It Is impossible to toll how fax labor is ruled by the Government and how much by its employers. There is a very wise saying: “Ah army has been led to victory'by a fool, and'even by a coward, but never by a debating society. 1 Men must have a man with whom to deal, some definite individual ; they will never bo satisfied with a corporation that haa no soul to damn nor body to kick. But as the politicians have accepted the responsibility (aud emoluments) for governing, they must accept the responsibility for failure, even if it.be duo to bad qounsel from their advisers.

Taking first Law 1; Never let those under your command think that you are afraid of thorn. Why, every politician in the kingdom gees in fear of the people—the unreasonable, terrible people. Wo sro told, in Voices hushed with awe: “The people won’t stand this ; the people won't stand that. Yon must not irritate the people.” First it'was Conscription, and wc wasted millions upon millions bolstering up an unpopular voluntary system. Then it was feed rationing, anil it very nearly came to riots before our politicians dared to move. The armistice was signed, the public were allowed to believe that all need for seif-control was at an end, and every undisciplined chauffeur in the mechanical transport was encouraged to think that hs would bo demobilised at once if only lie bawled loudly enough in Whitehall. -Finn Fein must n'ot be annoyed by firm, action in Ireland, And so on.

Turning now to Law 3i Always support authority. What of those gallant men the constabulary and police In Ireland? Why was the general in command thrown t-c the wolves just when order was being restored in that politically-ridden country" after the rebellion? What of our policy in India and Egypt. Soldiers notice all such ‘actions.

But when we come to Law 3, perhaps the most important of all—Novel 1 break ft promise—what do we find? The dust bins of Downing street , must be choked with the shards of pledges broken during the past teuir wars. Wo have recently heard Certain politicians complain that the people will never believe anything which they are told. Ie it to be wondered at? So long as the men who control the welfare of the nation are allowed to think that to hud some legal quibble is enough to justify the breaking of their promises, so long can there never be any feeling' raids them but distrust. Take tho case uf the strike of mot omen on the underground railways in February, 1919. The method of it was ouit e Tiujastifiable; but undoubtedly a large proportion of tire men honestly believed that in the new agreement into which they had entered they had been quibbled out of their meal time. Striotly speaking, it '.ms their own fault. They should hj ve s rut nised the r.g cement more carefully before they accepted it; but- they had the' impression that some clever fellow in the Crovormnent had bilked them, and this cost the hives of goodness knows how many innocent people, who contracted chills whilst walking home in the snow, tired after their day’s work. Nobody can tell what may yet bn th© result of' tlie orgy indulged- in during November and December, 1918. Tho electoral furnace being duly charged and lit, at the correct moment there was turned into it a blast bf promises which fanned to melting boat th© already glowing mass of enthusiasm for a victorious peace and desire for a better England, Tho metal was run off, and, lo* surely 500 neat dttic Coalition pigs, all steadily sucking £4OO a year, except for a few who have been recast into massive Ministerial ingots, whose salaries run into thousands! All very nice. But what of the promises? Unfortunately, in Nature nothing is lost. It merely changes. The blast of hot air which boomed and bellowed from the Coalition tuyeres has not been dissolved into nothingness. It charged itself, in its headlong passage through the incandescent mass, with carbon and divers other elements, and still hangs, a thin and menacing haze, between the sun and this unhappy country, on which ite solids are steadily, steadily settling down. To change the metaphor ; We are already having trouble, and every one of those promises has still to come homo to roost.

The fourth law is : Be consistent. Well, A marciful Providunce fashioned ua holler, * e O' purpose flthet »’e might our principles s waller. Consistency is only another name for justice, and'absolute justice is the_ Divine prerogative. But there are certain glaring inconsistencies which obtrude themselves upon the soldier’s notice and will not be ignored. A crippled man cun be brought to see that tho pittance on which ho must maintain life is as much as the country can afford j but ho cannot bo brought to see why a politician who, on lus own admission, failed glaringly in his duty towards the country which paid him should, after being jobbed into an office and holding it for a few months, bo allowed to retire with a pension of £5,000 a year for life. Inconsistency appears everywhere. _ Loyal Englishmen are liable to serve in the armyrebel Irishmen are exempt. The small income taxpayer, of whom there were many in the ranks, is oppressed and bjod white i vast fortunes have been piled up by purveyors d wav material. A munition girl is called extravagant if she buys a rabbitskin coat; the host of lady clerks taken to the Peace Conference are given a liberal dross allowance —or so it is believed, and it has never been denied.

Get the good men- on your side, says Law 5. It is now universally accepted by all classes in Great Britain and Ireland that the quickest way to get what you want is to break the law in order to frighten the politicians into conceding your demands. It is a method which scarcely ever fails ; whereas if you remain loyal and, law-abiding you will carry no weight at all. The last law runs : Explain the reason for unpopular orders. Throughout the war a policy of unnecessary secrecy was adopted, and a lot of ill-feeling was caused thereby. People were ordered to submit to all' sorts of' inconveniences, and were left to find out the reasons f or_ themselves. And much of the unrest in the mines cam© from the fact that there was nobody who could explain to tno men how tho difference arose between the price paid for coal at the face and the price paid by the consumer. Rightly or wrongly, the miners thought that someone was making too much money, and _ there was no means of explaining tho situation to them.

Nearly all disagreements start from nothing worse than misunderstanding, and frank/ open discussion will often nip a quarrel .in- the bud. -But publicity does not suit, the politician ; once a pledge has been published it becomes much harder to wriggle oui of, and the of your failures can no longer be secretly interred. “Commit nothing to paper” is a sound maxim : it is easier to deny that you said what you said than to prove that you did not .write what you wrote. And so the public,.which includes Labor, goes stumbling on in ignorance, protesting and grumbling at discomforts which arc inevitable, and submitting patiently to injustice which might be remedied easily, while deep in their offices lurk political alchemists compounding secret nostrums which, the public are asked to believe, will cure all ailments, including these of Labor. Otnne ignotnni pro magnijico. If one of the remedies were analysed, some pinchbeck Cagliostro might find 'himself out of a job. Not many years ago there was a popular song describing the properties of a patent medicine called. “Joojah,” which was capable of doing anything from curing pains in the back to growing a new tail on a dog, : Political Joojah may be all right so long as Labor has faith in it, but sooner or later someone discovers that it is only water dyed, and then come demands for* money back, and sometimes rough handling for the compounder. Sergeant Rudy’s article in the November ‘ Contemporary ’ emphasises the point that the soldier has for some time been suspicious as to tlie efficacy of the Joojah, ond he is likely to grow even less trustful as he learns' more about its composition. Our politicians can have no realisation of the absolute distrust and utter contempt with which they were regarded by the Army in iho field. The matter has been alluded to jocularly in speeches, when members of Parliament have described themselves as belonging to the most unpopular class in tho country, but it is no matter for jesting : tho reaction from the Coalition Government, when at comes, as como it surely will, is going to be something terrific, and will need exceptionally firm iguidance. Remember what happened, under normal conditions, to tiie great Unionist majority after tho enthusiasm aroused by the South African War had died down, and ponder. Our soldiers, who form a considerable proportion of Labor, were not led by Joojah merchants whose chief concern was to have an excuse ready for failure: thoy demanded men of action for their officers —men whom they could trust, and men who know their job. It mattered not in the least whether the officer came from a university, a department store, or the plough tail: if they recognised that he was a good man they would follow him anywhere ; but for temper isers, shirkers, or pledge-breakers they had no use. And so it is going to be in peace. Labor wants .leaders, not jerrymandered, and if the leaders do not appear from among the classes who have hitherto held most of tbs responsible posts. Labor will find leaders for itself, whether we like it or not; and we can only hope that it will be a statesman and not a mere politician who forces his wAy past the veil and into the Holy of Holies in Downing street, where site the Lord High Alchemist a-dishing out tho Joojah. It was a maxim of Napoleon that he had no bad battalions ; he had only had commanding officers. The trouble with Labor is due far less to any evil in Labor itself than to injudicious and slippery treatment By the politicians in the past, which has driven into the arms of agitator's and revolutionaries those admirable follows whom we had the honor to command. The worst of the trouble is that confidence once forfeited is very hard to regain, and Labor’s memories of its dealings with tho Government are such as to make promises now of no avail. Labor wants to see something tangible. One step has been made in advance, and the nation owes to Mr Smillie and his terrible miners a great and unrecognised debt of gratitude for having forced the politicians to take it, and to come out into the open and face the men's representatives as men should be faced, frankly and honestly, with the cards on the table and not uj, someone’s sleeve. [22]