Grey River Argus and Blackball News FRIDAY. MAY 11th, 1923. AUSTRALIAN COAL WAR.

Grey River Argus, 11 May 1923, Page 4

Grey River Argus and Blackball News

FRIDAY. MAY 11th, 1923. AUSTRALIAN COAL WAR.

Delivered every >no. nlntf m Gr, .mtfa, tri, Hcl’itika, Oo’csou V’allsend, Tayku/iUc, Cronadun, Ny.-here. B'.xck. ■ v t .i 3oe Creek. Brunner. T« ; ... t oerw, Inchbonnie. Padara, Fur a, !. Kol.iki Moana, Aratika, Bunanta. lAic.olb.e. <...• • , iiax’.ri s, Kokiri, Aha urr H ikainatua, Sui water Wa uta, Ro ton. Ross. Ruatapua, Manama. flari Hari, Walhc Gorge. Weheka. Rewanui, Otira, iuangatua Junction, Westport. Waimangaroa. Denniston, Giauity Millerton. Ngakawau. Hectoci BeduGuviUc, Cape f oulwind. and Karam

Yesterday’s cables brought us word that the situation on the Australian coal fields “is blacker than ever,” and that “the only ray of hope” is the possibility of a split in the miners’ ranks —that is, the possibility of the niineowners being able to engineer divisions among the miners. The dispute will, of course, be cabled across from day to day as a “strike.” In every sense of the word it is a lock-out, deliberately precipitated by the mineowners for a set purpose. The “Australian Worker” of April 18, makes the charge that, in launching an attack on the miners, the Coal Barons are “putting up a smoke screen to conceal the excessive profiteering that is now taking place and divert attention from the move to secure still bigger profits.” The Labour paper goes on to show that on the N.S.W. fields coal can be placed at the pit’s mouth at about 10/per ton, and that it can be sold profitably at the port of shipment at. 15/- per tou or thereabouts, '.rhe Coal Barons themselves say that coal costs 15/- per ton at the pit’s mouth (this has since been proved to be an extravagant estimate) and that a selling price of 21/9 per ton pays them handsomely. What they do not want the general public to know is the exact connection between themselves, the Interstate Shipping Combine, which freights the coal, and the intermediary selling agents who retail it. “They are anxious to hide the process by which the price increases from 21/9 per ton at the ship’s side at Newcastle to 40/- per ton delivered to manufacturers and 60/- per ton delivered to householders in Sydney, and cover up the tracks of i hose who get this huge intermediary rake-off. ’ ’ This is why, it. is argued, the Australian mineowners are shifting their ground day by day. At one time they contended that the price of coal was high because of the wages paid to the miners, and that a reduction in wages would be necessary before they could reduce the selling price of coal; but, as the “Australian Worker” points out, they ha.ve now abandoned this argument. And they have abandoned it for the following reason: When the miners were getting 2/- per ton for hewing coal, the price at the ship’s side at Newcastle was 7/- per ton, and the retail price was between 15/and 2-0/- per ton. Immediately before the lock-out the miners •were getting an average hewing rate of 3/3 per ton (4/8 for hand

work and 2/8 for machine work), and the price of coal at the ship’s ! side at Newcastle had gone up to 1 21/9, and the retail price to be- , tween 40/- and 60/- per ton. “In 1 other words, while the wage paid to the miners had risen on an . average of 1/3 per ton (62| per i cent.), the wholesale rate had in- i creased 13/9 per ton (196| per cent.), and the retail price had leapt up to the enormous sum of between 20/- to 40/- per ton (166. to 200 per cent.).” It is pointed' out that there is little wonder that the coal companies which were paying 10 and 15 per cent, dividends when the wholesale. rate was 7/- per ton are jiow able to pay dividends on watered stock rising to 100 per cent, and j even higher ! The facts provide | the reason why the Coal Barons no longer justify the high price of • coal on the score that wages are | high. “Nor can they use the argument that wages should be reduced because of a decrease in the cost of living, for the N.S.W. Board of Trade has now declared that the cost of living has increased.” These facts notwithstanding, the Coal Barons are out to effect a reduction in wages for the purpose of swelling 1 heir own profits. “They counted on the Coal Tribunal ordering a reduction of wages, and the miners declaring a general strike as a protest. Had this happened, there! is every reason to believe that the Coal Barons would have induced the Federal Government to abolish the Coal Tribunal, leaving the miners to face a policy of deliberate starvation.” In concluding its April 18 article, the “Australian Worker,” remarking that for-I tunately the owners were beaten 1 in the first round of Ihe fight, added this comment: ‘ ‘ They have yet another card to play—the weakening of the miners’ organisation financially, and the forcing of the miners into a position ■ where they will be economically “winged” when the opportunity presents itself to launch another, attack on wages. That explains their present action in battening down nearly a score of mines in the Maitland district, and locking the men out. Just how far they will succeed in this new move remains to be seen.” As our cables of yesterday intimated, the mineowners’ “only ray of hope” is iu the possibility of their being able to create disunity in the miners’ ranks. It is always so. Labour united—on whatever field—is Labour victorious. The disunity of Labour is ever the hope of the enemies of the People. I —— i