A NATIONAI COAL MINE

Lyttelton Times, Volume CV, Issue 81244, 13 March 1901, Page 6

A NATIONAI COAL MINE

SYDNEY OPINIONS. United Press Association—By Electric , ■' Telegraph—Copyright. SYDNEY, March 12. ■ The Sydney “ Morning Herald,” oomr men ting .upon Mr Seddon’s proposal for a national coal-mine, says that wore the nationalisation of mines to become a recognised thing, private enterprise would, of course, be ruined. The Government, influenced by political pressure,, would .pay wages that no private owner could hope to pay. It concludes: “The propounder i of the scheme does not seem to understand that* there is no particular virtue in,Grid- ■ vernment taxpayers and consumers being one and the same.' There is no saving in having money taken out of one pocket and i put into the other.” | The “ Daily Telegraph,” commenting" on Mr Seddon’s proposal; for a national coal- ; mine, takes it that the proposal is only to ! provide, under State control, coal for State i use?* bub if producing for the general mar- | ,k«t is undertaken, the Government can beat i all competitors, even though it be at the I cost of the taxpayers. In general, it ap- ! proves of providing a State supply, bub | considers that the wider scheme has little j to commend it.

SOME WELLINGTON INTERVIEWS. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS OF THE ; COAL TRADE. ’ THE PREMIER’S OPINION. [Prom Our Correspondent.] WELLINGTON, March 12. This morning the new coal policy of the Government was attacked by three leading, “xafembers of the local coal trade by the medium of Press interviews/ They denied imputation made -by several mem* of the deputation to the Premier that there is a ring of any kind, and they ended by declaring that in consequence of the many‘difficulties, of which I gave yoii a "short list last night, their profit was not more than sixpence per ton. The “Times,” in commenting on the matter, pointed out that 'all these objections but one were not against-State coal mining at all, rather the other way. To meet the other objection, that the State cannot ,do the work profitably, the'paper simply gave 1 a list of the successful Government ventures from the railways'to. the AdvaPces to Settlers. In the afternoon Mr Seddon, also through the mbdiuihx of the interviewer, stuck to his guns -with great force and point. After defending the principle of State ,manage"much • as above, he went into the, rest of the subject exhaustively. He began with wages, -declaring that as the rate has . bden fixed by- the Conciliation and Arbitration -'Apt ! the Government could not get any~unfair advantage by cutting rates, even.' if ffc wanted to. Coming to the prices paid by the.-local dealers,, who only -made sixpence a ton profit, he was astonished. The price -paid to the hewers fat Westport was 2s lOd per ton, and the railway freight from ( the mine to the wharf was 2s a ton, mak-' dug a total of 4s lOd.a ton. The - price" of the coal on board the ship when she left Westport was. 10s,. of which 5s 2d apparently went .to the Coal Company, and 1 yet the retail" price in Wellington -Was 38s. and-4ds. One man,/ indeed, the Premier, knew, to he paying fifty shillings. Coming i .to the coal -supplied to the Railway Depart-ment;.-at. nineteen to twenty shilling's,' -he pounced on the statement of "a dealer .that the icpal is unscreened, producing in reply the. tenders accepted by the Department,; - and pointed out that they avei’e,for screened I cpal. ■ The Brunner" Company’s contract’ -.price was IBs' per ton, the Blackball Com-, i pany’s was 18s 6d per ton, and the West-port-Company’s was 21s 6d ;per ton, all for screened coal. His .natural conclusion wasthat if the railways could get- screened coal at "these rates, delivered in Wellington, there was no. "reason why /Wellington people should, have to pay .so much as they were now--paying For the larger subject of the'-"development of -the coal reserves “Times” contended that private enterprise has failed utterly as" the coal figures are-the black Spot in our statistics.