PATER'S CHATS WITH THE BOYS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3415, 29 August 1919, Page 62

PATER'S CHATS WITH THE BOYS.

THE COAL COMMISSION. Little did I think last week that nationalisation of the coal deposits of the Dominion would so soon come within the range of practical politics here. The question at Home is surrounded with points of view that are foreign to us. Just a word or two to show how. In the first case, coal-owners at Home in many, cases are descended from ancestors — not very remote either—who received their lands as gifts or at an absurd price, perhaps from boy Kings, or from ancestors who were court favourites—men and women. In the second case, when Henry VIII closed up monasteries and nunneries, court sycophants got grants of church lands for nominal figures. In the third case, the people had no representation in the Houses of Parliament, and consequently " had no say in the passing of the Inclosure Acts, which deprived the people of common areas; and so I could go on. Consequently miners and others at Home need go back only to the times of grandfathers and grandmothers to know of cases of pure pilfering, and a little further back to times when favourites got grants of lands formerly in the hand of religious houses, and so increased the number of beggars who used to get .relief at these houses, and by turning monks and nuns adrift added to the number of mendicants. All this by way of introduction to a continuation of my Chat on the land question—an introduction suggested by Sir Joseph Ward's proposal to nationalise our coal. Last week I gave a Chat upon the majority- report of Mr Justice Sankey, in which he favoured coal nationalisation, and mentioned that there were four reports in all. • THE LABOUR MEMBERS' REPORT. This is a short one, for, being in substantial agreement with the chairman's report, they say it is unnecessary to set forth any separate statement of their views, and, that being so, I'll pass it over except for two references to it. They say: "Whilst recognising with regret that the output from the mines has not yet. satisfactorily recovered from the adverse circumstances which have depressed it during the war, we wish to emphasise the fact that, no evidence has been produced to show that the men are refraining from .doing their best. We believe that this is not the case, and that other causes are at work. The miners demand an instant inquiry, and we support this demand. . . . We think that it is of the utmost public importance that there should be no deficiency of tubs, no lack of waggons , and no obstacle to prompt clearance from pithead, all of which are now reported to exist." This quotation gives a phase of the coal shortage we hear little of here, for it is the purpose of the Home coal-owners to put the miners in as unfavourable a light as can be, seeing the miners want nationalisation. To this I add a quotation from the Daily Mail Year Book for 1919: "The coming winter (1918-19 or 1919-20?] should find us short of this valuable commodity. One reason of this shortage is, of course, the absence of tens of thousands of miners who have been called from their work to fight. More than 400,000 British miners have enlisted" ; and though most have been demobilised they cannot have yet all settled down to work, even though all go back to their old employment. To continue my reference to the Labour members' report: Three of them (Messrs Hodges, Smillie, and Herbert Smith) do

not agree that any compensation should bo paid for the mineral rights, though they will agree " to the grant of compassionate allowances in cases in which small royalties are expropriated in such a way as to deprive them of their means of livelihood." Their idea is, perhaps, that as they have had the wrongful use so long and have taken out what human effort cannot replace, they have had enough plunder. The Labour members of. the Coal Commission are (or were) Robert Smillie, Frank Hodges, Herbert Smith, Leo Chiozza Money (a well-known writer on financial matters) and Sydney Webb (one' of the founders of the Fabian Society and a well-known humanitarian writer). THE COAL-OWNERS' REPORT. This is as long as the chairman's report, and is signed by Arthur Balfour, R. W. Cooper, Sir Adam Nimmo, K.8.E., Sir Allan M. Smith, K.8.E., and Evan Williams. After a general introduction, it goes into dealing with the three schemes put before the commission—(1) that contained in a pamphlet "The Nationalisation of the Coal Supply," which originally constituted a chapter of a book entitled "How to Pay for the War," published in, July, 1916, one of the authors being Mr Sydney Webb; (2) the scheme contained in a draft of a proposed Parliamentary Bill prepared on behalf of the Miners' Federation of Great Britain; and (3) the scheme submitted by Lord Gainford in his evidence on behalf of the Mining Association of Great Britain. Mr Sydney Webb's scheme proposes to* buy out all collieries, issuing Government stock covering an indemnity covering a fair value on pre-war price to be paid by the State. The Bill of the Miners' Federation goes further, and not only takes over the coal, but eventually to take over iron, steel, and other works connected with mining; but excludes paying compensation for royalties and wayleaves except to a very limited extent. The Mining Association scheme is against nationalisation, saying it " would be prejudicial to the economic welfare of the country." . But the rest of the outline I'll quote, except for a paragraph unnecessary: " The authors contend that want of knowledge with respect to prices, costs, and profits and the absence of machinery conferring upon the workers opportunities foi obtaining information and influencing the conditions under which they work have been to a great extent the cause of the existing discontent. " The authors propose that in future fluctuations of the wages of the workers in each mining district, over and above the minimum rates, should, instead of being regulated solely as in the past by selling prices, he regulated by reference also to costs and profits in that district." The next paragraph is not necessary, but details how the proposals in the previous paragraph can be put into effect. "The authors propose that by means of joint committees of employers and workers full opportunity shall be given to the workers in each district and at each colliery to make suggestions with respect to the methods and conditions of their work without impairing the authority of the owner, agent, or manager of the mine, upon whom the law imposes responsibility for their control, management, and direction, of the mine." Whether the Mining Association is the voice of the coalowners or of the more conservative portion of the miners, or a combination of both, I cannot say; but there is no doubt of who fathers the other two schemes. As our editor will have to find room this week for Sir Joseph Ward's resignation and the outline of his-policy governing his future action, I think I shall finish off to-day.