THE MINERS’ STRIKE.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LX, Issue 143781, 3 May 1912, Page 5

THE MINERS’ STRIKE.

THE MINIMUM WAGE BILL. During the debate in the House of Commons on the-Minimum Wage Bill Mr, Balfour made a tolling spech, the only defect in which was that it was purely critical and not constructive, in its report of the speech Tho Times said; When Air, Balfour rose and look his stand by the box on the clerks’ table, the very place from which he had so often addressed the House in the days when ho led his party, there was another great outburst of cheers. Throughout his speech he spoke with deep seriousness, and from first to last the House listened with an attention tliat could not bo exceeded. Ho began by describing the impression that was left on his mind by the debate on the introduction of the Bill. It was that neither on the Treasury bench nor elsewhere was there a single mem-

l/ci WiiU ti ilb ftilUMlcU Wll/ll lIIC 6(JIU” tion of the strike crisis proffered by the Government. Raising his voice, lie declared that this solution held out no hope of finality, and sanctioned principles which; though they might be convenient for the moment, would bo the precursors of perpetual trouble in the future. In all its long history the country had never faced before a peril of the character and magnitude of that now confronting it. There was the .new, strange, and portentous spectacle' of an organisation!, acting within its legal rights, threatening to paralyse, and in a measure actually paralysing, the whole trade of the community. The power of this organisation under the existing law was almost limitless, and there was no evidence that the leaders of the movement desired to temper the use of that power with any consideration of policy or mercy. Amid loud cheers, he asked whether any feudal baron ever exercised his power as the loaders of the miners had exercised theirs, and whether any American Trust had ever pushed the exercise of its power to the same extent. It was a tragic thought, said Mr. Balfour solemnly, to

reflect that the very perfection to which we had brought our social organisation had rendered us more liable than our predecessors in ruder ages to great changes and perils. He reminded the House impressively that the Prime Minister, in his speech on Tuesday, made no mention of the notorious fact that both the Welsh and Scottish mineowners had agreements with their men. He was quite unable to understand, he said with great emphasis, how harmony could be preserved in our industrial system if ono side to an agreement was to bo allowed to break it without public reproach. It was an unhappy thing that agreements between masters and men, some of them, ho believed, signed by a President of the Board of Trade, should be torn up without a word of reproof. After contending that the Bill did not correspond With the arguments used by the Prime Minister in its defence, the speaker alleged that the Government had deceived the House of Commons, for tile arguments based on abnormal places and places where there was a deficiency of tubs were not arguments in support of the establishment of minimum wages for all men working below ground. It might be said that the thing to do was to get out,of the mess in which they were; hut were thev going to get out of it by means of this Bill? As far as he understood, the leaders of the miners were not satisfied with the Government’s proposals and "had' passed resolutions directly conflicting with every pledge given by the Prime Minister. ’ It seemed to him as if the miners desired to compel Parliament and a reluctant Government to adopt a principle which would make it impossible in logic to oppose a universal application of tho minimum wage. A COLOSSAL REVOLUTION. There was no justification, he declared with conviction, for the attempt to force, through this colossal revolution in a less time than a Parliamentary week. The Government did not pretend that they were improving the legislative system of the country; they simply brought the Bill forward as they might order out special constables or a large body of police to cope with a particular emergency. So they were asking Parliament to abandon its legitimate functions of debate, discussion, and amendment. In the circumstances what ought the Opposition to do, their objection to the Bill being unalterable? The 'position was abnormal, for no Dissolution was possible; even if the Government were beaten ’’you cannot,” he Said, “add the confusion of a general election to the horrors of tho coal strike.’’ Consequently it was only the existing Hondo that could deal with the crisis. Were the Opposition to abstain from taking part in the deliberations on the Bill it might look as if they were not prepared to do their best to meet the tremendous problem before the country. _ This was a time, he exclaimed, amid ringing cheers, when members should not show anv lack of civic courage. The Opposition, then, would test the opinion of the House upon the Bill; at the same time they would do their best to secure that the policy of the Government, bad as it was, should have its chance if the House approved it. In impressive concluding sentences Mr. Balfour described the strike as the first great display of a policy of power which would be absolutely destructive of society if it was successful. If society was “held up” all would suf-, for, hut those who would suffer most would be the poor men, women arid' children remote from the scene of the struggle. The cost of living would rise, employment would diminish, trade would be driven from the country, mines might be closed down for ever. For the reasons which he had given, he held that the Opposition were not exceeding their duty in_ resisting the Bill, and he moved its rejection. Loud, and prolonged were the cheers when Mr. Balfour sat down. Am. ASQUITH’S REPLY. In the course of his reply, Mr. Asquith said that Mr. Balfour had not put forward any alternative proposal; he had propounded nothing out barren negatives and impracticable platitudes. “As for ourselves, .we do not think it our duty to sit with folded arms, keeping the ring, while the two combatant parties fight out their conflict. We do not so read our duty.” The Government had tried by every form of argument, nersuasion, negotiation, to bring the disputants to agreement. and they had failed, and the stoppage of the’ coal supplv threatened to continue. “As I said the other, night, we cannot allow the population and the industries of the country to be starved for want of coal.” The whole life, social and industrial, of the community could not bo brought to a deadlock and standstill. Then were not the Government bound to obtain from Parliament a legislative declaration as to the reasonableness of a minimum wage, coupled with adequate' safeguards for the employer and accompanied by perfectly fair and impartial machinery for ascertaining what the wage should lie in different districts? They held that this was the politic preliminary to any further steps which it might be necessary to take hereafter, which, however, Heaven forbid! “We see in this Bill the best means of escape out of this industrial crisis without any sacrifice of principle or abnegation by the Government of’its primary duties towards society.”