The Dominion MONDAY, AUGUST 18, 1919. THE MINERS AND THE PUBLIC SOLDIERS AND SETTLEMENT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 276, 18 August 1919, Page 6

The Dominion MONDAY, AUGUST 18, 1919. THE MINERS AND THE PUBLIC

SOLDIERS AND SETTLEMENT

Members' of the general public, eagerly awaiting such a settlement of the coal industry dispute as will make it possible to remedy the serious hardships that are now being occasioned all over the country by a shortage of coal, will have read with interest the discussion which, .took place on Saturday when a deputation representing the Alliance of Labour interviewed the Prime Minister and other members of tho Cabinet. The Alliance of Labour includes in its ranks a very large number of workers employed in various transport callings, and its spokesmen might have been expected to consider the coal dispute from a broad standpoint, taking account not only of the interests of mineworkers, but of those of wage-earners in general. Unfortunately such was not the case. They failed to consider national as distinct from sectional interests, and declined to discuss the questions in dispute from any but the narrowest standpoint One of them, Mr, R. Hampton, did say at the outset that they recognised that the , subject should be looked at from a national point of view, but no hint of such an outlook appears either in his own further observations or in what was said by his fellow-spokesman, Mr. Roberts. When the Prime Minister, in replying, said_ that what the miners were now asking was going to increase the cost or living to every individual in the community, Me. Hampton protested that this was raising "another argument" which be and his co-delegates were not prepared to go into. He maintained that "an argument on the cost of living was not going to do any good," All who look at the matter dispassionately will recognise that the considerations which Me. Hampton wished to rule out as irrelevant .in fact bear vitally! upon the claims put forward by the miners. It is plainly impossible to consider these claims without taking the fullest account of the effect that further concessions to the miners would have upon tho cost of living and the course- of industry throughout tho country. If the miners refuse to take account of the public interest, they must expect to discredit their claims in- the eyes of the public. It must be obvious, also, that although.he professed to speak on behalf of a largo body of workers other than miners, Mr. Hampton, in taking the stand he did, subordinated the interests of these workers and treated them as of no account in comparison with the interests of the miners. If the members of the Alliance of Labour are prepared to support in this way any claims tho miners like to advance they are strangely blind to their .own interests as well as to those of the "public generally. In what he had to say, as he developed his case, about "treating the dispute on a' national basis, Mr. Hampton apparently had in mind only the national organisation of the coal mining industry, and more particularly of tho workers to whom it affords employment. How far such an organisation of the industry is desirable or necessary may be a debateal-le Question. There is something, no doubt, to be said in its At the outset, however, it is manifest that a combination of the workers employed in an industry merely for the sake of more effectually enforcing demands is not in any real sense a step in national industrial _ organisation. On the contrary,' it is sectionalism carried to an extreme. Most of what was advanced on behalf of the miners on Saturday was based on the narrowest- sectional outlook, and any doubt in regard to the attitude of the Alliance spokesmen was resolved by their definite refusal to consider the bearing of the miners' claims on cost of living, generally. It, of course, goes without saying that if the_ miners can show that they, are unjustly treated as matters stand they will have public opinion behind them in demanding concessions and the rodress of their grievances. The suggestion, for instance, that working conditions in the State mines would give satisfaction if they were applied generally merits consideration, and may open tho way to an understanding. The State mines arc immune from some taxation and other charges which in tho case of privately-owned, mines are incurred and form part of the cost of producing coal, but this need not of nocessity prevent conditions in tho State mines, so far as they are applicable to all mines, being" accepted as a general standard, though such an acceptance would, of course, involve an increase in the price of coal. _' t ' , 'It is plainly incumbent on the miners in any case to show that whatever claims they make are just primarily, and with regard to their effect on tho cost of living and on general welfare. They are asking for themselves an increase in wager, which would fully meet the increase in cost of living during the war period. At the least, in order to justify such a demand, they must' show that they would be u'nfairh treated under the terms lately offered by the employers, l and a'so that tb t ey fife not demanding fot themselves more generous concessions than the body of workers in the country can possibly obtain This docs not.cover nil the jrrouvid. for it has to bo considered that increased costs in coal mining vzjh:. themselves far .more widely felt tfc.r, a similar increase in any other \:\ ckstix Existing conditions in fe, Dominion, with transport facilities reduced f,n a minimum, some industrial establishments at a stacdstill. and all seriously and increasingly hampered,' are due more to <:h'c shortage of coel than to its' :n----creaacd prim. - P.nJ, the increased price of coal in.itself hns alreadv done a great deal to raise tho cost of livinsr to the whole community. T)pnr coM operates diivrtlv to limit production and incr"n,se vorkina ensh in nraetieally nil industries. Higher freights for p/"i and land transnort. and i'-ercascd chat-yes for municipal sc'vic.-s SII .-»jj ; ,,, trnrnways, rras, and eh-ctricitv. are onlv items in the total account. Noihinnc is more obvious than that even-' increase in the price .if onal mnr.l increase the cost of living to flic whole comnuinitv, ;:.nd. incidentally, cut, down -the value of the waees obtainable by any arid a!! workers other than miners. That the. miners have not given these facts t-lie consideration they merit may be gathered from the emphatic _ objection made by their representatives to the stipulation of the mine owners that in the event of an agreement being

concluded no further demand should be made during its currency. The objection is based upon the fact that in legislation passed last session Parliament authorised the Arbitration Court to. vary industrial agreements to meet changes in the cost of living. This is perhaps the most inept attempt ever made by a legislature to solve the cost of living problem. It is tho prescription of a "remedy" which simply intensifies the evil to be cured—an evil the remedy for which is to be found primarily in increased production. In the case of coal milling, an attempt to' overtake cost of living by increasing wages holds absolutely disHstrfrus possibilities, the reason being, of course, that any increnas in the price of coal at once and universally increases- the cost of living. The extortion of any unjust concession by the miners would thus penalise tho whole community to a very much greater extent than a similar extortion in any other industry. This does not affect, the point that any just claim made by the miners must be met, but while they maintain their present attitude they, or those who speak for them, are leaving it to bo assumed i-hat they care nothing for the general welfare, and are simply intent on extorting all they can.

The idea- of employing groups of soldier settlers to break in undeveloped lands and so prepare holdings for their own occupation has much to commend it. Alike from the point of view of,the State and that of returned soldiers, settlement on these lines holds promising possibilities. The benefits in prospect would be even more important but for the fact that the amount of land in the Dominion still available for treatment on these lines is somewhat limited. Detailed information on this point is lacking meantime, but it ought soon_ to be forthcoming, now that explicit proposals for the institution of such a settlement- scheme have been submitted, to the Minister of Lands by the 'Returned Soldiers' Association,, and. have received his approval. As was mentioned in a news article-published on Saturday, the Minister has already offered a.'block of 40.000 acres of bush land for development by its future settlers.' From the point of view of the State settlement on thes-s lines is distinctly preferable, though it cannot., of course, wholly replace the establishment of soldier settlers on lands acquired at high prices from private owners. It should mean that tho basis of primary production will be enlargprl at comparatively light post to the State. The benefits' to'soldiersettlers are equally apparent. Tt ought to be quite, possible unrW such a scheme to establish men without capital conditions giving them every reasonable prospect of success and prosperity. The detail arrangements would have to be carefully considered, but at a cursory view those suggested by the Returned Soldiers' Association seem largely to meet the case. The idea of grouping experienced with inexperienced men, nnd ensuring that the latter shall receive orderly instruction in farming methods, is particularly good, and meets the fact that soldiering has developed a taste for life.and Avork in the open in not a few men vt ho formerly clung to the life of the town. Practical sense is shown also in tho proposal that such settlement group, as far as possible should include a proportion of carpenters and jnen qualified in other branches of the building trade. Every care anoiild, of course, be taken to'ensure that any bush lands henceforth opened _ for settlement are capable of being converted into good farni3, and would not yield a better return if maintained as permanent forest. The fact that new demands are being made on bush lands emphasises the Necessity of hastening the organisation of the Forestry Department and the employment of an expert forester to direct its operations. The conservation of valuable forest would, in no way hinder snch a scheme of settlement as is now being promoted, Einoe in most cases the remaining forest worth preserving permanently is on poor land, unsuitable for agricultural development. Without the co-operation of a Forestry Department, however, any scheme of bush settlement is liable to entail the incidental devastation of valuable tim-ber-growing areas which arc good for little else.