The Taihape Daily Times. AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, AUGUST 16, 1919. THE INSCRUTABLE COAL PROBLEM.

Taihape Daily Times, 16 August 1919, Page 4

The Taihape Daily Times. AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE.

SATURDAY, AUGUST 16, 1919. THE INSCRUTABLE COAL PROBLEM.

With which is incorporated “The Taihape Post. and Waimarino News.”

In another -column we publish :a communication received by the Hon. Mr Massey from Mr R, W. -Smith, M.‘ P. for 1 -this electonate. It is a remarkable tdocunl‘enli'~, -as it 'discloSes that. ./slll‘ lgrcat railway blunder is verily a twoI edged sword; it shows clearly and unmistakeably that with one stroke it disembowels coal-ships and beheads our cherished ‘-timber industry. If the Railmay flbtepartruernt ‘is really troubled with lcoal-shortage, one could .understand it caring nothing about six hundred men ‘being rendered workless in this district, But 110 being with common sense will understand why this coal-starvin_g Department is deliberately cutting out ships that are bringing the coal that would stem the famine of which the .Dep'art'ment itself is the chief victim. It is obvious that if any ship is employed Ito carry coals, from Australia to this Domini-on, -back—loading cargo mustbe provided by the New Zealanders. If coal is really wanted from Australia, common sense indicates that we must find something =to load the ships on their return, It is indisputable I that we have but one productjn quantilties sufficient for back-loading such lships, that,is saleable in Australia at jrenninerative prices, and that is trim‘-D lber. We have nothing but timber to i return to Australia for the coal that is l despatched to us in"'ou.r7'ext.reimity,and yet the Government refuses to rail the timber required‘ to Auckland, that the’ ‘coal ships ‘may continue to come». . People are accused of making wild statements about this c-oal trouble, but is not the Department, or the Government inviting such statements by their inscrutable (ldifll‘llll]l{’LtlollSC.l Azre not ‘ people.‘ entitled to say that the Government is cutting ofi‘ its coal nose to spits its timber face‘! Is it possible that the Government would refuse‘ buaok—loading -for coal boats .if any other product thall timber were available? Whatever else was forthcoming, saleable in Australia, it would have to be railed to the ship ’s side; why is such an arbitrary line drawn against timber'?‘And yet four such cases of coalboats being refused back-loading have already been recorded. It is -obvious that coal ships will -cease bringing the coal we so desperately stand in“need of, and who can be blamed for plainly stating there can bcfno real coal-; shortage so long as such a silly uatti-l‘ tude is maintained.‘.? If the authorities l will con-si-‘der =the pros and cons for only l a moment, they must be convinced of the discreet, profitable nature of the arrangement. they are at present jeopardising. The people of this country now understand that Australians will certainly refuse to send us coal so long as we refuse to back-load theirl boats, and they will undoubtedly hold those, who are the cause, fully responsible. If the coal problem is what it is alleged to be, the act of refusing back loading to. coal-ships is positively inscrutable. Machinery of Government , has been so long; in action without public attention, that it seems to lnave been completely run down, intellectually and inechanically; nothing but a total clear up seems adequate in securing any improvement.