The Daily News. TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1919. BRITAIN'S INDUSTRIAL SUPREMACY.

Taranaki Daily News, 15 July 1919, Page 4

The Daily News. TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1919. BRITAIN'S INDUSTRIAL SUPREMACY.

"If dear coal becomes permanent England's industrial supremacy will be doomed, and her commerce and trade irretrievably injured." Such is the opinion expressed by Professor "W. Bons,

a fuel expert, and lest it should be thought.he is an alarmist, he declares he is afraid to express his real views, though the warning he conveys is one of extreme gravity. It is* cheap coal, he states, that has been the magnet attracting to Britain raw material for the metal, ;*otton atod wool industries, and he emphasises what the effect of dear coal will be on the industrial activities of the Motherland. This view is supported by the manufacturers of Sheffield, Nottingham and Bradford, who are alarmed at the prospects of losing the country's trade, while the Birmingham iron market has been paralysed by the prospect of the increase of six shillings a ton, which,' it is estimated, will also affect the gas companies to the extent of six millions sterling a yea)'. If we take the annual sale of coal at 200,000,000 tons the increased price means a toll of sixty millions sterling. It is difficult to understand that in view of the imperative ueed of increasing British trade the Government should take action that may lead to the doom of England's industrial supremacy. In 1917 British exports were valued at £527,079,746, including £31,000,000 for arms and ammunition. The value of exports of cotton yarn and the manufacthereof was £112,810,497, metals and manufactures £44,828,253, machinery and mill work £19,482,924, linen yarn and manufactures £17,681,911. These are among the principal articles affected by the price of coal, and give some idea, of what would happen if British goods were un-der-sold by America, Germany or any other nation. That America will'be a strenuous competitor against the Motherland may be taken for granted, and whereas the British output of coal has been decreasing that of the United States is increasing. With the advantages that France will now possess in coal and iron and the necessity for.; making the most of her opportunities, the outlook for Britain becomes even more serious. It is interesting to note that the average output of coal per man in America for the year 1917 was 770 tons, in Britain 240 and in New Zealand 715 (35 tons less than in 1916).' For the last five years British coal has played an important part in the war in supplying not only the railways, the fleet, the mercantile marine and the munition factories, but in sending it to France and Italy on a stupendous scale. In addition to this heavy drain on the output it must be remembered that more than 400,000 British coal miners enlisted in the army, the result 1 being that shortage in coal stocks amounted to 38,000,000 tons, equal to five tons less per family. Moreover, the shortage was all the greater by reason of the deplorable coal strikes wherein during August last 227,800 people were involved. According to the recent statement issued by the British Board of Trade the estimated deficiency on the working of the coal industry for the year, from July 16, will amount to the value of £46,600,000, the output being 217,000,000 tons as against 256,875,406 tons in 1916. When it is considered that iron ore to the extent of 14,845,734 tons was raised in Britain in 1917 some idea can be formed of the importance of the iron industry which is dependent on coal supplies. Under the circumstances there is no room for doubting that consternation at the increased price of coal is widespread, and that any factor which threatens Britain's industrial supremacy strikes at the vital activities Of the nation. The shortage of coal was of itself a big hurdle to negotiate, but the danger of the situation has been magnified considerably by increasing the price, especially, in the face of the intensely keen competition Britain will have to meet in the world's markets. How such a step can he reconciled with the imperative need for increased trade is difficult to conceive, for enlarged output will be of no service if the price is such that the goods produced cannot compete in outside markets. Possibly Mr Lloyd George's statement, which is to be made this week, will throw some much needed light on the subject, but at present it looks as if British trade was making for the rocks and needs most careful guidance if a disaster is to be .averted. If steel, for example, is to cost an extra thirty shillings per ton it may kill the export trade. There is also the fear that the workers will have to suffer severely unless British trade increases instead of decreases.