1111, ONLY WAY TO DEAL WITH THE MINERS. IN our
first leading article we have written virtually on the assumption that there will be a strike. We have no right at present to assume anything else, although the papers on Thursday, when we go to press, speak more hopefully about a settlement. The only " settlement " worth having is one which will once for all put an end to the long-drawn-out story of restlessness. It must be made plain once for all and beyond a shadow of any doubt who is to rule in this country—the duly elected representatives of the people or. any little section, oligarchy or junta which may at any moment raise its head and impudently act on the principle that its own policy is better than that of the united wisdom of the nation. If this fact be kept clearly in mind it will be seen that the only " settlement " that holds out any hope for the industrial future of the country is that the political pretensions of the miners should be finally and unmistakably withdrawn. The matter has now come to a fair issue, and if the Government, who are the champions of all those citizens (not miners) who do not want to be disfranchised, give way, the prospect will become as dark as it possibly could be. It will mean that the challenge to democracy has succeeded. That is why we say that it is necessary not only to assume that there will be a strike—since the miners still present political demands—but to make all the necessary prepara- tions for it, including every detail that can be thought of for securing the food supply and saving the country as far as possible from paralysid. In spite of the comparative hopefulness on Thursday, no one has yet suggested that the miners intend to confine themselves to industrial demands. The hopefulness arises from the fact that the miners are temporizing, that they have become alarmed, and that they are at least examining the locks and bolts on the doors to see which door can most easily be used as a way of escape in case of necessity. The fresh negotiations between the Government and the miners, which are taking place on Thursday when we write, were opened at the request of the miners. These negotiations will not be final, as next Tuesday there is to be another conference of miners in London to discuss the negotiations. The significance of the miners' request to reopen negotiations is that Mr. Smillie is weakening about the indivisibility of his two-fold programme. No doubt the revelation that the estimated profit of £66,000,000 on the export coal trade is a mere will-o'-the-wisp, very unlikely to be caught and grasped after all, has a good deal to do with Mr. Smillie's relenting. He has based his whole policy upon that estimate. We may take it for granted, therefore, that since Mr. Smillie has been finding much less support among the Trade Unions than he had hoped for, since the ridiculous argument about the miners acting as the benefactors of the consumer has fallen flat, and since public opinion is arrayed strongly against the miners—no great strike has ever yet won in the face of public opinion—Mr. Smillie hopes to bring off some " settlement " which will save him from humiliation. But is any compromise, such as Mr. Smillie probably has in mind, at all admissible if the Government are to insist upon the simple fact that policy must be directed by the whole body of electors and not by the miners / It is true that the miners' leaders have talked much less during the past few days about the reduotion of the price of coal by 14s. 2d. a ton and a great deal more about the question of de-control of the mines. Mr. Lloyd George has stated that de-control will be impossible for a considerable time. Although it is rash to prophesy, we imagine that the miners intend to explore this subject of de-control and will try to extract a promise from the Government that de-control shall be postponed till a particular date. For instance, Mr. Smillie may request the Government to pledge themselves not to de-control the industry during the life of the present Parliament. So far as we can see, it is unlikely in any case that the Government will either desire or be able to bring about de-control during the present Parliament. On this point, therefore, there may seem to be very little difference between the Government and the miners. Nevertheless, the principle that any group of people should extract such a pledge from the Government and should afterwards be in a position— as of course they would be—to say that they had created and controlled the policy of the Government when the Government had been stupid and stubborn, and Perlis. ment indifferent and inefficient, would be utterly wrong and disastrous. As probably nothing will be settled before these words appear, we make a most earnest appeal to the Government not to deceive themselves by thinking that in buying peace by such a device they would be paying but a small price. The only persons who have a right to demand any pledge on a matter of public policy which concerns every matt, woman and child in the country are the elected represents, tives of the nation in Parliament. We are quite sure that Sir Robert Home, at all events, is far too clear-headed to allow himself to be imposed upon. Mr. Lloyd George, it is said, is trusting absolutely to Sir Robert Horne's judgment, and the latter s responsibility is heavy indeed since he is thus made the trustee of Constitutional practice. Unless democracy—the right of the majority to decide—be pre- served now, the revolutionaries who have been fed too indulgently already will let their appetites grow, and there will be no end to the restlessness, the raids, excursions, and alarums of the minorities with the resulting lack of general confidence, all of which things are at the bottom of the very disappointing and unexpected set-back to our national trade. The talk of the extremists about a plot to smash trade unionism is sheer nonsense. Trade unionism has evolved to the enormous advantage of manual workers abreast of the evolution of democracy, and as democracy helped it to grow, so also will democracy be proved to • be its only safeguard. When we insist upon the absolute duty of the Government to stand firm and not to give way upon any single point where the desires of a few seek to override the opinions of the many, we write in the interests of the worker himself and in full sympathy with his am- bition unceasingly to improve the conditions of his labour. Really if we could get rid of all these revolutionary threats the future would be ours. The ball is at our feet ; and more confidence, which spells more credit and more trade, would lead to more prosperity and contentment for every- body.
The revelations about the impudent attempts of the Bolsheviks to make Great Britain like Russia, a land of horror, want, slavery and anarchy, have come at an opportune moment, for we are now at the parting of the ways. We must choose either the Moscow way or the British way, and the only thing for the Government to do is to insist upon the British way. Nothing is more certain than that we must all stand or fall together. The question of the miners' wages, though a serious one, is, of course, not vital. We put it in quite a different class from the demand to impose a policy upon the Government. Six Robert Home has already made an excellent proposal in offering to submit the wages question to the impartial Industrial Court. There seems to us to be no reason what- ever why he should recede from that position or take back anything essential that he has hitherto said to the miners.
Previous page
