THE COAL STRIKE.

[The following letter is by a gentleman of whose anxious study of the facts we have personal knowledge. Without committing ourselves to its conclusions, we think they ought to be laid before the public.—En. Spectator.]

To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."

• SIR,—About a month ago, public attention was directed to the

strike at the collieries of Messrs. Straker and Love, near Durham. Unwilling as respectable people generally are to believe that an employer can ever be in the wrong in a dispute with his workmen, the announcement that several hundred men, women, and children had been turned out of their houses into the open fields did create some sensation. The proceeding was very generally condemned, the Times being, I believe, the only journal that took the side of Mr. Love. But such things are soon forgotten, and I fear the pUblic is not aware that the evictions are still going on, and that the dispute is as far from a termination as ever. It is always difficult to comprehend the points at issue in a trade dis- pute from isolated newspaper paragraphs, especially when the latter are intended to mislead. Will you permit me, therefore, to lay before your readers a succinct, and I trust an intelligible state- ment, of the facts in this case ?

It will make matters clearer if, before describing the system

practised by Mr: Love, I explain the system which ought to be adopted, and which is actually in use at many collieries, both in Durham and Yorkshire. Each tub as it arrives at bank is passed on to the weigh." Its weight is ascertained, and entered to the name of the man who hewed it. At the end of every fortnight each man is paid for the total amount he has produced at so much per ton. In order to provide for fair weighing, the Mines Inspec- tion Act permits the men to have a" check weighman " of their

own to look on.

Now, at many collieries, and amongst others at Mr. Love's, the

practice still prevails of paying not by weight but by the tub, and to prevent the men sending up tubs underfilled, such tub; are "set out," or confiseated. The miner loses them altogether. The objections to this system are • too evident to need discussion, especially when it is mentioned that the official at the pit mouth judges the tubs "by knack of eye." Still, so long as things are Managed with tolerable fairness, the miners, who are an easy- going, long-suffering race, do not rebeL It is only when advantage is taken of this lax system to impoae upon them in too flagrant a manner that they lose their patience. Some eight years ago Mr. Dove, who is not only a cealowner but a methodist preacher, called his men together in his chapel and offered a premium to those who should send the fullest tubs to bank. Now in pits where the ways are lofty the tubs may be " uptseaped," and if the men are paid

by weight they always do upheap to the utmost of their power ; but when they are paid by the tub they cannot be expected to do so. In Mr. Love's pits, however, the ways are very low, in some places (horrible as it seems to us who get our living above ground)

not three feet high. To get an extra quantity, therefore, into the tub, it was necessary to make the coal settle by "rocking "it, then to put SOU19 more in. and rock again, and so on. Rocking, as the men affirm, is a very painful process, often taking the skin off their backs. When Mr. Love, by means of his premiums, had gradually introduced rocking into his pits, he dropped the premiums, and insisted on all tubs coming to bank " strake full," that is, full to the edge. Now the coal will inevitably settle considerably in its subterraneons journey of two or three miles ; and, there- fore, before these innovations the tub had been allowed to pass without confiscation, although it AVM some incises short of strake full on coming to bank, and such is the custom at other collieries, as, for instance, those of Messrs. Pease, at the present time. Mr. Love's new regulation neceasitated the rocking of every tub. He thus obtained additional weight without additional payment either to the men or to the landlord (whose royalty was so much per tub), and enforced it by the penalty of confiscation. In his letter to the Times he pretends that an allowance of 281bs. was made before the tub was confiscated ; "if a tub is deficient 27Ibs. the man receives full pay, as though the tub was quite full." Will it be believed that at some at least of his pits there was no weighing-machine at all ? The standard of weight was a myth for the newspapers. The only standard he admitted was "stroke full at bank," and this was judged by "knack of eye."

The gains of Mr. Love by this system during the last eight years must have been enormous. He puts them himself, in his letter to the Times, at 20,0001. a year ; in other words, that is the sum the men and the landlord have lost by the enforcement of a system unknown at other collieries. At Brancepeth colliery alone the extra quantity, if estimated at 561bs. per tub (and it was probably more) would amount to upwards of 12,000 tons a year, for which Mr. Love has thus paid not a farthing either to the pitmen or the landlord. A fact like this will enable the public to understand why he holds with so much tenacity to what appears, at first sight, a very petty matter. No wonder that he has been able to undersell other coal- owners in coke by 2s. 6d. or 3s. a ton.

Gross, however, as this system was, the poor colliers would probably have been submitting to it at the present moment had it not been for the severity of the confiscations. This was the last straw that broke down their patience. When as many as 111 tubs were seen set out in a single shift (of eight hours) ; when poor fellows coming to bank after their painful and dangerous toil found six out of nine, or CVUIL all their tubs set out (such cases have occurred), human nature could stand it no longer. Accord- ingly, about three months ago, the men took steps to organize a union, preparatory, of course, to demanding a change of system. As soon as Mr. Love heard of this he announced that he would have no union on his collieries, and took to turning off all who were elected committee-men. This was the beginning of the present dispute. Be it observed that hostilities were commenced by Mr. Love before the men had even made a demand. That they were right in forming their union is proved by the fact that under the pressure of the strike Mr. Love has already receded from the stan- dard he first proposed to the extent of 35 lbs., and, of course, sees his way to making a profit even with that reduction, although he did declare in his letter to the Times that any concession was impracticable, and that 'the masters had no alternative but to resist."

Early in October evictions began to take place. Mr. Love declares that he resorted to this measure because he wanted the houses, and because the inmates persecuted and intimidated his new workmen. As the houses are still, for the most part, empty, the first reason falls to the ground. I aan informed, on the beat authority, and it is, moreover, notorious, that there is no founda- tion for the charge of intimidation, the men having scrupulously abstained from anything of the kind. Probably most of your readers have seen some account (though not in the Times) of the heartrending spectacles which have been presented from day to day in Willington and the neighbourhood, as the orders of Mr. Love have been ruthlessly carried out.- Space does not permit me to dwell upon them here. It soon became clear to the men that Mr. Love meant to get rid of all members of the union, not at once, but as fast as he could supply their places. They deter- mined, therefore, to stand together, and after the rejection of a respectful demand for the restoration of the dismissed men and payment by weight, they first restricted their hours of labour, and subsequently, on the 20th of October, ceased work altogether,. In the middle of the next night twelve of them were taken out of their beds by the police andlodged in Durham lock-up, on the charge of deserting their work without notice. The case was tried before the magistrates on the 22nd. The defence was that Mr. Love, at his last interview with the men, had told them that any one who did not like his terms might bring up his gear, get his money, and go. This Mr. Love positively denied ; but the magis- trates accepted the men's statement, and as it was further proved that he had been in the habit of turning off men without notice the case was dismissed.

Unfortunately, as it seems to me, the men while demanding payment by we;ght still consented to the principle of a standard, and consequently to confiscation. They ought to have refused it altogether, and insisted on being paid by weight for all they pro- duced. The endless question was thus raised, what should be the standard weight ? the men holding out for the average of six tubs filled strake full at bank ; Mr. Love requiring the average of tubs filled in the workings so as to arrive strake full at bank; in other words, of rocked tubs. By consenting to his terms the men would escape confiscation "by knack of eye ;" but their other grievances would remain unredressed.

On November 7, Mr. Love addressed a long rambling letter to the Times, in which he asserts that" the true origin of the strike is an advance of wages from 20 to 25 per cent." This is not the only place in which he has endeavoured to create the impression that the men are demanding an increase of wages over and above what is implied in the reduction of weight. Let it, therefore, be clearly understood that they demand nothing but an unrocked tub, with price unaltered. They are, therefore, entitled to take Mr.

Love's statement as an admission that rocking has deprived the men and the royalty of the landlord to the extent named, which he else- where puts at 20,000/. a year.

The men have now been on strike nearly two months, and there is not at present the least sign of an accommodation. Space does not permit me to enter into the various negotiations which have taken place. I will briefly explain how the matter stands at present. On November 12, Mr. Love offered to reduce the standard 351bs. For example, before the strike the standard at Oakenshaw was nominally 7 cwts., 3 qrs., 7 lbs. In point of fact, it was, as I have said, '' strake full at bank," weight being entirely ignored. Mr.

Love now offers at this pit a standard of 73 cwts. But the men declare that even this cannot be reached without rocking, and they adhere to their demand that the standard shall be the average weight of tubs filled strake full at the mouth of the pit. Redhead, the Oakenshaw overman, stated on oath before the Durham magistrates that the tubs held 23i- pecks, which, according to the computation of weight for measure customary in the trade, is equal, I am informed, to 7 cwts. 7 lbs. If this is correct, Mr. Love is still demanding 491bs. more than the tub will fairly hold. Of course, the truth might be ascertained at once by an experimental weighing, but Mr. Love has steadily refused to permit this experiment to be made.

But even if this difficulty were settled another remains. Mr. Love refuses to take back the men whom he regards as leaders of the rest, or to permit the existence of a union on his collieries. I think every impartial person who reads this narrative will admit that a union is indispensable to the men for their protection against the master ; and that as an organization must have leaders, wisdom and generosity alike demand that they should not sacrifice those who have been but the mouthpiece of the rest. It is worth adding that Mr. Love was himself once a unionist, and in the year 1831 was carried home on the shoulders of the colliers on strike.

I would caution readers of the Times against believing all they see in that paper on trade disputes. I shall never forget the excessive unfairness which characterized all its accOunts of the great Building Strike in 1861, with the details of which I was conver- sant. In the article of November 7, on the present strike, I recog- nize the same hand. Heartily do I concur in Mr. Cobden's wish that the names of these men were appended to their productions. They would then hardly dare to write in this fashion—" It appears to be the old story over again. An unreasonable demand for an in- crease of wages is masked by a number of petty and unreal grievances, and the leaders of the union persuade the men by misrepresentation or force them by violence to join in a struggle against the masters."

Of course we are told, further on, that "it is satisfactory to hear that this strike has come to an end." Strikes always have come

to an end, according to the Times. But a week afterwards comes the confession that "the termination of the strike seems to be as distant as ever," and the blame is laid on the "paid delegates,"

and "paid agitators." Mr. Love is always spoken of as "the masters," just as Messrs. Kelk and Lucas were ; the fact being that the points in dispute are quite peculiar to Mr. Love's collieries. Upon the Builders' Strike the Times was able to mislead the public. On the present occasion it has made itself the champion of a far Coarser form of oppression, and I have no fear that the sympathies of honourable and humane people will be perverted if the truth can only obtain sufficient publicity.

E. S. BEESLY.