October 17, 1918] 



NATURE 



127 



Is surel) a case where the Ministry of Reconstruc- 

 tion might do some real good it 11 would resort 

 to deeds instead of mere- words. Having regard 

 to tin scan it) ol coal with which we are threatened 

 during the coming winter, there is every reason 

 win the Government should establish or assist 

 in establishing briquetting plants in all centres 

 where small coal is being wasted to-day, and thus 

 usefully supplement the national coal resources. 



An interesting and much-debated question is that 

 of the I"---- "i coal lefl in barriers underground; 

 the Committee holds that a considerable propor- 

 tion of barrier-coal might be worked it a central 

 authority, such as a Ministry of Mines and 

 Minerals, which the Committee wisely suggests 

 should be created, had statutory authority to com- 

 pel a n\ -harriers to be worked which could he worked 

 safely, but it also points out that a large propor- 

 tion of this barrier-coal could not he worked out 

 without incurring risks which tin Committee e\ i- 

 dentl) finds to be unwarrantable. Under the head 

 oi coal lefl lor support, the Committee discusses 

 the effect of the well-known decision of the House 

 ol I ords in the Howley Park v. I.. & N.W. Rail- 

 way ease [mi-'), and shows that it has operated 

 adverse!) to the public interest, and is, more- 

 oxer, probably opposed to the real intentions of 

 the Legislature. The remedy proposed is that the 

 prescribed distance within which a railway com- 

 pany has to pay compensation for coal left un- 

 wroughl should be made to vary with the depth 

 of the coal-seam, the distance suggested being 

 to one-hall of the depth of tin seam beneath 

 the surface. Ibis would imply an angle of draw 

 of -'<>!\ whereas in practice a draw of 20 is 

 about the maximum, so that most engineers will 

 agree that the Committee has cried on the side of 

 excessive caution. 



On the question of wayleaves the Committee 

 has merely repealed the conclusion of the 1883 

 Royalties Commission, to the effect that mineral 

 owners unfairly debarred from a means of access 

 ought n ' to he left without remedy. This con- 

 clusion has been inoperative for thirty-five years, 

 and is likely to remain so; what is really required 

 is something more definite and much stronger. 

 A: present wa\lea\e rates are determined by the 

 needs and means of those working the minerals, 

 and not by the injury done to the landlord. What 

 is really required is a statutory enactment that 

 wayleaves shall in all cases be assessed by an 

 independent tribunal, the measure "l the payment 

 to be made therefor being the damage suffered 

 l>\ the l^sor granting the wayleave. 



I he ill-important question of the cost of pro- 

 duet ion receives but little assistance from the 

 labours of the Committee; the ven serious posi- 

 tion is revealed that, whereas ten years ago the 

 output of coal per worker employed was greater 

 in this country than in Germany, to-day the re- 

 V< rse is the 1 ase, and the German miner is actually 

 producing more coal per head than the miner in 

 this country. The Committee is necessarily 

 powerless in 'his matter, which depends essen- 

 tially upon the coal-miner himself ind his trade- 

 NO. 2555. VOL.' I02] 



unions, but the CO) ol the Committee on 



this subject deserves unqualified endorsement: — 

 "It is only by increased production per head of 

 the persons employed that 01 , |< position can 

 be maintained, and that Hi conditions of 



employment can be secured, and this ought to be 

 recognised by workmen as well as bj ei iployers." 



One ol the most interesting documents in the 

 report is a letter from Mr. Robert Smil , presi- 

 dent of the Miners' he-deration of Great Britain. 

 The Committee strongly recommends the fori n 



ol a Ministrj of Mines, a recommendation i 

 the majority of those interested in the mi 

 industry will heartily agree; and Mr. Smillie wants 

 not onl) such a Ministry, but further wants "the 

 State to have the ownership and full control of the 

 mines, not only on the productive side, but on 

 the commercial side also." No doubt it would be 

 a fine thing for a brief while for the coal-miners 

 and their trade-unions if the State worked the col- 

 lieries, and a compact and powerful body of voters 

 like the coal-miners could no doubt dictate its 

 own terms of employment ; but this could not be 

 except at the expense of the nation as a whole, 

 and could last only until the increasing cost of 

 coal involved the whole nation, and with it the 

 miners and. the mining industry, in universal ruin. 

 The classical example of a State-worked coalfield 

 is Saarbrucken, and everyone knows that the 

 working of this field has cost the Prussian 

 Treasury vast sums of money, operations having 

 been carried on at a heavy loss, whilst the privately 

 worked Westphalian coalfields made huge profits, 

 and yet conditions of employment were better in 

 the latter coalfield, and the price of coal to the 

 general public was actually lower ! 



It is grossly unfair to suggest that British col- 

 liery proprietors have been unmindful of the safety 

 of mine-workers. Every real improvement in the 

 safety of coal-mining — e.g. the safety lamp, safety- 

 explosives, stone-dusting, prevention of gob-tires — 

 has in every single case been due directly to re- 

 searches undertaken at the instance, and paid 

 for out of the pockets, of the colliery proprietors, 

 whilst the State has done nothing at all. It is 

 doubtful whether any one of these life-saving dis- 

 coveries and inventions would be in existence to- 

 day had collieries been worked by a red-tape 

 Government Department instead of by enterpris- 

 ing individuals. Mr. Smillie does not suggest 

 how the State is to obtain the ownership of the 

 mining industry; he is far too shrewd to suppose 

 that it Tould be done in any other than a perfectly 

 equitable fashion, for he knows that our national 

 credit, the most valuable asset we possess, is 

 based essentially upon our reputat*5n for fair 

 dealing, and any action tending to tarnish ever 

 so slightly our fair name would be a serious 

 national calamity. It is, however, verj cl that 

 the nation cannot afford to purchase and work the 

 coal-mines of the country; our financial position 

 to-day is not so strong thai we -. venture to 

 take upon ourselves further burdens, particularly 

 when there is nothing whate 1 to be gained 



thereby. H. LOUIS. 



