Letters and Papers Concerning the Trans-Persian Railway and Other Railways in Persia [‎179r] (357/442)

285
Coal Mines
286
[ 25 May 1914 ]
(Northumberland) Bill.
ances greater than those which exist at
the present time. Moreover, this measure
has a far wider application than the noble
Lord seems to realise. There are many
mines, probably by far the majority, which
draw coals during the night; some work
coals during the night. This Bill proposes
to limit the operation, and provides that
no coals are to be drawn or worked between
the hours of six o’clock at night and three
o’clock the next morning. That would
affect hundreds and hundreds of collieries
throughout the country, so that it is not
simply the county of Northumberland with
which you are dealing. Clause 1 of this
Bill provides that—
‘ ‘ Subject to the provisions of this Act, no
workman shall be below ground in a coal mine
for the purpose of the work of getting, hauling,
drawing, or raising coal, or of going to or from
such work between the hours of six at night
and three on the following morning. Subject to
the provisions of this Act, in every coal mine
the haulage of coal below ground and the raising
of coal to the surface shall absolutely cease for
a continuous period of at least twelve hours in
every consecutive twenty-four hours.”
Such a measure is unworkable and
altogether impracticable, and if you were
to put it into operation the first effect
it would have would be largely to reduce
the production of coal in this country
and largely to increase the cost of pro
ducing coal. And it must not be forgotten
that a reduction in the production of coal
in this country would mean very much
higher prices to consumers. The con
sumer has an important interest in this
Bill, and his is an interest which should
be most carefully looked into when you
are passing Acts of Parliament. Many
Acts have been passed during the last few
years which have had this result—largely
increased cost, with very little benefit
indeed to the workers. I am certain
that if such a measure as the one now
before your Lordships were passed it would
be disastrous for the whole country. There
are many other arguments that I could
adduce, but I think I have stated the case
against the Bill quite sufficiently. In my
opinion it would be extremely unwise on
the part of your Lordships to give the Bill
a Second Reading, and I hope you will not
do so.
Amendment moved—
To leave out the word (“now”) and add at
the end of the Motion (“this day six months”).
—(Lord Joicey.)
* Viscount ALLENDALE: My Lords,
perhaps it would be convenient that I
should now state what the position of the
Government is with regard to this Bill.
First of all, I should like to say that we
all admire the energy and versatility of
! the noble Lord who has introduced this
Bill, and his anxiety to remedy an in
dustrial and social grievance whenever he
sees one that seems to require his atten
tion. I do not for a moment doubt his
sincerity in bringing this measure forward.
I welcome also the interest which he has
shown in the affairs of the county in which
I have the honour usually to reside.
As has been explained to your Lordships,
the three-shift system with its evils, if they
are evils, and inconveniences came into
existence with the passing of the Eight
Hours Act. Most of us will probably
agree that eight hours is quite long enough
for men to work underground. And I
may, perhaps, be allowed to say that,
although I quite sympathise with the idea,
I never was in favour of the Eight Hours
Bill so far as it seemed likely to affect
Northumberland and Durham. I held that
view not as a coal owner or as a worker of
coal, for I am neither, but as one residing
in the county who had an opportunity of
making himself acquainted with the work
ing of coal there, and also as a repre
sentative at one time of a constituency
which contained a very important body
of miners whose views, equally with those
of the employers, I had an opportunity of
learning. I was always proud to act with
the miners’ representatives for North
umberland and Durham when I was in the
House of Commons in all matters affecting
labour, and I think I have on more than
one occasion voted against the Second
Reading of an Eight Hours Bill for miners
in co-operation with the Labour repre
sentatives for Northumberland and
Durham. I have, however, always had
sympathy with the men in other districts
who desired to obtain by legislation the
limitation of the hours of work under
ground to eight, but I felt that the con
ditions in the mines of Northumberland
and Durham did not require a measure of
that kind, and that 1 ugely because it was
I obvious that the arrangements then existing
in Northumberland and Durham were certain
to be considerably disturbed by its applica-
; tion to those counties. The apprehensions
which were formed by masters and men have
I been fulfilled to the letter. After no little