In a letter addressed to The Times, early in the present year, in which the case of the masters was ably argued, Mr. Laing narrated the history of the Bleanavon Company. Owing to various causes, that concern had been worked for several years without profit. Only within the last three years had it become a profitable undertaking; and yet all through a long period of adversity an amount of £3,000 to £4,000 a week was paid in wages, at the same rate as by the most prosperous iron works; and the capital sunk by the original proprietors was the means of creating a town, and supporting a population of 9,000, in a secluded mountain valley of South Wales.
Causes which will lead to a reduction in price of coal.
The present unprecedented prosperity may continue for a year or two years at the most, but, at the end of that time, the influx of capital into the coal trade, attracted by the present high profits, will infallibly lead to some reduction of price. New coal pits are being sunk. Old pits are being improved. More workmen are being trained in the business of mining. Hence we may look with confidence to an augmentation of the output, and to a sufficient supply for the ordinary demands of consumers. The insufficient profits of former days cannot be attributed to the unreasonable standard at which wages were maintained. The excessive competition in the supply of coal was the true cause of the unfortunate position of the trade. And as in the former period of depression, so in the sudden and it may be short-lived prosperity of the present day, the rates of wages must be regarded, not as a cause, but as a consequence, of an abnormal position of affairs.
Hours of labour.
Complaints have been urged as to the effects of shortening the hours of labour; and it is certain that if a comparison be made between the amount raised and the total number of individuals employed, a less quantity is raised than in former years. It must not, however, be forgotten that high wages have attracted many untrained hands to the coal pits. It would be presumptuous in me to express an opinion as to the precise number of hours, which would constitute a fair working day in a coal pit. Mr. Macdonald, who has had actual experience as a working miner, declares that the present earnings could not be obtained with less than eight hours of work a day, and that no man, who laboured assiduously for that number of hours could work continuously six days a week at coal mining. It will be the duty of those, to whom the miners are in the habit of looking for guidance, to watch with care the course of trade. They know that the iron manufactures of this country can only prosper, so long as we are able to sell our iron abroad at cheaper rates than those demanded by foreign producers.
There are some who think that a limitation of the hours of labour is in itself an evil. I cannot share in this view. Because some may make an unwise use of their newly acquired advantages, that is no reason for returning to a former state of things; when, in the general depression of trade, an undue pressure was brought to bear upon the working man. ‘No doubt,’ says Sir Arthur Helps, ‘hard work is a great police agent. If everybody were worked from morning till night, and then carefully locked up, the register of crime might be greatly diminished. But what would become of human nature? Where would be the room for growth in such a system of things?’
The use of leisure requires education, and that education had not been freely given to the mechanics, miners, and puddlers, of former generations.
The double-shift system.
Among the various proposals for maintaining the production of collieries while conceding to the individual workman the advantage of a reduction in the number of hours of daily labour, the double-shift system of working promises a most satisfactory result. When the memorable struggle was commenced in Newcastle for a reduction in the number of hours, I ventured to suggest, in an address delivered at Birkenhead, that the solution of the difficulty, which had arisen in the engineering establishments, might be found in employing relays of mechanics to succeed each other at the same machine. When we have to combine human labour with machine power, we know that it is impossible for the human machine to keep pace with machinery of brass and iron. But why, I venture to ask, should not a machine, which never tires, be tended by two or three artisans relieving each other as one watch relieves another on board ship? In driving the machinery of steamships, it has been found necessary, on long voyages, to have three sets of engineers and firemen. Why should not the day be divided into three periods of eight hours, or the working day be extended to sixteen hours, two sets of men being employed? The change, arising from the increasing use of machinery, seems to render corresponding modifications in the application of labour essential. My friend Mr. Elliott is pushing the system of a succession of labour in collieries with very advantageous results to all parties concerned. Comparing a Durham colliery, worked on the double-shift system, with a colliery in Glamorganshire, worked by one set of miners, he ascertained that twice the quantity of coal per day was being raised in Durham. The prejudices of the miners in South Wales against the double-shift have presented a serious obstacle to its introduction, but Mr. Elliott hopes that this may eventually be overcome by the influence of Mr. Macdonald and other representatives of the men, whose superior intelligence will enable them to appreciate more readily the advantages of new and improved systems of working.