bution towards the solution of the latter. We see no reason why the Weir scheme which, in our judgment, is a serious attempt, conceived on scientific lines, to organise productive power to meet the present urgent need for houses, should not be fully developed as an auxiliary and emergency scheme side by side with the present development of the building industry. The requirements of the country in the matter of housing are so great that, even with the maximum development of such auxiliary schemes, they cannot be overtaken except over a period of many years. Any fear, therefore, that the adoption of such schemes will compete unduly with the recognised building industry appears to us to be groundless. Anyone having a knowledge of the facts must appreciate the joint efforts which are being made by the building industry in the face of considerable difficulties to meet these requirements, and the endeavour which is being made to overcome the present shortage of skilled craftsmen, particularly bricklayers and plasterers, by the scheme for the extended system of apprenticeship. It is essential in the interests of the building industry itself, and of the community, that these joint efforts should continue, but in the meantime it must be recognised tha the present urgent demand for houses cannot be met by the building industry in its present state, and any scheme which will alleviate to some extent the existing hardships of overcrowding must be welcomed by all those who have the welfare of the community at heart."

(ii) The Dispute in the Coal Mining Industry.

On 30th June the Mining Association of Great Britain gave notice to the Miners' Federation of Great Britain for the termination at midnight on 31st July of the wages agreement between the parties, dated 18th June, 1924.

Subsequently, new wages proposals were communicated by the Association to the Federation. These were considered by a National Delegate Conference of the Federation which met in London on 3rd July, and were rejected.

The Prime Minister announced in the House of Commons on the 13th July that the First Lord of the Admiralty (Mr. Bridgeman), the Minister of Labour (Sir A. Steel-Maitland) and the Secretary for Mines (Colonel Lane-Fox) had had conversations with the representatives of the owners and the representatives of the miners; that in view of the situation disclosed by those conversations the Government had decided to set up a Court of Inquiry under the Industrial Courts Act; and that the Minister of Labour had set up a Court accordingly.

The Court consisted of the Rt. Hon. H. P. Macmillan, K.C., M.A., LL.D., Chairman, Mr. W. Sherwood, and Sir Josiah Stamp, G.B.E., D.Sc., with the following terms of reference :

66

To inquire into the causes and circumstances of the dispute in the coal mining industry and to report thereon."

The Court held their first public sitting on 17th July. Representatives of the Mining Association were in attendance at the opening of the Court but the Miners' Federation were not represented. The proceedings were accordingly adjourned until 20th July and, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Court, a formal request was directed to the President and Secretary of the Miners' Federation to attend on that date, but they both replied declining to attend. The Court accordingly proceeded to conduct their inquiry in the absence of representatives of the Miners' Federation, representatives of the Mining Association alone being heard.

The Court issued their report on 28th July (Cmd. 2478). The report first of all sets out the existing position as between the Mining Association and the Miners' Federation, the Court having in the first instance invited the mine owners to narrate the course of events leading up to the dispute. After describing the steps taken to appoint a joint sub-committee of the Mining Association and the Miners' Federation to make a thorough investigation of the conditions of the industry in all its aspects, the mine owners explained the progress made by the joint committee, and the circumstances leading up to the notice given on 30th June by the Mining Association to the Miners' Federation terminating the existing wages agreement at 31st July, and the proposals of the Mining Association for a new wages agreement. These proposals were rejected by the Miners' Federation, who demanded their withdrawal.

Proceeding to consider the causes and circumstances of the dispute, the Court state that the origin of the trouble is to be found in the deplorable condition of the industry itself, due to the general depression and disturbance of trade consequent upon the war, the substitution of oil for coal in ships, the growth of hydro-electric power, and the great increase of coal production in countries which were formerly Great Britain's best customers. The Court state that the high cost of production of coal, to which the Mining Association largely attributed the decline of the industry, was undoubtedly an important factor. Particularly as regards exports, the trade had been conducted on very narrow margins, so that small reductions in cost might make all the difference in securing contracts. A table was put in showing the rise in the cost of production as between 1913 and the 12 months 1st May, 1924-30th April, 1925. The increase shown. by this table was 94-27 per cent. in wage costs, and 104.48 per cent. in costs other than wages, the total increase being about 9s. 2d. a ton, or 97.06 per cent. Proceeds, on the other hand, had increased by only 7s. 111d., or 72-21 per cent., so that the margin between proceeds and costs of production had been reduced from 1s. 6d. a ton to 3d. a ton, a reduction of 80-22 per cent. Moreover, this does not indicate the position in particular

districts. If the Eastern Area were eliminated there would be a minus general balance, instead of a small credit balance.

Much of the evidence of the Mining Association was devoted to demonstrating that the high cost of production could be reduced by increasing the output; and that, if the Coal Mines. Act of 1919 were repealed, the output per shift would recover the diminution of nearly 12 per cent. attributed to the shortening of the working day. Upon this the Court remark that "coincidently with the shortening of hours of labour, there has been a diminution in the output per person per shift, although the output per person per hour has slightly increased " and that "we are prepared to agree that, if no other considerations were involved, a reversion to the former working day would result in a substantial increase of output and some diminution in working costs per ton, the extent or effect of which we do not find ourselves in a position to predict with assurance."

In their conclusions, the Court state

"We are satisfied on one point, that the workers are justified in claiming that any wages agreement which they can be asked to accept should provide for a minimum wage. What that minimum should be is a matter for negotiation between the parties. We do not think that a method of fixing wages which allows of their indefinite diminution can be regarded as satisfactory . The claim that wages must be a first charge on the proceeds of industry is a contentious and ambiguous one. If the meaning be that wages at some agreed minimum rate must in practice be a charge before profits are taken, we concur in that view." The conflict between the economic wage which the coal industry can afford to pay and the social wage which the worker can be asked to accept is, in the opinion of the Court, not the whole of the case. Apart from wages costs, which constitute the largest part of the outgoings of a colliery, there are other costs of a lesser but still important character. The Miners' Federation had indicated a number of directions in which they suggested that some measure of relief might be found apart from reductions in wages. Owing, however, to the abstention of the Miners' Federation from the proceedings, the Court were unable to examine their proposals in detail. The Court, however, expressed the opinion that there was considerable room for improving the efficiency of the industry, and indicated various directions in which such improvement might perhaps be possible. One general conclusion forced upon the Court by their investigation was that

"the present crisis in the industry, unlike other crises which have arisen in the past, is to a large extent the creation of neither party to the dispute. It has arisen in the main from without, and is due to causes not within the control of either party. These causes are to be found in

the operation of national and international disturbances and dislocations which are the inevitable sequel of the economic upheaval due to the war. They are causes which may continue to operate for a considerable time to come. In such a crisis it is, perhaps, natural that each party should seek to transfer to the other as much as possible of the consequences of the common calamity. Just because the calamity is a common one not primarily due to the fault of either, we venture to think that in taking common counsel together the parties are most likely to find a means of averting its worst consequences.'

In an addendum to the report, Sir Josiah Stamp deals with the effect on the coal mining industry of the return to the gold standard, and states that, in his view, the recent improvement in the exchange or decline in the price level, whether or not compulsorily brought about by the anticipation and then the realisation of the gold standard, was sufficient in itself to accoun: for the special plight of the industry since March, 1925. The state of affairs in the industry in the last few months must not be regarded as the necessary result either of normal trade movements or the present agreement; the evil had been aggravated by currency policy.

Renewed efforts were made by Mr. Bridgeman to bring the parties together. On 24th July, following separate meetings with the two sides, Mr. Bridgeman, who was accompanied by Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland and Colonel Lane-Fox, was successful in arranging a joint meeting under his chairmanship. Owing to the engagement of both sides in the country it was not possible to discuss more than future procedure, and it was agreed that the joint conference should meet again on 29th July, with Mr. Bridgeman again in the chair.

Meanwhile, on 27th July, the day preceding the issue of the report of the Court of Inquiry, the Prime Minister received a deputation from a special committee of the Trades Union Congress General Council, and expressed his intention of using every effort to secure a peaceful settlement. On 29th July, he saw representatives of both parties separately, but no agreement was found possible. The negotiations continued throughout the following day, when the Prime Minister offered financial assistance to the industry until the spring of 1926, to allow of a full investigation being made, and asked the mine owners to suspend notices for a fortnight. These terms were accepted by the parties concerned on 31st July, and arrangements were made for work to be continued.

A Royal Commission was accordingly appointed. consisting of the Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert Samuel, G.B.E. (Chairman), Sir W. H. Beveridge, K.C.B., General the Hon. Sir H. A. Lawrence, K.C.B., and Mr. Kenneth Lee, to inquire into and report upon the economic position of the industry and the con

ditions affecting it, and to make any recommendations for the improvement thereof.

The Commission held their first public sitting for the hearing of evidence on 15th October, and were still in session at the end of the year.

(iii) Railway Shopmen, London and North Eastern Railway and Cheshire Lines.

In connection with the threatened stoppage of work of certain railway shopmen on the Great Central Section of the London and North Eastern Railway and on the Cheshire Lines, the Minister of Labour, on 24th December, 1925, appointed a Court of Inquiry consisting of Mr. Holman Gregory, K.C. (Chairman), Mr. R. A. Austen-Leigh, and Mr. Arthur Shaw, J.P., with the following terms of reference :

"To inquire into the threatened dispute concerning the claim of the National Union of Railwaymen for the application of decision no. 728 of the Industrial Court, dated 8th July, 1922, to the various classes of men employed in the several departments of the railway shops of the Great Central Section of the London and North Eastern Railway Company and the Cheshire Lines Committee or in connection therewith, and to ascertain and report on the facts.". The inquiry was held in public at the Institution of Civil Engineers, Great George Street, Westminster, S.W.1, on the 11th and 12th January, 1926, when the contentions of the various parties were placed before the Court. Representatives of the lowing organisations were present :-the London and North Eastern Railway Company, on behalf of the Great Central · Section and the Cheshire Lines Committee, the National Union of Railwaymen, the Amalgamated Engineering Union, the Federation of Engineering and Shipbuilding Trades, the United Society of Boilermakers and Iron and Steel Shipbuilders, the National Union of Foundry Workers, the United Operative Plumbers' and Domestic Engineers' Association, the Amalgamated Machine, Engine, and Iron Grinders' and Glaziers' Society, the United Society of Saddlers and General Leather' Workers, and the Workers' Union..

The report of the Court was received on 8th February, 1926.

CHAPTER II.

EMPLOYMENT.

COURSE OF UNEMPLOYMENT.

The course of unemployment during the past four years is illustrated by the following figures of persons on the live registers