A Dangerous Precedent?

Commonwealth (British Commonwealth of Nations)

"A government," observed the great Burke, "is founded upon compromise and barter." Last week it became evident that Premier Stanley Baldwin also believed in compromise as the basis of government. For several weeks William C. Bridgeman, First Lord of the Admiralty, had vainly attempted to mediate between mine owners and miners in an effort to reach an agreement on wages and avert a threatening general strike (TIME, July 20 et seq.). Mr. Baldwin at length was convinced that it was high time to send his colleague back to tend the Navy, and he himself filled the role of mediator.

The public, which had grave reason to fear the consequences of the near-looming strike, became somewhat reassured when Pilot Baldwin grasped the helm. Was he not above all things safe, sane and sure? Moreover, as the master of the great iron foundry, Baldwin's Ltd., he understood the psychology of both sides of the embittered dispute; and this understanding was not alone technical, but deep-seated in his sympathy for the lot of the worker. Perhaps something of this understanding of, and sympathy with, others, sometimes artistically and poignantly revealed in his speeches, owes something to the fact that his mother* was the youngest of a famous quartet which included Lady

Burne-Jones, Lady Poynter and Mrs. Kipling, mother of the poet.

The problems of the British Government today, turn in whatever direction one will, are predominantly economic. It is, therefore, fortunate that Mr. Baldwin is a captain of industry rather than a scholarly epigrammatist with political finesse and a nice Disraelian scorn. A plain man--and the Premier is one--in these days may rush in where brilliant men fear to tread. And with a feeling that the best man for the difficult task of mollifying master and miner was on the job, all Britain hopped in between the sheets and snored for eight long hours.

Early in the week, a court of inquiry set up by the Government made a report, he most important points of which were:

1) "We do not think that a method of fixing wages which allows of their indefinite diminution can be regarded as satisfactory.

2) "That wages at some agreed minimum rate must in practice be charged before profits are taken."

3) "We venture to think that there is considerable room for improving the efficiency of the industry as a whole and in this way affording some aid to its economic position.

4) "Further collective action on the part of the collieries would enable facilities and resources to be used in common to a greater advantage and would promote economic working.

5) "It is also for consideration whether the industry should remain in isolation or whether by its coordination with other enterprises better results might not be obtained."

On the basis of this report, Mr. Baldwin tried to meet first the miners' representatives, then the owners' representatives. In the morning the miners would refuse to budge from their decision to strike unless the owners canceled their notice to end the existing wage agreement. The Premier, before taking up this point with the owners, chewed some roast beef, guzzled some ale. The owners met him with the same intransigeance as the miners had shown. How, said they, can we afford to pay wages at the present scale when the coal industry is losing millions of dollars a month? How, returned the miners, can you expect us either to work under the ground for longer than seven hours a day or to accept a wage cut which, with prices far above their pre-War level, would mean that we are to work for less than we got under intolerable pre-War conditions? Mr. Baldwin confessed himself beaten, but did not give up hope of finding a satisfactory solution of the problem.

Eight hours before the miners were due to circumvent a lock-out declared by the owners by declaring a strike, the Premier announced that, on condition that the owners postponed their lockout, the Government would subsidize the coal industry for nine months from Aug. 1. Meantime a royal commission is to inquire into the whole position of the mining industry with a view to seeking a scientific remedy for its troubles. Both sides agreed to this proposal and the strike menace was ended for the time being, at least.

The terms of the subvention were: "Assistance to be given by the Government to the coal mining industry will take the form of a subvention in aid of wages," to be paid by the Treasury. This offer allowed the owners about 30-c- profit per ton, any greater profit to be utilized for reduction of the subvention. "It is impossible at present," ended the Government's official statement, "to forecast correctly the cost involved to the Exchequer, as this must depend upon the course of trade."

Five minutes later, the substance of this remedy was unfolded to the House of Commons by the Premier in an atmosphere of hushed tension. Cheers greeted the Premier's statement, but questions were postponed at the Government's request.

Next day, ex-Premier George poured the vials of his scorn on the Government, calling the settlement "a very successful hold-up of the community."

"There is only one agreement among the miners, mineowners, House of Commons and the public, and that is the Government has mishandled the situation," he cried, glaring at the Government benches, his mass of white hair dishevelled. "The Government was taken by surprise. This has been going on since February and they were taken by surprise in July. No plan, no proposals, no suggestions. Even the strike emergency organization was not ready.

"There settlement means the taxpayer is to be milked dry. It is the worst transaction the Government has ever made. The precedent now established will be very difficult to deny when a crisis comes in other industries. " How can the Government discriminate between the mining industry and the railways, or, supposing there is a strike, which God forbid, of sailors ? They are all vital and if the taxpayer is to be called on to pay a subsidy in each case you will have both worker and employer combining to milk the taxpayer and there will be no cream left for anybody.

"Can any one of sense and responsibility say the subsidy plan will cost less than -L-20,000,000?"

Chancellor of the Exchequer Winston Churchill, being brilliant and therefore distrusted, came in for a major share of the criticism. It appeared that he had originally agreed to allow the mine owners 8-c- a ton profit, but had ended by giving way to their stubborn demand for a 30-c- per ton profit. On this ground was he criticized, and many an angry voice in the ranks of the Conservatives was heard.

A. J. Cook, general secretary of the Miners' Federation, himself a near-Communist, crowed: "An armistice has been declared, but the issues during the next nine months will be far greater than the mere wage issue. Last Friday was Good Friday--not the crucifixion of workers but the crucifixion of those who have been exploiting them."

Significance: Criticism of Premier Badwin's strike settlement was facile. In justice, only a compromise was possible. To throw down the gauntlet to Labor was to invite a general strike of miners, railwaymen and transport workers and the active sympathy of other Labor bodies.

To argue that the public was sure to win by organized resistance, as it did in 1919, was to beg the question. Such a course, even if it avoided bloodshed, would have cost the country hundreds of millions of pounds instead of the few tens of millions that the Baldwin scheme may cost.

But the fact remains that a dangerous precedent has been set; other industries may, under threat of a new general strike, demand subventions. This precedent would seem to imply that, as the Laborites claimed it did, a severe blow has been struck against the principle of representative government; for have not a noisy and extremely powerful minority of the country successfully, if temporarily, forced its demands upon the nation without reference to the expressed wishes of the representatives of the sovereign people? It has, and it may continue to do so until, perhaps, the State is forced to nationalize industries, railways, land, etc. The present Government, to safeguard the interests of democracy, would seem morally bound to make a repetition of Labor's threat illegal, which it now is not, by enacting a bill to make settlement of disputes by a court of arbitration obligatory.

*Mrs. Baldwin, who recently died (TIME, May 25, MILESTONES), daughter of a Wesleyan pastor, the Rev. G. B. Macdonald, was at the age of seven a most precocious child. Unable to write (not an unusual thing in mid-Victorian days), she dictated with calm assurance The History of the Piebald Family. Later, when her father passed off one of her witticisms as his own, she stormed: "God knows I made that joke!" and, bursting into tears, fled from the room.