THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 THE 
 
 MINING ASSOCIATION 
 
 OF 
 
 GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL, 1893 
 
 (Appointed for 2nd Reading 3rd May, 1893.) 
 
 DIGEST OF EVIDENCE GIVEN BEFORE GROUP " A " COMMITTEE 
 OF THE ROYAL COM .MISSION ON LABOUK 
 
 IN REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE, AND 
 
 PRINT OF THE BILL. 
 
 THOS. RATCLIFFE ELLLS, 
 
 LAW CLERK AND SECRETARY, 
 
 6, STRAND, LONDON, W.C.
 
 Z IDsT ID 
 
 PAGE 
 
 SUMMARY ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 
 
 DIGEST OF EVIDENCE GIVEN BEFORE GROUP "A" OF THE 
 
 KOYAL LABOUR COMMISSION 37 
 
 EXTRACT FROM MEMORANDUM AS TO MINING AND IRON 
 
 INDUSTRIES ... ... ... ... ... ... 219 
 
 EEPRINT OF MINES (EIGHT Horns) BILL, 1893 225
 
 THE MINING ASSOCI 
 
 GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 MINES (EIOHT HOUKS) BILL. 
 
 , 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 p WHEN the Coal Mines Regulation Act Amendment 1887. 
 "* (Government) Bill was before the House of Commons in the ^ aZ - afi/ " 
 
 > Hequlatio 
 
 5 Session of 1887, Mr. Williamson moved to insert a new Act Amen 
 S clause, providing that, except in cases of emergency, no 
 workman should be employed in any mine to which the Act 
 applied for a longer period than eight consecutive hours or for 
 more than eight hours in any twenty-four hours, where the 
 mine was worked on the single shift system. 
 
 This, it is believed, was the first occasion on which Parlia- 
 ment was definitely asked to fix the hours of male adult 
 labour in coal mines at eight hours per day. 
 
 The clause in question was opposed by, amongst others, the 
 then Home Secretary (Mr. Henry Matthews), Mr. Burt, Mr. 
 Childers, Mr. Broadhurst, Mr. Fenwick, Mr. Bradlaugh, and 
 Mr. W. H. Smith. 
 
 Mr. BURT, in the course of the discussion, pointed out that 
 so far as adults were concerned they could do for themselves 
 what the amendment proposed to do for them. 
 
 Mr. CHILDERS mentioned that about two years before he 
 had received a deputation of miners and had put to them 
 most carefully the question, " Do you wish any State inter- 
 ference with the hours of adult labour ? " and the answer in 
 
 38(5618
 
 every case was "No." He stated that he could not find 
 that in any district it was the desire of miners that restriction 
 upon their labour should be imposed by law. 
 
 Mr. BROADHURST opposed the clause on the ground that 
 it proposed to do for grown men what they could do for 
 themselves. 
 
 Mr. FENWICK, in opposing the clause, mentioned that the 
 miners he represented had solely by the force of their 
 organization and self-dependence been able to secure for 
 themselves a shorter period of labour. 
 
 Mr. BRA.DLAUGH said he emphatically opposed the clause, 
 contending that the miners ought to be taught to rely upon 
 themselves and not upon the legislature. 
 
 On a division, the clause was rejected by a majority of 105 
 votes, the numbers being, for the clause 54, against it 159. 
 
 This debate and division took place in Committee on the 
 Mines Bill on the 17th August, 1887. 
 
 1887. In the month of September of the same year, at the 
 
 September, grades Union Congress held at Swansea, a resolution was 
 Trades Union 
 Congress at\, proposed to the effect that the reduction of the working day, 
 
 Swansea. ^ ALL TRADESj ^ o e ight hours, was desirable, and could be 
 effected by combination if eight hours only were worked in 
 Government workshops. 
 
 An amendment was moved to the effect, that this object 
 could be better effected by law. 
 
 A further amendment was proposed to the effect, that 
 first of all the opinion of the working classes should be 
 obtained by a plebiscite. This further amendment was 
 carried by 84 votes to 11. 
 
 1888. In the Session of 1888, a Mines (Limitation of Hours) 
 ^talion'of^' ^^ ^ " ^ m ^ the h urs of labour by underground workers 
 Hours) BUI. to eight hours a day " was brought in by Mr. Cunninghame 
 
 Graham, Mr. Abraham, Mr. Pickard, Mr. Conybeare, and
 
 3 
 
 Mr. Cremer, and was read a first time on the 4th May. The 
 order for second reading was, however, read and discharged, 
 and the Bill withdrawn on the 9th July. 
 
 In September, 1888, at the Trades Union Congress held 1888. 
 at Bradford, Mr. Threlfall (of Southport) moved a resolu- 8e f tember - 
 tion in favour of an Eight Hours Bill for MINERS and Congress at 
 RAILWAY WORKERS, and stated that the Mining popula- Srad f rd - 
 tion were overwhelmingly in favour of it. The resolution 
 was, however, lost by one vote, 46 voting against it and 
 45 in its favour. 
 
 At the same Congress an amendment was moved by Mr. 
 Keir Harclie that the Bill should apply to ALL TRADES, but 
 was defeated by a large majority. 
 
 In the Session of 1889 a Mines (Eight Hours) Bill was 1889. 
 again brought in by Mr. Cunninghame Graham and other ^ws'y^ill 
 members, but it did not reach a second reading. 
 
 In September, 1889, at the Trades Union Congress at 1889. 
 Dundee, a motion was made by Mr. Keir Hardie for the &&"**& 
 furtherance of legislation on the Eight Hours day, but Congress at 
 this was defeated by 23 votes, the numbers being 65 in Dundee - 
 favour and 88 against it. A resolution in favour of an 
 Eight Hours Bill for MINERS was, however, carried by a 
 large majority. 
 
 In the Session of 1890 a Bill " to restrict labour in mines 1890. 
 to eight hours per day " was introduced by Mr. Philipps, Mr. ^r^S* 
 Cunninghame Gfrahame, Mr. Pickard, Mr. Abraham, Mr. 
 Conybeare, Mr. Jacoby, Mr. Randall, Sir W. Foster, and Earl 
 Compton, and was read a first time on the 12th February. 
 It was, however, subsequently dropped. 
 
 In September, 1890, at the Trades Union Congress at 18&0. 
 
 Liverpool, a resolution in favour of an Eight Hours Bill &?***** 
 
 Trades Union 
 FOR ALL TRADES was carried by 38 votes, the numbers Congress at 
 
 being 193 in favour, and 155 against the motion. Liverpool,
 
 An amendment was moved on behalf of the Durham 
 miners, against any legislation on the subject, but this 
 was lost by 6 votes, the numbers being 175 for and 181 
 against. 
 
 1890. On the 26th November, 1890, a Bill "to restrict the 
 Mi^eTfmght la ^our in mines to eight hours a day " was brought in by 
 Hours) Bill. Mr. Abraham, and the members above-named, and others. 
 
 1891. On the 21st January, 1891, a Conference on the Mines 
 Eight Hours Question took place at the Westminster Palace 
 
 Conference in Hotel, between certain representative Coal-owners, and the 
 iween Coal Miners' Federation of Great Britain, the South Wales and 
 
 Monmouth Miners' Federation, and Scotland. 
 
 Mr. Alfred Barnes (then M.P. for the Chesterfield division 
 of Derbyshire) presided. 
 
 This Conference was brought about as the result of a cor- 
 respondence between Mr. Pickard, M.P., and Mr. Thomas 
 Ashton, the President and Secretary respectively of the 
 Miners' Federation of Great Britain, and Mr. Maskell Peace 
 and Mr. F. Parker Khodes on behalf of the Coal-owners. 
 
 Mr. PICKARD read the case on behalf of the Miners repre- 
 sented at the Conference in support of " An Eight Hours' 
 day from bank to bank." The statement was as follows : 
 
 Statement of " Gentlemen, we appear before you to-day to prefer a 
 
 Miners' Case. , . , . , . . . . r . 
 
 claim which, in our opinion, is a fair, a legitimate, and 
 
 a just one, namely, to ask you to agree to a working 
 day or shift of eight hours from bank to bank in every 
 consecutive 24 hours day. As is well known, we are 
 anxious to secure such a working day by legislative 
 enactment rather than by arrangements with gentlemen 
 engaged in the trade. That is our first way of looking 
 at it. Our reasons are that in our opinion an eight 
 hours' day, if so arranged, would be conducive to health, 
 safety, and the better regulation of the internal working
 
 5 
 
 of our mines. The long hours our men have to put 
 in from the time they leave their homes to engage 
 upon their work in any shift is, on the average, longer 
 than in any other trade or occupation in the country. 
 The average is from five in the morning until two or 
 three in the afternoon, which means ten hours and a 
 half to eleven hours actually engaged either in getting 
 to their work, or being engaged at the coal face. This 
 means more time put in than the staple trades of this 
 country. Whilst these men on the surface are breath- 
 ing pure air, being supplied with warm food and drinks, 
 with their half hour to breakfast and their hour to 
 dinner with such intervals in their toil, our miners are 
 hurrying, as if for life or death, from home to the pit 
 bank, and when they descend the mines the only pure 
 air they possess during that day is what they take 
 down with them. From the time they enter the mine 
 they are breathing impure air, risking their lives every 
 moment they are underground, and their toil is more 
 dangerous and exhaustive than any other work known 
 on the surface. It has been ascertained that the deaths 
 among our miners, who actually work in the mines, are 
 on the average higher than in the case of those working 
 in other trades; that we have more disabled, perma- 
 nently disabled men than any other trade, and there 
 is not the slightest doubt that we have more killed, 
 seriously injured and non- seriously injured, than half 
 the trades of the country put together. It has just 
 been ascertained that a great portion of the accidents 
 resulting in persons killed and injured occurred during 
 the later hours of the shift worked. From the fourth 
 hour, and during the remaining portion of the shift 
 according to a return granted to Mr, Fenwick on coal
 
 mines explosions vast numbers of our miners have 
 been killed during the last 10 years ; conclusively 
 proving, as we contend, that as men become mentally 
 and physically exhausted they are not so well able to 
 look after their own and their fellow-workmen's safety. 
 We also ask you to concede the Eight Hours Day 
 because the workmen will have more time for recreation 
 and self-improvement, and be better able to perform 
 their duties as citizens generally. We likewise believe 
 that the work will be done more efficiently, more regu- 
 larly, and with less cost and wear and tear in material, 
 in addition to safety to life and limb. We also believe 
 that the output will be more regular, will give the 
 managers more confidence in the ability of the work- 
 men to perform a fair day's work, and will bring about 
 a better feeling between employers and employed. 
 We have no fear that if this is conceded there will be 
 any diminution of output. In our opinion if this 
 shorter time is conceded, the workman will be able 
 to leave his work with that reserve of strength which 
 will better enable him to attend his work the following 
 day than under the present system. In our opinion 
 the present plan actually takes out of a man during 
 the last three-quarters of an hour in which he is engaged 
 at his work that vital energy which it is utterly im- 
 possible to replace, and which, persistently exercised, 
 works down the whole system, and brings in its course 
 unnatural decay of the system. 
 
 " In conclusion, we ask you to concede this day of 
 eight hours in the following form, namely : That it 
 become a special rule in every mining inspector's district 
 that no person shall work underground from bank to 
 faank more than eight hours in any one day of 24 hours,
 
 and that the same shall be mutually agreed upon and 
 form part of the Act of 1887. Unless such is the case 
 it will be utterly impossible for us to take it, as our 
 great object is to secure a uniform Eight Hours Day -for 
 the underground toilers in the United Kingdom." 
 
 Mr. A. M. CHAMBERS (the then President of the Mining 
 Association), in replying on behalf of the Coal-owners, asked 
 that the Conference might be adjourned to enable the latter 
 to consider the case which had been read by Mr. Pickard, 
 and to ascertain whether the statements put forward were 
 really verified by the facts. 
 
 It was accordingly arranged that the Conference should be 
 adjourned for three weeks, and that in the meantime the 
 Coal-owners should be supplied with prints of the case which 
 had been read by Mr. Pickard. The adjourned Conference 
 took place on the 1 1th February, 1891, Mr. Barnes, M.P., again 
 presiding, when the reply of the Coal-owners to the case put 
 forward by the Miners' Federation was read, in which the 
 Coal-owners said that it was quite impossible to agree to the 
 establishment of a rule making it a penal offence for any 
 person to work more than Eight Hours in any one day, 
 and gave the reasons for the decision at which they had 
 arrived. 
 
 The reply of the Coal-owners, which was read by Mr. F. 
 PARKER RHODES, was as follows : 
 
 " Since we met you on the 21st January we have con- Reply of Coal 
 ferred with the owners in different districts with regard 
 to your request that the owners as a body should agree 
 to the establishment throughout the kingdom of a 
 Special Rule under the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 
 1887, by which it shall be provided that no person shall 
 work under ground, from bank to bank, more than 8
 
 hours in any one day of 24 hours. You formulated 
 your request and also the reasons which, in your judg. 
 ment, supported it, in the statement which Mr. Pickard 
 read, and in dealing with such an important subject 
 that course was undoubtedly convenient. We propose 
 to adopt the same method and to read now, and also 
 hand to Mr. Pickard, this written statement in which 
 we have set out the conclusions at which we have 
 arrived, and in which we have also indicated some errors 
 into which we think you have fallen, and some of the 
 reasons which, to our minds, appear to negative some of 
 your allegations. You will then have your own state- 
 ment and ours together, and can consider them and judge 
 for yourselves. In the first place, we are bound to tell 
 you that it seems quite impossible to agree to the esta- 
 blishment of such a Special Eule as you ask for which 
 would render it a penal offence under the Mines Act 
 of 1887 for any person to work more than 8 hours in 
 any one day, and expose both the person working and the 
 employer permitting him to work to fine or imprison- 
 ment. We are quite sure that such a rule was never 
 contemplated by the Legislature when that Act was 
 passed, and that even if agreed to, it would be bad 
 and beyond the powers conferred by that Act. But 
 quite apart from that part of the question, we are 
 satisfied that the adoption of your proposal would entail 
 serious injury to the industry on which both you and 
 ourselves are dependent, and on which we must all 
 remember the community at large is also dependent. 
 Of course we might take a selfish view, and say that we 
 need not consider the rest of the community. That 
 would, however, be a fallacy. They depend on us for 
 fuel, but we depend on them for its consumption. We
 
 will deal, however, for the moment with your request as 
 it affects our trade alone. That request in form applies 
 to the whole of the United Kingdom, but in reality it 
 does not. On your side we see that the oldest and 
 most important mining district in the kingdom, viz., 
 the North -of England, does not join in your demand. 
 On our side you will see that the North of Engand, 
 South Wales, and Scotland are not here. If therefore, 
 your proposal was adopted in the Midland Counties, 
 Lancashire, Cheshire, and North Wales, those districts 
 would be heavily handicapped in competing with the 
 North of England, South Wales, and Scotland. Already 
 the inland coalfields compete at a disadvantage with 
 those on the seaboard. You need only slightly increase 
 that disadvantage to shut out the inland coal- 
 fields to a large extent from the markets on 
 which they depend. This argument applies with 
 equal force to competition with the Continental coal- 
 fields, and in their case it must be remembered that 
 such competition is every year becoming more severe, 
 and that the maintenance of our supremacy in foreign 
 markets is essential for our existence. Apart from 
 the foregoing weighty considerations we think there 
 are errors in your statement that require correction, 
 Those statements are as follows :(!.) ' That the time 
 put in by the miners at present is on the average from 
 5 in the morning until 2 or 3 in the afternoon, 
 which means 10^ to 11 hours actually engaged in 
 getting to their work and being engaged at the coal 
 face. This means more time put in than in the other 
 staple trades of this country.' This overstates the 
 case, as irom their own figures the extreme time is only 
 10 hours per day. In almost the whole of the staple
 
 10 
 
 trades of the country the workmen are absent from 
 their homes at least 12 hours per day, as work usually 
 runs from 6 o'clock in the morning till 5 in the after- 
 noon. (2.) The statement is made that ' when they 
 descend the mines, the only pure air they possess 
 during that day is what they take down with them,' 
 and 'also from the time they enter the mine they 
 are breathing impure air.' As a matter of fact, with 
 the improved modern means of ventilation, the air in 
 most mines is quite as pure and healthy as in most of 
 the mills engaged in the textile trades and in the 
 workshops of a large number of industries; such as 
 those used in the manufacture of iron files, cutlery, 
 clothing, boots and shoes, etc. (3.) It is stated that 
 ' It has been ascertained that the deaths among our 
 miners are on the average higher than in the case of 
 those working in other trades ; that we have more 
 disabled, permanently disabled men than any other 
 trade, and there is not the slightest doubt that we 
 have more killed, seriously injured, and non-seriously 
 injured than half the trade of the country put 
 together.' This statement is an exaggeration. Accord- 
 ing to a Parliamentary return ordered by the House of 
 Commons to be printed, 15tb August, 1890, the number 
 of persons seriously injured amongst railway servants 
 is considerably larger in proportion to the number 
 employed than the number seriously injured in 
 collieries. The following table, extracted from that 
 return shows this to be the case :
 
 Total Number 
 employed. 
 
 Deaths per 
 10,000. 
 
 Injured per 
 10,000. 
 
 Coal Mines 
 
 581,809 
 
 19-1 
 
 73-6 
 
 Railway Servants 
 
 381,626 
 
 11-8 
 
 272-2 
 
 With regard to the average death rate among the 
 mining population, the following statement shows 
 that it is only slightly in excess of other occupations. 
 These figures are taken from the supplement to the 
 45th Annual Report of the Registrar-General. 
 
 TABLE 6. MEAN ANNUAL MORTALITY AT SUCCESSIVE 
 PERIODS OF LIFE OF MAJ^KS ENGAGED IN VARIOUS 
 OCCUPATIONS. 
 
 
 15 
 
 20 
 
 25 
 
 45 
 
 65 
 and upwards. 
 
 All males, mortality 
 per 1,000 . 
 
 4-67 
 
 6-04 
 
 10-16 
 
 25-27 
 
 92-65 
 
 Occupied males . 
 
 2-95 
 
 5-60 
 
 9-71 
 
 24-63 
 
 88-71 
 
 Coal mines, mean 
 
 4-68 
 
 6-18 
 
 7-64 
 
 25-11 
 
 117-70 
 
 TABLE L. COMPARATIVE MORTALITY OF MALES 
 2565 YEARS OF AGE. 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 li 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 *j 
 
 
 ! 
 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 1 
 
 00 
 
 I 1 
 
 I 
 
 J! 
 
 cO 
 
 S 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 O 
 
 
 
 All males, England 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 and Wales . 
 
 119 
 
 14 
 
 120 
 
 220 
 
 182 
 
 41 
 
 30 
 
 88 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 Mines (mean) 
 
 72 
 
 3 
 
 95 
 
 126 
 
 202. 
 
 27 
 
 22 
 
 32 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 ...
 
 
 Accidents. 
 
 All other causes. 
 
 Total. 
 
 General ... 
 
 67 
 
 146 
 
 1,000 
 
 Mines 
 
 186 
 
 115 
 
 883 
 
 Extract from letter of Dr. Ogle, page xlix. : 
 
 " ' COAL MINERS. The death rates of coal miners are 
 surprisingly low. In spite of their terrible liability 
 to accident, and their constant exposure to an atmo- 
 sphere vitiated by coal dust, by foul air and by an 
 excessively high temperature the comparative mortality 
 of their labourers is considerably below that of all 
 males.' (Again) * The mortality of the miners from 
 all other causes (than accidents) is below that of the 
 general male population.' (Again), ' if we exclude 
 these accidents it will be found that the mortality of 
 the coal miners only slightly exceeds that of the 
 most healthy class of men in our table, viz., the agri- 
 culturists; that is to say the farmers, the agricultural 
 labourers, and the gardeners.' 
 
 " With regard to the premiums for life assurance 
 charged by the Industrial Life Assurance Company, the 
 Prudential, Refuge, and London Edinburgh and Grlas- 
 gow Companies make no higher charges for miners 
 and railway men than for the other working classes. 
 One company only (so far as has been ascertained), 
 namely, the Scottish Temperance Insurance Company, 
 make an extra charge on the lives of miners and 
 railway men, but the extra amount of that charge is 
 only 1 per cent. 
 
 (4.) " The next statement is that * It has been ascer 
 tained that a great proportion of the accidents resulting 
 
 .
 
 13 
 
 in persons killed and injured occurred during the later 
 hours of the shift work.' The return relied on to 
 prove this is one that was granted on the motion of 
 Mr. Fenwick, M.P., showing the number for the last 
 ten years of the fatal explosions which were notified 
 to the Inspectors of Mines, and the number of lives 
 lost, and the approximate hour of the shift when the 
 explosion occurred. This return, however, shows rather 
 the following contrary results : 
 
 COAL MINES, FATAL EXPLOSIONS DURING LAST TEM YEARS 
 SHOWING THE HOUR OP SHIFT IN WHICH THEY HAVE 
 OCCURBED. 
 
 1st. 
 
 2nd. 
 
 3rd. 
 
 4th. 
 
 5th. 
 
 6th. 
 
 7th. 
 
 8th. 
 
 9th. 
 
 10th. 
 
 ... 
 
 15th. 
 1 
 
 48 
 
 22 
 
 29 
 
 26 
 
 24 
 
 17 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 10 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 Total first four hours, 125. Total after fourth hour, 80. 
 
 COAL MINES EXPLOSIONS (FATAL) DURING TEN YEARS 
 NUMBER OF DEATHS IN EACH. HOUR OF EMPLOYMENT. 
 
 1st. 
 
 2nd. 
 
 3rd. 
 
 4th. 
 
 5th. 
 333 
 
 6th. 
 
 7th. 
 
 8th. 
 
 9th 10th. 
 95 1 2 
 
 llth. 
 
 
 15th. 
 3 
 
 136 
 
 317 
 
 278 
 
 481 
 
 69 
 
 182 
 
 ro 
 
 Total first four hours, 1,202. Total after fourth hour, 744. 
 
 " It should be noted that this return refers only to 
 explosions, the causes of the greatest number of acci- 
 dents in mines are, however, falls of roof and side. We 
 have at present no statistics to shew what proportion of 
 these accidents occur during the earlier hours of the 
 shift, but the general experience of mining engineers is, 
 and the contention of the men themselves when the last
 
 u 
 
 Mines Act was passed, was that a larger proportion 
 occurs during the first two or three hours of the shift, 
 and this was naturally explained by the men's repre- 
 sentatives on that occasion by the fact that during the 
 time in which the working places are not occupied, 
 the gradual weight which is always at .work has 
 loosened both roof and sides,and rendered the place in the 
 first hours of the shift more liable to such accidents. (5.) 
 A further statement is, ' We have no fear that if this is 
 conceded there will be any diminution of the output.' 
 It is impossible to understand upon what ground this 
 statement rests. The usual practice in the Midland 
 Counties, Lancashire and Cheshire, and North and 
 South Wales is to work a single shift. It is also the 
 custom to wind coals from 8 to 10 hours. If every per- 
 son employed underground is to be drawn out within 
 8 hours of the time he goes down, it is manifest that 
 coal winding cannot be carried on for more than 6 
 to 7 hours, and in many instances even less than that, 
 as at nearly all the large pits it occupies from one hour to 
 two to lower and raise the men employed. According to 
 the present special rules, in winding men the engines 
 have to run slower than when winding coal. This pro- 
 posal if acceded to might lead to winding the men out 
 at a quicker rate, and increase the danger of this 
 operation. The result of a 6 to 7 hours winding day 
 would be to reduce the output of coal from 20 to 25 per 
 cent., and as a very large number of all persons em- 
 ployed underground are paid by the piece, this would 
 very largely reduce the aggregate wages fund, and, 
 consequently every pieceman would suffer in propor- 
 tion. Another very serious result would be a large in- 
 crease in the cost of production. This lessened pro-
 
 15 
 
 duction and increased cost would lead to a very con- 
 siderable advance in the prices of fuel of all descrip- 
 tions. This would bear very hardly upon the whole of 
 the industries of the country dependent upon the 
 supplies of fuel. At the present time the iron trade 
 is in a state of depression ; many firms owning blast 
 furnaces and rolling mills find it impossible to carry on 
 their concerns at a reasonable profit even at the pre- 
 sent prices. Any considerable increase of prices would 
 inevitably lead to a complete stagnation of the iron 
 trade, and many other industries connected with it. 
 Blast furnaces would be blown out ; rolling mills would 
 be stopped ; shipbuilding works and engineering works 
 would be unable to carry on their operations ; and the 
 result would be an enormous diminution in the demand 
 for coal, a fall of prices, and a serious struggle between 
 coal-owners and miners for a reduction of wages, and 
 a return to reasonable hours of working. (6.) The 
 exact form in which this day of eight hours is de- 
 manded is as follows : f That it become a special 
 rule in every mining inspector's district that no per- 
 son shall work underground from bank to bank more 
 than eight hours in any one day of 24 hours, and that 
 the same shall be mutually agreed upon, and form part 
 of the Act of 1887.' As we have already stated, such a 
 course as the one proposed, in our judgment, cannot 
 legally be carried out, and it raises the large question 
 as to whether Parliament should fix the hours of 
 adult labour. If Parliament is to be asked to do this, 
 why should it not also fix the rate of wages and the 
 rate of profits to be earned in this industry. There are 
 about 600,000 miners employed in this country, repre- 
 senting about 3,000,000 of the population, out of a
 
 16 
 
 total population of 38,000,000 who are all more or less 
 consumers of coal. If the result of any Parliamentary 
 enactment should lead to a considerable increase in the 
 price of coal, it is perfectly certain that the great bulk 
 of the consumers will raise their voice with respect 
 to it, and insist upon its being supplied at a 
 reasonable price. In conclusion, we wish to make it 
 clear that if the working hours in different districts do 
 interfere with the health of those concerned, that all 
 of us would desire to find a remedy. It seems to us that 
 it would be easy to ascertain beyond doubt what the 
 facts are, so far as they are in dispute between us, 
 and we should be quite willing (either by means of 
 a Joint Committee, or, still better, by means of a Koyal 
 Commission, if one could be obtained), to ascertain 
 the real facts and circumstances, and endeavour in 
 conjunction with you to find a solution for any proved 
 and ascertained grievance." 
 
 1891. The Bill last referred to, which had been introduced and 
 
 March. rea( j a first t me Qn ^ ^Qfa November, 1890, was appointed 
 ing of Mine*' for second reading on the 18th March, 1891, on which date 
 Mil moved!-? -^- r * Abraham, in moving the second reading, said that it 
 Bill dropped, would be a great disappointment to many members of the 
 House and to the labouring population of the country that 
 there was no time for the discussion of the Bill. He there- 
 fore moved the second reading, and Mr. Pickard moved the 
 adjournment of the debate. The Bill was subsequently 
 dropped. 
 
 1891. At the Trades Union Congress, held at Newcastle in 
 
 September. September, 1891, a resolution in favour of an International 
 Congress at Conference to promote legislation for an Eight Hours day 
 Newcastle. was carr j e( j ^ 59 vo t e s, the numbers being, for the reso- 
 lution 232, against it 163.
 
 17 
 
 An amendment was proposed that no Bill should be 
 passed applying to all trades. This was proposed by a 
 representative of the Northumberland Miners, but the 
 amendment was lost by 166 votes, the numbers being 
 136 in support of it and 302 against it. 
 
 A second amendment was proposed to the effect that any 
 Bill passed should require a majority of two-thirds in a 
 trade before an Eight Hours measure could be enforced, and 
 this amendment was carried by 86 votes, 242 voting in 
 favour of it and 156 against it. 
 
 A further amendment was proposed to the effect that an 
 Eight Hours day should be enforced by law in all trades 
 where a majority wanted it, and this was carried by 102 
 votes, 285 voting for it and 183 against it, and on being 
 put as a substantive resolution it was carried by 268 votes, 
 the voting being, for the resolution, 341 ; against it, 73. 
 
 A resolution was also proposed, on behalf of the Miners 
 Federation, for an Eight Hours Bill FOR MINERS. An 
 amendment to this was moved on behalf of the Durham 
 and Northumberland miners, against Parliamentary inter- 
 ference, but the amendment of the latter was lost by a large 
 majority, 59 only voting for it, and 237 against it. The 
 resolution was earned by 290 against 50. 
 
 The Bill introduced into Parliament in the Session of 1892 1892. 
 was similar to the Bills on the same subject introduced in Mines (MgU 
 
 J Hours) Sill. 
 
 previous Sessions. It was backed by Mr. Leake, Mr. W. 
 Abraham (Glamorgan), Mr. Pickard, Mr. Kandell, Mr 
 Philipps, Mr. Roby, Mr. Jacoby, Mr. Conybeare, Mr. Spencer 
 Balfour, Mr. Arthur Acland, Mr. Philip Stanhope, Earl 
 Compton, and Sir Walter Foster. 
 
 It was appointed for second reading on the 23rd March, Delate on 
 1 892, and occupied the whole of the sitting on that day. Second 
 
 Mr. Leake, in moving the second reading of the Bill,
 
 18 
 
 mentioned that from the last returns on the subject, it 
 appeared that the number of underground workers was 
 531,000, of whom 506,000 worked in coal-mines. He stated 
 that with the exception of the important districts of North- 
 umberland and Durham, the miners of Great Britain were 
 practically unanimous in their support of the measure. He 
 admitted that it was only within the last few years that they 
 had become so unanimous ; that in 1889 at a Conference in 
 Birmingham they had come to a decision to support an 
 amendment in favour of the Bill. He argued the miners 
 claim to the Bill on the following grounds : (1) the largeness 
 of the number of people employed ; (2) the peculiarity of 
 their toil ; (3) the dangers of their calling ; and (4) that Eight 
 Hours work was quite as much as an average man could 
 yield. He pointed out that all the restrictions on the free 
 use of labour which had been imposed by the Coal Mines 
 Eegulation Act had proved to be beneficial, and he stated 
 that he thought that as between the miners and the mine- 
 owners any friction which the proposed legislation might 
 create would soon pass away. As far as the case of coal was 
 concerned he did not think that that depended upon the 
 hours of work. That the output depended not upon the 
 number of hours that the men were at work, but upon the 
 amount of work they did during those hours. 
 
 Mr. BURT, in opposing the second reading of the Bill, did 
 not dispute the statement that eight hours' work under- 
 ground was long enough for anybody. He had always 
 advocated the shortening of working hours for all classes of 
 workmen, and he believed that in connection with many 
 employments the hours might be very considerably shortened 
 with advantage, not only to the workmen, but also to the 
 employers. He held, however, that the best way to shorten 
 the hours of labour was by mutual agreement, if possible,
 
 19 
 
 between employers and workmen. Not only could that be 
 done with less friction, but it was more likely to be carried 
 out effectively. He would not hesitate to go further, and 
 say that, where workmen had thought out the subject for 
 themselves, and where by the power of their Unions they 
 could obtain moderate hours of labour, it could be better 
 done than by laying down a hard and fast line, and enforcing 
 it by penalties. He believed that they could not be made 
 unanimous as to hours by Act of Parliament. He pointed 
 out that the Bill was not a permissive Bill, but would im- 
 pose an arbitrary rule upon workmen, irrespective of their 
 own wishes and interests. He questioned the statement 
 that the opinion of the Miners on the subject (with the 
 exception of those of Northumberland and Durham) was 
 unanimous, and he pointed out that in England the only 
 representative men closely associated with large bodies of 
 miners, in an official or other capacity, who had come before 
 the Royal Labour Commission to give evidence, had opposed 
 the Bill, and stated that in their particular districts it would 
 be impracticable. He mentioned the fact that votes had 
 been taken from time to time on the subject, and that only 
 a few months before a vote was taken of the members of the 
 Miners' Union in the usual way, when, out of 11,307, there 
 were 2,587 for the Eight Hours Bill, and 8,720 against it 
 While he appreciated the energy and determination of those 
 who were in favour of the Bill, he did not hesitate to say 
 that, if one-half of that energy and determination had been 
 directed to the accomplishment of their object by voluntary 
 effort, a great deal more would have been accomplished. He 
 further pointed out that in other countries, where the hours 
 of labour of adult men had been fixed by statute, the law 
 had remained a dead letter. That it was only in Australia 
 that Eight Hours had been successfully carried out, and
 
 20 
 
 there the result had been attained, not by legislation, but 
 by voluntary effort, and all that the Government did was to 
 give the sanction of law to what had already been agreed 
 upon and carried out, and even there it was NOT Eight Hours 
 from BANK to BANK, but it was Eight Hours from leaving the 
 surface until the day's work was completed in the workings. 
 He concluded by pointing out that the proposal of the Bill 
 was not only to confer a benefit, but to force what was 
 deemed a benefit on the miners of the North; he, how- 
 ever, believed that the change was almost impracticable, 
 and that it would expose them to loss, suffering, and misery 
 on all hands. 
 
 Mr. HOWARTH, in seconding the amendment, stated that 
 it was impossible to treat the question as a purely miners 
 question, that the industry that produced coal could not be 
 throttled without throttling their own industry also, and 
 argued that the ultimate effect of the proposed legislation 
 would be either to limit the out-put or to put up the price 
 of coal, or otherwise to affect its production, which must 
 necessarily affect every other industry. He believed that it 
 was incontrovertible that the hours of labour could not be 
 interfered with without at the same time affecting wages. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN, who supported the motion for second 
 reading, urged that the effect of passing an Eight Hours 
 Bill for miners would not necessarily be to decrease the out- 
 put of coal. He thought that long hours meant listless, 
 inefficient, and even bad work, and if there was a maximum 
 which could not be exceeded with any efficiency in the 
 labour, there might be a minimum which could not be 
 exceeded without increasing the cost of production. The 
 question was, had that minimum been reached. He stated that 
 he believed the great majority of the Miners were in favour 
 of the Bill. His argument in favour of State interference to
 
 further an Eight Hours Day was that it was the simplest, the 
 easiest, the quickest, and the least irritating way of settling the 
 question. Whilst admitting that the same thing might be 
 obtained by the men's organisations, he held that if obtained 
 in that way it would lead to strikes and industrial warfare, 
 and would injure both the miners, the employers, and the 
 trade generally, but he intimated that whilst he supported 
 the second reading as an admission of the principle, he 
 would feel himself at liberty to criticise the details of the 
 Bill in Committee, and perhaps to alter it materially in the 
 way of giving greater elasticity to its provisions. 
 
 Sir FREDERICK MILNER opposed the Bill, and argued that 
 reforms such as were proposed could only be brought about 
 by those who had practical knowledge of the conditions of 
 the work in the various districts, and an Act of Parliament 
 could not be made sufficiently elastic. He mentioned the 
 fact that in the United States, where eight and ten hours 
 were enacted by law, the men worked as many hours us 
 they liked themselves, and the law was utterly inoperative. 
 He thought further that the difference of hours was not so 
 great that it could not be settled in friendly discussion. 
 He held that the difference in the circumstances of various 
 mines, and the mode of working them, would render any 
 hard and fast limitation of time absolutely an impossibility, 
 and further, that if the hours were restricted to eight from 
 bank to bank the danger to a miner's life would be consider- 
 ably increased. In a great many pits the machinery was 
 stopped for half an hour in the day, and this half hour was 
 taken advantage of to examine the machinery, ropes, etc., 
 in order to see whether they were in- a proper condition. 
 If the Bill were passed, one of the results would be that 
 the machinery would be kept working without intermission, 
 and there would be no time to examine it. The miner, too
 
 would be anxious to get out as much coal as possible in the 
 time allowed him, and would be less careful than he would 
 be under existing circumstances to keep his roof in good 
 condition, and there would therefore be more accidents from 
 falls of roof. 
 
 Mr. FENWICK also opposed the Bill, and said that large 
 bodies of men having given the question the fullest and 
 most careful consideration, had come to the conclusion that 
 there was no practical way out of the difficulty by means 
 of legislation, except by inflicting much greater hardships 
 than those which they sought to correct. He maintained 
 that the proposed limitation of the hours would greatly 
 reduce the production, and that consequently the cost 
 of production would be proportionately increased. He 
 stated that the workmen whose confidence he enjoyed 
 believed that what injured their employers would 
 affect their own social and material interests; they be- 
 lieved their position would be worse under the Bill than 
 it was then, and therefore he opposed the second reading. 
 
 The HOME SECRETARY, SIR JOSEPH PEASE, and Mr. MUN- 
 Division. DELLA also opposed the Bill, and ultimately on a division there 
 voted for the second reading, 160; against it, 272; ma- 
 jority against, 112. 
 
 1892. On the llth May, 1892, a deputation from the London 
 
 May nth. Trades Council waited upon the Marquis of Salisbury (Prime 
 Minister) and Mr. A. J. Balfour (First Lord of the Treasury) 
 . in su PP ort of a legislative eight hours day IN ALL TRADES, 
 except in special cases where exemption was asked for. 
 
 Lord SALISBURY pointed out that whilst there was a strong 
 conviction of a general desire for an eight hours day on the 
 part of the workmen of the country, the conviction was by 
 no means so strong that they were unanimous in desiring 
 that it should be done by Parliament. The deputation, he
 
 pointed out, seemed to think that those who were asking for 
 an eight hours day could get as much wages as they now 
 got for working more hours, and asked what possible ground 
 they had for saying it. If for eight hours' work the same 
 amount of wages was paid as for ten, to that extent the 
 price of the goods they had to sell would be increased, the 
 number of consumers would be diminished, and consequently 
 it would diminish the employment of workmen in the pro- 
 duction of the industries of the country ; and he expressed 
 a fear that if the hours were reduced by legislative enact- 
 ment, the result would be to drive capital out of the country. 
 
 Mr. BALFOUR, in the course of his reply, pointed out that 
 the result of insisting whether a seam of coal be a thick 
 seam or a thin seam a deep seam, worked with difficulty, 
 or a seam near the surface, worked with facility that in 
 every case every seam should be worked under precisely the 
 same conditions, would be to drive out of the market, and 
 to drive out of employment, those workmen whose lot had 
 been cast in parts of the country where their particular 
 industry was carried on under less favourable conditions. 
 
 The Deputation from the London Trades' Council waited 1892. 
 upon Mr. Gladstone, at Carlton Gardens, on the 16th June June i 
 1892, when the same grounds were urged in support of an 1 jE?S 
 Eight Hours day as at the interview with Lord Salisbury stone ' 
 and Mr. Balfour. The proceedings at this interview are 
 reported in the Times of the 17th June, 1892. Mr. Glad- 
 stone did not appear to favour the proposal with the infor- 
 mation on the subject then in his possession. 
 
 At the Trades' Union Congress held at Glasgow in 1892 
 September, 1892, the President (Mr. Hodge, of Glasgow) in 8 *ptemi> 
 the course of his address, said, in reference to the Eight 
 Hours Day, that the dividing line which separated 
 Trades' Unionists was as to how the Eight Hours
 
 24 
 
 Day was to be attained, whether by legal enactment 
 or trade union effort. He said that in the controversy that 
 raged on the question, those in favour of gaining it by 
 legislative enactment subordinated all other reforms to this. 
 As a matter of fact, the gaining of an Eight Hours Day, no 
 matter by which of the modes it might be gained, was but 
 the fringe of the labour problem, and was but a small part 
 of the question either from an economic point or in its 
 general aspect as a solution of the labour problem. A 
 general Eight Hour Day would do very little towards 
 equalising the products of labour. The cause of labour 
 would, however, be materially advanced if the energy (hen 
 being devoted to the advancement of a legal Eight Hour Day 
 was diverted in the direction of better organization and the 
 advancement of the many local movements which had a 
 direct bearing on the labour cause. The question, he added, 
 was in an embryo state. It required elucidation. Personally, 
 he was in favour of gaining it by legal enactment, but he 
 was not prepared to force it on trades who, by argument, 
 founded on lifelong knowledge and study of their particular 
 industry, declared it unworkable. - 
 
 Mr. S. WOODS, M.P., took exception to the foregoing, and 
 moved a resolution condemning the action of the Parlia- 
 mentary Secretary, Mr. Fenwick, M.P., in having spoken 
 and voted against the second reading of the Mines Eight 
 Hours Bill on the 23rd March. A very long discussion 
 ensued occupying the whole of the morning sitting, after 
 which the Congress divided, and there voted, for the resolution 
 121 against it 289 majority against, 168. Subsequently, 
 after a protracted debate, a resolution to the following effect 
 was declared by the Chairman to have been almost unani- 
 mously carried : 
 
 "That it be an instruction to the Parliamentary
 
 25 
 
 Committee to assist and support the miners in their 
 endeavours to get the Miners' Eight Hours Bill passed 
 into law." 
 
 There does not appear to have been a division. 
 
 At a national Conference of miners held at Birmingham, 1893. 
 on the 9th January, 1893, at which 64 delegates were present, January. 
 representing 269,100 miners an amendment was moved on 
 behalf of the Durham representatives to the effect that the 
 Eight Hours should be secured by trades union effort and 
 not by legislation, but this amendment only received the 
 support of the mover and seconder. 
 
 An important Conference was held at Merthyr on the Conference at 
 28th January, 1893, between certain representatives of the 
 Coal-owners and the Miners' representatives, on the ques- 
 tion of the Eight Hours bank to bank Bill, and the 
 Chairman at that Conference (Mr. Henry Davies, Aberaman), 
 stated his opinion that most of the workmen in South 
 Wales were gradually coming to adopt the views of the 
 districts represented at that Conference, namely, that there 
 should be Eight Hours' ACTUAL WORK, and not Eight Hours 
 from bank to bank, per day. 
 
 The Vice-Chairman stated that he would like to see a 
 resolution in favour of NINE Hours bank to bank, so as to 
 give them Eight Hours for work and one hour for going to 
 and from work. After a lengthy discussion it was resolved 
 by a vote of 69 to 20 : 
 
 " That we confirm the resolution that was passed in 
 this district some years ago to support the Eight Hours 
 working day, and not Eight Hours work from bank to 
 bank." 
 
 A deputation was appointed to attend on the Prime 
 Minister or the Home Secretary to represent the views of
 
 
 the Merthyr, Aberdare and Dowlais Miners on the 
 question. 
 
 The foregoing briefly shows the progress and position of 
 the movement as regards the Eight Hours Bill for Miners, 
 up to the present time. 
 
 Appendix. In the app e n dix (A) will be found a digest of the evi- 
 dence given upon this subject before Group A of the Royal 
 Labour Commission. 
 
 When the Royal Commission was appointed, the 
 Miners' Federation of Great Britain declined the invitation 
 of the Commission to offer any evidence before them, but 
 as far as is known no reason was stated for their refusal. 
 
 It will be seen from the digest that the evidence both 
 of employers and employed is almost unanimously opposed 
 to any interference by Parliament with the hours of adult 
 labour in coal-mines, and very cogent reasons are given in 
 support of the views put forward by the various witnesses on 
 the subject. 
 
 I ,, re - introd "<*d in the present Sessioi 
 
 H n r,,mu. I* backed by Mr. Storey, Mr. Pickard, Mr. Wood,, Mr' 
 Uake, Mr. Jacoby, Mr. Abraham, Ix,rd Randolph Churchill' 
 Mr. Cremer, Sir Charles Dilke, Mr. Phillips, Mr. Kandell 
 Mr. Conybeare, and Sir Albert Rollit 
 
 A reprint of the Bill is contained in Appendix B. It is 
 appointed for second reading on Wednesday, May the 3rd 
 J s n e f ea t tc ; iall -'^ h - the Mines Eight Hours Bill,' if 
 passed mto law woukl effect, the obligation lies upon its 
 promoters to shew that such an alteration in the law is 
 necessary necessary both in the interests of those who are 
 
 wo are 
 
 ^rectly affected by it, and of the genera! community, who 
 must be ind.rectly affected by it. 
 
 appear to b 01 ^^" 1 " 611 ' 3 " *"* ' the Bi 
 appear to be as follows : _
 
 27 
 
 (1) That there is a great majority of the Miners in 
 favour of it. 
 
 (2) That the unhealthy and dangerous character of 
 the employment in mines justifies it. 
 
 (3) That the result would not be to diminish the 
 output, or to increase the cost of production. 
 
 With reference to the first of these, namely, that a great 
 majority of the Miners are in favour of it, which appears to 
 have been assumed both by Mr. Leake and Mr. Chamberlain 
 in the debate on the motion for second reading of the Bill, 
 already referred to, Mr. W. ABRAHAM, Member for the 
 Rhondda Valley, stated in his speech in the same debate 
 that there were 700,000 men working in the mines of Great 
 Britain. 
 
 Now the National Conference held in Birmingham, in 
 January of the present year, which has been already referred 
 to, and which is the latest and most numerously attended 
 meeting of Miners, was a special Conference to which had 
 been invited representatives from all the mining districts 
 in England, Scotland, and Wales. At that Conference there 
 were 268,100 miners represented. Included in that number 
 about 50,000 would be Durham miners, and the opinion 
 expressed at that Conference in favour of a Mines Eight 
 Hours Bill was therefore the opinion of 268,100, less 
 50,000, as represented by the Durham delegates, or in other 
 words the expression of opinion of 218,100 persons. Remem- 
 bering that this was a Conference to which representatives 
 had been invited from all the mining districts (as per the 
 report in the Birmingham Daily Post of the 10th January, 
 1893), to consider this question of an Eight Hours Day 
 the result would appear to be that the representatives of 
 218,100 Miners expressed themselves in favour of the Bill,
 
 leaving 481,900 of the 700,000 (the number fixed by Mr. 
 Abraham, M.P., as the number of persons who were affected 
 bj it), who.. were either distinctly opposed to such a 
 measure, or who had given no expression of opinion on 
 the subject. 
 
 In the face of these figures it cannot be said-and that 
 eems to have been the strong point urged iu favour of 
 passing the Bill-that the majority of the persons to be 
 affected by it are in favour of the Bill. 
 
 It must also be remembered that the evidence which 
 was given before the Koyal Labour Commission (Group A) 
 
 Zt nt oi r ed to such a " e - a d * - SJ 
 
 tuna e that he Miners' Federation of Great Britain, of 
 The " r ; PlCkard ' M - P -' i8 *esident, did not accept 
 
 upon 
 
 >e dangerous 
 Bi "' th ' s ^ 
 
 
 
 1th February, 1891,
 
 29 
 
 which has already been referred to. Dr. Ogle there 
 
 says : 
 
 " The mortality of the Miners from all other causes 
 (than accidents) is below that of the general male popu- 
 lation If we exclude these accidents it 
 
 will be found that the mortality of the Coal Miners 
 only slightly exceeds that of the most healthy class 
 of men in our table, viz., the agriculturalists, that is to 
 say the farmers, the agricultural labourers, and the 
 gardeners." 
 
 With reference to the other statement that the greater 
 number of accidents happen during the last hours of the 
 shift statistics again do not bear this out. 
 
 The return which was granted by the House of Commons 
 to Mr. Fenwick, M.P., with reference to explosions in coal- 
 mines, shows that during the ten years prior to the 
 publication of the return in question, in the first four 
 hours of the shift the total number of fatal accidents was 
 125, and that after the fourth hour the total number 
 was 80. 
 
 This return applies only to explosions, and there are no 
 statistics to show what proportion of the accidents, such as 
 arise from falls of roof and sides, occurred during the earlier 
 hours of the shift ; but the general experience of Mining 
 Engineers is, and the contention of the men themselves, 
 when the last Mines Act was before Parliament in 1887, was, 
 that a large proportion of such accidents occurred during the 
 first two or three hours of the shift, and this was naturally 
 explained by the men's representatives on that occasion, by 
 the fact that during the time that the working places are not 
 occupied, the gradual weight, which is always at work, by 
 the operation of nature, has loosened both roof and sides
 
 30 
 
 and rendered the place in the first hours of the shift more 
 liable to such accidents. 
 
 There is no lack of evidence, however, that a reduction of 
 the hours of labour, as proposed, would not conduce to the 
 safety of the miners, and that for two reasons ; in the first 
 place, as pointed out by Sir Frederick Milner, in the debate 
 on the second reading of the Bill, before referred to, if the 
 hours were altered as proposed, the machinery would have 
 to be kept working without intermission during the whole 
 period of the employment, whereas at present the stoppage 
 for half-an-hour in the day is taken advantage of to examine 
 the machinery and the ropes, etc., in order to see that they 
 are in proper working condition. 
 
 Secondly, so far as the Miner himself is concerned, in addi- 
 tion to getting his coal, he has imposed upon him certain 
 duties necessary for his own safety, and the safety of those 
 who are working with him, by seeing that the roof and sides 
 of his working place are kept in good condition, and if the 
 time during 'which he can be in his own working place is to 
 be limited in the way proposed, he would naturally be anxious 
 to get as much coal as possible in the time allowed him, 
 and would have less time at his disposal to enable 
 him to take those necessary precautions for safety. 
 This danger would be increased when the state of trade 
 made it impossible for the pits to be worked for more 
 than two or three days a week. In such a state of things, 
 by no means improbable, he might not be able, even 
 by devoting the whole of his available time to the getting of 
 coal, to secure for himself sufficient wages upon which he 
 and his family could live, much less would he be able or 
 inclined to devote any part of that period to the examina- 
 tion of his working place or to the work necessary for 
 securing safety.
 
 31 
 
 The above affects the Miners themselves. 
 
 The third point affects not only employers and employed, 
 bat the community generally. It would appear to be beyond 
 question that the result of a such a Bill would be to lessen 
 the out-put, and, either to reduce the wages of the 
 men, or to increase the cost of production. The representa- 
 tives of the men who gave evidence before the Royal 
 Labour Commission were obliged to admit this, and it will be 
 found on reference to the Digest of Evidence that this was, 
 in fact, generally admitted. 
 
 If the cost of production is in this way artificially in- 
 creased, the result must be to impose upon many other 
 industries which are large consumers of coal an additional 
 burden which they would not be able to bear. Coal is an 
 article of first necessity, and the various industries of the 
 country using steam power are dependent upon receiving a 
 constant supply. To use the words of Mr. Howarth, in the 
 debate before referred to, " the question cannot be treated as 
 purely a miners' question ; the industry that produces coal 
 cannot be throttled without throttling their own industries 
 also." 
 
 Such a result would also seriously prejudice both the 
 miners and their employers. 
 
 As Lord Salisbury pointed out, at the interview before 
 referred to, if the price of the goods they had to sell was 
 increased, the number of consumers would be diminished, 
 and consequently they would diminish the employment 
 of workmen in the production of the industries of the 
 country. 
 
 There are other reasons why this Bill should not be allowed 
 to pass into law. Coal mines differ in one important re- 
 spect from the great majority of industries indeed from 
 all other employments. In coal mining a man does not
 
 32 
 
 begin his work when he arrives at the pit bank. The miner 
 or coal hewer is paid according to the quantity of coal he 
 gets, and his work consequently does not begin until he 
 is in his working place in the mine. 
 
 In a factory or workshop the workman can begin his work 
 as soon as the gates are opened to him, and can continue 
 at his work until the actual closing time. 
 
 In all cases in which Parliament has hitherto regulated 
 the hours of labour the regulations have applied to the 
 hours of actual labour, and there has never been any 
 attempt made to interfere with the time during which work- 
 men are proceeding to or returning from their employment. 
 In the case of a miner he is not paid for the time occupied 
 in going to and returning from his work. His remunera- 
 tion depends upon the quantity of coal he gets. 
 
 It is estimated by some that, taking the whole mining 
 industry of the kingdom, the average time occupied by 
 miners in going to their working places from the pit bank 
 and returning thereto is one hour per day, and it would 
 seem to be a departure from all Parliamentary precedent 
 to attempt to regulate the hours of work upon any other 
 principle than shall affect the time that the miner is 
 actually at work. 
 
 The effect of passing such a Bill as is proposed, to limit 
 the hours of miners from bank to bank, would mean, in prac- 
 tice, that the actual available working hours would be limited 
 beyond what it is believed is intended even by the 
 advocates of the Bill. As a matter of fact the average time 
 of a miner in his working place, if such an Act were passed, 
 could not exceed six hours per day. 
 
 The proposal is that a man who leaves the pit bank at six 
 o'clock in the morning must be back on the pit bank again 
 not later than two o'clock in the afternoon.
 
 33 
 
 In many collieries there are hundreds of men who have to 
 be lowered down the shafts in the morning and wound up 
 again in the afternoon, and it will be seen at once that a 
 practical difficulty arises as to how the provisions of such an 
 Act of Parliament are to be carried out except by altering 
 the hours of winding and limiting them to eight per day. A 
 number of men are waiting on the pit bank to take their 
 turn to enter the cage to be lowered into the mine, and 
 when they have finished their work they are again crowding 
 at the bottom of the pit waiting their turn to enter the cage 
 to be drawn out to the surface, and unless they are to be 
 marshalled in numerical order, and, so to speak, ticketed with 
 the time at which each man descended the pit, it will be 
 impossible that each individual man shall be back again on 
 the pit bank within the eight hours. The only way in 
 which such an Act of Parliament could be carried out would 
 be that, as already mentioned, the pit should only be wind- 
 ing for eight hours. If a man had to be got into and out of 
 the pit in the time named, it is clear that the time which 
 would be available for him to get his living by getting coal 
 would be reduced to a point which it is impossible to fix with 
 any accuracy, but, as already named, taking the average, 
 the actual working hours would not exceed six hours per 
 day. 
 
 Mr. A. J. BALFOUK, in his reply to the London Trades 
 Council referred to above, pointed out how difficult, if not 
 impossible, it would be to lay down a hard and fast line in 
 the case of Mines where in each district and almost at every 
 pit the work is carried on under varying and dissimilar 
 physical and other conditions, 
 
 In some pits a Miner may be working in a seam and in a 
 place where he would be able in a much shorter period to 
 get as much'coal as another man working in a less advanta- 
 
 D
 
 34 
 
 geous place would be able to get in a much longer 
 period. 
 
 In one case the distance from the bottom of the shaft to 
 the working place might be much greater than another 
 again the capacity of Miners for work differs considerably. 
 A young man would probably be able to do much more 
 work than an older man in the same period, as the work of 
 coal getting depends more on the strength of the worker 
 than on his skill, and a young man, who had no responsibili- 
 ties beyond himself, might be content with a less return for 
 his labour than an older man who had to keep a house open 
 and maintain a wife and family. Still, notwithstanding 
 this, it is proposed to apply to all these varying conditions 
 and circumstances the same hard and unalterable rule. 
 
 The impossibility of doing so with any satisfactory result 
 would appear to be manifest, and it all points to the sound- 
 ness of Mr. BUST'S view upon the matter, viz., that the 
 hours of labour of adult males should be left to arrangement 
 between employers and employed, and should not be 
 sought to be enforced by a hard and fast Parliamentary 
 enactment. 
 
 Such a restriction on the working hours would absolutely 
 prevent a man from making up deficiencies in his earnings 
 when trade was not brisk, at any other time, and this would 
 be a result which would tell very hardly upon the Miner, 
 more particularly upon the man who had a family to main- 
 tain. 
 
 The interest of one class of employes in and about mines, 
 namely : those who are known as daywagemen, seem to 
 have been entirely disregarded by the advocates of the pro- 
 posed restriction of hours. The miners or hewers are not by 
 any means the only people engaged in and about a mine. 
 On the surface there are the enginemen, banksmen and the
 
 35 
 
 like, and below ground there are the men who are employed 
 in keeping the roads in order, and in doing a variety of 
 work. These men are paid so much per day, and not as the 
 colliers are, by the amount of work they do. The day wage- 
 men now work about 54 hours per week. If the hours 
 during which the pit winds are to be reduced, the working 
 hours of the daywagemen must necessarily also be reduced 
 and very considerably reduced. It can scarcely be expected 
 that the employers will consent to pay the same amount of 
 wages for the reduced period of labour, and thelpassing of an 
 Eight Hours Bill for underground workers would un- 
 questionably result in a reduction of the wages of the day- 
 wagemen by a considerable amount. 
 
 The proposed Bill enacts penalties for contravention of its 
 provisions, and provides that the penalties shall be imposed 
 on the employer. If any such Bill is to become law it 
 should be provided that the person who is guilty of the con- 
 travention sh.uld be the person to be subject to the penalty 
 and that person would be the workman, and not the 
 employer who would have no means at his disposal for pre- 
 venting a man continuing his work at the face beyond the 
 time limited, and it would be altogether unreasonable that 
 he should be subjected to penalties for offences which he 
 has not committed, and which he could not prevent. 
 
 THOS. RATCLIFFE ELLIS, 
 
 Law Clerk and Secretary. 
 6, Strand, London, W.C., 
 
 16th February, 1893.
 
 36 
 
 Mr. WILLIAM HAMMOND PATTERSON 
 
 Mr. JOHN WILSON, M.P 
 
 Mr. JOSEPH TOYN 
 
 Mr. JOHN NORMAN 
 
 Mr. JABEZ STRONG , 
 
 Mr. FRANK STOBAUT 
 
 Mr. RALPH YOUNG 
 
 Mr. WILLIAM HENRY LAMBTON 
 
 Mr. JOHN GEORGE WEEKS 
 
 Mr. KOBEHT ORMSTON LAMB 
 
 Mr. GEORGE JAQUES 
 
 Mr. JOHN WEIR 
 
 Mr. DAVID MORGAN 
 
 Mr. ISAAC EVANS 
 
 Mr. ALFRED ONIONS 
 
 Mr. WILLIAM EVANS 
 
 Mr. LANGFORD RIDSDALE 
 
 Mr. GEORGE CAI.DWELL 
 
 Mr. GEOBGE WATSON MAC ALPINE .. 
 
 Mr. ARTHUR SOPWITH 
 
 Mr. WILLIAM FAIRLEY 
 
 Mr. JOHN PDXI.EY WHITE ... 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 37 
 
 Mr. 
 
 38 
 
 Mr. 
 
 40 
 
 Mr. 
 
 42 
 
 Mr. 
 
 43 
 
 Mr. 
 
 45 
 
 Mr. 
 
 47 
 
 Mr. 
 
 55 
 
 Mr. 
 
 60 
 
 Col. 
 
 65 
 
 Mr. 
 
 69 
 
 Mr. 
 
 82 
 
 Mr. 
 
 92 
 
 Mr. 
 
 98 
 
 Mr. 
 
 101 
 
 Mr. 
 
 106 
 
 Mr. 
 
 107 
 
 Mr. 
 
 108 
 
 Mr. 
 
 111 
 
 Mr. 
 
 115 
 
 Mr. 
 
 119 
 
 Mr. 
 
 123 
 
 Mr. 
 
 FREDF.RICK CHANNER CORFIF.LD 
 FREDERICK PARKER RHODES ... 
 ARTHUR MARSHALL CHAMBERS 
 
 WILLIAM KERRY 
 
 JOHN BENNETT 
 
 BFNJAMIN MORRIS 
 ROBERT SMELLIE 
 
 WILLIAM SMAIJ 
 
 JOSEPH BRAMAH COCHRANE ... 
 
 JACOB RAY 
 
 GRIFFITH THOMAS 
 
 HOWELL JOHN 
 
 DAVID EVAN DA VIES 
 
 EDWARD JONES 
 
 WILLIAM THOMAS 
 
 WILLIAM JENKINS 
 
 GEORGE WILLIAM WILKINSON ... 
 
 THOMAS GRAY 
 
 J. KEIR HARDIE 
 
 ROBERT BAIRD 
 
 ANDREW KIRKWOOD McCosn ... 
 JOHN CONNEL .,
 
 37 
 
 APPENDIX A. 
 
 MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL, 1892. 
 
 (Appointed for 2nd Reading 23rd March, 1892.) 
 
 DIGEST OF THE EVIDENCE. 
 
 (Reprinted from the published Official Report.) 
 
 GIVEN BEFORE GROUP "A" OF THE KOYAL COMMISSION ON 
 LABOUR, IN EEFERENCE TO THE EESTRICTION OF THE 
 PERIOD OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALL UNDERGROUND WORK- 
 MEN TO EIGHT HOURS FROM BANK TO BANK, AS PRO- 
 POSED BY THE ABOVE BlLL. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAM HAMMOND PATTERSON, Sec- 
 retary of the Durham Miners' Association (8th July, 
 1891), stated as follows : 
 
 (27.)* The fixed hours (hewers in the County of Durham) 
 are seven from bank to bank. 
 
 (30.) The stone men and shifters work eight hours from 
 bank to bank. The onsetters and other men directly engaged 
 in the output of the coal work 10^ hours ; the boys work 10 
 hours from bank to bank. 
 
 The question of eight hours from bank to bank has been 
 before the men two or three times, and always been decided 
 by an overwhelming majority against it. 
 
 * The fiyurcs in brackets are t'le numbers of the questions in the Official Report. 
 
 38IJ618
 
 (109.) A single shift of eight hours would increase at least 
 every hewer an hour and a half a day. As soon as they got 
 the eight hours they would want in the County of Durham 
 two shifts of men. 
 
 (110.) If it was a single shift of eight hours it would mean 
 an hour and a half a day entra. 
 
 (267.) I believe that the hours of men would be better 
 adjusted by themselves and their organisation than they 
 would be by any Acts of Parliament, if such were passed. 
 
 Mr. JOHN WILSON, M.P. 
 
 (624.) The pits run 10 hours a day with the exception of 
 Saturdays. 
 
 (625.) Prior to 20 years ago, 21 years ago, men were hewing 
 coals in many parts of the county of Durham, 10 hours a day, 
 but when the Mines Regulation Act came into operation we 
 availed ourselves of the opportunity to shorten the hours, 
 and with the concurrence of the owners, we arranged it 
 mutually. Last year, (and here I would like you to see the 
 magnitude of the thing) we took an hour a day off, I should 
 think, 130 or 140 collieries; we reduced them from 11 
 hours to 10, and the actual hewers' hours were reduced to a 
 maximum of seven hours per day from bank to bank. But 
 at those pits where there are seven hours a day from bank 
 to bank some of the coal hewers would not be down the pit 
 seven hours. I think that we can arrange these things 
 better by negociation with our employers than by depending 
 upon the State to arrange it for us. 
 
 (627.) I have an objection to eight hours for men. I 
 mean eight hours for men who are now engaged 7. There 
 are very few men engaged 10 hours down the pit. 
 
 (629.) They on the bank principally in connexion with the 
 pit are the men who work 10 hours.
 
 (632-3.) Personally, I am in favour of reducing the boys* 
 hours, and the hours of those engaged in and about the 
 mines. 
 
 (634.) I would not say to a maximum of eight. In 
 arranging the hours you want to take various things into 
 consideration. Now, I speak about the eight hours Bill. I 
 think some occupations are more arduous than others, and if 
 an eight hours' shift has to be fixed with justice to the labour 
 itself, then it would be unfair to have a man who was 
 working very hard and a man who was working at very light 
 work working the same quantum of hours. There wants to 
 be some arrangement made with regard to the lightness and 
 the hardness of the work. 
 
 (638.) I am favourable to a reduction of the working 
 hours to a maximum of eight hours a day. The difference 
 would be as to the means of getting it. 
 
 (653.) Our Association is in favour of limiting the hours 
 of labour ; we have done so. 
 
 (654.) If I had not thought it was fair I would not have 
 had a hand in it. 
 
 (683.) The hours now in Durham are seven from bank to 
 bank as the maximum. There are some men who are 
 working less, that is, those who are near the shaft. 
 
 (684.) That would not be the same under a Bill, if they 
 had to stop eight hours down the pit. 
 
 (686.) That with some of them would increase it an hour 
 only ; with some of them it would be an hour and a half. 
 
 (687.) Legislation in the direction of fixing eight hours 
 from bank to bank would make a difference in the arrange- 
 ments we have now, making it seven from bank to bank. If 
 you said eight, he would be compelled to stop eight, I pre- 
 sume. Of course, I may be wrong, but it looks like that 
 to me.
 
 40 
 
 (688.) I do not say that our men object to it on that 
 ground. 
 
 (689.) I say it would increase their hours beyond what 
 they are now working ; some of them are working six and a 
 half hours and some seven. 
 
 (690.) Those that are working six and a half would have 
 an increase of an hour and a half. 
 
 (691.) And those who were working seven would have an 
 increase of an hour. 
 
 Mr. JOSEPH TOYN, President and Agent of the 
 Cleveland Miners' Association (9th July, 1891) : 
 
 (698.) My evidence has relation to ironstone mining in 
 Cleveland and the North Hiding of Yorkshire. 
 
 (806-7.) There are a certain number of men working under- 
 ground whose hours of labour are more than eight. They 
 are in the class that I have just been describing ; there are . 
 not many of them ; they are principally boys and men who 
 are getting the work away, such as roily- way men, and men 
 on the engine plane, and the men who have to get the work 
 out. 
 
 (1068.) Although the hours have been very materially 
 reduced within the last 18 years, nevertheless the output has 
 been, if anything, increased. 
 
 (1069.) I mean by that, the output per man. 
 
 (1070.) I do not think that process can be carried further 
 -- if you were to still further reduce the hours you would not 
 get an output equal to or greater than the present; it could 
 not be done indeed. 
 
 (1072.) If we reduce the hours the output would be reduced, 
 I think.
 
 41 
 
 (1073-4.) Our maximum number of hours is eight from 
 bank to bank. That is universal in the Cleveland district. 
 
 (1075.) That means seven hours in the face. 
 
 (1076.) Seven in the pit at the face, and the other hour 
 represents half-an-hour going out and half-an-hour coming 
 
 (1077.) I believe that is satisfactory both to the men and 
 the masters. 
 
 (1078-9.) There is a larger output now than when the 
 hours were longer a larger output per man. 
 
 (1080-1.) That is, a man does more work and better work 
 in the short time than he did in the nine or ten hours. He 
 works harder and freer than he did then, of course. 
 
 (1082.) The hours in Cleveland, compared with the hours 
 in Durham are a little longer ; probably about an hour a 
 day, not longer. 
 
 (1083.) And in Northumberland half an-hour longer. I 
 believe Northumberland is about 7 hours; some of their 
 men work that, I think. 
 
 (1168.) There is not any agitation among our men for a 
 further reduction of hours at present, only for some youths, 
 and the men who are getting the workaway probably about 
 300 or 400 in the whole district we want to bring them to 
 eight hours, because we believe that eight hours underground 
 is as long for health and wages purposes as any man ought 
 to work. 
 
 (1169.) Our men are not at present in favour of any legis- 
 lative regulation of the hours. They are against it at present; 
 they think the men can regulate the thing for themselves if 
 they like between themselves and the employers. 
 
 (1170.) They object to go any further than that at present.
 
 42 
 
 (1171.) As to the grounds if I were to give my own opinion, 
 I think I should cover the opinions of some of the others. 
 First of all, male adults have the thing in their own hands. 
 Secondly, my own opinion is that if there were a legislative 
 enactment passed for men only to work eight hours, it would 
 cause the unorganised men in the country not to organise if 
 the eight hours were given to them without organising. 
 
 (1172.) I would rather keep the regulation of the hours of 
 labour as well as wages in the hands of the men themselves. 
 
 JOHN NORMAN, a Cleveland miner. 
 
 I have worked for about 20 years in the mines of Cleve- 
 land. 
 
 (1195-6.) I have heard the evidence which has been given 
 by Mr. Toyn, and in the main I agree with the evidence 
 which he has given, with the whole of it, generally speaking. 
 
 (1208-9.) We are now working eight hours. That is con- 
 sidered our time, eight hours a day, or eight hours per shift 
 from bank to bank. 
 
 (1210.) I am satisfied with those hours at present, at any 
 rate, and certainly our conditions are very materially better 
 now than they were 20 years ago. 
 
 (1211.) I do not believe in legislation. I believe that I 
 am qualified as a miner, if my employer will meet me, to 
 submit my conditions to him and that we can agree matters 
 more favourably than any other persons could legislate 
 for me. 
 
 (1212.) I consider legislative regulation unnecessary. 
 (1213.) I should rather consider it objectionable. 
 
 (1215.) I have not considered whether it would affect us 
 indirectly, favourably or otherwise.
 
 (1216.) I do not think a man could work underground for 
 more than eight hours a day without injury to his health. 
 
 (1217.) I have worked as many as 14 hours underground. 
 We were perfectly at liberty to work as long as we liked. 
 
 (1218.) When I worked more than eight hours a day 
 underground, I found that I suffered in my health and 
 strength from it, and very materially too, although at that 
 time I was younger than I am now. Still, I could not follow 
 my usual employment so often as I can now, on account of 
 physical strength. I am quite of opinion that eight hours 
 in a mine is quite sufficient for any person to work, that is, 
 having regard to his physical strength. 
 
 (1219.) I not only think it would injure him physically 
 to work longer than eight hours, I am quite sure. 
 
 Mr. JABEZ STRONG : 
 
 (1220.) I am, and have been for some years, a deputy in 
 one of the mines of Cleveland. 
 
 (1225.) I have heard the evidence given to-day by Air. 
 Toyn, and I generally acquiesce in it, but I should like to 
 supplement it in some instances. 
 
 (1232.) There is a point about the hours which has never 
 been discussed. The hours of the miners have been referred 
 to, and the hours of the working lad, but we have never got 
 to the hours of the enginemen, and the boiler-minders, and 
 such like in the district. Unfortunately their hours are 
 considerably in excess in the district of what we think they 
 should be. In many instances the pumping-engineman, the 
 fan-engineman, the boiler-minder, and the fireman are called 
 upon to work 12 hours with the exception of the week-ends. 
 That we think is an excessive time to work in connection 
 with this work. We think that there should be some change 
 in their hours, and we live in the hope of improving their
 
 44 
 
 position in that particular instance by conciliation with the 
 employers if it is possible. 
 
 (1234.) As to the evidence of Mr. Toyn and Mr. Norman 
 with regard to the question of hours ; if you refer to legisla- 
 tive interference, I might say that I quite agree with them. 
 I have a decided objection to legislative interference in 
 connection with the hours, for two particular reasons, I 
 might say for three reasons. I have an objection to it 
 because in the first instance we can settle the hours much 
 more satisfactorily ourselves, I believe. In the second 
 instance, if we admitted the principle that Parliament had 
 a right to interfere with our hours, I do not see how we 
 could object to the principle of Parliament interfering with 
 our wages. That would be only carrying it a step further. 
 That is my impression about it. I think if it was not 
 admitting that principle, it would be sailing dangerously 
 near the wind in that particular instance. I think of course 
 we should strenuously oppose it, as far as I have been able 
 to ascertain the views of the men, and we have ascertained 
 the opinions of the men in our district pretty fully upon 
 that point. We have some of those men. I do not know 
 why they should be termed New Unionists ; we have a few 
 in our district who are continually agitating for this move- 
 ment, but I might say authoritatively that they do not 
 represent 10 per cent, of the men in the district as far as we 
 have been able to ascertain. The men do not seem to 
 support it to any extent whatever. They feel that their 
 manliness to a certain extent should be left alone; that 
 they should not be interfered with in that direction in any 
 way. Of course they believe in parliamentary interference 
 as far as youth is concerned, because youths are not strong 
 enough to protect their physical condition. I believe that 
 eight hours in connection with lads is quite sufficient. I 
 believe that the more so far them than for men.
 
 46 
 
 (J238.) Respecting the engine men, and the boiler men, 
 who are working 12 hours a day, roughly speaking, I should 
 say there are about 100 of them. 
 
 (1239.) These men are continually at work, but they are 
 relieved to some extent at the week-ends. From Monday 
 morning at 6 o'clock, they work 1 2 hours a day, and then an 
 eight hours' shift counts from Saturday morning at 6 o'clock 
 till Monday morning at 6 o'clock. 
 
 (1240.) That is an agreement made 12 months ago by the 
 workmen with the employers. The question came up before 
 the Joint Committee. The men expressed dissatisfaction 
 with their hours and also with their wages, and it was 
 relegated to the men's managers, and some of the miners' 
 executive, and their position was improved by reducing the 
 hours at the week-ends, and by slightly increasing their 
 wages. 
 
 (1241.) They do not now work 15 and 16 hours at the 
 week-end unless they undertake to work another man's time, 
 and that of course is their own fault. 
 
 (1242.) I daresay it is done. Some men are very eager to 
 do it. If they like to avoid it of course they are in a position 
 to avoid it, but some of the men are very eager ; some do not 
 care about working overtime, but some are quite ready to go 
 and put two shifts in at the week-end if it is possible to be 
 done. 
 
 (1245-6.) I do not think it would be policy to make a 
 universal eight hours Bill ; or to go in for a universal policy 
 of eight hours. I do not think that could be successful. 
 
 Mr. FRANK STOBART ( 23rd July, 1891) : 
 
 (1963.) Agent of Lord Durham, and in addition to having 
 the control of his property there, I have also the control of 
 his considerable collieries in the county of Durham. I am 
 also part owner of collieries in the county.
 
 46 
 
 (1964.) My family are also large owners in the county of 
 Durham. 
 
 (1965.) I am a member of the Durham Coal Owners' 
 Association. 
 
 (2006.) As to the reason of the different hours of labour 
 which prevail, they vary according to the class of work. The 
 pit draws coal so many hours. You may take it first of all 
 that all the men that need not be at work during the time 
 that the pit is drawing coal that is eight hours a day 
 work only seven and a half or eight hours. First of all the 
 hewers j the pit is drawing coal 10 hours, but there are two 
 shifts of men, each being on an averages even hours from bank 
 to bank ; that is probably about six hours at work. Then 
 there are shifters and such men, who need not be at work 
 during the time that the pit is drawing coal. They work 
 eight hours. Then rolley-way men, and men of that kind, 
 are at work during the 10 hours that the pit is drawing coal. 
 They need only be at work 10^ hours. They must be at 
 work during the time the pit is drawing coal ; but if they do 
 not work 10 hours you would have to have two shifts of five 
 hours each. 
 
 (2010.) There is no agitation in the county of Durham for 
 a legislative regulation of the hours of labour. 
 
 12011.) I think the men are against it. It would be 
 difficult to arrange. The hewers at the present time are 
 seven hours from bank to bank. The boys are 10 hours 
 from bank to bank. If you made a uniform eight hours 
 you would have to lengthen the men's hours (which I do not 
 think they would very much care about), and even then I 
 think you would increase the expense of the colliery so much 
 that we would be unable to compete with other districts. 
 Yo might do it in one way, possibly. You might have three 
 shifts of hewers and two shifts of boys. You see the boys 
 go down in the pit after the men.
 
 47 
 
 (2012.) In order that the hewers may work six or seven 
 hours, somebody else must work more than seven. There 
 are two shifts of men to one of boys. The boys do not go 
 down the pit till two hours after the men, so that if the hewers 
 only work eight hours the boys would only work six. Equally 
 so, many of the off-handed men would work less hours than 
 the men. 
 
 (2013.) I understand that in the county of Durham the 
 hewers would not like a legislative regulation of the hours 
 of the work of the men on whom their work depends that 
 they are against any State legislation. 
 
 (2014.) If it were possible to do so, we should be very 
 glad to reduce the hours of boys' work, but I see no possi- 
 bility of doing it. 
 
 (2030.) I think if it could be managed it would be a good 
 thing. 
 
 (2074.) The putters work 10 hours a day. 
 
 (2075.) Judging from their appearance I should say that 
 that length of employment is not injurious to their health. 
 I certainly never noticed it. It is not very hard work. It 
 is nothing like the hard work of a hewer who is working 
 shorter hours. 
 
 Mr. RALPH YOUNG (5th August, 1891 : 
 
 (2086.) I am the corresponding secretary of the 
 Northumberland Miners' Mutual Confident Association. 
 
 (2087.) The Society represents the coal mining industry of 
 Northumberland . 
 
 (2088.) It includes practically the whole of the mining 
 community of Northumberland. 
 
 (2089.) In the whole of Northumberland there are 30,041 
 workpeople engaged in our industry.
 
 48 
 
 (2098.) My printed reply to the following question. 
 What are the hours of labour is : <( Hewers at long hour 
 "collieries, about 7 hours and 30 minutes, and at short 
 " hour collieries, about six hours and 35 minutes from bank 
 " to bank. All other classes of underground labour except 
 " boys, rolley waymen, and onsetters, 8 hours from bank to 
 "bank. The hours of onsetters and many rolleywaymen 
 "are 10 and 11 hours from bank to bank, the hours of boys 
 " are 10 from bank to bank, except those working in con- 
 " nexion with endless ropes and chains, who work half an 
 " hour longer." 
 
 (2159-60.) I do not see any practical way of reducing the 
 hours of the boys, except at a considerable disadvantage to 
 the whole of the workmen, and also to the boys themselves, 
 if you take their whole career as workers, by reducing the 
 hours of the boys, say two hours per day, and bringing their 
 hours down to eight hours per day, that would be a reduction 
 of two hours per day for a matter of three or five years ; 
 but then, what would follow ? There would be a consider- 
 able increase in the cost of production. Wages would 
 consequently at once be much less than they are, and, in 
 addition, the boys would have to work for a period of perhaps 
 20 years, from half-an-hour to an hour-and-a-half per day 
 longer, so that I think it would be a great disadvantage to 
 the whole of the workmen, including the boys, during the 
 whole of their lives. 
 
 (2161 ) It would not be possible, in my opinion, to <r e t 
 two shifts of boys. There is a considerable difficulty at 
 present m getting a sufficient number of boys to work the 
 mme s un der the present system, and if there were three 
 nfs of workmen and two shifts of boys, that difficulty 
 would be increased by 50 per cent, 
 
 shift* 6 f 1 TW Sl f S f men W0rkil * bn ^ r h > "nd two 
 shifts of boys e lg ht hours is altogether impossible. 

 
 49 
 
 (2163.) If you take a more favourable view of that, and 
 say three shifts of men working night and day, and two 
 shifts of boys, it would not be practicable, in my opinion, to 
 get a sufficient number of boys to work under that system. 
 
 (2164.) As to there being no way of arranging the hours 
 of the hewers and the hours of the boys, so as to give the 
 boys shorter hours, consistently with the general interest of 
 all who are employed in the mines, whether men or boys, 
 I do not see any way. We had that question under con- 
 sideration at the beginning of last year. Some of our 
 members thought that it might be possible to arrange 
 some plan by which the hours of the boys might be short- 
 ened to eight or nine per day. What is termed the wage 
 committee, consisting of ten representatives of the workmen, 
 were appointed to meet and consider the subject, and report 
 to the rest of the members. They met, and were fully con- 
 vinced, after considering the question in all its aspects, that 
 it was altogether impracticable. The result was, after the sub- 
 ject had been fully discussed and placed before the lodges, that 
 only one colliery out of about 56 voted in favour of eight 
 hours. I might read here the report of the committee 
 upon that subject. " Having been instructed to endeavour 
 " to arrange some plan for shortening the hours of the 
 " boys without lenghening those of the hewers, we very 
 " fully discussed the subject. As regards the hours of 
 " the hewers we are second to no district in the country, 
 " and superior to every other except Durham. The 
 " hours of the boys, however, are not at all satisfactory, 
 " Both the advantages that we enjoy, and the dis- 
 " advantages under which we labour, are due to the double 
 " shift system. The more we discuss the question the 
 " more apparent it is to us that it will be exceedingly difficult 
 " to retain the benefits of that system for the hewers, if we 
 " materially shorten the hours of drawing coal. The first 
 *' proposal we considered was that of a uniform eight hours 
 
 E
 
 50 
 
 single shift 'for all classes of workmen, including boys. That ' 
 " has met with approval at many conferences of miners, 
 and resolutions in its support have been carried at such 
 conferences by overwhelming majorities. A very brief 
 discussion convinced us that this is utterly impracticable 
 " for this country ; it would almost necessarily mean an 
 " extension of the hours of the hewers ; it would certainly 
 " mean tte discharge of some thousands of workmen. What- 
 " ever solution may be forthcoming, we are agreed that the 
 " time during which coals are drawn cannot be diminished 
 " to any great extent. Another plan discussed was that of 
 " two shifts of boys of eight hours each with three shifts of 
 " hewers. This we think would probably be more easily 
 " obtained than most other changes that have been suggested ; 
 " it would have the advantage of giving moderate hours to 
 " the boys. Two great drawbacks are that it would be very 
 " difficult to obtain a sufficient number of boys, and it would 
 " necessarily involve a certain amount of night working. 
 " Another suggestion was that the pits draw coals 10 hours, 
 <{ and that the boys have nine hours shifts, a portion of them 
 " going down as at present, and another portion an hour 
 " later. Something similar to this is now in operation at 
 " some of the collieries where 11 hours are worked." That 
 went out to our lodges, who sent their delegates to discuss 
 this report. The discussion took place, as I have stated ; 
 they returned to their lodges, and the vote of the lodges was 
 taken, and only one out of 56 was in favour of eight hours. 
 
 (2165.) That report says that under a uniform eight hours 
 system there would probably ensue the necessity of increased 
 hours for the hewers, and there certainly would ensue the 
 dismissal of a large number of men. It requires the whole of 
 the time that is now devoted to drawing coals to get the 
 work away produced by the men at present employed, so 
 that if there was taken off from 20 to 30 per cent, of the 
 time available for getting the coals out of the pit, it would
 
 51 
 
 consequently follow that about 30 per cent, of the men 
 employed would have to be discharged. It would be impos- 
 sible to get the work out that they produced. 
 
 (2166.) It would not be possible for the whole of the 
 men now employed in two shifts to find pit room so as to 
 perform their work effectively, with the number of drawing 
 hours, that is, with eight hours drawing. 
 
 (2167.) The men are now in two shifts for the most part. 
 
 (2168.) If they all go in together, there would not be 
 accommodation in the pits for the total number of men, 
 certainly not ; not without they were working in a manner 
 that would be a very great disadvantage compared with the 
 present system. There is a large quantity of the coal in 
 Northumberland worked on what is known as the long wall 
 system two men generally work together and if the men 
 all had to go in together, there would be four working where 
 there are now only two, and they would be to a very large 
 extent in each other's way. 
 
 (2169.) The hewers work now less than eight hours, and, 
 of course, if there was a single eight hours shift, they would 
 be expected to work eight hours, if that is the point you are 
 raising, I am not sure. In respect to the eight hours, I do not 
 know whether I might say further, speaking for myself, that 
 my objection is not simply on account of the difficulty that 
 would accrue to the workmen in Northumberland, but it is 
 because I think it is economically unsound, and that those dis- 
 tricts who now work longest, and expect to derive most benefit 
 from the change would suffer most from its operation. If 
 workmen, say in Wales and in the Midlands, are now 
 required to send away 10 or 11 hours' produce in order to 
 maintain their present position against other districts that 
 are more favourably situated, they would certainly be 
 placed at a disadvantage compared with the position they at 
 present occupy, if they were prevented by Act of Parliament,
 
 52 
 
 or by any other means or methods, from working so long a 
 time. If they were reduced from 10 or 11 hours, say in a 
 normal state of trade (in a time of prosperity like the 
 present, when there is a margin of profit to work the worst 
 of collieries, they, of course, can work shorter hours), but in 
 a normal state of trade in which they are required to work 
 10 or 11 hours to compete with other districts which are 
 more favourably circumstanced, if they were compelled to 
 work only eight hours many of the collieries would, in my 
 opinion, have to be closed. It would be practically impossible 
 for them to do it. 
 
 (2290.) In Northumberland at some collieries those that 
 are termed the short-hour collieries the men are down the] 
 pit about 6 hours 35 minutes. At the long-hour collieries 
 they are down about from 7 hours and 20 minutes to 7 hours i 
 and 30 minutes. Well, then, the men are pretty much like 
 other people I daresay. I do not know whether, if you metj 
 them in the town, you would be able to distinguish them | 
 from ordinary people that you might meet in the street. 
 
 (2291.) The boys are more and the men are less thanj 
 eight hours down the pit. 
 
 (2292.) They attend reading rooms. They have 
 mechanics' institution at every colliery, I should say, and as ll 
 said before, they are nearly all members of co operative 
 societies, and they are interested in seeing those societies 
 successfully carried on. Then, no doubt, some of them, take 
 an interest in sports of different sorts, just like other people.] 
 
 (2303.) I do not know whether anyone can fairly prescribe j 
 what another shall do. But if a large body of workmen agree, ! 
 with something like unanimity, that it is advantageous to 
 work under a certain system and under certain regulations, I 
 think that they act wisely in laying down some sort 
 regulation which they, after full consideration, have concluded; 
 will be well for them to adopt.
 
 53 
 
 (2329.) I have no doubt at all that it would be better for 
 [the boys if they could work nine hours, better still eight 
 [hours, better even still seven hours ; but you have to take 
 [into consideration what the effects would be. Of course 
 [there are other people concerned, and they themselves become 
 (concerned as soon as they cease to be boys. 
 
 I (2330.) As to adult labour, we do not believe in having 
 [them fixed by Act of Parliament at all. We do not think it 
 [would be advantageous, nor yet practicable to have them 
 Efixed by Act of Parliament. It is absolutely impossible in 
 Imy opinion to have uniformity either in hours or wages 
 iunder the diverse conditions of the various mines through- 
 tthe country. 
 
 j (2386.) It is absolutely impossible to have one shift of 
 boys at eight hours, whilst the present hours obtain with the 
 [Ihewers. 
 
 (2387.) As to one shift of hewers not being sufficient to 
 keep the boys going with the hewers' present hours ; the 
 loutput would be very much diminished, the cost of produc- 
 tion would be very greatly increased, wages would con- 
 bequently fall, and in the end it would be much worse for all 
 ^concerned. 
 
 i (2388.) That is the basis of the objection on the part of 
 the Northumberland miners to a fixed eight hours' day. 
 
 (2389-90.) We should be glad to have the boys hours 
 )rought down to the lowest possible point, provided it was 
 shown to be an advantage for all concerned. Taking 
 >he whole of the effects of such an alteration in con- 
 sideration there is no doubt in the opinion of those who 
 have a practical knowledge of the question, that it would be 
 Averse for all concerned to make that alteration. 
 
 (2391.) If the boys were reduced to eight hours a day 
 during the period of their -juvenescence, then afterwards they
 
 54 
 
 would have to be increased an hour-and-a-half a day as men, 
 from an hour to an hour-and-a-half. 
 
 (2392.) That would apply to the hewers. 
 
 (2393.) You could not well have a single shift of 7 hours or 
 7\ hours ; the cost of production would be so enormously 
 increased that many of the pits would be closed down in a 
 very short time. 
 
 (2394.) The chief objection to the alteration is that it 
 would be undesirable, taking a broad view of it, and that 
 while it would be an advantage to a boy, as a boy, leaving out 
 the reduced wage that he and his parents would get by the 
 increased cost of production, yet taking the boy's career, as a 
 boy and a man, he would be worse off than if the alteration 
 were not made. 
 
 (2395.) The argument about the increased cost of pro- 
 duction has always been used when the men have tried to 
 reduce their hours, and, of course, quite reasonably so. 
 
 (2396.) The cost of production has been decreased by the 
 men working longer time. If you take from 1874, when 
 the hours were shortened, up to 1876 and 1877, there is not 
 the slightest reason to doubt that the cost of production 
 was"greater when the shorter time was worked than it was 
 after the men increased their working time. I have a state- 
 ment here showing that the men increased their production 
 directly after they increased the working time. 
 
 (2399.) I would not state that, as a matter of fact, the 
 extra 50 tons per man output since 1874 was due entirely to 
 the additional hour, but I think, in all probability, that it is 
 due to the addition of time worked. 
 
 (2401.) There is a time, I think, in which, say, if you : 
 take eight hours, if a man worked hard during that time, or 
 if you take *l\ as they now work in Northumberland, in which j 
 they can produce the maximum quantity of coal ; but if
 
 55 
 
 they go beyond that, according to the way they work in 
 Northumberland, they probably would not send away much 
 more coal, if they go below that they would send away less 
 coal, 
 
 (2429.) One reason why I do not look with favour upon 
 the legislative regulation of the hours of adult labour is that 
 we have found in Northumberland the advantages of a system 
 of reducing our hours in certain states of trade, increasing 
 them again and yetcontemplating a reduction again, adapting 
 them in fact to the varying conditions of trade, that is one 
 of our strong reasons for desiring to be left free so that we, 
 who are more conversant with the technicalities of the trade 
 and the general conditions of the trade, should be able to 
 adjust our position to the varying condition of trade from 
 time to time. Of course, my own opinion as I expressed it 
 before, is that, from an economic point of view, it is 
 absolutely impossible for Parliament to advantageously fix 
 the hours. 
 
 MR. WILLIAM HENRY LAMBTON. 
 
 (2579.) I am Secretary of the Durham County Colliery 
 Engine-Men's Mutual Aid Association. 
 
 (2580.) Also Secretary of the National Federation of 
 Colliery Engineers. 
 
 (2581.) And in the former capacity, as secretary to the 
 Durham County Colliery Engine-Men's Association, I am a 
 member of the Federation Board. 
 
 (2593.) The winding men have eight hours, and have had 
 since 1872. The underground man's hours are betwesn 10 
 and 11. The pumping and fan man 12. The locomotives 
 and sundry others about bank are 11.
 
 56 
 
 (2608.) The underground men's hours have not yet been 
 brought down to that point that we desire them to be brought 
 down to. 
 
 (2609.) What I desire is, first, that the hours of the under- 
 ground men should be reduced. 
 
 (2615.) So far as the hours are concerned, I may state at 
 once that rather more than one-third of our men have eight 
 ' hours. As I have already stated, we obtained that reduction 
 in 1872. At that time, when the eight hours was granted ' 
 instead of 12, which had been going on for many many 
 years, about as long as I have known anything about the coal 
 trade. We took a personal vote of the whole of the members 
 of our Association to know whether they would continue to work 
 the 12 hours in the future as they had been doing in the past, 
 or whether they would maintain their present wage and have 
 an eight hours. I may say that the vote was returned, and 
 eight or nine to one of them voted that they would rather 
 have their present wage and accept the eight hours than 
 accept I6d. per day additional and go on working 12 hours 
 as they had done before. 
 
 (2617.) In the County of Durham the underground 
 engine-men working 12 hours shifts are simply the number 
 that have charge of 40 engines. And probably the worst 
 part of the feature is this, that when the men have to change 
 their shift from the day shift to the night shift, or from the 
 night shift to the day shift, a man has to stay 24 hours in 
 the pit, and this at a time when probably there is no one in 
 the pit but himself, or it may be a man minding the furnace. 
 
 (2618.) That is to say, if a man has been on the night 
 shift from Sunday night to Saturday night inclusive and then 
 passes on to the day shift, he works the Sunday succeeding 
 that Saturday night. They change in some instances. The 
 man who has been at work during the Saturday will stay the
 
 57 
 
 Saturday night, and then his mate will come in on the Sun- 
 da} 7 morning and that will change the shift. 
 
 (2621.) That is to say, if they are pumping engine men 
 they must so work to keep the mine sufficiently clear of 
 water for the operations of the week. 
 
 (2622-3.) If they are winding engine men they are there, 
 in order to lower into the mine, and to raise from the mine, 
 men who are so working underground. According to the 
 Mines Regulation Act you must have a competent person in 
 charge of every winding engine so long as there is any 
 person underground in the mine, and there is generally 
 somebody down in the mine, but of course there is no 
 working or drawing of coal. 
 
 (2634-5.) I can mention the fact that at the annual con- 
 ference which was held on the 19th and 20th May last the 
 question of eight hours and the desirability of having it 
 was discussed at very considerable length. Two proposals 
 were brought before that conference ; one was that while 
 it was desirable to have the eight hours, it was desirable to 
 have it by organised effort. The other one was that we 
 should seek it by legal enactment. The matter was put to 
 the vote, and 139, as you will find at the latter end of the 
 report, voted for parliamentary enactment, while 138 voted 
 that it should be obtained by organised effort, but there has 
 not been any action at all taken thereon. 
 
 (2636.) A delegate who represents 100 members would 
 have five votes. 
 
 (2640.) Our Association regards the hours at present 
 worked by the underground enginemen in Durham as 
 excessive. 
 
 (2641.) I gave those hours as being from 10 to 11. I may 
 say this, that while 1 1 hours is stated to be the shift for 
 underground workmen they work 12 hours in those cases
 
 58 
 
 that I have referred to, but they are paid for the twelfth 
 hour at the rate of time and a half. So that still, really 
 speaking, the men's time of labour has not been reduced, 
 but what they have got practically is an increase of wages. 
 
 (2642.) They continue to work 12 hours, but one hour is 
 counted overtime, aud for that they receive additional pay. 
 
 (2643-4.) It is necessary in working the mines that some of 
 these underground men should be at work during the whole 
 24 hours; it is very important the work must be continuous. 
 
 (2645-6.) The only way really to reduce the hours would 
 be to have three shifts instead of two. That is what we pro- 
 pose ought to be done. We cannot see any other way of 
 reducing the hours. 
 
 (2647.) Supposing three shifts were adopted instead of 
 two, and by that means the hours of work were reduced 
 from 12 to 8, and as to whether that change could be 
 accomplished without a corresponding reduction in the 
 wages ; I presume in that case some reduction would have 
 to take place in wages. 
 
 (2648.) There was no rise offered to us until we had 
 agitated for the eight hours, and as we hoped were on the 
 eve of getting it ; and then an offer of an advance of wages 
 if the men continued working was made by the owners. 
 
 (2649.) As a matter of fact, when the change was made 
 we had the choice of either accepting an advance of wages or 
 a reduction of hours. 
 
 (2650.) We have met the Owners' Committee on three or 
 four occasions, and discussed with them the question of 
 reducing these men's hours from 12 to 8. We have not 
 succeeded yet. 
 
 (2651.) In the negotiations entered upon with the owners, 
 we have not offered to accept a lower wage on the under- 

 
 standing that there should be three shifts instead of two, and 
 the hours reduced from 12 to 8. We have not heard anything 
 like an offer from the owners that they are prepared to give us 
 the eight hours. I suppose that the question would have to 
 go on step by step by each party until we could arrive at 
 this point when wages and hours would have to be considered. 
 
 (2652.) The difficulty is not that if any change is made at 
 all it must be a change from 12 to 8 hours, no intermediate 
 step being possible, further than that we think, having 
 regard to the heated engine rooms and also the impure air 
 that rises from the hot machinery, were there is grease and 
 oil, &c., that eight hours is sufficiently long for those men to 
 be in the mine and in these engine houses. 
 
 (2653.) I may say that we are prepared to accept the same 
 rate of wages for eight hours for underground men as is now 
 paid to the winding men. The winding men's wages at the 
 present time are 5s. 3d., while the wages of these under- 
 ground men that we are now speaking of stand at 6s. Id. 
 
 (2654-5) That would be a reduction of 10d., whereas the 
 reduction of hours from 12 to 8 would be a reduction of one- 
 third. 
 
 (2657-9.) Those excessively long hours apply more par- 
 ticularly to where there is pumping day and night, or drawing 
 coals during the day and pumping at night, and in mo&t 
 of those cases there are men present during the whole of the 
 time ; so that it would be an easy matter, apart from the 
 wage question, to divide the shifts into three of eight hours. 
 In fact, you have had the eight hours for underground 
 enginemen in Northumberland since the early part of 1872 
 in the neighbouring county. 
 
 (2695-96.) We take a very strong objection to the decision 
 that was arrived at by the National Federation where there 
 vras only a majority of one in favour of parliamentary effort.
 
 60 
 
 We think that more time would be spent in trying to move 
 Parliament to give the eight hours than we should have to 
 spend in getting it for ourselves. That is the main argument 
 used by the Durham men. 
 
 (2697.) As to whether our Society is practically unanimous, 
 we took a vote some four or five years ago on the subject, 
 and I may say that a very great number of our members 
 were very indifferent. They did not care to record any vote 
 at all. But those that did vote voted very strongly against 
 any parliamentary interference whatever. 
 
 (2698.) When I said that efforts were being made, and 
 negotiations going on, I meant between our Society and the 
 employers. 
 
 (2699.) Nothing is being done, or is anything being- 
 attempted by the Federation. 
 
 Mr. JOHN GEORGE WEEKS (27th October, 1891) :- 
 
 (2856.) A member of the Northumberland Coalowners' 
 Association and a mining engineer in the county of Nor- 
 thumberland. 
 
 (2857.) Have been appointed along with Mr. Lamb to 
 represent the Northumberland Coalowners' Association and 
 to give evidence on their behalf. 
 
 (2940.) With reference to the hours of labour of the boys, 
 the employers would be willing to concede shorter hours I 
 think if they could see their way to it. 
 
 (2941.) I agree with the objections to any alteration of 
 the present system which were laid before the Commission 
 by .Air. Young entirely. It is not practicable to alter their 
 hours at present.
 
 61 
 
 (2942.) The Association desire no legislative interference 
 at all. They think that the workmen are able and willing 
 to meet the circumstances from time to time as they arise. 
 
 (2982.) I am aware that there is a strong and a very 
 natural feeling in Northumberland in favour of shortening the 
 hours of the boys to reduce them to eight, and I agree that 
 would be a desirable thing if it could be accomplished. 
 
 (2983.) I considered the proposal that has been made in 
 favour of three shifts of men and two shifts of boys. 
 
 (2984.) I do not think it would be a solution of the diffi- 
 culty. We have considered the various proposals. We have 
 seen the report that was made by the Miners' Association, and 
 we have read and considered that amongst ourselves, and we 
 quite agree that it is impracticable to work our mines in 
 Northumberland upon any other than the present system, and 
 that the three shifts of men and two shifts of boys is not a 
 feasible system for that part of the country. 
 
 (2985.) As to its having been said that the coal owners 
 would not object strongly to a scheme of that kind, I do not 
 assent to that at all as representing them. We say it is not 
 practicable. We do not say it is not possible, because I 
 suppose everything is possible, but it is impracticable, as far 
 as our mines are concerned, looking at it from every point of 
 view as far as we can see. 
 
 (2986.) With three shifts of coal hewers we could not get 
 the stone men in to do the work required in the time. We 
 find that now, with two shifts of hewers, it takes us very 
 often all our time to follow the two shifts, and therefore if 
 we had three shifts of men in, and those men were 
 working something like six hours at the face, there is 18 hours 
 at the face, and there would be only six hours for the men to 
 shoot the top and bottom stone, which would not be enough. 
 We would have to multiply the number of the stone men very
 
 62 
 
 much, and then these men would have only six hours to do 
 their work in instead of eight. That is one of the strong 
 objections. Not only that, but the hewers would get forward 
 in front of the stone " canches," and it would be extremely 
 awkward for them to work and fill their coals. There would 
 be a further difficulty in getting boys. We have not boys 
 enough now to follow the ordinary one shift. If we had to 
 have two shifts of boys the difficulty of finding the boys would 
 be still greater. There would never be time to put the pit 
 right or to allow the pit to cool. 
 
 (2987.) With regard to the difficulty of getting boys, I would 
 say that that is general, it is over the whole country. There 
 is a difficulty in getting boys sufficient at the present time. 
 I am speaking of boys under 16. The Mines Regulation Act 
 limits those boys' hours to 54. Well, our boys work 10 hours 
 under 1 6 years of age. Therefore many of them only get five 
 shifts of 10 hours, and at a few pits where there are big 
 families you may be able in a few cases to lay idle every fifth 
 boy in order to work the Saturday. In these cases the boys 
 only work 50 hours a week, or 100 in a fortnight. But at the 
 majority ot the collieries there is not a sufficient number of 
 boys to work the pits owing to this 54 hours' regulation, and 
 their places have to be made up with boys out of the night 
 shift, shifters, rolleyway men, and other people who have to 
 take their places on the Saturday when we work the six days. 
 Altogether we are, as I have said, pinched for boys as it is 
 already. 
 
 (2988.) It is quite impracticable to get a sufficient 
 number to have a double, shift of boys. 
 
 (2989.) As to there being objections, if not of the same 
 kind, of another kind, to a single shift of eight hours for 
 everybody ; that would be equally bad, because, in the first 
 place, we should have to reduce the number of hewers by 
 about 30 per cent, to get the work out by the boys only
 
 63 
 
 working a short time. If the boys were only working eight 
 hours, as it is suggested, there could only be about six and a 
 half hours for the boys to get the coals conveyed along in 
 the place of nine hours at the present time. That would 
 mean at once, supposing the same number of boys are 
 employed, a reduction of 30 per cent, of hewers, assuming 
 we could find them all pit room ; but it is not possible, iu 
 the way the mines are laid out in Northumberland, and the 
 way the mines are there worked, to find pit room for the 
 men to work a single shift. 
 
 (2990.) Supposing an Eight Hours Act were passed, and it 
 had to be complied with, and there was a single shift, the 
 time left for coal drawing, with eight hours from bank to 
 bank for everybody, would not be much more than six and a 
 half hours. Six and a half to seven hours would be the very 
 outside for coal drawing. It would take a man probably half 
 an hour to go to his place, and half an hour to go back, and 
 after he got to his place he would not have coals ready ; the 
 boys would have to wait for him. He would have to get the 
 coals ready, and they would not have much more than about 
 six and a half hours to travel the coal from the working face 
 to the bottom of the pit. 
 
 (2991.) So far as Northumberland is concerned, my opinion 
 is that a single shift of eight hours would be out of the 
 question altogether. That is not only my opinion, but the 
 opinion of the Association which has discussed it, and that 
 was everyone's opinion at that discussion. 
 
 (3038.) As long as we work the double shift, I do not see 
 how we could reduce the boys' hours. 
 
 (3068.) The men, through their representatives, have net 
 made any representations for reducing the hours all round. 
 They have never asked us to reduce the hours of labour all 
 round to 8. They know it would not work, therefore they 
 have not come forward with such a proposal.
 
 64 
 
 (3069.) I have been where I am now since the year 1872 
 19 years in Northumberland. 
 
 (3072-3.) The Coal Mines Regulation Act provides 54 
 hours per week for lads under 16, and the Act of 1872 did 
 the same. 
 
 (3074.) I do not consider that boys working that number 
 of hours find it injurious to their health not the slightest. 
 
 I have asked the medical man, our colliery doctor, whether 
 he thought their hours were at all injurious to their health, 
 and from what he told me, and what I have seen myself, I 
 think their present hours do not affect their health in the 
 slightest. 
 
 (3086.) Suppose that the young men who now work 10 or 
 
 I 1 hours were required to work only 8 we would have to get 
 adults then, because we have not boys to do the work. 
 
 (3088.) As far as our own Association of Workmen is 
 concerned, I think their wish is, when they can, to get the 
 boys' hours shortened with a view to giving the boys more 
 leisure time for other purposes on the surface. I rather 
 fancy the idea of a universal eight hours day is to find more 
 employment for the spare population. 
 
 (3089.) That desire does not emanate from the Northum- 
 berland miners at all. They see that if the boys' hours were 
 reduced, it would entail longer hours upon themselves. 
 
 (3090.) I think the motive is, possibly, partly with a view 
 to the boys' health, and also that the boys may have more 
 leisure to educate themselves, and to enjoy themselves, by 
 being fewer hours in the mine. It i* not on account of the 
 hardness of their work when they are there. 
 
 (3091.) I think the physical labour of the men is much 
 greater in itself than the physical work of the boys. 

 
 65 
 
 (3092.) The boys' hours are sought to be curtailed in order 
 that they may have more leisure the men already have 
 sufficient leisure. 
 
 (3094.) I do not think there is any hardship at all upon 
 the boys working 10 hours, either as to their health or even 
 their enjoyment. 
 
 (3095.) If the boys did work shorter hours than they do at 
 present I think it would lead to very great inconvenience,, 
 and, in the normal state of trade, to the closing of many 
 collieries. 
 
 Mr. ROBERT ORMSTON LAMB : Chairman of the 
 Northumberland Coalowners' Association. 
 
 (3125-6.) I have heard the evidence given by Mr. Weeks 
 on behalf of that body, and generally concur in it. 
 
 (3128.) The Association is opposed to legislative inter- 
 ference with the hours of labour, and we consider that, to 
 shorten the hours of the boys would be detrimental to our 
 mode of working ; in fact, having regard to the quantity of 
 coal produced in Northumberland owing to the arrangement 
 of the collieries, it is essential to have a double-shift system. 
 Without this double-shift system I do not suppose any 
 colliery could be worked to a profit. 
 
 (3129.) Any scheme for shortening the hours of boys must 
 proceed, I think, upon the basis of the continuance of the 
 double shift of hewers, that is recognised by all. 
 
 (3139.) I agree with Mr. Weeks as to the difficulty of 
 shortening the hours of the boys in Northumberland. 
 
 (3140.) If it could be done, certainly I would consider it a 
 desirable thing to have them down to, say, eight per day if 
 it could possibly be done. But the question has been 
 thought out, and it is the general opinion amongst all the 
 
 F
 
 experts I have spoken to, that it would be impracticable. I 
 do not think, though the time the boys may stay down the 
 pit now seems long, that the nature of their work is detri- 
 mental to them. I have not heard that they suffer from 
 illness, and they always appear to me, when I have seen them 
 come from their work, exceedingly cheerful, and in good 
 preservation. 
 
 (3142.) Apart from questions of increased cost of produc- 
 tionapart from the economic side of the question altogether, 
 I think there would be great practical difficulties in reducing 
 the hours to eight in Northumberland. I understand it that 
 to carry out our present system of working it is essential to 
 us it would be impossible to reduce the hours. 
 
 (3143.) The coal trade in Northumberland, for a great 
 many years past, has been a very unpaying property to hold. 
 It is only latterly that there has been an improvement 
 'during the last three years. I do not think you would get 
 any discreet coalowner to agree to work his collieries in view 
 of the fact that the prices are not only now falling, but are 
 falling rapidly, and that we do not know what they may be 
 in the future ; and, if before we could not work the collieries 
 without a loss, one would not invite a loss by increasing and 
 enhancing the cost of production upon a falling market. 
 
 (3187.) "On the 19th December, 1887, the men requested 
 " that eight hours in the 24 be the maximum day's work for 
 " all persons employed underground where the single shift, 
 " and seven hour where the double shift is worked ; the time 
 t( to be reckoned from bank to bank. On the 21st January, 
 "1888, Mr. Burt and deputation attended; at the outset 
 "the chairman stated that the owners could not accede to 
 " request. Some conversation ensued on the points raised, 
 but the deputation did not press the request." I remember 
 that : that is an extract from the minutes of the meeting 
 that took place.
 
 67 
 
 (3187a.) " The Chairman stated that the owners could not 
 "' accede to the request. 
 
 (3188.) I think I was the Chairman of the meeting on that 
 occasion. 
 
 (3189.) We have not the absolute words spoken on that 
 occasion given. It is only given indefinitely that the 
 Chairman declined to accede to the request ; that some con- 
 versation ensued on the points raised, but the deputation did 
 not press the request. I have read from a copy of our 
 minutes. 
 
 (3192.) If they had pressed their claim I should fancy it 
 would have resulted in a strike. 
 
 (3216.) The hours of the Northumberland miners, just 
 now, are about seven-and-a-quarter, I think. 
 
 (3219.) As to what logical reasons there can be for colliery 
 proprietors, whose men are only working seven-and-a-quarter 
 hours, to take any objection to the eight hours ; In my 
 opinion it is this: We found that for some 10 or 12 years 
 the collieries in Northumberland, speaking for almost all, 
 but, I believe, not absolutely all, ceased to be profitable, and 
 had the hours been altered by legislation, we should abso- 
 lutely have been ruined, or, at least, if not ruined, we should 
 have had to bring into the collieries a very large capital, 
 greater than we had. Certain collieries with which I myself 
 Lave been connected were, at that period with a very large 
 capital indeed, for from 12 to 14 years unremunerative, and 
 had there been eight hours, I have no doubt that, instead of 
 continuing these collieries they have been worked profitably 
 now during the last three years we should have closed them, 
 and they would have been driven out of the coal trade. 
 
 (3220). We compete with all persons producing coal, 
 whether in Scotland or Wales. I should say that our great
 
 68 
 
 competitors in the steam coal trade are more the Welsh coal- 
 owners. 
 
 (3221.) We have also in Scotland strong competitors for 
 the class of coal which we have in Northumberland, particu- 
 larly for the north of Europe a very great competition. 
 
 (3223-4.) If you restricted the hours, say one hour, of 
 course, you would restrict the output of coal very materially 
 and raise the price. It might benefit us in that way, but we 
 should have no certainty that foreign coal would not be 
 produced to a greater extent than it now is, and that we 
 should get competition there. 
 
 (3225.) Any benefit we should get by having a universal 
 day's work we should lose by the boys' hours being, 
 shortened. 
 
 (3226.) I am quite satisfied that if you did succeed in 
 England in getting an eight hours' Bill you would have to 
 reckon with an enormous increase of production abroad in 
 coal and with the conditions under which that coal can be 
 worked. There has been an enormous increase of production 
 in Germany during the last 10 years. Another reason would 
 be that the cost of coal to the manufacturers would be serious. 
 In the north of England a large number of manufactories 
 have been put down owing to their being able to obtain 
 cheap coal. It would be very detrimental to them, of course, 
 if they found, through the shortening of the hours, that the 
 quantity of coal produced fell off, because the prices must 
 go up. 
 
 (3245.) I do not know exactly the advantages and 
 disadvantages of other districts which have different seams. 
 In Northumberland we have the thin seams of coal, and it 
 would be impossible, I think, at low rates of wages for the 
 men to live if you reduce the hours below what they are now, 
 The earnings of the men were, comparatively speaking, very 
 low until three years ago.
 
 (3246.) It might be brought about, but I think it would 
 be very detrimental, both to the owners and to the men 
 themselves. 
 
 MR. GEORGE JAQUES: Coal Miner, working at 
 the Walker Colliery, in the county of Northumberland. 
 
 (3261.) Have worked as a coal miner for many years ; I am 
 now 46 years of age. I commenced to work in the mines 
 when I was between 10 and 11. 
 
 (3262.) I commenced in the county of Durham. 
 
 (3272.) I am very desirous that the youth of the age in 
 which I am living should have better facilities and oppor- 
 tunities of acquiring information mentally, and so cultivating 
 their minds ; and I consider that the shorter the time that 
 a young man or a boy is employed in a mine, whether his 
 work be light or whether it be hard, the better for him. 
 The very fact of being confined in regions below, I think it 
 is feasible to suppose, will be more detrimental to his 
 health than favourable to it. Although we have had 
 evidence given here to-day of a certain doctor saying 
 that it does not affect their health at all, yet I think 
 that if they had more sunshine and more recreation 
 above ground there would be a tendency for them to be more 
 healthy. Not only that, but, as a member of the Northum- 
 berland Miners' Association, I am not at all satisfied with the 
 efforts the Association I will not say have made but I am 
 not satisfied with the efforts that they ought to have made. 
 I have here a copy of the rules, and I see it is recorded on 
 the wrapper of those rules that the Association, of which I 
 am a member, was established in January, 1863. I find, when 
 I open the wrapper and look into it, on the first page, that 
 the primary object of the formation of the Association it is 
 marked with the letter B. ' ; is to shorten the hours of labour
 
 70 
 
 " of boys in mines to eight hours per day." Consequently I 
 hold the opinion that when the Association was formed it was 
 formed with that avowed object to limit the labour of the 
 boys in the mines to eight hours per day. I believe that 
 the leading men in this country that I have referred to 
 are not opposed to what I may term an eight hours 
 labour day, but they are opposed to an eight hours 
 labour Bill. In that position they are opposing me, but I am 
 not opposing them. If they will set the machinery of the- 
 Union at work to get an eight hours Bill, I will assist them.. 
 What I want is an eight hours day, got by hook or by crook, 
 so long as it is got ; Now the thing narrows itself down to- 
 this point, with me. If an eight hour day isto be got, can 
 it be erot by any other means than a strike or a law ? In 
 my opinion it cannot. The owners have been asked to 
 concede it, and they will not, and, because they will not r 
 my impression is that our Association cannot enforce it. 
 I have endeavoured to ask myself the question, and to 
 answer it as well as I was able : If an eight hours Bill was 
 passed, would it be an advantage or a disadvantage to me 
 as an individual and to the county I belong to as a whole ? 
 In my own humble opinion I think it will be a decided gain 
 to us. And I may say further, before I go into any further 
 remarks on this subject, my own candid opinion is this : that 
 the men who are supposed to oppose us do so from a mere 
 selfish point of view. I may say that we do not receive any 
 opposition from anybody but those who hew coals, or that do 
 not work in the pits at all, or, if there are any pitmen who 
 oppose it, they are coal-hewers. I would like that to be- 
 particularly noted. What opposition we have received in 
 Northumberland has come from those who never descend a 
 pit, or those who do descend and who are hewing coals. 
 
 (3276.) I quite agree that those hewing coals are the large 
 majority of the persons employed. The numbers that they 
 represent, according to the last census we had of the mining
 
 71 
 
 industry, is something like 11,840, I think. I have come to 
 this conclusion, that if an eight hours day was procured, 
 either by negotiations or by a law (but I would prefer it 
 being got by a law), instead of it being a disadvantage to us 
 it would be a decided gain ; because I contend this : I have 
 a letter before me here which I have received from Mr. Kalph 
 Young in the early part of the year in reply to a letter that 
 I wrote to him asking if he could give me any information as 
 to the number ^of boys working in Northumberland mines 
 who work 10, and the number who work 11 hours, or if he 
 could not give me the exact number of boys as individuals, 
 could he give me the number of ^collieries in the county which 
 work lOJhours a day, and which work 11 hours a day. I have 
 it before me here that five-sixths of the steam coal'collieries 
 in Northumberland at that time were considered as 11 hours 
 pits. The date of that is February 16th, 1891. There are 
 some adults underground who work 10 hours a day, and 11 
 hours when the pits are drawing coals 1 1 hours ; that is, I 
 mean, the on-setters and the rolleyway men, and what I may 
 term putters and hewers, they have been accustomed to go 
 in with the boys and ascend at night with the boys as well. 
 When I add the one to the other we get a total, according to 
 the last returns I was able to get hold of, of 9,300 odd, who 
 work in and about Northumberland mines over 10 hours a 
 day. 
 
 (3277). Including surface men. Of course I expect that if 
 a Bill should be passed it will affect them as well as under- 
 ground men, because their hours are practically fixed 
 and regulated by the hours of the boys who work now 
 10 hours a day. Then I say that, looking at the hewers 
 as 11,000 odd, and the boys and surface men as 9,000 
 odd, even if it should be that an Eight Hours Bill should 
 cause the employers to make the hewers work eight hours, 
 we may say each of these hewers will have an hour a day 
 put on to them : that is 11,000 odd, taking two off each of
 
 
 72 
 
 the others, multiplying the 9,300 odd bj 2, it gives a total 
 of 18,600. So, while we allow the owners to take 11,000 
 hours off, we get 18,000 for it. Consequently, looking at the 
 thing from a common standpoint as affecting the county 
 generally, I think it is a decided gain to us as a county. I 
 think a Bill is most preferable, because I think we cannot get 
 a shorter working day, at least an eight hours working day, 
 without some serious struggle, I may say I also find that the 
 miners in the year 1887 had the question brought before 
 them on two separate occasions. On each of these occasions 
 at the delegate meetings the resolution in favour of an eight 
 hours day was carried by overwhelming majorities. 
 
 I have referred to illustrations where we have seen the 
 impotency of our Association, and I have come to this 
 conclusion : In the whole of the coal trade, as far as I can 
 gain information, the Midland Counties, and, I believe, the 
 Welsh Collieries and the Welsh Federation and the miners 
 of Scotland, and wherever there are coal fields, and colliers 
 getting coals and employed about coal mines I believe 
 there is a unanimous feeling and desire for a limitation to 
 eight hours per day, but Northumberland and Durham seem 
 to stand in the way, and to try to prevent it if possible. 
 And why they should do so I am at a loss to understand, 
 because they every one admit that legislation in the past 
 the two Coal Mines Eegulation Acts that we have got, in 
 1872 and 1878 have been of immense benefit to us, and 
 we seek to get further legislation on other points. 
 
 (28th October, 1891): 
 
 (3288.) Inmy letter to the Commission of July the 24th,Isaid 
 " I feel sure that I could state a simple and workable plan by 
 "which all who work over eight hours a day could be limited 
 " to eight, while at the same time all who work less than 
 " eight hours a day would still do so, and the owners could
 
 73 
 
 " extend their hours of coal drawing, and the public would 
 "have a fuller and cheaper market for coals ? " 
 
 (3289.) I may say that in studying this question I have 
 been forced to come to the conclusion in my own mind that 
 if it should really become so that those who work now more 
 than eight hours per day should either be compelled or be 
 disposed to work only eight hours, we shall have to adopt 
 one of three separate courses. One course would be the 
 adoption of a single shift during the daytime. Of course 
 I go against that entirely on this ground, that I am afraid 
 if it were to be adopted it would be to the disadvantage 
 of Northumberland as a county, because it would displace a 
 very large number of both men and boys ; it would fling 
 them out of work for some time. Consequently I do not 
 entertain that idea at all. Then, in my opinion, the second 
 course would be to take two shifts of men and boys, each 
 having eight hours. I take it for granted that, as I have 
 already said, the chief reason why many of our hewers object 
 to it is because they are afraid it may lengthen their hours, 
 and on that ground I think the entire county would reject 
 a proposition of that sort. I think the difficulty could be 
 met by adopting three shifts of hewers and two shifts of 
 boys, the hewers each to work six-hour shifts and the boys 
 each to work eight-hour shifts. I have repeatedly asked this 
 question through the public press and when I have been in 
 conversation with the opponents of the measure : " What 
 " other objection than an unwillingness to adopt it stood in 
 " the way ? " and it is only recently that we have received 
 anything like a lucid statement of objections. 
 
 I contend that this means will satisfy the whole of those 
 who want an eight hours labour day, and will also satisfy 
 those who are opposed to it, because it will give them some- 
 thing less than they really now are working. I say that I 
 think it is very simple and workable. One of the chief
 
 74 
 
 objections that my friend Mr. Burt raised to it, was that it 
 would partially entail upon the county a portion of night- 
 shift working, or men and boys working at night time. I 
 may say I agree with him that as a county we are as much 
 opposed to that as we possibly can be. Instead of increasing 
 the night-shift work, I believe the feeling of the county is 
 to decrease it as much as they possibly can, but of course we- 
 know it cannot be entirely abolished. I think that objection 
 is not so strong as would appear at first sight, because I think 
 that those who went in early in the morning would have an 
 opportunity of getting out a good deal earlier than they do 
 now. There is no regular stated period for the boys and 
 others in the daytime taking their meals. My arrangement 
 is this, that at the middle of each shift there should be a total 
 cessation of work right throughout the mine for 30 minutes, 
 that all hands might have an opportunity of taking their 
 meal, and taking it comfortably, and then when the 3O 
 minutes were expired all hands to commence work again. I 
 may say that is another feature that I would like to see 
 introduced in any change that is brought about by further 
 mining legislation. 
 
 (3327.) I propose that the hewers should work shifts of 
 only six hours. 
 
 (3328.) My impression is that the men would take the 
 shorter hours with a reduction of wage rather than go on as 
 they are. 
 
 (3329.) I admit that it would, as a matter of fact, impose- 
 upon them a reduction of wage for a while. I think it would 
 be so at the beginning. 
 
 (3330.) I think the state of trade in a very short time- 
 afterwards and the state of the labour market would bring 
 up the wage to what I may term its normal state. 
 
 (3337.) I say that the wages at present earned with the 
 shorter hours are higher than those formerly earned with the 
 longer hours. That is exactly it.
 
 75 
 
 (3338.) If the same process were to continue and the hours 
 were still further shortened, wages would, at least, not fall. 
 I do not anticipate their rising very much. 
 
 (3339.) I do not think the hours could be shortened 
 indefinitely without affecting the wages of the workers. 
 
 (3340.) I think, however, that they can be shortened from 
 the present number of 7 or 7^ down to 6 hours, and without 
 diminishing wages. 
 
 (3353.) I do not say that I have the authority of any 
 section of the Miners' Union to speak on their behalf further 
 than this. We had that .matter talked over when we met, 
 and I may say it was a unanimous understanding among us 
 that the very fact of my having been returned to the Con- 
 gress us a delegate to represent the Northumberland miners 
 was an indication that that the Northumberland miners 
 wanted the eight hour question at least ventilated in the 
 Congress. 
 
 (3354-8.) At that Congress as delegates, there were 10, and 
 out of the 10 there were nine who opposed. 
 
 (3359.) I take it that my appointment was an indication 
 that they were favourable to the eight hours. I may say as 
 an explanation of that, that in the list of names that was 
 sent out into the county to be voted upon, I was, I believe 
 the only one in the whole list who was looked upon as an 
 advocate of the eight hours ; but if there had been more, 
 my opinion is that there would have been more returned. 
 
 (3389-90.) In dealing with full-grown men, I would say that 
 by Act of Parliament it is to be penal for them to work 
 beyond eight hours per day. Even for increased pay. 
 
 (3405.) I had a record that ballot papers were sent out to 
 the collieries ; they were, but I never saw one and never 
 learned of there being one at our colliery,
 
 76 
 
 (3406-7.) I made no complaint to our lodge secretaries on 
 the subject, because I did not think it would have any effect. 
 
 (3408.) The question was " Are you in favour of an eight 
 hours working day ? " Those who voted for were 211; those 
 against, 744. I was aware of that fact when I gave the 
 record of the votes yesterday. 
 
 (3409.) The reason I did not mention it when referring to 
 the number of votes that had been taken on the subject was 
 because I had not it in my memory at the time. I have 
 nothing to fear from it, because I have a record of it some- 
 where or another, if I could only lay hold of it. 
 
 (3411.) When Mr. Fenwick and I were appointed to go to 
 a Miners' Congress at Birmingham the miners were asked : 
 Are you in favour of your representatives voting in " favour 
 " of the eight hours for all men and boys working under- 
 " ground ? No, 113, Yes, 85." 
 
 (3441-3.) I say that the employers would not take very 
 much, if any, harm by their adoption of the Eight Hours 
 Miners Bill now before the country. I heard Mr. Weeks 
 and Mr. Lamb in their evidence yesterday speak on behalf 
 of themselves and the Coal Owners' Association, and I heard 
 how emphatically they opposed the eight hours ; they would 
 take some amount of harm, but I have already said I think 
 they can afford to bear it. 
 
 (3521-3.) The question submitted^ to a vote was those 
 of you who are in favour of obtaining an eight hours labour 
 day by legislation vote ; those of you who are against it, 
 vote. I really cannot remember the number of votes, but I 
 may say that there was a preponderating majority against it. 
 
 (3524.) It would be somewhere about correct, that three 
 voted for, and all the rest against it.
 
 (3525.) Then, subsequently, the discussion was continued 
 at Seghill colliery, and the result there, was that four voted 
 in favour. 
 
 (3527-9.) I think it was in the month of March in this 
 year. I may say that the meeting was held on a night 
 which was a very inconvenient night for getting a good 
 congregation. 
 
 (3530.) As to whether it is true that of the four who voted 
 at Seghill three of them went from Walker colliery, and were 
 those who had voted at Walker. I really cannot tell, I took 
 so little interest in the vote. I expected the vote coming 
 that did come I fully anticipated that. I said I had not 
 gone there to win a score in the matter of voting, but I had 
 gone there on an educational mission, and I entered into the 
 discussion with the object of disseminating views. 
 
 (3534.) If my intention should have any effect on the Bill 
 it would be a Mines Regulation Act for eight hours per day 
 of 24 for all underground workers, because I consider that 
 the surface labour would be regulated by the hours of those 
 below. 
 
 (3535.) In case Parliament conceded the request and 
 established the legal eight hours, I do not think the owners 
 would be justified in demanding that every man should work 
 the eight hours. 
 
 (3536.) We would not ask Parliament to give us an eight 
 hours day Bill, we would ask Parliament to give us an eight 
 hour limit to those who work over eight. 
 
 The Bill that I go in for is entitled The Mines Eight 
 Hours Bill." 
 
 (3538.) If it is a legal eight hours day I say I think the 
 employers will not be justified in demanding that every man 
 shall work eight hours, but of course I do not concern myself 
 about the employers' interests very much.
 
 78 
 
 (3539.) I think that my scheme of eight hours means to 
 limit the hours of those who work over eight, and to leave 
 those who work less than eight to be looked after by those 
 who want them to work more. 
 
 (3541-4.) As to whether if Parliament deals with the 
 hours and fixes the limit, the employers would have a right 
 to ask Parliament, having dealt with the hours, to state 
 the rate of remuneration, I may say that I think that is 
 anticipating something that we have no dread of coming. I 
 do not think they would. 
 
 (3614.) As to whether in the reduction of those hours the 
 men should obtain the same wages or earnings in the shorter 
 hours as they do now in the longer hours, I would suggest 
 that if they could not have the shorter hours without a pro- 
 portionate reduction, they might take it then with the 
 proportionate reduction of wage. 
 
 (3615.) As to whether it would be fair to a man who does 
 not happen to be as strong as his neighbour in another stall, 
 that he should be limited to eight hours, while another man 
 can do far more work in the same time, I think that 
 anything is fair which is agreed upon before you commence. 
 A man would know the conditions that he went to work on, 
 and if he assented to it, I think it would be fair enough 
 then. 
 
 (3617.) In my experience as a pit man, I have known 
 many men who can earn as much in seven hours as another 
 man can in eight or nine. 
 
 (3618.) I think that it would be a decided benefit to each 
 and every working man, both to the strong and to the weak. 
 
 (3626.) I propose to make it penal if a man or a youth 
 works more than eight houis under ground in the day. 
 
 (3627.) I consider that the hours now worked are not so 
 conducive to safety as they would be if they were shortened.
 
 79 
 
 (3628.) I am not prepared to say they are exactly unsafe. 
 
 (3629.) As to whether I consider that the men are un- 
 healthy in consequence of working the number of hours they 
 now do, I may say from my own experience, if I may speak 
 as a representative, that I have sometimes, nay, I may say 
 frequently, when I have been compelled to work day by day 
 successively, and to work the full time, such has been the 
 excess of toil and the amount of perspiration that I have 
 given off, that at the latter end of the week I have been so 
 worn down and fatigued and incapacitated that I have been 
 obliged to stay at home to recoup my strength and energy. 
 
 (3630-1.) When I was a coal hewer I was working seven 
 hours from bank to bank. 
 
 (3632.) That is my own experience, and I may say it is 
 the experience of a good many more besides. 
 
 (3633). I say that I would not allow any body to be down 
 more than eight hours. 
 
 3634-5.) I would not compel them to be down eight hours, 
 nor any given number of days a week. 
 
 (3636.) I do not go so far as to say that it would be un- 
 lawful for an employer to allow a man to be down for more 
 than eight hours, but that it would be optional for a man 
 whether he would be down eight hours or not, or how many 
 days a week he worked. 
 
 (3637.) I would certainly agree to have an understanding 
 come to between the employers and the employed to this 
 effect, that no man nor boy shall work more than eight hours, 
 and that their time should reckon from bank to bans. If by 
 arrangement any class of work could be done in less than 
 eight hours I would not compel that class of men to stop 
 down the whole of the eight hours. With regard to the 
 number of days worked, I do think that the employers will
 
 80 
 
 be justified in insisting that each and every man and boy, 
 when able, should attend to his work every day in the fort- 
 night. 
 
 (3638.) The custom now is eleven days per fortnight, five 
 in one week and six in another. 
 
 (3639.) As to my answer to Mr. Balfour, that I considered 
 after a time the hewers would earn as much money in six 
 hours as they now do in eight. I can only surmise it would 
 be so because it has been so. 
 
 (3640.) As to how that particular change is going to come 
 about, I cannot explain how that has come about I feel that 
 it is a difficult task for me to explain how it can come about, 
 but I recognise the fact all the same. 
 
 (3641.) As to whether it must not come about in one of 
 two ways either that the man works harder, or that he is 
 paid more money, I do not know that the man works any 
 harder. I think that the whole of my experience as a miner 
 is that hewers generally work as hard as they can, and I do 
 not think a man can work any harder than he can. 
 
 (3643.) After what I said about the idea of the working 
 harder, I think it must come then by the owners paying 
 more money. 
 
 (3644-5.) As to what Mr. Weeks said, and what some of 
 the other Northumberland gentlemen and miners' represen- 
 tatives have said, that for about 12 years, up to 1889, the 
 Northumberland miners were mostly losing money, I may 
 say that these 11 or 12 years are included in the whole of 
 my time, and I may say that is the general expression of 
 colliery owners all over the northern district. We frequently 
 hear that cry repeated. But then, of course, as the saying 
 is in the North, it goes in at one ear and out at the other. 
 We pay no heed to it ; we do not believe it, in fact.
 
 81 
 
 (3646.) I do not believe that they were losing money. 
 We think that they are not so foolish as to work the collieries 
 at a loss. 
 
 (3647-8.) We must admit that when a proprietor has 
 started a colliery it is rather a serious thing to stop it. 
 
 (3649.) We think that the gentlemen and miners' repre 
 sentatives, who have come here and said that they consider 
 the Northumberland collieries were working at a loss, have 
 stated that which is not correct. I do not say that 
 individually I do not believe it. I say that the class of men 
 I represent generally discredit such statements. 
 
 (3651.) My own opinion is this, that if we are to trust in 
 the integrity of the gentlemen who have spoken, it ought to 
 be accepted until it can be proved to be otherwise. 
 
 (3653.) I would make it unlawful for a man to perform 
 any other employment during the remaining 16 hours of the 
 day. 
 
 (3654.) As to whether the day hands should be paid the 
 same rate of wages for eight hours as for ten, if they could 
 get the same rate by all means I would urge them to take it, 
 but I would prefer, if they could not get it without a 
 proportionate reduction, that they should take it with the 
 reduction. 
 
 (3655.) I think it would ultimately be that the reduction 
 of hours must come out of the pockets of the employer. 
 (3656.) I cannot say that it is exactly fair. 
 
 (3657-8.) The hewers work by the piece, if they work 
 shorter hours, they will have to be content with less wages 
 unless the price of the piece-work be increased. 
 
 (3659.) In my letter to the Commission I referred to one 
 rf the advantages of my scheme resulting in cheaper coal to 
 Dhe public.
 
 82 
 
 (3661-62) As to whether I admit that if they work shorter 
 hours they will hew a less amount of coal, I daresay that the 
 amount per man might be less, but the aggregate days 
 work would be more, I think. My meaning is this, that 
 while the colliery employed more hands the out-put would 
 be greatly enhanced. 
 
 (3679.) Assuming that a majority of the members of a 
 trade were against a legal day, I would not force that legal 
 day upon them, not if a very strong majority were against it ; 
 but 1 would not prevent it being operative by simply a bare 
 majority. 
 
 (3680.) In Northumberland the miners, I think, are agreed 
 to the principle of an eight-hour day. 
 
 Mr. JOHN WEIR : Secretary of the Fife and 
 Kinross Miners' Association. 
 
 (3724-5.) The working hours of the underground men 
 are eight, but not from bank to bank. 
 
 (3726-7.) From bank to bank, I should fancy if you are 
 allowing about half an hour or three quarters of an hour 
 more that would be about the average time the miners would 
 be working underground there ; that is from bank to bank. 
 8^ from bank to bank. 
 
 (3728.) Those are the hours of all underground workers- 
 boys, men, and off-hand men. 
 
 (3769.) The 'men in our district are very decidedly of 
 opinion that the eight hours should be enforced by a legal 
 enactment in mines that there should be a legal eight 
 hours day for miners. 
 
 (3770.) We have been working as a district since 1871 on 
 the eight hours system, and our contention is that notwith- 
 standing that we have been working these shorter hours, we
 
 83 
 
 have been able to keep our own as a district with the other 
 districts in Scotland where ten, eleven, and twelve hours 
 have been worked. We hold our own so far as wages are 
 concerned, and I think our coal keeps its .place pretty fairly 
 in the market, notwithstanding we are working the shorter 
 hours. 
 
 (3771.) Our hours in Fife and Kinross are much shorter 
 than those of Lanarkshire. 
 
 (3772-6.) Our hours have been now what they are for 20 
 years, since 1871, we brought it about by organised effort 
 .and after considerable sacrifice. 
 
 (3777.) We had no strike that I remember of in any of 
 the districts in Fife, but there were strong efforts made by 
 the employers to compel the men to go back to the long 
 hours by refusing to send hutches to them in order to take 
 out their output. 
 
 (3778.) That was after we had forced them, they were not 
 conceded by the employers, we forced the shorter hours from 
 the employers. The employers were unwilling that the 
 shorter hours should be begun. The men began to work 
 only eight hours in spite of the employers, and in order to 
 force them back into the long hours, the employers refused 
 to send in hutches or tubs to take their output away during 
 those eight hours, and caused the men to lie in many cases 
 for Is. 2d. and Is. 6d. a day for some time. That is how 
 they tried to fight the eight hours. But we overcame the 
 difficulty, and succeeded in establishing it, and have kept it 
 ever since. 
 
 (3779-80.) After a struggle, which could not be described 
 as resulting in a strike, we brought about the result described. 
 That is my recollection of that time, and we have maintained 
 it since. 
 
 (3781.) But now we are of opinion that it would be
 
 nedient that underground labour should be by law limited 
 " e tt hour, We Lid a strong opinion, and that opunon 
 If course is grounded on the fact of having the ezpenence 
 of 20 years of that system, although it has been got by trad* 
 union effort, 
 
 (3782 ) I rather prefer the men to have the right to say 
 whether they would or would not have an eight hours day. 
 
 (3822.) With regard to a legal eight hours day, at 
 present we work in the Fife district eight hours, not from, 
 bank to bank but at the face. Eight hours at the face 
 is reckoned to be the rule by which we work, but I believe 
 the average working at the face is considerably less than 
 that in consequence of the stoppages. We stop 30 minutes, 
 for breakfast, so you will observe that eight hours at the 
 face does not properly state the case. 
 
 (3823-4 ) The legal eight hours would hardly affect our 
 actual procedure. I do not think it would atfect us very 
 much, it would leave us very much as we are at present, but 
 it would make a difference. We would have less trouble 
 to keep obstreperous members from breaking away from the 
 eight hours. 
 
 (3825.) As to whether that implies that there are a con- 
 siderable number of our men who would desire to work more 
 than eight hours if the Union permitted them to do so, I do 
 not say a considerable number, but I have referred already to- 
 instances where contractors have a tendency to work extra 
 hours in consequence of their having extra interest in work- 
 ing overtime. 
 
 (3826-7.) I think serious harm would result from a certain, 
 number of men working more than eight hours, it would 
 injure the men themselves, and it would create an irritation 
 among other men and probably lead to large numbers-
 
 85 
 
 following the lead of those who were working more than 
 eight hours to the general detriment of the district. 
 
 (3828.) There is a general disinclination to work more 
 than eight hours a day or we would not have maintained it 
 so long, and I believe, although there was an inclination on 
 the part of a number of the men, it would take a long time 
 for those men to operate before they would influence the rest 
 of the mem 
 
 (3829.) I think ultimately the fact that a few did work 
 more than eight hours would cause others to do so ; there 
 would be that danger I say, and it would give us greater 
 difficulty to keep the whole body of tbe men working strictly 
 to the eight hours. 
 
 (3830.) I consider it would be a serious evil if they did 
 work more than eight hours, most assuredly. It is for their 
 own sakes, and I should say for the sake of the above-ground 
 -workers as well. 
 
 (3832.) As to whether I think the Union in fixing eight 
 hours a day is a better judge of what is good for these men 
 than they are themselves, there are'a great many men whose 
 opinion as to what is good for them is not to be relied upon. 
 
 (3833.) As to whether in general I would prefer to be 
 allowed to manage my own household in these matters, we 
 do so, but you would not say that an individual of a family 
 would have a right to upset any family arrangement. 
 
 (3834.) The miners of a district are on organization the 
 :same as a family. 
 
 I ([// J)M/h' ^i'.> ."! 
 
 (3835.) I think the advantages of a uniform eight hours 
 are so great that I would prevent by custom certainly and 
 possibly also by law any individual from exceeding these 
 hours ; I have a strong opinion on that point.
 
 (3837-8.) We in Fife have been able to get an eight hours 
 day by our own exertions. As to thinking it would be 
 impossible for the miners in the west of Scotland to do the 
 same, that is a hypothetical question. I can only speak 
 from experience in that matter. I do not know what may 
 prevent them in the future, but I know what prevented 
 them in the past. Opposition on the part of the employers,, 
 and the want of organization among themselves. 
 
 (3839.) In our own case there was opposition on the part 
 of the employers, but we had organization. 
 
 (3841.) Because these men are apathetic and decline to 
 organise for their own benefit I would ask Parliament to inter- 
 fere and act for them. I would have no hesitation, because 
 our experience has shown, and our employers agree with us, 
 in saying that it has done no injury to the trade. Our 
 experience has shown that it would be a good thing for these 
 men. 
 
 (3842.) As to our experience having shown that it is a 
 good for us, but not shown necessarily that it is a good thing 
 for any other district, if the district is similarly situated I 
 do not see why it should not. 
 
 (3846.) Before we come to any decision upon a question 
 so important as this, it is essential that we should examine 
 into the economical conditions of one district as compared 
 with another, I am looking at the conditions under which coal 
 is got there. It is got from seams that can be easier worked 
 than those in Fife in most instances ; that to my mind is a 
 sufficiently broad fact upon which to found an opinion that 
 an eight hours' day could be worked with as great economic 
 advantages in that locality as in Fife. 
 
 (3849.) As to my belief from a consideration of the 
 position of the coal seams and their thickness in the west
 
 87 
 
 of Scotland that an eight hours' day could be as successfully 
 worked there as it is in Fife, the reason it comes about that 
 it has not been adopted is as I have told you, from, the 
 opposition of the masters and the want of organisation and 
 want of energy among the men. 
 
 (3855.) I have stated that by Trades Union effort we won 
 20 years ago, and have maintained practically eight hours in 
 Fife. 
 
 (3856-7.) During that 20 years the coal trade has fluctuated 
 very much in Scotland as elsewhere, and reductions of wages 
 have taken place repeatedly with a view to adjusting the 
 wages to the prices and the condition of trade very frequently. 
 
 (3858.) During all the vicissitudes of trade, and at times 
 when the difficulties were greatest, we, surrounded by a com- 
 paratively disorganized district, entering the same markets 
 with comparatively disorganised men, have maintained the 
 advantage that we won at that time by Union effort ; but I 
 might be allowed to point out that apart altogether from 
 Union effort, we are of opinion that the employers are quite 
 convinced that their position would not be improved in the 
 least by compelling us even under the most adverse circum- 
 stances, to go back to the longer hours. I have heard them 
 state myself, at least some of them, that they had no desire 
 to ask the men to go back from the eight hours to the longer 
 hours, and as a matter of fact it is clearly demonstrated by our 
 experience that the eight hours' system, both for employer 
 and employed, has been a complete success economically. 
 
 (3859.) We have succeeded by persisting in working the 
 eight hours, and they from experience have come round to 
 our view. 
 
 (3860.) As to whether that does not tell, so far as it goes, 
 very strongly in favour of organisation as a method of obtain- 
 ing an object [of that kind, undoubtedly it goes a long way
 
 88 
 
 to say that it can be obtained if you have a certain class of - 
 men to deal with by organisation. 
 
 (3863.) As to leaving the working men to have a say as 
 to whether they would veto or object to an Eight Hours Act, 
 it has never entered into my mind to limit that option to 
 anything less than trade, because take it as between district 
 and district it might have a very serious effect on some dis- 
 tricts as against others. 
 
 (3865-6.) The trade which would have to exercise an option 
 upon the passing of such a measure would be the coal trade 
 of the United Kingdom, not Fife and Kinross by itself, or 
 Lanarkshire by itself, or Northumberland or Durham by 
 itself. 
 
 (3867.) It would be the coal trade of the United Kingdom 
 that would, in my opinion, be justified in declaring whether 
 the Act was to become operative in respect of that trade 
 that is my view. 
 
 (3907.) In answer to a question by Mr. Burt, I said that if 
 Parliament gave the majority of the men in a trade the 
 right to fix the hours of labour, I would make the whole 
 trade and not the district the unit. 
 
 (3908-11.) I said that otherwise different districts might 
 adopt different hours of labour, and so one district might be 
 placed at a disadvantage as compared with another. That 
 is possible ; but one district at present is at a disadvantage 
 as compared with another in so far as they work different 
 hours. 
 
 (3913-4.) I really do not think it would be a great hard- 
 ship now to alter the balance of advantage and disadvantage. 
 I do not know how it might affect the north of England. 
 
 (3915.) I cannot see how it would operate by throwing 
 men out of employment. My notion is the opposite way.
 
 89 
 
 (3917.) [When you replied that if different districts were 
 allowed to fix their hours differently, one district might 
 be placed at a disadvantage as compared with another, 
 you implied that the difference of hours might constitute 
 an advantage or a disadvantage. Now that difference 
 exists at present. Therefore, at present one district, 
 according to your view, must in that respect be at an 
 advantage as compared with another district?] Well, 
 that is so to a certain extent, although I believe there are 
 other countervailing advantages. For example, the West of 
 Scotland works long hours, and we work eight hours, yet the 
 employers in our district always complain that they are 
 handicapped with the long hours in the west. We reply to 
 that by saying, you have a steadier class of men ; they work 
 with more energy and more constantly than they possibly 
 would do if longer hours prevailed ; consequently from the 
 steadiness of your service you are able to recoup yourselves 
 for any disadvantages you may experience in connection with 
 the districts that work longer hours. 
 
 (3918-9,) [Let us grant that to be the case, still that ad- 
 vantage would continue in Fife, supposing an eight hours 
 day were established, and the result would be to place the 
 west at a disadvantage as compared with Fife ?] I do not 
 think so. It would create a steadiness and energy among 
 the men there. 
 
 (3920.) [How long would that take to bring about ?] 
 Well, it would not commence at once, I suppose, but it 
 would take less time than 20 years, I am sure. 
 
 (3922-3.) I think that there are other trades in which it 
 would be desirable that the men should not work more than 
 eight hours. I am quite frank to admit that ; my opinion is 
 this. In all the trades where it has been shown by experience 
 and where there is a desire on the part of the men that an 
 eight hours day should and can be worked, my opinion is
 
 90 
 
 that Parliament should interfere and settle the number of 
 hours for those trades. That is my view. 
 
 (3924 5.) [Now supposing the effect of an eight hours day 
 was to raise the price of coal who would be the sufferers from 
 that rise in the price of coal ?] I expect that those who con- 
 sumed the coal must pay the price and therefore the loss 
 would be the loss of those who consumed the coal if there is 
 a loss in it. 
 
 (3926.) [And the gainers would be the trade in question ; 
 in this case the mining trade. If an eight hours day for 
 miners was established the mining trade would gain at the 
 expense of the community generally, or rather at the 
 expense of the consumers of coal ?] Well, that is clearly 
 hypothetical. 
 
 (3927.) [I am asking whether that is your view ?] It is 
 not my view. I have always found that when the price of 
 coal was high there was a gain all round. I do not know 
 where the money came from, but it did not come out of the 
 pockets of the general public as a whole, because the general 
 prosperity of the country was such that prices of other things 
 went up as well, and recouped the buyer of coal. 
 
 (3928-9.) [In that case the high price of coal is a sign,' not 
 the cause of prosperity ?] It always has been. I think the 
 danger is very infinitesimal of raising the price of coal 
 through the eight hours day. 
 
 (3931-2.) [Suppose the effect of a uniform eight hours day 
 for miners was to obtain a gain for this particular trade at 
 the expense of the community, do you think Parliament 
 would be justified in interfering on behalf of any one trade 
 in that way ?] If it is for the safety and for the health of 
 those that are employed in that particular trade, I say 
 certainly. The grounds upon which I really base this
 
 91 
 
 demand for legislative interference are the grounds of the 
 health and safety of the miners. 
 
 (3933.) Mining in respect of danger and unhealthiness, is 
 not different from all others ; there mayj be some trades as 
 dangerous and as unhealthy, but whenever that exists I con- 
 sider there should be a limit of the working hours to the 
 lowest possible. 
 
 (3934.) [Before you can differentiate one trade from 
 another in respect to the way in which it is treated by 
 Parliament you have to show or ought to be able to show 
 that that trade differs very markedly from other trades with 
 which no such interference is proposed ?] I do not suppose 
 that it would be necessary to show that in every case. If it 
 was shown that economically the trade could stand to be 
 reduced in hours apart from the considerations of health and 
 safety altogether, then it might be quite legitimate on the 
 part of a trade to ask Parliament to interfere. 
 
 (3935-7.) [I thought a minute ago you acknowledged to 
 me that the only grounds upon which Parliament could be 
 expected to treat one trade differently from another were 
 the grounds of danger and unhealthiness ?] That is in 
 cases of urgency. I put it on the ground of urgency. 
 Wherever you find a trade in such circumstances as I have 
 described it is urgent that it should be dealt with. On the 
 other hand another trade could come forward and ask 
 Parliament to interfere to regulate their hours if they were 
 of opinion that economically their trade could stand such 
 interference. I may frankly confess that eight hours is quite 
 sufficient for anyone to work. 
 
 (3938.) I am inclined to the view that Parliament should 
 be asked to establish an eight hours day for other trades 
 than mining, if those trades want it. 

 
 92 
 
 (3939 41.) Besides danger and unhealthiness there is the 
 consideration that the work of mining is laborious. That is 
 one of the grounds upon which I say that the miner should 
 not work any longer than eight hours. He is not able to 
 work much longer. . ^, o - ; 
 
 Mr. DAVID MORGAN (29th October, 1891). 
 (3942.) Agent for the Aberdare and Merthyr Miners' 
 Association. 
 
 (3943.) I appear to give evidence on behalf of that body. 
 
 The hewers would be from bank to bank something 
 like 9^ hours to 10 hours. 
 
 (3969.) And the surface men's hours are something similar. 
 Then with reference to the remedy for that, as I have stated 
 before, the men are most unanimous in reducing the hours 
 of labour to eight hours per day of operation, something 
 similar to what we are working the nine hours a day now, or 
 54 hours a week ; and they wish to have that by legislation. 
 Our argument in favour of legislation is that we believe the 
 object of legislation at all times is to protect the weak against 
 the strong, and our experience, in reference to contending 
 with the capitalist, is that we are to weak too maintain our 
 position. We are not in favour of eight hours from bank to 
 bank, because eight hours from bank to bank means in the 
 great majority almost universally that the actual working 
 of coal hewers would not be more, on an average, than about 
 6 hours. Therefore we take it that we cannot ask for that ; 
 we believe that the state of the country does not permit it 
 at present. 
 
 (3975.) I would seek an eight hours of winding coal, or 
 eight hours of operation in the colliery. 
 
 (4012.) As to whether the views of our Union agree
 
 93 
 
 generally with the views of the other unions in South Wales, 
 with the exception of this question of eight hours, I think we 
 we do agree, but we differ upon that point. We say eight 
 hours of operation, and to get that by legislation, but the 
 others, as I understand them, go in for eight hours from bank 
 to bank, which means a vast difference. 
 
 (4028-9.) The Union does not endeavour to prevent men 
 staying one or two hours longer in the mine than the normal 
 time. We persuade them not to do as much as we can, but 
 we do not apply any compulsion. 
 
 (4034.) The men are almost unanimous in their wish to 
 reduce the hours of labour to eight and by legislation. 
 
 (4043-5.) We say that they desire this change by legisla- 
 tion because they would be too weak to maintain their position 
 that although they might gain the eight hours in good 
 times, they would be too weak to maintain that position in 
 bad times. I lay down the general principle that it is 
 the duty of Parliament to protect the weak, and that there- 
 fore it should interfere on behalf of the miners in this case. 
 
 (4050.; If the men turn tyrants on the employers, then I 
 would say protect the employers. 
 
 (4051-2.) [Then it comes to this, does it not, that in all 
 disputes between employers and men, Parliament is to inter- 
 fere and regulate the business ?] I would not go so far as 
 that, but, in reference to the hours of labour, I say that 
 Parliament should intervene. I would not go so far as to 
 say that Parliament should interfere in the wages question. 
 
 (4053.) I should not like to see Parliament interfere in 
 the question of wages, because I believe that might bring 
 about the result of destroying competition altogether, and 
 hence it would be detrimental to this country, in my opinion.
 
 94 
 
 (4054.) I think if Parliament were to interfere with wages 
 it might have the effect of dislocating trade. 
 
 (4055-6.) I do not think it possible that trade might be 
 dislocated by an interference with the hours, because, as I 
 understand, our Continental friends go in for eight hours as 
 well as ourselves, and if they go in for eight hours we can 
 easily compete with them in any part of the world. 
 
 (4057.) I would not be an advocate of an eight hours' 
 legislative day in this country unless there was a simultaneous 
 legislative eight hours' day in foreign countries. 
 
 (4058.) There are not laws to that effect already in foreign 
 countries at the present time, but they are going in for it. 
 
 (4059.) I believe if this country were to go in for it, other 
 countries would follow. 
 
 (4062.) I, and those whom I represent, would be in favour 
 of introducing this change into England before it is intro- 
 duced into foreign countries, in order to be an example to 
 others, and I believe that others would follow. 
 
 (4063-4.) I believe it would be injurious to us afterwards if 
 they did not follow. If they did not follow, we should have 
 to return to the present system, it might be. 
 
 (4065.) My measure of what the Legislature ought to do 
 is simply the requirements of our own particular district. 
 
 (4066.) I do not go in for what the miners in general 
 advocate an eight hours' day from bank to bank. 
 
 (4067.) That would not do in our district, and, therefore, 
 looking to the wants of our district, I propose that Parliament 
 should pass a Bill providing for an eight hours' working day 
 for the whole of the country. 
 
 (4069.) I think Parliament ought to determine the number 
 of hours according to the needs of the Merthyr and Aberdare
 
 95 
 
 Valleys, and that would be applicable to the other districts, 
 in my opinion. 
 
 (4070.) It may be possible that the other districts do not 
 think so. 
 
 (4088.) I would not allow any man, under any circum- 
 stances, to work more than eight hours if he desired it. 
 
 (4089.) I am referring to the underground mine. I would 
 have a general eight hours' Bill for miners. 
 
 (4110.) [What would be your scheme to prevent men 
 from remaining underground any length of time, as they are 
 able to do now?] I would put it that they must be at a 
 certain mark say the lamp station for eight hours. 
 
 (4111.) I presume that nine hours from bank to bank 
 would answer the purpose. 
 
 (4114.) All other districts in Monmouthshire and South 
 Wales are favourable to an eight hours Bill from bank to 
 bank. That is the representation, at any rate. 
 
 (4130.) As to whether I consider that the number of hours 
 a man works has anything to do with the amount of earnings 
 he should obtain, of course a man cannot produce as much 
 in seven hours as he could in nine. 
 
 (4131.) [Do you intend that the workmen shall earn the 
 same money, assuming that your wish is gratified, after 
 the hours are reduced to eight as they do now]. So far as 
 the piece-workers are concerned they would not do it, because 
 the less they could produce the less money would they receive. 
 But it might affect the day wagemen. But, in my opinion, 
 the reduction of hours by one hour would not have much 
 effect upon the Droduce, and therefore that would do away to 
 a great extent with the argument about reducing even the 
 day wagemen.
 
 
 (4132.) As to whether I would make it obligatory to work 
 regularly, and to work every day in the week, I do not say 
 that I would go so far as that. There is another thing. As 
 I have said, it would not be so necessary, because naturally 
 they would work more regularly themselves. 
 
 (4133.) [Then the employers are to be bound on the one 
 hand, and the men are to be free on the other is that it ?] 
 Yes. 
 
 (4178.) I do not wish to enforce the eight hours against 
 the wish of anybody, because, so far as my district is con- 
 cerned, they are almost unanimous. 
 
 (4179-80.) I have been willing to be governed by the 
 majority in any trade, the majority, say, in South Wales. 
 
 (4181-2.) Assuming that the Aberdare and the Khondda 
 Valley did not wish to have eight hours enforced upon them, 
 and the Merthyr and Khymney Valleys did, I would still 
 enforce it upon the Aberdare and Rhondda against their will, 
 if they were in a minority. 
 
 (4275.) If owing to the reduction of hours of working a 
 collier got less coal, he would have to receive less money. 
 
 (4276.) As to whether that would not increase the cost of 
 production by the general charges having to be divided over 
 fewer tons, it would to a slight extent, but not to a great 
 extent; because I believe that the production would be 
 much more regular than it is at present, and so compensate 
 the employers for the little extra cost of production. 
 
 (4277.) I do not admit for a moment that the production 
 would have been lessened taking a twelvemonth all round. 
 
 (4280.) The men are working more irregularly at present 
 than they would under the eight hours' system, and they
 
 97 
 
 would produce much more coal during the first days of the 
 week than what they are at present. 
 
 (4281.) As to whether it would not be necessary to make 
 it compulsory that they should work eight hours in that 
 case, I do not see that at all ; because there is a danger in 
 that ; using a weapon of that kind may prevent a man going 
 out when he is ill. 
 
 (4284.) Assuming that the amount produced were less, I 
 agree that the working cost per ton must be more. I will 
 admit that, assuming that it was the case, but I do not 
 admit it for a moment. 
 
 (4285.) [Out of whose pocket ought that to come ?] Out 
 of the pockets of the public 1 expect. 
 
 (4286.) If the coal-owners would not get as much as would 
 give them a remuneration, I daresay that they would soon 
 stop their collieries ; that is our experience at any rate. 
 
 (4287J [Do you not think it is a very serious thing to 
 stop a colliery which may cost from 100,000 to 200,000 ; 
 do you not think they would go on to the very end before 
 they stopped it ?] It is serious for the colliery owners, no 
 doubt, and equally so for the men. 
 
 (4288-9.) I believe that the employers can take a little less 
 remuneration than they get at present. I think that they 
 have so much profit that they can afford to have less. 
 
 (4290.) I do not say that that is so throughout the country, 
 but taking the great majority they can afford to have less 
 remuneral ion than they have at present. 
 
 (4326-7.) What I stated is this : that a collier or a coal 
 hewer would not produce as much coal in eight hours as he 
 would in nine hours. Take the production of a colliery all 
 round for a twelvemonth, under the eight hours' system they 
 
 H
 
 would produce as much coal as they do now because the 
 production would be ever so much more regular owing to the 
 fact that there is so much lost time at present, and then 
 there would not be as much lost time. Some would work 
 more than what they do at present. 
 
 Mr. ISAAC EVANS (17th November, 1891); 
 Agent of the Neath, Swansea, and Llanelly Miners' 
 Association. 
 
 (4400-1.) The hours of labour in our district are nine 
 hours per day as a rule for underground men from bank to 
 bank. 
 
 (4402.) Those are the recognised hours for all classes of 
 underground men. I do not mean to say by that that nine 
 hours are strictly enforced ; that is that some places do not 
 work less than nine hours, and some places from bank to 
 bank may not be above nine hours, but those are the 
 recognised hours of labour throughout our district. 
 
 (4403.) The hours of surface labour connected with the 
 colliery would vary a little ; some are ten hours and others 
 are ten hours and a half. 
 
 (4414.) We believe the hours at present are too long, and we 
 should like to see the hours reduced. We believe that 
 eight hours from bank to bank wonld be sufficient, par- 
 ticularly in our district, for any person to be underground. 
 We believe conscientiously that eight hours from bank to 
 bank in our district would be sufficient for any man to be 
 underground. Without saying anything as to the impure 
 atmosphere or anything of that, we believe that it would 
 be beneficial to the workmen at large if the hours were 
 reduced. 
 
 (4417.) Our Association wish to limit the hours by 
 legislation.
 
 99 
 
 (4513.) We had a conference with the employers in 1890, 
 I think, or in 1889, in South Wales, where we then asked 
 the employers to admit the principle of eight hours, but 
 the employers did not see their way clear. After that we 
 had a general conference with the employers, with the repre- 
 sentatives of the Miners' Association of Great Britain, and 
 with the miners' representatives of South Wales, and we met 
 there in London on two occasions, but we failed to bring 
 about any sort of arrangement between ourselves, although 
 we believed then as we believe now that eight hours from 
 bank to bank would be a sufficient number of hours for any 
 person to work underground. Having failed in that direction, 
 we think now there is nothing left but to appeal to the 
 Legislature. 
 
 4519-21.) [Supposing that the workmen of South Wales 
 were unanimously of the opinion that eight hours was long 
 enough to work from bank to bank, could they not enforce 
 that opinion by a general strike ? It is possible we could 
 do it, but I should be very sorry to test our strength in that 
 direction. It would bring the whole thing to a dead-lock. 
 
 (4522-3.) In the present condition of South W T ales I think 
 it is better that Legislature should enforce that without 
 coming to the extreme point of war. 
 
 (4582-3.) I referred to the hours of working. I say they 
 are nine hours from bank to bank, that is the recognised 
 rule, and I think they should be eight. 
 
 (4594-5.) [If a man has a hard place which would take 
 him 8^ hours to do his day's work in, you would not allow 
 that one man to stop in the half hour extra to make his 
 wages up equal to the other man's ?] Certainly not. Not 
 over eight hours. 
 
 (4596.) 1 do not think there is a danger if you ask Parlia- 
 .ment to deal with the hours that the employers will ask
 
 100 
 
 Parliament to deal with the wages. I think ther.e is no 
 necessity for going to Parliament to regulate wages. 
 
 (4752.) [ Assuming there is plenty of work, is it part of 
 your scheme that 48 hours per week shall be worked by each 
 man, assuming eight hours per day is carried out ?] Not 48 
 hours of actual labour, because it would not be more than 
 eight hours from bank to bank. What we say is eight hours 
 from bank to bank, and not 48 hours' actual labour. 
 
 (4757-8.) I would expect them to agree to the eight hours,, 
 because I do not see for my own part how it would increase 
 the cost of production. As a practical man, I say that as 
 my deliberate opinion. 
 
 (4766.) [If the colliery owners could prove that the cost of 
 production would be greatly increased by reducing the number 
 of hours you would not insist upon it ? ] I would insist 
 upon it. What I say is this, that I would insist upon eight 
 hours being adopted all through the coal-fields of Great 
 Britain. 
 
 (4767.) Whether a section of the workmen or a large section 
 of the workmen liked it or not, I would enforce it. 
 
 (4772.) [And, regardless of the consequences, you think eight 
 hours must be the time which pitmen in the future must 
 work ? ] I believe so. 
 
 (4881.) I believe that an eight hours day is essential for 
 the miner, because I believe that eight hours is sufficient for 
 any man to be underground for one shift. 
 
 (4882.) [Do you mean that if he is underground for more 
 than eight hours it seriously injures his health ? ] I should 
 say that it does, more or less. 
 
 (4886-99.) I consider the dangers to miners would be very 
 materially diminished by reducing the hours from nine to-
 
 101 
 
 eight. I consider that the increase of safety secured by a 
 legal eight hours day would be so great as to justify our 
 coming and asking Parliament to interfere on our behalf in 
 & way in which I would not propose to interfere with any 
 other industry. I do not think it would be the cause of 
 closing collieries. I would insist upon legislation, whether 
 the economical effect was disastrous or not. 
 
 16. Mr. ALFRED ONIONS : Secretary of the South 
 Wales and Monmouthshire Miners' Federation. 
 
 (4979.) In regard to the reduction of the hours of labour, 
 I would have it by legislation. I think that eight hours from 
 bank to bank is a sufficient length of time for a person to be 
 employed below the groun 1. 
 
 (4980.) In the first place I am of the opinion that it would 
 be beneficial to the health both moral and physical of the 
 men employed underground, and I have also reason to believe 
 that in those districts where the greatest number of hours 
 are worked .per day the largest number of accidents take 
 place, from falls of roof and sides more particularly. 
 
 (4981.) I think that when it can be proved that the miner's 
 life is in any degree endangered, or his limbs endangered, 
 legislation should step in and say that that shall not be so, 
 as it has done on previous occasions. 
 
 (4982-3.) [You think it could be shown to Parliament that 
 the difference between a miner being underground nine 
 hours, and being underground eight hours, would so diminish 
 accidents or illness, as the result of protracted underground 
 labour, as to justify that?] I think it would as regards 
 accidents. It is chiefly upon those grounds the grounds of 
 safety that I would ask Parliament to step in and reduce the 
 hours of labour by Act of Parliament.
 
 102 
 
 (5002.) It is my opinion that it would improve the social 
 and moral condition of the men to have their hours reduced, 
 that it would give them more chance to improve themselves, 
 and they would be less hours in an atmosphere which is 
 calculated to damage their health, and they would have an 
 opportunity also of improving themselves mentally and 
 morally. 
 
 (5010-11.) I mean that in those districts where the long 
 hours are in operation, there are more accidents caused by 
 falls of roof and sides than in those districts where the short 
 hours are in operation. 
 
 (5012.) I am taking the hours as a whole. I did not pick 
 out any particular hour in the day. I am talking of them as 
 a whole, and I deduce this from it. that it is the long hours 
 which must be conducive to the greater number of accidents. 
 
 (5018.) [Now your view was that if safety was in any 
 degree endangered by the longer hours, those hours should 
 be reduced ; but if on that ground you are to reduce the 
 hours from nine to eight, would not the same argument be 
 good for a reduction from eight to seven?] Oh, certainly; 
 if it could be proved that by reducing the hours it would be 
 conducive to the well-being in general of the community and 
 to the miner. 
 
 (5019-20.) [If you were to reduce the hours to zero, clearly 
 there would be no accidents ?] Certainly not, it must be a 
 question of degree. If we carry it out to its logical issue, 
 we should say of course that there would be no accidents 
 at all if there were no men employed in the mines; but 
 my contention is a comparative one. I compare it with 
 other districts, and therefore I say this, that if collieries can 
 be carried on in one district with these short hours, and if it 
 can be proved that they have less accidents than in those 
 districts where the long hours are in operation, then I think 
 the law should step in and give the short hours all round.
 
 103 
 
 (5021-2.) [I understand your contention to be this : that 
 if the hours were reduced from nine to eight there would be 
 a very material and marked diminution in the number of 
 accidents ?] I suppose there would be a reduction. I would 
 not qualify it by saying a very material or a very marked 
 reduction, but I would say that there would be a reduction 
 in the number of accidents. 
 
 (5034.) I cannot see any reason why the cost of produc- 
 tion should be increased, or even the productive power of 
 the mine reduced by a reduction in the hours of labour, 
 and I base that upon the fact that in those districts where 
 the short hours are worked the greatest production per man 
 is in vogue. 
 
 (5035-6.) It is my experience that a man who works nine 
 hours underground is in a more exhausted state mentally 
 and physically than a man who only works eight, and he is 
 better able to take the several precautions against accidents 
 if he only works eight hours. I would naturally infer that 
 from the statistics. 
 
 (5037.) Nine hours underground and not from bank to 
 bank ; generally speaking these are the recognised hours 
 with us. 
 
 (5039.) [Would half an hour cover the going up and 
 down in your district ? ] In some collieries it would not 
 take that much, in others it would take more ; I take it as 
 an average. 
 
 (5041.) The wages of the hewer depend upon the amount 
 of coal he cuts. 
 
 (5042-3.) I believe that the hewers in South Wales and 
 Monmouthshire and I speak more particularly of the steam 
 coal miners now could do their work in a shorter number 
 of hours than they do at present, and if the employer would
 
 104 
 
 provide them with the necessary trams to fill the coal, that 
 their wages would not be reduced. There is no reason why | 
 the production per man should not increase. 
 
 (5045.) If the man does not produce so much coal he 
 must have a reduction in the price of his labour unless his 
 cutting price is increased. 
 
 (5057A-8.) I believe it would be hopeless in our district to 
 get a reduction of hours by arrangement. As I have said 
 before, it would be impossible to have a continuation in my 
 opinion, and a uniform system of hours unless legislation 
 does step in. I think that legislation is preferable to the 
 misery and loss of a strike. 
 
 (5098-100.) The principal reason I want the eight hours is 
 that I think it would conduce to the welfare of the men. 
 That is my case, I have not yet got out the statistics as to 
 whether the occupation was more unhealthy than others or 
 not. That is my opinion. 
 
 (5101-2.) [I want to ask you this. If a man were bound 
 to come out and be at the top or on the surface of the ground 
 in eight hours, do you think it might conduce to his trying 
 to get his coal out without putting timber up properly ?] I 
 do not, because I believe that, so far as my district is con- 
 cerned, generally speaking and as I have said before, I refer 
 more particularly to the steam coal that, he would have 
 time to do his work, and do it well, and do it with safety. 
 
 (5103.) [Do not you think the fear would be that he would 
 be in a great hurry and think, " Now the roof will stop up 
 "a little bit longer; Tarn bound to be out in 10 minutes, 
 " and therefore I will run the risk " ?] A man with foresight 
 and practical experience would not be led into a trap of that 
 kind.
 
 (18th November, 1891) : 
 
 (5126,) [Could you tell the Commission what number of 
 men of those whom you represent have testified to this eight 
 hours ?] I say I represent directly the 8,000, indirectly the 
 15,000 to 16,000. 
 
 (5129.) There was a mass meeting at Ebbw Vale in 1889 
 when there were from 8,000 to 10,000 people present and 
 there was not a dissentient voice or hand. 
 
 (5159-61.) My belief is that collieries working on shorter 
 hours, everything else being equal, there is less risk of 
 accidents. My table supports that there are fewer accidents 
 in the short-hour district generally than in the long-hour 
 
 district. 
 
 (5232.) If a man knew when he was going down the mine 
 that he was coming out at the end of eight hours, or would 
 be on the bank again in eight hours, he would go more freely 
 to his work than he does at the present time, and I believe 
 he would come out of the work less physically exhausted than 
 at the present time. 
 
 (5233.) I do not say that he would work harder. I have 
 not admitted that yet ; and that he would be both in a 
 physical and mental condition to enjoy social intercourse and 
 improve himself mentally and morally. I believe, taking all 
 these things into consideration, that the men under the eight 
 hours system from bank to bank would attend to their work 
 much more regularly than they do at present. 
 
 (5237-8.) [Is it your opinion that if the hours from bank to 
 bank were reduced to eight, the men in your district would 
 work forty-eight hours per week ?] Am I in giving an answer 
 to that question to understand it to mean this : would the 
 men be willing to work under a law which would compel 
 them to work forty-eight hours per week and nothing less ?
 
 106 
 
 If you ask that question, I say no ; they would not be tied 
 down by Act of Parliament to work forty-eight hours per 
 week and nothing less. 
 
 (5239-43.) In my opinion, if there was an Act of Parlia- 
 ment passed limiting the hours of labour to eight, hours from 
 bank to bank, and that was the system adopted in the 
 district, the men would on the whole loyally abide by it ; 
 and as I have already said, they would more faithfully carry 
 out that system than they do the nine hours or the 9^ 
 hours; that is my opinion. I think they are the best judges 
 as to whether it is necessary to work 48 hours per week. 
 
 (5244.) [Then they are to be the sole judges, the owners 
 are to be bound on the one hand not to carry on their 
 operations beyond eight hours per day ; but there is no 
 obligation on the men on the other hand to go to the colliery 
 at all ?] In that respect it would not alter the position 
 of the owners from what it is at the present time. 
 
 (5251.) [Assuming that you could be satisfied that it 
 would increase the cost, would you recommend the men in 
 your district to insist upon an eight hours shift ?] I would 
 advise them to go in for the eight hours shift. 
 
 (5252.) [Eegardless of the effect ?] Kegardless of the cost. 
 I think that life is before cost, and the commodity must be 
 raised to meet that in order to increase the safety of the mine 
 and be conducive to the welfare of the miners as a whole. 
 
 MR. WILLIAM EVANS, recalled 
 
 (5612-4.) I think the collieries in the Aberdare Valley are 
 similar to the collieries in the Ehondda Valley ; working the 
 same seams, and practically under the same conditions. 
 
 (5615.) [And would you suggest that the thousands of 
 colliers in the Aberdare and Merthyr Valleys, who would be
 
 107 
 
 content with nine hours from bank to bank, should be forced 
 to comply with eight hours from bank to bank because the 
 Ehondda Valley collieries require that ?] Yes, if the majority 
 of the workmen say so, and certainly they think it would be 
 to their interests from all points of view. 
 
 (5616.) [Do you say that the majority of the workmen 
 in the district, or the majority of the workmen in the king- 
 dom, should decide this ?] Well, in South Wales especially ; 
 I believe in Home Kule. 
 
 (5617.) [Then suppose South Wales went in for it, and 
 Monmouthshire did not, would you leave Monmouthshire 
 alone, and say that South Wales alone should have the eight 
 hours ?] I have not studied it to that effect, but, as I have 
 said before, we have held meetings, and the vast majority of 
 our men are of opinion it is a unanimous opinion that 
 eight hours' work would be of great benefit. 
 
 (5618.) [Have you considered the effect upon the cost of 
 working a colliery that the reduction of the number of hours 
 would have ?] No, I am not in a position to know that. 
 
 (5619.) [Would you still persist in it if the cost was such 
 as to entail the closing of a number of collieries ?] Yes. 
 
 (5620.) [And throw men out of employment ?] I do not 
 think it will entail the closing of collieries. 
 
 (5621.) [I am asking you to assume that it would for a 
 moment ; would you still insist upon it ?] Yes, but I am far 
 from believing that it would. 
 
 MR. LANGFOED RID SD ALE 
 
 (5732.) I appear here as the representative of the Coal 
 Owners' Association of the Tamworth district. 
 
 (5733.) I am a mining engineer and coal-owner.
 
 108 
 
 (5776.) [Have the men approached you with a view tc 
 obtaining an eight-hour day from bank to bank ?] No. 
 
 (57V 7.) [Are they in favour of an eight-hour day from bank 
 to bank, in your district ?] To some extent, but not verj; 
 largely, I believe. I think it is fair to say that on the whok; 
 they are satisfied with the times as they now stand. 
 
 Mr. ENOCH REES, on behalf of the members o: 
 the Anthracite Miners' Association (19th November 
 1891) : 
 
 (5786.) With reference to the eight hours working 
 day which it is intended by the intervention of State t(; 
 secure for miners, we, as a district, are in favour of a systenc 
 of eight hours from bank to bank, as we consider that is' 
 quite sufficient for men who toil hard underground. 
 
 (5797.) As a rule the workmen earn more money now witt 
 short hours than they did when working 10 and 11 and 12; 
 hours. 
 
 (5798.) The rate of wages per ton has not increased since 
 that arrangement was made. 
 
 Mr. GEORGE CALDWELL : 
 
 (5800-3.) I am a director of the Moss Hall Coal Company 
 Limited, and of two other companies, also ex-president o: 
 the South Lancashire and Cheshire Coal Association. 
 
 (5804-5.) The Moss Hall Collieries are situated at Plat- 
 Bridge, near Wigan, in the West Lancashire district, and tb< 
 other collieries are situated also near Wigan. 
 
 (5838.) [What are the hours of underground men, particu- 
 larly hewers, in West Lancashire r ] Eight, nine, and ten 
 any collier is at liberty to come up most of the pits ii 
 West Lancashire any time after 2 o'clock.
 
 109 
 
 (5840.) These enumerated hours eight, nine, and ten per 
 lay represent from bank to bank. 
 
 (5841.) It means this : colliers are allowed to come up any 
 ime after 2 o'clock ; some of them come up at 2, some at 3, 
 some at 4 ; therefore it is entirely optional to them after 
 2 o'clock whether they stop down longer or not. 
 
 (5842.) Auy man can come up after 2 o'clock if he thinks 
 >roper. 
 
 (5843-44.) So that those who went down shortly after 5 
 would be down in that case nine hours. But if they did not 
 50 down till nearly 6, they would be only down eight hours. 
 
 (5845.) They are expected all to be down at 6 o'clock ; the 
 Colliery is expected to begin winding coal at 6 o'clock. 
 
 (5886.) There are a considerable number of men who are 
 rilling to work nine or ten hours when they are not com 
 jelled to work more than eight hours. 
 
 (5887.) I think the majority of them are in favour of the 
 eight hours movement, but there are a great many who do 
 not favour it at all, and many who are in favour of it would 
 aot be in favour of it, I think, by legislation. 
 
 (5894.) I think it would in fact it must undoubtedly 
 lessen the output very considerably, because it would only 
 mean about 6^ hours winding, and in that time we could 
 not raise the coal with the present machinery, and it would 
 aot be safe to put larger machinery at greater speeds than 
 is now employed for that purpose. The speeds are very 
 ^uick indeed, and the engines are very large and can produce 
 great quantities out of each pit ; as the pits are becoming 
 BO much deeper it is a matter of necessity that you should 
 [pull up coal in large quantities because you have to go 
 [over a so much larger area from each pit. 
 
 (5895.) It is a question of winding.
 
 110 
 
 (5896-7-8.) [What are the hours of winding at present ? ] 
 From 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. That is just eight hours, and that is 
 actual coal winding. 
 
 (5900.) . Those hours would have to be reduced supposing 
 we had a legal eight hours day from bank to bank to six 
 and a half practically, or six or seven. 
 
 (5901.) I do not think we could make up the defi- 
 ciency by improvements in the winding apparatus. 
 
 (5902-3.) [Would an eight hours day materially increase the 
 cost of production ? ] Very materially, and in times of 
 depression its introduction would probably lead to the closing 
 of a good many collieries. 
 
 (5905.) It might increase the regularity of attendance; 
 but my experience of colliers is that they like a day or two a 
 week under any circumstances. 
 
 (5906.) During times of depression they still have their 
 holidays, as you will see by one of the statements I put in, 
 because even in the very worst periods there was 9 per cent. 
 and 10 percent, of absentees when the wages were at their 
 lowest. 
 
 (5907.) [Have your men ever approached you with the view 
 of obtaining an eight hours day?] They are frequently 
 talking about it, but we have had no regular organised demand. 
 
 (5934.) We have heard of it in the papers and so on, and 
 the men have been continually talking about it ; but we have 
 had no special demand that I am aware of. 
 
 (6044.) As a rule in West Lancashire the hewers at any 
 rate are not bound to be down more than eight hours. 
 
 (6046.) I have lived among the colliers all my life, and I 
 do not consider that the hours now worked in West Lanca-
 
 Ill 
 
 shire conduce to accidents in the mines by reason of their 
 length. 
 
 (6047.) [Do you consider that the men suffer in their 
 health from the length of hours which are in vogue in West 
 Lancashire ?] I think they are as healthy a class of men 
 as any other, and as a matter of fact I think the statistics go 
 to prove that. If I remember rightly, they rank next to 
 the agricultural labourers, either before or after I think 
 they come after parsons, if I remember rightly. 
 
 (6048.) [Then you would say, making the comparison, 
 that they are not less healthy than other persons in the 
 neighbourhood ?] No, as a matter of fact they are not 
 exposed to all the vicissitudes of the climate that we have 
 when we are above ground ; they are better off a vast deal 
 than a navvy who is liable to the tempests we have had all 
 through this summer ; they have more equal temperature 
 and all that, 
 
 (6049.) [I think you said that if the men did work 48 
 hours per week, speaking of the hewers, it would be a gain 
 in hours ?] No doubt. 
 
 (6050.) [But in order to bring that about would it or 
 not be necessary to make it compulsory that the men should 
 work eight hours a day and six days to the week ?] I am 
 sure it would if they are to make eight hours. 
 
 Mr. GEORGE WATSON MACALPINE : 
 
 (6110.) I am sole proprietor of the Altham Colliery, which 
 is situate at Altham, near Accrington, in the North Lanca- 
 shire district. 
 
 (6177.) The views of our Association on the question of 
 limiting the hours of underground men to eight are not very 
 favourable.
 
 112 
 
 (6178.) The principal difficulty is the limitation of tl 
 hours of winding coal. 
 
 (6179.) To limit the hours of hewers to eight from bar 
 to bank would in my opinion shorten considerably the hou 
 of coal drawing. 
 
 (6225.) [What would be the effect on the output of 
 reduction of the hours of work to eight hours a day ?] ] 
 our district I think it would undoubtedly reduce the outpu 
 
 (6226.) [Can you form any estimate of what thereductic 
 would be, what percentage of the present output ?] Eigl 
 and three-quarters is the number of hours worked, an 
 probably if we reduce the output in the same proportion fro] 
 eight and three-quarters to eight we should get at th 
 alteration of the output ; it would be in proportion to tt 
 reduction of hours. 
 
 (6227-9.) I think it would be pretty nearly in the sam 
 proportion as the reduction in time from bank to bank. ] 
 would increase the cost of production somewhat. 
 
 (6230.) [So materially as to close a certain number ( 
 collieries in times of depression ?] I think perhaps no 
 Collieries are not so easily closed in our district. 
 
 (6231.) [Does that mean that at present you are earnin 
 a sufficient margin of profit to enable you to stand the los 
 which an alteration of ^ that kind would cause ?] That i 
 rather a difficult question to answer. The margin of profi 
 is not sufficient. 
 
 (6232.) It would reduce the margin of profit to a ver 
 trifling thing at most collieries. 
 
 (6233.) [Have the men ever asked you to reduce th 
 hours of work to eight ?] Not specifically, not definitely a 
 our colliery. We know that they are in favour of eigh 
 hours provided it is generally conceded.
 
 113 
 
 (6234.) [Their attitude is merely that they are willing 
 :o go with the majority of miners in the country, but they 
 have no very special grievance of their own in the number of 
 hours now worked ?] That is not exactly what I meant to 
 indicate. What I mean to indicate is that they would 
 willingly have the eight hours, but they would not have the 
 Mght hours, as far as I understand their views, while other 
 jollieries in the country are working nine, 
 
 (6269). [I think I understood you to say, that no organised 
 )r united application had been made by the workmen in 
 N"orth Lancashire for eight hours ?] That is so. I think I 
 im right in stating that I have no recollection of having 
 oeen applied to on the eight hours question. 
 
 (6293.) There are very thin seams in North Lancashire. 
 
 (6294.) We do not find that the present hours of labour 
 ire detrimental to the health of the men. 
 
 (6295.) We would not think it right at all, speaking as a 
 natter of principle, to regulate the hours of adult male 
 iabour. 
 
 (6296.) I said, I consider the output would be reduced if 
 bhe hours were also reduced to eight. 
 
 (6297.) [That being so, would the men earn the same 
 stages ?] I think not. 
 
 (6299.) [If that were the case, do you think the men 
 would be in favour of being limited to eight hours ?] If 
 you are speaking of their present views I suspect they are. 
 Whether they might change them when they get the eight 
 hours is another question. 
 
 (6300.) I do not know whether the men imagine their 
 seages would be reduced by the hours being reduced. 
 
 (6357.) [Your hours are eight and three-quarters ?] That 
 is so ; the average hours from bank to bank.
 
 114 
 
 (6358.) [If they were reduced to eight from bank to bank,, 
 the hours of labour at the face would be reduced by more in 
 proportion ?] That is so, because the travelling to and fro 
 would be a constant quantity practically. 
 
 (6359.) [And you are inclined to think that would greatly 
 raise the cost of production ?] It would, to some extent, 
 undoubtedly. 
 
 (6360.) It is quite impossible to estimate what the effect 
 of the changed conditions of labour would be. 
 
 (6361.) The actual amount paid to the person working at 
 the face for getting the coal would not be made greater 
 necessarily ; his earnings would depend upon the coal he 
 got. 
 
 (6362.) [And therefore the cost in that respect would not 
 be increased ?] No ; there are the permanent costs of the 
 colliery, however. 
 
 (6363.) And those would be applicable to seven and-a- 
 half hours instead of eight hours, or something of that 
 kind. 
 
 (6385.) [Now you said in answer to a question that you 
 opposed any interference with the hours of adult male 
 labour ?] That is so. 
 
 (6388.) [Are you opposed to restrictions on the right of 
 an adult male to work on Sunday ?] I think adult males 
 can be left to look after themselves. 
 
 (6392.) [You have expressed an opinion here that the 
 reduction of the hours of labour from eight-and-three- 
 quarters to eight would reduce the output ; is that opinion 
 based upon any statistics or information, or only upon general 
 ideas?] We can have no statistics of the effect of the 
 reduction.
 
 115 
 
 (6393.) [But have you heard of cases in which the reduc- 
 tion of the hours of labour has not diminished but actually 
 increased the output ?] I do not know of any cases. 
 
 "(6394.) [If the workman at the face of the coal hewed 
 as much coal with the reduced hours as he does now, the 
 cost of production would not be increased, would it?] 
 There is always the difficulty of winding ; that introduces a 
 limitation. 
 
 (639o.) [Would the increase in the cost of the product by 
 the difficulty of winding be appreciable ?] The out-put of 
 the colliery would be reduced. 
 
 (6396.) [No, the output would not be reduced if the man 
 at the face could hew as much coal in the seven-and-a-half 
 ^hours as he does now in eight ?] It does not matter how 
 much he hews if he cannot get it drawn and wound. 
 
 Mr. ARTHUR SOPWITH (8th December, 1891) : 
 
 (6418-9.) I am a mining engineer and I am vice-president 
 of the Cannock Chase Coal Owners' Association. 
 
 (6420.) I have been appointed by our Association to give 
 evidence on their behalf. 
 
 (6447.) [What are the hours of labour in the collieries in 
 the Cannock Chase district ?] About nine hours from bank 
 to bank, in some cases less. 
 
 (6448.) [Is it of the hewer that you are now speaking ?] 
 I am speaking of all classes in our district. 
 
 (6468-9.) I desire to offer some opinion on the effect of 
 the legislative limitation of the hours to eight in our district. 
 One of the principal questions is the fact that our collieries, 
 -being principally household collieries, the trade in summer 

 
 116 
 
 is always very slack/and very often during the mid-summer 
 we only work about three days a week. The result of an 
 eight hours day (which would reduce the drawing of the 
 collieries by one hour) would place us in this position, that 
 during the time of good trade, and when men and masters 
 have a chance of making money with the collieries, then in 
 the first place they would be limited in their capacity for 
 drawing, and also the men would not be able to make up the 
 loss of time in the summer that they have made up hitherto.. 
 They cannot do it by working harder, and consequently it 
 would be a loss both to capital and labour. I may say with 
 reference to this, that it is very certain that the limitations 
 of drawing, as far as regards winding, have reached the 
 very outside, and it is practically impossible to have double 
 shifts in our districts or to have any modification of them, 
 so that the loss in winter, which is completely lost trade,, 
 would be practically gone. 
 
 (6473.) [I see that it is stated in your answer that the- 
 men actually engaged in undercutting or holding,coal do not 
 work more than six hours ?] That is so. What I mean 
 by that is that a man actually engaged in undercutting coal, 
 if he works hard all the time, I think that it might be taken 
 that he cannot work more than six or seven hours at that 
 one occupation alone. I am perfectly prepared to admit, and 
 I think a great many people would say, that if a man was 
 to set to work and work as hard as ever he could he could 
 not go on continuously at this one occupation of undercutting 
 for six hours ; and the way I view it is this : that undercutting 
 the coal in a constrained position which a man is in is one in 
 which he requires cessation from work occasionally, and that 
 he cannot really keep on at his work and do more work in a 
 certain time, in a limited time. If he has eight hours, we 
 will say, to do six hours work in, it would be something like 
 a fair proportion. I think that if a man is longer down the 
 pit he might possibly do six-and-a-half or seven hours 

 
 117 
 
 T>y having occasional rests ; but I would certainly say this, 
 that if the hours are reduced, then the men in our district 
 would not be able to work more than four-and-half or five 
 hours at undercutting, and, therefore, they would really be in 
 a worse position than they are now. What I mean is not 
 that the six hours has to be distributed over a longer term of 
 hours than at present, but that men cannot do in five hours 
 what men can do in the present hours. 
 
 (6474-5.) [You do not mean to have us understand that the 
 men are only six hours at the face ? ] Oh, no ; but actually 
 engaged at work ; that is the extreme limit that they are. 
 That is only for one class of work. The hewer, being we say 
 on the average nine hours from bank to bank, occupies a part 
 of that, possibly not more than an hour, in going to the face 
 and in coming back from the face to the pit bottom. 
 
 (6476.) [And then another half hour in meal time, is that 
 so ? ] Yes, and occasional rests. 
 
 (6477. [And that would still leave him seven-and-a-half 
 hours at the face.] It would leave seven-and-a-half hours, bu" 
 I consider that they take very much longer intervals than 
 the half hour for breakfast. 
 
 (6483.) [Is there any other observation that you would 
 like to make on the legislative limitation of the hours.] I 
 think one view of the question is this : one must look at it 
 thus, that in all the districts the hours have adjusted them- 
 selves in different districts in the country in order to meet 
 the different conditions, and it appears to me that if an eight 
 hours' day is legislated for it will affect different districts in 
 different ways, and the result of that might be in some cases 
 prohibitive ; and I think that it is not at all improbable that 
 certain districts would really wish to revert to what may be 
 a half hour longer, or, an hour longer, and in that case it 
 would be difficult to deal with that by repealing the eight
 
 118 
 
 hours' day or doing away with the eight hours' day 
 without special legislation ; so that if the eight hours' day is 
 got by legislation it appears to me that the Government 
 would really have to interfere with all questions arising in 
 the future with regard to trade. 
 
 (6484.) [You think that a legislative limit to, say, eight 
 hours, or at any rate a uniform number of hours, would not 
 have that elasticity which the varying circumstances of 
 different districts render desirable ?] Just so. 
 
 (6525.) [Do you express the views of your association on 
 that question ?] Quite so, with regard to the increase of 
 cost. 
 
 (6526.) [Do you know the views of the miners themselves 
 on that question ?] It is a very difficult question to answer 
 Jf course the representatives of the Union are very much in 
 favour of an eight hours' day. All the union men would be 
 m favour of an eight hours' day, so far as we can hear 
 expression of their views ; but I am not at all sure that that 
 is the feeling of a great many of the men. I think that we 
 hear more ot the expression of the men through the Union 
 than is arrived at by individual opinion. I may -say -this 
 that many men, without any leading questions at all, have 
 expressed their opinion to me that there is no object in an 
 eight hours' day, and that they cannot see the meaning of it. 
 
 (6532.) [Supposing, by legislative enactment, you were 
 now to make those hours uniform, would not the economic 
 effect be exactly as if the legislature were to fix different 
 rates of wages in the different districts. Let me explain 
 myself more clearly. You start now with differences, but 
 those differences equalise the balance of advantage' and 
 disadvantage in other respects. If now you alte & r that 
 balance by establishing an artificial uniformity of hours 
 would not the economical effect be the same as that of deter-
 
 119 
 
 mining the rates of wages in different parts of the country, 
 fixing them for part of the country at one rate and another 
 part of it at another re.te ?] Yes, I think it it would r 
 because whatever the advantages were, if you were to 
 legislate for an eight hours' day, then you might legislate 
 for a rate of wages to adjust itself to the various ways in 
 which the different districts had been prejudiced by the 
 eight hours' day. 
 
 (6534.) [You disturb it by insisting upon uniformity of 
 hours all over the country ?] Certainly. 
 
 (6535.) [You would disturb it in the same way by 
 arbitrary changes in the present rates of wages ?] I think it- 
 would be equivalent to that. 
 
 (6536.) [Are there collieries in your district which would 
 be prejudiced by a legislative eight hours' day, so greatly as 
 to make is necessary to close them ?] There are one or two, 
 even at the present time, that are very nearly being closed. 
 I do not know that I could say positively that any one of them 
 that are represented in the association would positively close, 
 but if we had the same depression of trade and the same 
 time of depression that we had from 1876 until compara- 
 tively recently, then I consider that several collieries would 
 be closed. 
 
 MR. WILLIAM FAIRLEY: - 
 
 (6710.) I am a Mining engineer, residing at Rugely, in 
 Staffordshire. 
 
 (6711.) I am a Fellow of the Geological Society, Vice- 
 President of the National Association of Colliery Managers, 
 and have acted as mineral agent to the Marquis of Anglesey 
 during the last 13 years.
 
 120 
 
 (6742-5.) [What are the hours of underground men ?] 
 Nine hours down the pit. Nine hours from bank to bank. 
 One shift of men of all classes, except the repairers at 
 night. 
 
 (6789-90.) [I think you desire to offer some evidence as 
 to the effect of a compulsory eight hours' Bill ? Yes ; the 
 effect would be generally to shorten the day by one hour 
 that is the winding of coal by one hour and. as has been 
 already shown, the actual time worked at the face is now 
 only about seven-and-a-quarter hours. This would leave the 
 working shift six-and-a-quarter hours, and would also reduce 
 the hours available for winding coal to seven hours, and as most 
 of the pits are fairly occupied during the whole of the time 
 the effect would be to reduce the output, and consequently 
 the miners' wages, where they work by the piece, by at 
 least 12 per cent. The hours now worked are reasonable, 
 and do not exhaust a man as did the long hours (10 and 12) 
 formerly worked. A proof of this is seen in this district, 
 where many of the miners are also small farmers or crofters, 
 and are able to and do work on their land for hours after 
 they leave the colliery. During the 20 years which 
 have passed since the hours were reduced very great 
 improvements have been made in colliery winding and haul- 
 ing machinery, and the improvements in these respects 
 have been very marked in North Staffordshire, and 
 no doubt the increased facilities for winding the coal, 
 and the application of mechanical contrivances, are the 
 principal reasons why the average get per man has been 
 so much increased. Even if it were possible for the men to 
 do the same amount of work in an hour's less time, the 
 attempt would do them more harm than the fair and 
 reasonable hours now worked. Many of the men now 
 voluntarily work overtime occasionally in their working 
 places to do their packing, timber drawing, and other work,
 
 121 
 
 which cannot be done without interfering with the coal 
 getting, and it would be unjust to such men, who are 
 generally the steady and regular workers, to limit their 
 hours and consequently their wages. The liability to acci- 
 dent would be greatly increased if the men were working 
 against time, which probably would be the case if the eight 
 hours were enforced by Act. I have a table here which 
 shows the general alterations from February 14th, 1881. 
 down to August the 6th, 1890, when the last 5 per cent, 
 advance was given. 
 
 (6817.) [You say that of an eight hours' day would be to 
 diminish output, and to reduce wages by about 12 per cent. ; 
 what is the attitude of the men towards the question of a 
 legal eight hours' day?] I do not hear any of them desiring 
 to bring about any eight hours' day. 
 
 (6818.) [They have made no representations to the 
 owners ?] No, I have never heard any of them express any 
 desire to bring it about ; they do not seem to wish for it, in 
 fact. I have never heard any of them express a wish to 
 have it. 
 
 (6820.) [Do you consider that an eight hours' day, the 
 primary effect of which would be, as you say, to reduce 
 wages, would bring about a greater regularity of attendance 
 to compensate for that reduction ?] I cannot say. It would 
 have the effect of decreasing the production, as it would be 
 taking off 12^ per cent, of the time of winding. 
 
 (6821.) [But could not that decrease of output be made 
 up by greater regularity of attendance if the men worked 
 shorter hours, but worked more days ?] "Well, that might 
 be so. 
 
 (6822.) [You have not considered, however, whether 
 one effect would balance the other ?] I have not considered 
 that, but that might be so.
 
 122 
 
 (6853.) [Could you give us an idea as to the increased 
 cost that you think the collieries in your district would be 
 put to by the establishment of eight hours instead of the 
 present working hours ?] The effect would be, I should say, 
 to diminish the output by 12^ per cent., and the standing 
 charges would all be the same ; and, to arrive at that, you 
 would have to divide the total charges by the diminished 
 quantity of 12i per cent. What that would amount to it is 
 difficult to say. 
 
 (6854.) [Would not your repairs increase greatly ?] There 
 would be a natural increase in the breakage of the roof. 
 You are working an hour less; your face is advancing 
 more slowly, and there would be an increase in timbering, 
 and so on. 
 
 (6855.) There would be no increase of safety; a diminution 
 in the safety, I should think. 
 
 (6864.) [Do you consider that the hours now worked in 
 the district you represent are injurious to the health of the 
 workpeople ?] No, I think not. 
 
 (6865.) [That being so, would you think it right or other- 
 wise to debar a man from working that length of hours ?] I 
 think it should be optional to the men. 
 
 (6880.) .[Do you think it would not very materially 
 assist the colliery proprietor and regulate competition if 
 there were some regularly fixed period of employment 
 instead of one district being seven hours, and another seven 
 hours and a half, another eight, and another nine hours a 
 day?] I do not know exactly how that would be. The 
 circumstances of every coal field that I have been in are so 
 different that one system might not apply well all through 
 the different districts. It has always been an eight hours' 
 system m the North of England since I have known anything 
 about it. When I was a lad I worked eight hours down a
 
 123 
 
 pit, and up to this day they are working eight hours a 
 shift that is, the shifters. It is precisely the same now as 
 it was 40 years ago in the county of Durham. There is no 
 difference whatever, that I know of, as regards the hours. 
 
 (6881.) [Did you think that long enough at that time?} 
 It was long enough for me. 
 
 Mr. JOHN PUXLEY WHITE (9th December, 1891). 
 
 (7176-7.) I am the chairman and managing director of 
 the South Leicestershire Colliery Company, Limited, and 
 have occupied those positions since the formation of the 
 company, 17 years ago. 
 
 (7178.) Am also agent to the Snibston Colliery Company. 
 Coalville, near Leicester, and have been connected with that 
 company for a period of 39 years. 
 
 (7201.) The ordinary hours of labour vary from eight and 
 a half to nine hours in our particular colliery. We have 
 an eight hours turning for five days a week, the collieries 
 being open nine hours, and the men having half an hour 
 for what is called snap. 
 
 (7202.) [Will you describe a little more exactly the hour 
 of the day at which the men begin to descend the pit ?] 
 That varies according to the season of the year, sometimes 
 it is at six, sometimes it is at half-past six ; if they begin at 
 six, they leave off half an hour earlier in the afternoon. 
 
 (7203-6. ) [We will suppose that they begin to go down at 
 six?] They leave off at 10 for snap; they resume half an 
 hour afterwards, and leave off at three. That is, the hours 
 are from six to three. They begin to descend at six, and 
 they begin to ride up the shaft at three.
 
 124 
 
 (7207.) '[They have had half an hour's suspension ?] Yes, 
 for snap. 
 
 (7208-9.) In the winter time we generally work five days 
 a week ; in summer from three to four. 
 
 (7267.) [You have given, I believe, some consideration to 
 the question of Parliament being asked to limit the hours of 
 adult labour to eight hours from bank to bank ?] Yes. 
 
 (7268.) [Perhaps rather more with reference to under- 
 ground workmen ; what is your view on that subject ?] I 
 think it would be a very great mistake. 
 
 (7269.) [Would you give some reason for that view ?] The 
 reason for that view is that they very rarely in our district 
 work more than eight hours to-day, but if you have Parliament 
 interfering with adults the time may come when they mav 
 order them to work 10 or 11 hours. I do not see why we 
 should not legislate for one the same as the other. 
 
 (7270.) [You say they do not work more than eight hours, 
 but, of course, the question is the number of hours below 
 ground ?] Yes. 
 
 (7271.) [They are now nine hours below ground ?] Yes, 
 nine hours for five days a week ; less than that on the sixth 
 day. 
 
 (7272.) [Then the question put to you rather is what 
 would be the effect, do you think, upon your trade of all 
 classes of men being limited to eight hours below ground ?] 
 In the coal trade generally throughout this district it would 
 reduce the output, very considerably in some cases; it 
 depends very much upon how far the face of the coal is from 
 the shaft bottom. 
 
 (7291.) There is a general opinion in Leicestershire, 
 South Derbyshire, and Warwickshire, that eight hours coal
 
 drawing, actual coal turning, not eight hours' work, bank to- 
 bank, would be satisfactory. 
 
 (7292.) [Over how many hours does coal drawing now 
 extend ?] 8 hours in a day of nine hours. We work nine 
 hours ; the coal drawing extends to 8 hours, and, I say, if 
 we could actually work eight hours coal drawing per day it 
 would be satisfactory to coalowners ; that is, for every day 
 they can find work for the men. 
 
 (7331.) I object to the interference of Parliament in adult 
 labour. 
 
 (7333-5.) [But you would not object to an arrangement by 
 which the present 8| hours of work should be changed to an 
 eight hours day ?] Personally, 1 should not. For coal- 
 drawing including snap ; they must get their snap as best 
 they can in that case. At present, half-an-hour is set apart 
 for snap. 
 
 (7336.) If this change was made, then the men would have 
 to get their snap as best they could ? 
 
 (7337.) [Now, the Chairman asked you whether it would 
 not be possible, supposing an eight hours day were worked, 
 to make up for the loss of time by working an increased 
 number of days in the pit ?] Yes. That may be answered 
 in this way, that if you work less coal in a day's turn, and 
 you have plenty of orders, it would necessitate your working 
 an additional day in the week, but it is not always that you 
 have got the orders to turn sufficient for another day. 
 
 (7338.) I do not quite follow that last reply ; do you mean 
 that if there was to, be any increase in the days you would 
 have to increase the work one day in each week ?] Yes, that 
 is so. 
 
 (7387.) [Then I understand from you, as speaking not
 
 126 
 
 only for yourself, but for the coal owners whom you repre- 
 sent, although there would be an objection to eight hours 
 from bank to bank, they would raise no objection to the 
 reduction of the hours to eight hours coal drawing ?] I 
 think that is so. I know that represents the views of a great 
 many of the owners in the Association. 
 
 (7530.) At present eight hours and a half is the number ; 
 five days a week. 
 
 (7531.) Although I object to legislative interference, I 
 would not object to its being reduced to eight hours by 
 taking away the half hour for meals. 
 
 (7532.) [Have you considered the effect that it might 
 have on a colliery which had workings two or three miles 
 from the bottom of the pit ?] Yes, 1 have. 
 
 (7533.) [What would be the effect ?] A very considerable 
 reduction in the output. 
 
 (7534.) [Do you propose, in your answer, that everybody 
 should be obliged to be up at the end of the eight hours, or 
 that it should apply to hewers only ?] Eight hours working 
 time eight hours coal turning. 
 
 (753.'.) Drawing, actual winding, I mean. 
 
 (7536.) [Then would they all have to be up within that 
 eight hours, do you mean ?] No. 
 
 MR. FREDERICK CHANNER CORPIELD. 
 
 (7626.) I have been connected with the Butterley Com- 
 pany, who are owners of large collieries and iron works in 
 Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, and Staffordshire for the last 
 25 years.
 
 127 
 
 (7627.) For the last 12 years of the period I have been 
 and am still the general manager of the whole of the Butter- 
 ley company's collieries in Derbyshire and Nottingham- 
 shire. 
 
 (7628.) About 3,500 persons are employed in these 
 collieries of the Butterley company. 
 
 (7695.) Have you any observations to make with regard 
 to an eight hours compulsory day ?] I think Parlia- 
 ment ought not to be asked to legislate for adult 
 labour. I think that the time worked throughout the year 
 is generally short enough, seeing that in the district I repre- 
 sent, which is nearly all soft coal, or house coal, the term is 
 not more than three to four days per wrek actual work in the 
 colliery now. If you had a regulation of eight hours from 
 bank to bank, it would not be to the safety of the men or to 
 the safety of the proprietor's interest in the mine. The 
 tendency would be for the men to come out of the workings 
 almost without taking time to leave their working places in 
 a safe state. I think that in large collieries, where it takes 
 a long time to turn the men down, also a long time to turn 
 them up again, also a long time to go from the pit bottom to 
 their working place and back again, the actual time worked 
 at the pit would not be much more than from six to six and 
 a half hours a day actual work at a colliery of that kind. If 
 you have shorter hours, it must tend very much to reduce 
 the output, and such reduced output must necessarily enhance 
 the cost of working, and then if the cost is greater the 
 colliery owner will have to charge the public more for their 
 coal supposing they get a fair remuneration now for their 
 commodity. Then it would also reduce the power of the 
 collier to earn, and if there was a good trade, and there was 
 an opportunity of making a lot of money, this Bill would 
 upset the opportunity of their earning more money. These 
 are some of the principal difficulties that we have talked over.
 
 128 
 
 (7727.) [When y ou 8 P eak of 6 * hours aS being the 
 present working time, do you mean that as an average in 
 the face ?] [ did not mean that that was what was taking 
 place now, what I meant was that if the eight hours bank-to- 
 bank Bill became law the men would not work more than 
 that time at the face. 
 
 (7728.) [What would be their present hours in the face 
 actual working ?] Of course that 6^ hours was more of an 
 average. It depends very much upon the size of colliery and 
 the power of the engine to bring the men up in a certain 
 time. It would vary in almost every colliery, I should think, 
 in England, 
 
 (7794.)- [You said just now, if the eight hour day was 
 established, that the actual work in the face, and the average 
 in your district, would be about 6^ hours?] Something 
 like that. 
 
 (7797-8.) [Then, would you be able to tell us what, in 
 your opinion, would be the extra cost of working, owing to 
 the adoption of an eight hour day as against the present 
 system ?] I could not say how much it actually would be, 
 but it would be more, considerable more. 
 
 (7799.) [Do you think that would have effect upon 
 the competitive power of collieries in your district ?] I 
 think it would have, because it would restrict the output at 
 a time, probably, when the books were full of orders in the 
 winter time. 
 
 (7800.) [Do you think it would possibly lead to some of 
 the more expensive collieries being closed?] Quite possibly. 
 Jn fact, I should think it would close some of the collieries. 
 
 Mr. FREDERICK PARKER RHODES : 
 
 (7829-30.) I am a solicitor practising at Kotherham, and 
 hold several public appointments there, and, among others,.
 
 129 
 
 I am the Secretary of the South Yorkshire Coalowners' 
 Association. I attend here as such secretary by the direction 
 and on behalf of that association. 
 
 (7850-1,) [What are the average hours of the collier from 
 bank to bank ?] I got that out as carefully as I could, in 
 order to make a return to the Board of Trade and also to 
 your Commission, and the average hours from bank to bank 
 are eight. It is eight hours and eight minutes really from 
 bank to bank. 
 
 (7852-3.) [And what are the average hours of the other 
 underground men ?] Other underground men vary from the 
 lowest I would put at eight, up to the longest, say, at ten. 
 And you would find that about nine hours was a fair average 
 to take for underground labour other than the hewer and his 
 trammer or filler. 
 
 ^7854.) The class of men who would be down 10 hours, 
 are men who attend to the roadway, and men of that class. 
 
 (7868.) [Have you or has your association given special 
 consideration to the suggestion for a compulsory working day 
 of eight hours from bank to bank ?] I think myself that 
 the effect of it of necessity must be to reduce the output. I 
 have heard it stated and stated strongly, that that would not 
 be the case ; but I have not been able to follow the arguments 
 adduced in support of that proposition, for this reason, that 
 at present, as appears from the return, the hewers work about 
 eight hours a day, but other classes of labour work on an 
 average nine. If, therefore, you reduce those other classes of 
 labour by one hour, and bring them to eight, you must of 
 necessity sacrifice to a certain extent the useful drawing 
 effect of the pit for the day. In other words, to my mind, 
 the solution of the problem, as to whether it would result in 
 the restriction of output or not depends on whether the 
 drawing power of the pit for the day would be affected or 
 whether it would not. 
 
 K
 
 130 
 
 (7869.) [Was your association a party to certain 
 conferences which took place in London on 21st January and 
 the llth February last?] Yes; Mr. Maskell Peace and 
 myself acted as joint secretaries for the owners during these 
 conferences. 
 
 (7870.) [Do you propose to put in the official memo- 
 randa that were exchanged between the parties ? ] I think 
 it would be useful to do so ; because at those conferences, 
 for there were two, one on the 21st January and another on 
 the llth February, the men put in their case in the shape 
 of a written statement, and that case set out the demand 
 they made, and the reasons they adduced in support of it. 
 The owners took time to consider, and, at the meeting on 
 the llth February, they on their part put in their reply to 
 that statement, in which they adduced the reasons which 
 appeared to them to negative the arguments that were put 
 forward by the men. 
 
 (7871.) [Those two documents then may be deemed to 
 represent the views of both parties ?] Of the two parties at 
 that time, the districts that were represented at that con- 
 ference were the various districts of England, with the ex- 
 ception of the North of England and with the exception of 
 South Wales. I am not quite correct there. I was thinking 
 of our own side of the case, and the reply is so far accurate, 
 but Mr. Chambers reminds me that on the part of the men, 
 representatives were present from South Wales and also from 
 Scotland; but there were not representatives from those 
 districts on our side. 
 
 (7885.) [Then, practically, in your district you have eight 
 hours ? ] For the hewers, to all intent and purposes, that is 
 so, if you take the average. 
 
 (7886.) [Is there not a very general feeling among the 
 miners in South Yorkshire for a legislative eight hours ? ] I
 
 131 
 
 am bound to say that the leaders of the men appear to be 
 unanimous in favour of it. 
 
 (7887.) [Are not the men unanimous ? ] I have no means 
 of telling that. I can tell you this : I have not heard any 
 expression of opinion to the contrary from the men. 
 
 (7888.) [We can apply another test: is it not rather 
 notorious that it is a test question electorally in South York- 
 shire ?] It is. 
 
 (7889.) [That nobody has a chance there unless he is 
 prepared to vote for the eight hours ? ] No, I do not think 
 he would have. 
 
 (7890.) [How do you explain that strong feeling for 
 legislative interference in South Yorkshire, if practically 
 they have the eight hours for the hewers, and there is only, 
 as I understand you, a very small addition for the other men ?] 
 The demand for the eight hours, as set forth in the men's 
 manifesto, which I have handed.in, is not an eight hours' day 
 for the hewers, but an eight hours' day for all who ride the 
 rope ; that is, for all who go down the pit, of whatever class. 
 Now I can only judge as to the reason why they ask it from 
 the reasons that they set forth in their statement, and those 
 reasons are these ; They say first that the hours are too long, 
 and that the nature of the work is laborious and exhaustive ; 
 that there are more men killed and permanently disabled in 
 that trade than in any other; that shortening the hours 
 would exhaust the men less, and would render them better 
 fitted to carry out their work ; and would ensure on that 
 ground greater safety to the men. That is shortly the way 
 in which they put it. 
 
 (7891.) [Assume that there was a legislative eight hours 
 day, applying to all men underground, how much would that 
 reduce on an average the labour of the man who is hewing 
 the coal ?] It would reduce his labour on the average ; it 
 would bring him to less than eight.
 
 132 
 
 (7892.) [My question is, how much ?] It would be difficult 
 to say under those circumstances, because, of course, then if 
 you had a fixed limit of eight hours, you would have the 
 strongest possible efforts made to make both classes of labour 
 run together as far as you could, and so it would not be quite 
 fair to argue proportionately from the present difference. 
 
 (7893.) [Would that result in the reduction of the hours 
 of the hewer ?] It would follow as a matter of course, but 
 it would not arise from that in the first instance. It 
 would arise from this. That whereas at present your pit 
 winds nine or ten hours to draw out the produce of eight 
 hours of hewing, if you reduce the hours of winding, you, 
 of necessity, reduce the power of the pit to wind, and there- 
 fore the hewer will have to go short. 
 
 (7894.) [As I understood you just now to say, it would 
 be so small an amount of difference that you could hardly 
 tell ?] I did not quite say that. I certainly did not intend 
 to say it. I said it would be very difficult to say what the 
 exact difference would be, because there would be an 
 endeavour on all sides to keep to the new conditions, and 
 lessen check of production. 
 
 (7895.) [Would there be improved methods of drawing ?] 
 No. In most of our large collieries. I do not think that 
 that would meet it. It is not so much a question of drawing ; 
 it is the question of getting the material to the pit bottom 
 with regularity, as it is wanted to draw. Take the case, for 
 instance, of a colliery working by endless rope. The rope 
 travels at the rate of, say, 2^ miles an hour. Now that rope 
 is continually moving up to the pit bottom, and the amount 
 of the output depends upon the means that are devised for 
 bringing all that coal gradually on to that rope, and getting 
 it evenly to the pit bottom just as it is wanted. 
 
 (7896.) [And that could not be re-adjusted by means of 
 working in shifts, could it ?] If you went in for working in
 
 shifts then you would have another difficulty that working 
 in shifts would, of necessity, either practically halve the 
 output for one shift, or it would mean double the labour in 
 two shifts. 
 
 (7897.) [I mean double the labour in two shifts ?] There 
 is not the labour. 
 
 (7898.) [You could not do it ?] No. 
 
 (7899.) [You have not sufficient colliers ?] No. 
 
 (7902.) [Doe* the statement which is published in the 
 proceedings of the joint conference represent the whole of 
 your case, or would you like to add anything to it ?] I 
 could add something to it if I sat down with pen and ink. 
 We prepared that under some little pressure, for we had to 
 postpone our meeting. I think it might be strengthened ; 
 but it is a fair statement of the principal grounds. 
 
 (7945.) The great difference between us and the men is 
 as to the question of principle. They ask for parliamentary 
 interference to limit the hours of labour. It is that great 
 principle that was objected to by the owners. There has 
 never been any negotiations as to the establishment of an 
 eight hours' day other than compulsorily. 
 
 (7946.) If the men would open up negotiations with the 
 employers in that district, to have an eight hours' day 
 established by conciliatory means by amicable settlement, 
 and without legislation, do you think that the employers 
 would concede it ? ] I can only say this : that if a demand 
 of that kind were made, it would be my duty, of course, to 
 submit it to the employers, and they would have to consider 
 it. They never have considered it. 
 
 (7947.) Do you think they would have the same objec- 
 tion then as they have now to legislation ? ] I cannot 
 say ; but, speaking for myself, if I were a coalowner, I 
 should not.
 
 134 
 
 (7948.) [So, after all, then, the difficulties to be sur- 
 mounted with respect to an equal production of coal are not 
 very great ? ] I may be wrong, and I am open to correc- 
 tion, but from my point of view, a very small restriction 
 in the outpot of coal would have a very serious effect on the 
 trade. The presence power of production and the present 
 demand are, undoubtedly, very nearly equal ; and, therefore, 
 it would not be safe to say that a small difference in the 
 output would be an insignificant matter ; it might be a very 
 serious matter. 
 
 (7949.) [Is it the fact that the men ask for eight hours 
 by legislation, or the probability of reducing the output, 
 that is the real difficulty in the way of establishing the eight 
 hours ? ] There are two difficulties. First of all, as a 
 matter of principle, the owners object to a limitation of the 
 hours of adult labour by Act of Parliament, and secondly, 
 they point out that if that principle were adopted, it would 
 result in a restriction of the output ; and, of course, if the 
 adoption of that principle resulted in a restriction of the 
 output, so also would the arriving at the same arrangement 
 by agreement result in a restriction of output. 
 
 Mr. FREDERICK PARKER RHODES (10th 
 December, 1891.) 
 
 (7973.) [The statement put forward on behalf of the 
 owners at the joint conference consists of replies, point by 
 point, to the representations of the men ? ] That is so. 
 
 (7974.) [I see in the account of the proceedings of the 
 conferance that Mr. Pickard, on behalf of the men, states it 
 as his opinion that the output would not be diminished by a 
 legal eight hours day ; do you know whether the contrary 
 opinion has not sometimes been expressed by the leaders of 
 the men ? ] I should not like to say that it has.
 
 135 
 
 (7975.) [You have not heard it contended on their behalf 
 that though the output would be probably reduced, the price 
 of coal would be in consequence raised, and that that higher 
 price would compensate both the owners and the men for the 
 diminished output ?] Yes, I have seen that statement put 
 forward, but I should not like to say that it was put forward 
 by one of the leaders of the men in my own particular dis- 
 trict. Certainly I have seen that statement made. 
 
 (7976.) [Have you heard it further contended on behalf 
 of the men that such a change would relieve the districts 
 which are now working short hours from unfair competition ?] 
 Yes. 
 
 (7977.) [I presume that no such relief could be obtained 
 unless the output were reduced by reducing the hours ?] 
 I do not see how it could. 
 
 (7978.) You yourself, at all events, are convinced that, as 
 a matter of fact, the output would be reduced?] Yes. I 
 should like, if you will allow me, perhaps, to qualify that to 
 some extent. When I said that yesterday I was speaking 
 of the immediate effect of such a change, but it is open 
 to great doubt whether that change would be permanent. 
 I think, myself, that what would occur would be this, that 
 at first you would undoubtedly restrict the output, that would 
 be equivalent to a corresponding increase in demand; that 
 would mean a rising price produced by artificial causes ; that 
 again undoubtedly would bring capital into a trade which, 
 for the moment, was artificially profitable, and you would 
 have in that way by the opening of fresh pits an increase in 
 output. That would go on until demand and supply were 
 equal, and then bad trade would come again as we have 
 had it before. When that occurred, then, in my judgment, 
 the artificial system would break down. You would 
 have staved off the operation of the natural laws as 
 long as you could, and you would then have a calamitous
 
 136 
 
 condition of trade when it would be almost impossible to 
 maintain an artificial restriction which depended for its main- 
 tenance on the prevention of a man from doing what he liked 
 with his own labour. 
 
 (7979.) [Then I understand that in your view the 
 sequence of events would be this ; first of all, output would 
 be reduced ?] I think so. 
 
 (7980.) [Secondly, prices would rise and wages might rise 
 with them ?] Yes. 
 
 (7981.) [Next, the demand would be lessened by the rise 
 of price ?] Yes. 
 
 (7982.) [And at the same time foreign competition would 
 be stimulated ?] Yes, and stimulated most in the markets 
 where our power of supply and their power of supply are 
 most nearly balanced. 
 
 (7983.) [Now if when that point was reached the high 
 prices could not be maintained a certain number of collieries 
 would, I presume, have to be closed?] Yes. What you 
 would have at first would be this : you would have collieries 
 gradually beginning, as demand slackened, to run short 
 time, and that would go on till the doctrine of the survival 
 of the fittest had had time to take effect. But in the mean- 
 time you would have every colliery prolonging its existence 
 as long as it could, working, perhaps, two or three days a 
 week, and then, as I say, to my mind, would come the great 
 difficulty of maintaining the artificial restriction that you 
 had created. 
 
 (7984.) [And would you further add, that supposing 
 you could maintain high prices you would be injuring those 
 industries which depend upon coal, and that that injury would 
 in time react upon the coal trade itself?] Yes. My view 
 is this: that although it would be very pleasant for us
 
 to regard the matter from our own point of view, and simply 
 regulate the thing with a view to what it would bring into 
 our own pockets ; it is impossible for us to disregard the 
 general public, because although we are a necessity for the 
 general public, and they cannot do without us ; still, on the 
 other hand, the consumption by the general public is an 
 equal necessity for us. Experience shows that high prices 
 undoubtedly check demand. I believe that is a proposition 
 which as a matter of logic and of economic law cannot be 
 gainsaid. If, therefore, you raise the price unduly you must 
 to some extent, sooner or later, check the demand for the 
 article for which you are charging the increased figure. 
 
 (7992.) [In your view the ultimate effect upon the trade 
 generally, including both the owners and the miners, of 
 a legislative eight hours' day would be bad ?] I think so. 
 
 (7993.) [That is speaking for the industry as a whole ?] 
 I think so. 
 
 (7994.) [Now I will ask you one or two questions as to 
 the effect of such a measure upon the various districts of the 
 country. As between the different districts of the country 
 would the operation of a uniform eight hours' day affect all 
 districts equally ?] No, and to my mind that is one of 
 the great difficulties in its application. Districts vary ; they 
 vary in their customs, they vary in their hours of work, and 
 they vary in their modes of work. For instance, compare 
 the north of England and my own district : in the north of 
 England you have the hewers working a much shorter shift 
 than that which is asked for now, and you have the other 
 classes of labour working a longer shift. The hewers are at 
 full liberty to do nothing else except get their coal; the 
 timbering is all done by a separate class of persons who are 
 paid for it. Now in our own district the hewer does his own 
 timbering ; it is part of his work ; and instead of having a 
 double shift of hewers and a single shift of other men in our
 
 138 
 
 district we have a single shift system applied to both. Now 
 I cannot see how it is possible by a Parliamentary enactment 
 to bring those two districts into line without inflicting 
 injury or hardship upon one or the other. 
 
 (799o.) [So that the introduction of such a measure as is 
 proposed would disturb the existing balance of economic 
 advantage and disadvantage ? ] I cannot see how it could be 
 avoided. 
 
 (7996.) [In such a way as to injure some districts and 
 possibly benefit other districts at the expense of the injured 
 districts?] Possibly. 
 
 (7997.) [Now do you consider that such a disturbance of 
 the existing economic conditions can properly be described 
 as a relief of those districts which are now working short 
 hours from unfair competition?] No, I think that such 
 a disturbance of the economic conditions of the district must 
 of necessity to a greater or less extent injuriously affect all 
 districts because the trade of each district has grown up in 
 consequence of the particular economic conditions which exist 
 in it. The north of England trade is carried on in the way 
 that it is done by means of the particular state of circum- 
 stances which exist there, and which has produced and given 
 rise to the trade. So also with regard to Lancashire ; so also 
 with regard to Yorkshire ; and although you might say that 
 you gave relief from unfair competition I am afraid myself that 
 you would give hardship in another way. 
 
 (7998.) [In short, you think that a state of things has grown 
 up naturally which it would be unfair now arbitrarily to dis- 
 turb ?] Yes, and extremely difficult. I do not know of any- 
 thing more difficult than to alter a particular custom, even a 
 trivial one, which has grown up and become part of the life of 
 a district. 
 
 (7999.) [I gather from the statement put forward at the
 
 139 
 
 conference by Mr. Pickard that he attaches extreme import- 
 ance to the question of uniformity. I think he goes so far 
 as to say that unless the eight hours' day was secured by 
 legal action, it- would not be desirable for the miners in any 
 one district to take it at all. The words are these, " Unless 
 " such is the case," that is to say, unless legislative sanction 
 is given to the proposed change, " it would be utterly im- 
 " possible for us to take it, as our great object is to secure a 
 " uniform eight hours' day for the underground toilers in the 
 " United Kingdom ?] Yes, and I quite understood his point ; 
 he would not want to inflict injury, for instance, on his own 
 district and his own men, or to handicap them unless all other 
 districts were treated alike. 
 
 (8000.) [But is that consistent with his other statement 
 tlist the output would not be diminished ?] That last is an 
 assertion only, and it is impossible to argue on an assertion 
 unless you have the reasons for it. 
 
 (8001.) [But you do not regard the two statements as 
 consistent?] No, I do not. 
 
 (8002.) [In your opinion, in view of the disturbance of 
 economical conditions that might arise, is this uniformity a 
 thing so desirable that Parliament ought to be asked to 
 depart from the principles on which it has hitherto acted in 
 order to secure it for adult miners?] Personally, I think 
 that nothing but absolute national necessity would justify 
 Parliament saying to an adult male that he shall not do 
 what he likes and thinks best for himself with his own labour. 
 As an individual I have the strongest possible opinion with 
 regard to it. 
 
 (8003.) [Is it your opinion that elasticity and freedom 
 are what we should aim at rather than uniformity in a 
 matter of this description ?] I think so. I think that 
 trades are like men, and that in order to get on and to live,
 
 140 
 
 they must adapt themselves to the varying circumstances 
 that arise from time to time. 
 
 (8004.) [Do you think it possible to separate the question 
 of hours from the question of wages ?] I have heard that 
 debated a great deal, and I have listened very carefully to 
 what has been said with regard to it, but I cannot myself 
 get out of my mind that if you do less work, you get less 
 money. I find it so in iny own case, and I do not see myself 
 how it is possible for anyone to reduce the amount of time 
 he works, without, at the same time reducing his remunera- 
 tion that is in the long run. I do not know at first 
 whether that would be the case or not for the reasons that 
 we have been discussing. But in the long run my view is 
 that less work means less earning power. 
 
 (8005.) [And do you not think it even more important for 
 a man to be able to earn enough to keep his family in 
 comfort than for him to reduce the hours which he now 
 works from ten or nine to eight ?] Yes. I put it this way. 
 I think that it is a very grave thing indeed to say to an able- 
 bodied man that he shall not earn if he chooses to do so. 
 
 (8006.) [Now, do you think, supposing the economic 
 conditions in any given district were to allow of it that the 
 coal owners would be averse to granting an eight hours' day ?] 
 Do you mean by arrangement ? 
 
 (8007.) By arrangement?] That I cannot say, because 
 that question has never yet been discussed by the owners ; 
 they have only discussed the demand as it was put forward, 
 and of course with regard to that I am simply here as their 
 mouthpiece speaking upon their mandate. 
 
 (8017.) I think you said that the hours of labour were for 
 hewers practically eight, and for others from nine to ten 
 in your district of South Yorkshire ? ] Yes, about nine I 
 think would be the average with us for the latter.
 
 
 141 
 
 (1018.) [Do you find that that length of time is injurious 
 to the health of the people ? ] I do not think so. T think 
 you will find in that statement that I handed in which was 
 put forward by the owners that they give statistics there 
 given from the reports of the Eegistrar General as to the 
 average mortality in different classes of labour. You will 
 find there, I think, that the reverse of that proposition is 
 shown to be the case. 
 
 (8019.) [That being so would you think it prudent or 
 otherwise to compulsorily restrict the hours of labour ? ] 
 No, I do not think so. I would say this at once without 
 hesitation, that if it were proved and shown that the hours 
 of labour were such as to injuriously affect health, that 
 would be the most cogent argument in favour of parliamen- 
 tary interference. 
 
 (8022/> [I think you said that a reduction to eight hours 
 would necessarily decrease the output?] I think it would 
 myself; that is my opinion. 
 
 (8023.) [That being so, have you considered what the 
 effect would be upon the cost of production ? ] No, it is 
 very difficult to get at that, because in order to arrive at the 
 effect on the cost of production, you would have to ascertain 
 exactly what the percentage of reduction in output would be, 
 and that is a sum which admits of so much argument that 
 it would be very difficult to work it out accurately ; but un- 
 doubtedly it would increase the cost of production. 
 
 (8024.) [Supposing that the output were reduced the stand 
 ing charges remaining the same the cost per ton would be in- 
 creased more or less ? ] Certainly. 
 
 (8025.) [With regard to the effect of the eight hours, do 
 you not think it would have an injurious effect upon the 
 home trade ?] Undoubtedly it would disturb the balance of 
 power between the respective districts.
 
 142 
 
 (8026.) Leaving out the question of balance of power we 
 use coal in all our manufactures. 
 
 (8027.) [And we largely export. If it would injure our 
 export trade in coal, would not the increased cost to the 
 manufacturer and to the exporter injure the general trade, 
 and affect not only the coal trade abroad, but the trade at 
 home ?] I think it would. It has been put in this way : 
 that an increase of 6d. or Is. per ton in price would not hurt 
 anybody very much, one way or the other. Well, one is 
 inclined upon first sight to say that it would not, but I do 
 not think that you can get over the operation of the economic 
 law, that increase in price undoubtedly tends to check con- 
 sumption ; a slight increase less than a large increase, but 
 undoubtedly it operates. 
 
 (8029.) [But would not the immediate result of the eight 
 hours be to reduce the output and increase the cost and to 
 lessen the purchasing power of the money ?] Yes ; but in 
 what I was saying before I was assuming the case of the 
 other side for a moment making them a present of their 
 case and assuming that it would result in a benefit to all 
 parties at the present time. As a matter of fact, I do not 
 think that is correct, because as against the temporarily 
 increased price you have to set the increased cost. 
 
 (8030.) [Then you entirely agree that the result would be 
 injurious to our home trade so far as manufacturers are con- 
 cerned ?] I think so. 
 
 (8060.) [But is it not possible, even assuming the eight 
 hours were applied on the continent as well as here, that the 
 introduction of the eight hours here might mean to us a 
 much larger difference than on the continent ? ] Possibly. 
 
 (8061.) [Assuming, for instance, that on the continent 
 the average cost of putting coal on the pit bank is 6s., but 
 the average cost here, we will say, is 7s., 10 per cent, on the
 
 143 
 
 one is one figure, 10 per Cent, on the other is another 
 figure, so that we may suffer more by the introduction of 
 the eight hours than even they would on the continent ?] 
 That is so. I had for the moment lost sight of that result. 
 
 Mr. ARTHUR MARSHALL CHAMBERS: 
 
 (8062 3.) I am the managing director of the firm of 
 Newton, Chambers & Co., Limited, of the Thornicliffe Iron 
 Works and Collieries, South Yorkshire. I am also the 
 president of the Alining Association of Great Britain, and 
 filled that office last year also ; but I wish to say that I do 
 not appear on behalf of the Mining Association of Great 
 Britain. I simply appear for the South Yorkshire Coal 
 Owners' Association. 
 
 (80G7.) With respect to the eight hours's question, I 
 may say that our collieries furnish an instance in which any 
 enactment of a legal eight hours' day would differently affect 
 different pits. For instance, we have several pits by which 
 the men are let down by winding engines in the ordinary 
 manner; and we have other pits which are driven from the 
 day, by what are called day drifts or day holes, where the 
 men walk down. The distance which they have to travel 
 underground in the one case is much greater than in the 
 other, although the distance from their own homes to their 
 places of work may not be any further. So that, with respect 
 to those colieries where the men have to walk from the day 
 underground, the eight hours would have a very much more 
 serious effect than it would have in those pits in which they 
 a~e let down by winding engines. 
 
 (8068.) [You mean that if there were a perpendicular 
 shaft sunk at the point or near the point where the men 
 would get to work they would be walking on the surface to 
 that shaft, instead of as at present walking underground ? ]
 
 144 
 
 That is so ; and that is the case with regard to a considerable 
 number of collieries in the district, showing how unequally 
 such an arrangement would apply. As a matter of fact, in 
 the collieries where we let the men down by means of the 
 winding engine, they are in from surface to surface a less 
 time than they are in those collieries where they have to 
 walk. It may be said, with regard to those in which they 
 have to walk from the surface, that they are really less liable 
 to accident than they are in the collieries where the means 
 of ingress and egress is by the winding engine. These 
 different circumstances mean that it would put many of the 
 collieries of that class at a very great disadvantage. 
 
 (8069-70.) [Before leaving that point, will you tell us how 
 the present regulations of hours apply to the collier who 
 descends a shaft, or to the collier who descends a drift mouth. 
 Does each enter the earth at the same time ? ] No, in the 
 case of men who walk down the drifts they usually, if they 
 go at the same time, return perhaps half-an-hour or an hour 
 later than the men who are let down by the winding shift. 
 
 (8071.) [The time of each class is not the same, 
 reckoned in the case of the man who descends the shaft 
 from the time he proceeds to do so and reckoned in the case 
 of the man who enters the drift mouth from the time he 
 does so enter it ?] No, it is not the same. 
 
 (8072.) [It is longer in the latter case?] It is longer 
 in the latter case. Then with regard to the effect of the 
 eight hours upon the method of working which is prevalent 
 in the Midland and Yorkshire districts, at all events in 
 the South Yorkshire district, the fact is that the off-hand 
 workers the day men are employed from nine to ten 
 hours underground. The effect of a compulsory eight hours 
 would be that these men would have to come out at the end 
 of eight hours, and the hewers would have their time 
 reduced to probably seven, and a considerable decrease of
 
 145 
 
 output would ensue. Then another effect would be this : in 
 that district most of the coal is worked on the long wall 
 system, and in the long wall system the whole of the men 
 employed in the face are responsible more or less for the 
 timbering and the packing, and for any sudden difficulty 
 that may arise. Possibly after they have been working six 
 hours what is known technically as a weight may come on. 
 In that case, if the men were required to return to the surface 
 just to make up their exact eight hours, there might possibly 
 be a fall of roof, an interference with the faces, and a stoppage 
 of the ventilation ; and therefore the operation of any com- 
 pulsory time would lead to more danger and to considerably 
 more expense in working the coal. 
 
 (8073.) [May I understand that that implies that at 
 present cases are not infrequent when men, from some such 
 cause, have to remain longer than the ordinary appointed 
 hour ?] That is so ; and when they go down they do not 
 know in what condition they will find their working places 
 at the end of the shift. The system of working in the 
 Midland district is very different from what exists in the 
 North of England, where the pillar and stall system is 
 prevalent. 
 
 (8074.) [The force of the point you have just made lies 
 in this, as I understand, that at present, whilst there are the 
 ordinary hours which have been described by Mr. Parker 
 Rhodes, there is elasticity, inasmuch as if any underground 
 conditions, more especially of safety, call for a man to remain 
 a little longer he can and does do so ?] That is so. 
 
 (8075.) [But that under the other system there would 
 be a hard-and-fast line ?] There would be a hard-and- 
 fast line which would be, in my opinion, a source of continual 
 danger and possibly disaster. I quite agree with the evidence 
 of Mr. Rhodes with respect to the effect of the eight hours' 
 system on the decrease in the production of coal, because in 
 
 L
 
 146 
 
 most of our large collieries the machinery is employed for 
 from nine to ten hours to its full capacity, and any com- 
 pulsory eight hours would inevitably lead to a reduction, in 
 my opinion, of from 20 to 25 per cent. I would also point 
 out that the off-hand labour, as a rule, is much less arduous 
 and exacting than that of the miner and the trammer. The 
 men employed on the roads have not to work so hard, and 
 they can work without any inconvenience for the time which 
 is usually established in the district. 
 
 (8076.) [It seems more convenient, perhaps, that you 
 should yourself initiate the points on which you desire to 
 supplement Mr. Ehodes' evidence. Will you proceed there- 
 fore ?] I would say that the system in Yorkshire of 
 paying the hewer by the piece causes him to work to the 
 full extent of his capacity, and I may also say that the men 
 throughout the district are a strong and healthy class of men, 
 and so far as I can judge do not suffer at all from overwork, 
 though undoubtedly they are subject to accidents and to the 
 other conditions of this class of labour. 
 
 (8077.) [Are you speaking of the hewers generally?] 
 Yes. They are a very strong and healthy class of men, 
 and I do not think the hours of labour at all interfere with 
 their general health and comfort. I do not think they could 
 possibly increase their output per hour if their time was 
 reduced. For instance, they now work in the face about 
 seven to seven and a half hours, and during that time 
 my experience in seeing them work frequently, and what I 
 have heard, leads me to believe that they work as hard as they 
 possibly can, and that if you cut an hour off their work you 
 will cut an hour off the quantity of coal, a seventh off the 
 quantity of coal which they could produce. 
 
 (8085.) [Mr. Ehodes has explained to the Committee 
 how a uniform eight hours' day would unequally affect 
 different districts, and your evidence goes to show that it
 
 
 147 
 
 would also very unequally affect different pits ?] That 
 is so. 
 
 [So that the effect of a uniform eight hours Act 
 would be not only unfavourably to prejudice some districts 
 as against others, and some collieries as against others, 
 tut also some men as against others ?] Quite so. 
 
 (8091.) [So that to establish a uniformity in hours would 
 not be really to establish a uniformity in the amount of work 
 done ?] It would not. 
 
 (8092.) [Now with regard to the diminution of output, 
 .supposing it to be true, as you think, that the output would 
 be diminished by some 20 per cent, that would immediately 
 raise the price ?] No doubt. 
 
 (8093.) [I presume that that rise of price would tempt 
 capital into the trade as one of its first effects ?] Yes, that 
 would be one effect. 
 
 (8094.) [If more capital was engaged in the trade it would 
 Tiave to be by the opening of new mines, would it not ?] 
 Yes. 
 
 (8095.) [Could that capital be applied simply to the 
 development of the existing mines ? ] It could to some 
 -extent. 
 
 (8096.) [But in order to keep up the supply, practically 
 more mines would have to be opened and more capital 
 expended in doing so ? ] Yes. With regard to many pits 
 that are now open there are, for instance, seams which are 
 thin which at present are not able to be worked profitably 
 but which might be opened out if a considerable rise of price 
 -took place. That is the same thing really, but it would not 
 mean the expenditure of so large an extra capital as the 
 .opening out of a new coalfield. 
 
 (8097.) [In any case an additional amount of capital 
 would have to be sunk ? ] No doubt.
 
 148 
 
 [You would also require an additional amount of 
 skilled labour ? ] That would be so. 
 
 (8099.) [Is that skilled labour available at the present 
 time ? ] It is not. 
 
 (8100.) [Would that be an additional difficulty in the way 
 of maintaining the present output ? ] It would. 
 
 (8122.) [Briefly, is the objection to the establishment of 
 an eight hours' day really against the establishment of a* 
 day of eight hours, or only against its establishment by 
 legislation ? ] I have no hesitation in giving you my own 
 opinion, which I think is probably shared in by most of the- 
 other coal owners. We object to it on principle, and we- 
 object to it on the ground of expediency, and because we 
 consider it would largely increase the cost, and do ultimate 
 damage to the trade. 
 
 (8123.) [Then you object to it upon both grounds ? ] Yes.. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAM KERRY (llth December, 1891T. 
 
 (8576.) I am a miner employed at the Swanwick collieries,. 
 Alfreton, the property of Mr. Palmer Morewood. 
 
 (8581.) My present occupation is conveying the coal, as 
 contractor, from the face to the pit bank. 
 
 (8582.) The work is done chiefly by boys and young men y 
 ranging from about 14 up to 21 years of age. 
 
 (8583.) I am responsible for the payment of the wages of 
 the boys under my charge. 
 
 (8588.) The length of time we work is eight hours wind- 
 ing ; the boys go down about a quarter past six in the 
 morning, and they arrive at the bank again at about a 
 quarter past three, and we stand half an hour, what we call 
 snap time, out of that.
 
 149 
 
 (8589.) As a rule we stand this snap time from half-past 
 eleven to twelve o'clock in the day ; but the boys, all of them 
 as any gentleman will know, want snap before that time. 
 If a boy leaves home at a quarter to six, and gets to his 
 work to go down at a quarter past, by eight o'clock in 
 the morning at the very latest he will want refreshment. 
 You have to allow them to get this refreshment in the legal 
 working hours. In my opinion, as I understand it, the eight 
 hours day means no snap time. I fail to see how we can 
 work boys from bank to bank eight hours without any snap, 
 as we find it very difficult, in fact you really cannot keep 
 them to one snap time now, and I fail to see how you are 
 going to do it when we get eight hours from bank to bank with 
 no snap time allowed. 
 
 (8590.) [I understand you to express the opinion that 
 the eight hours legal day, which is the subject of agitation 
 at the present time, is deemed to be an eight hours day 
 without what you call snap times ? ] I understand it as 
 that. 
 
 (8591.) As I understand it from bank to bank, it means in 
 many eases six and a half hours, but in a few cases it means 
 .seven. 
 
 (8598.) I think if the eight hours from bank to bank is 
 .-adopted, the winding probably would be only six hours and a 
 lialf in most cases, and that will cause a reduction to the boys 
 in proportion to the wage. In my contract it would mean 
 probably about an hour, but we are only on a small scale com- 
 pared with other collieries ; it would mean about an hour, and 
 in that case there would be an hour's less winding coal. The 
 loss of this output would certainly mean a reduction in pro- 
 portion to everyone that works under my contract. 
 
 (8599.) I believe the genuine feeling amongst the men in 
 -our district is that they are not in favour of an eight hours 
 day.
 
 150 
 
 (8614.) The effect of an Eight Hours' Act upon the position 
 of the boys would be first it will reduce their wages, that is my 
 opinion. 
 
 (8615-5A.) [I presume it would reduce your own earnings 
 also ?] Yes, correspondingly. 
 
 (8616.) [And you also think that if the effect of an eight 
 hours' Act was to deprive the boys of half an hour for snap 
 that would be prejudicial to their health ?] I am quite con- 
 vinced of it. 
 
 (8617.) [And to their work?] They could not work 
 without the snap. 
 
 (8618.) [At present they have snap at half-past 11?} 
 That is it, till 12. 
 
 (8619.) [And therefore they have to go from a quarter 
 past 5 to half-past 11 without any recognised hour for taking: 
 food ?] That is it. 
 
 (8623.) I think the men's real feeling is not in favour of an, 
 eight hours' Act. 
 
 (8624.) I go by what I hear amongst the men. I have. 
 no certain facts, not belonging to the Union in any shape or 
 form. 
 
 (8628.) Do you think that if an eight hours' day was. 
 introduced in your district it would lead to an attempt on 
 the part of the owners to establish a double shift ?] The 
 double shift system has never been introduced into our dis- 
 trict, as far as I know, in any shape or form whatever; it is a. 
 fallacy altogether. 
 
 (8629.) I do not think it is adapted to our district at all. 
 
 (8630-31.) [Supposing the output were reduced, as you- 
 believe would be the case, in what way do you think that the 
 coal-owners could make up for that diminution ?] I cannot 
 see that it can be made up.
 
 151 
 
 (8650-51.) At the snap time, from 11.30 to 12, there is no 
 winding of coal. 
 
 (8652.) Everybody then stops and gets his bait or meal. 
 
 (8653.) [And it is your impression that in case an eight 
 hours' Act was passed from bank to bank the snap time would 
 be abolished?] I believe so. 
 
 (8654.) I am given to understand that there is no snap 
 under the eight hours. It is eight hours from bank to bank 
 and no standing while the pit is open. 
 
 (8655.) I understand that from bank to bank means going 
 down, and that there is no standing in the winding during 
 that time ; there cannot be if it is law for a man to come out 
 when it is bank to bank, and it does not matter what is amiss 
 he must come out, as I understand. 
 
 (8656.) That is my understanding of the system of bank 
 to bank, that it means abolishing or putting an end to the 
 snap time. 
 
 (8657.) I am aware that at conferences the delegates from 
 Derbyshire have always, at least for some years past, advo- 
 cated eight hours. 
 
 (8658.) [Are you aware that Mr. Haslam and Mr. Harvey 
 have strongly urged the adoption of the eight hours ? ] I 
 believe they are going in for the eight hours. 
 
 (8659.) [Do you think that they do not, in that respect, 
 represent the opinion of the majority of the men? ] I do. 
 
 (8660.) [And you base that opinion of yours, on the fact 
 that you have not heard many of the men themselves declare 
 in favour of it, and that you have heard many declare against 
 it ; is that so ? ] That is it ; I believe the defect is done in 
 the ballot. I am not prepared to say in which way, but I 
 believe that is the secret of it.
 
 152 
 
 (8664.) I said that I had no special reasons upon which to 
 base the opinion that the men were not in favour of the 
 eight hours, only it was an impression made upon my mind. 
 
 (8665.) I have no intercourse with the Union in any 
 shape or form, and I only go by the conversation amongst 
 the men, the general feeling that prevails among them. 
 
 (8666.) I believe the eight hours must mean reduction in 
 wages. 
 
 (8667.) [You have made a statement, and we should like 
 to know whether you have any special knowledge or any 
 special fact upon which you could base the opinion which 
 you have expressed ; that is simply it ?] Only by conversa- 
 tion amongst the men. 
 
 (8668.) [Then if you could be convinced that an eight 
 hours' legal day would not do away with the snap time, that 
 would remove the difficulty with respect to the boys that you 
 have spoken of, would it not ?] I do not think it would 
 remove a very great deal of difficulty, because there is an 
 hour's winding gone; where is it going to be made up? 
 
 As I take the legal eight hours, they ask to be from bank 
 to bank. It will take at least half an hour to wind the men 
 in and in some cases more, and it takes the same to wind 
 them from the bottom to the top: and that means about six 
 hours and a half winding. The deficiency is gone, the 
 tonnage is gone. Where is it going to be made up ?] As 
 I understand, the masters are not prepared to give that ; 
 that question will have to be deal with later on, I suppose. 
 The question is, are the masters prepared to give the extra 
 amount for the hour and a half winding that is lost ? 
 
 (8680.) [You assume all that, but you have no special 
 knowledge of any proposition in the proposed Bill to do 
 away with the snap time ?] I do not see where the snap 
 time is to come in.
 
 153 
 
 (8697.) [I understand that your objections to an eight 
 Tiours' legal day are twofold ; first you think that if it had 
 the effect of doing away with snap that would be injurious 
 to the boys ; and secondly, you think that it would so far 
 reduce the output as to materially affect their wages ?] I 
 do. 
 
 (8698.) [Is that a correct statement of your position?] 
 
 Tes. 
 
 (8699.) [And if it did away with snap time, it would 
 still be necessary for the boys to have food at some time 
 or another, and that time they would have to take as best 
 they could ?] Yes, that is so. 
 
 Mr. JOHN BENNETT. 
 
 (8724.) I am a member of the Derbyshire Miners' 
 -Association. 
 
 (8726.) I believe they have passed resolutions in favour 
 <tf the eight hours from bank to bank, but I do not think 
 there is much in it myself. I do not think it showed the 
 correct feeling of the men ; this ballot paper does not. 
 
 (8727-8.) I think that notwithstanding that such resolu- 
 tions have been passed, the resolutions do not reflect 
 or express the general feeling of the men, because 
 of the way in which they are ballotted ; because of 
 the way the ballot papers are drawn up, and everything 
 there are open and free for everybody to see. That is a 
 ballot paper; there is no name signed or anything on it 
 (producing a ballot paper). 
 
 (8731.) [This ballot paper reads thus, " Derbyshire Miners 
 '" Association Labour Eepresentation Ballot Paper. Are you 
 *' in favour of starting a labour candidate for Parliament out 
 " of the funds of the Miners' Association ? " Then there are
 
 154 
 
 two columns, the one headed "Yes," the other u No n 
 " Place a cross under the head yes ' or no,' whichever you 
 are in favour of." There was issued a similar ballot paper 
 with a heading "Are you in favour of a legislative eight 
 hours days ? " followed by the same form " yes," "no," with 
 the direction to place a cross under the one or under the- 
 other according to the view of the person voting. 
 
 (8732.) I think the check weighman sees every one of 
 the papers when it is put in ; it is put in openly, and, of 
 course, he can retaliate on the men if they do not come up 
 to his wishes. That is where it is. 
 
 (8733-4.) I think many vote because others do on those- 
 papers, especially when the stallman votes for a certain thing 
 the men generally follow they often follow. 
 
 (8735.) That is the ground upon which I think that 
 the vote of the Miners' Association in favour of an eight 
 hours' day is not to be regarded as reflecting the general 
 opinion. 
 
 (8736-7.) [How would an eight hours' day affect the 
 Saturday half-holiday ? We should not like it at all ; we 
 would have to work until two o'clock instead of closing at 
 half-past ten on Saturdays, because we would have to work 
 eight hours every day from bank to bank, so I suppose. 
 
 (8738.) [I do not know that there is any proposal of that 
 sort ?] We cease work now at half-past ten on Saturdays, 
 and I do not think the majority of the men would like to- 
 work any longer. 
 
 (8739.) I take it we would have to work the eight hours, 
 from bank to bank every day. 
 
 (8740.) I mean we would have to do so as the result of art 
 Act of Parliament. 
 
 (8741.) [Or that you would have to do so in order to meet 
 the needs of the trade ?] Certainly, yes.
 
 155 
 
 (8743.) The output where I work is about 400 tons per 
 day, and it would take about 75 tons off if you were to take 
 an hour and a-half off the winding. 
 
 (8756.) [You say you think that the result of the ballot 
 taken on the eight hours' question does not really represent 
 the opinion of the men ?] I do not think so. 
 
 (8757.) [Do you complain of the way in which the ballot 
 is taken ?] Yes. 
 
 (8758.) [I consider that the ballot does not really provide 
 any safeguard of secrecy. 
 
 (8775.) A legislative eight hours' day would reduce the 
 working hours of the stall-men from eight to six and a-half 
 or six and three-quarters. 
 
 (8777.) The output of coal be reduced in proportion to the 
 reduction of hours. 
 
 (8778.) It would be reduced in proportion. 
 
 (8779.) [You do not think that, during those shorter 
 hours, the stall-men might work harder and in that way 
 compensate to some extent f&r the shorter time ?] I do not 
 think the stall-man could, and if he were to attempt to do 
 so he would endanger the lives of the men under him. I 
 think the stall-man is responsible for the safety of the men ;, 
 he is supposed to look after them. 
 
 (8780.) [You say you think that more rapid working 
 would endanger the safety of the men ; will you kindly 
 explain that a little more in detail ?] If the stall-men were- 
 to attempt to get the same amount of coal in six and a half" 
 hours as they do in eight hours now, they would be neglect- 
 ing their own work and be getting coal instead of examining 
 the roof, and so on. 
 
 (8781.) In our district the stallman's work includes re- 
 pairing the stall, timbering, and so on.
 
 156 
 
 (8282.) I think that some of the time which is now spent 
 in that .important work would be given up to the extracting 
 >of the coal instead. 
 
 (8709.) [Upon what do you base your opinion that reduc- 
 ing the hours to eight hours a day would reduce the work- 
 ing hours to six and a half?] I suppose if it was from 
 bank to bank we should go down at six and we should have 
 to be all out by two to be eight hours from bank to bank 
 .really. I should allow half an hour for walking each way, 
 and half an hour snap ; that is an hour and half off, but 
 I give it as six hours and three-quarters, which is allowing a 
 point. 
 
 (8848.) [In your own colliery you think there is a consider- 
 able number opposed to a legislative eight hours' day ? ] I 
 think they would be opposed to having to work a full day on 
 Saturday more than anything. 
 
 (8849.) [You mean they would opposed to a 48 hours 
 week?] Yes. 
 
 (8850.) [And you are opposed to it?] Yes, we work 44 
 iours now. 
 
 (8851.) [Has there ever been any application made on be- 
 half of the miners generally in your district for any reduction 
 of hours ?] Not at the colliery where I work. 
 
 '(8852.) [You are in a union, are you not ? ] Yes. 
 
 (8853.) [Do you know whether the Derbyshire Unions 
 .have made any applications to the employers for a reduction 
 of the hours of labour in collieries within the last two or 
 three years ? ] I do not know that they have. 
 
 Mr. BENJAMIN MORRIS: 
 
 (8854.) I am a colliery deputy in connexion with the 
 colliery district of Derbyshire.
 
 157 
 
 (8855.) Am employed by the Blackwell Colliery Company.. 
 
 (8889.) I am most certainly opposed to legal a eight hours. 
 I am very much in favour of short hours very much in favour- 
 of eight hours by combination. But the legal eight hours 
 I am very much opposed to for various reasons. The first is 
 that it would be a very great injustice to the men themselves 
 The second is the legal enactment could not possibly be 
 carried out in the case of a miner's work. The work of a 
 miner is of such a character that the miner could not leave 
 his work at a given moment not at all times I mean 
 because he never knows for five minutes what is going to 
 call for his attention or what is going to take place : and 
 my experience as a miner has led me to understand this 
 that if there is a law passed to prohibit me from keeping my 
 tool in my hand and doing any kind or manner of work 
 after a certain time, it would not only be an injustice to 
 me, but it would be a great loss to me at times : 
 and if I am bound by the present law that is now in 
 existence to do certain things this difficulty will arise. Of 
 course the Mines' ^Regulation Act imposes on us certain 
 obligations to pay attention to various things in connexion 
 with the miner's work ; and if that be so, and a legal eight 
 hours comes into force, the two laws will clash, and the 
 miner must either be continually summoned or he must cer- 
 tainly break the law. 
 
 [8890.) I am in favour of a limitation by arrangement of 
 the present hours of underground labour. 
 
 (8891-5.) [To what extent ?] Eight hours' coal-turning 
 seems to me to be reasonable and fair between employers 
 and employed ; and the eight hours' turning would meet the 
 requirements of the markets, etc. At present the coal-turn- 
 ing hours with us are eight. Out of that we stay off half- 
 an-hour for meal time ; and then we work an extra half-an- 
 hour every day in order to leave work at 12 on Saturday ; .
 
 158 
 
 -and we are paid a full day for it. That is a local arrange- 
 ment that exists at nearly all the collieries in our district. 
 
 (8900.) [Are you under the impression that the advocates 
 of a legal eight hours' day propose to couple with that the 
 abolition of meal time ?] I shall be very pleased indeed to 
 "be convinced that they are not in favour of abolishing the 
 meal time; but so far as I have been led to understand 
 yet, that is so. In fact, Mr. Pickard, in his speech before 
 the Coal Owners' Association in London, on this very 
 question, distinctly told them that he went in for eight 
 hours' continuous work, and no meal time whatever allowed 
 Those were Mr. Pickard's own words. 
 
 (8901.) But there is one thing that I complain about, and 
 a number of the members also complained about it, and that 
 "is the way the ballot papers were drawn up. It was very 
 misleading indeed. The first question upon the ballot paper 
 was : " Are you in favour of eight hours by Act of Parlia- 
 " ment ? " The second question was : " Are you against 
 " eight hours by Act of Parliament ? " Well, as a matter of 
 fact, all the men are in favour of eight hours. I may say I 
 wrote a letter to the press on this very same question draw- 
 ing attention to the unfair way in which the ballot papers 
 were drawn up ; and the men said themselves, " Now, if we 
 do not vote in favour of an eight hours' day by law we are 
 " voting against the eight hours altogether," and thus they 
 were misled. Now .what we say is this. If the ballot papers 
 had been, " Are you in favour of an eight hours by Act of 
 Parliament ?" and then the second question had been, "Are 
 you in favour of an eight hours' day by combination ? " it 
 would have been more satisfactory to the men, and the result 
 would have been very different to what it was. 
 
 (8922.) I do not object to a reduction of the hours to 
 .eight.
 
 159 
 
 (8923.) I mean eight hours' coal turning, not from bank 
 to bank. 
 
 (8924.) On the ballot papers of which I have spoken, the 
 expression " eight hours " was used without being further 
 defined. 
 
 (8925.) [Can you tell us the exact words on the ballot 
 paper?] I can. They are the same words as appear on 
 that ballot paper that has been handed up to the Chairman, 
 only it was in connexion with the legal eight hours, instead 
 of the question that was on that paper that has been handed 
 round. It said, " Are you in favour of an eight hours by Act 
 of Parliament ? " and then the second question was, " Are you 
 against eight hours by Act of Parliament ? " 
 
 (8926.) [Then you told us that every miner in your 
 district was in favour of an eight hours' day?] I do not 
 say everyone. There is a considerable minority. 
 
 (8930.) [Therefore, in your opinion, the statement that 
 that vote was a vote given in favour of a legal eight hours' 
 day from bank to bank would be misleading ?] I think it 
 would. 
 
 (8943.) [Do you think that the men were not well 
 informed as to the difference between an eight hours by legal 
 enactment and an eight hours' day by amicable arrangement ? 
 That is what I do believe that they were not well informed. 
 
 (8951.) [Again with respect to the eight hours from bank 
 to bank and the eight hours' drawing of coal, have you the 
 same opinion also that the men in that case were not aware 
 of the difference ?] Yes, that is so. 
 
 (8954.) [You know what was going on then with 
 respect to the reduction of hours in 1885, 1886, and 1887 ?] 
 I know that the men were in favour of a reduction of 
 hours, but I always understood from the men themselves,
 
 160 
 
 and from what I could glean of their views, that they were in 
 favour of it by combination. 
 
 (8955.) I am quite aware that the agitation for some 
 years has been for the eight hours from bank to bank. That 
 lately has been the agitation among the leaders of the men. 
 I am not here to say it is so among the men, because the 
 men have expressed themselves frequently in my hearing to- 
 the effect that they do not believe in an eight hours from 
 bank to bank. 
 
 (8956.) [Are we to suppose for a moment that the leaders 
 of the men do not reflect the opinion of the men in cases 
 like this ?] It would be hard for me to sit here and say 
 that, but one cannot close one's ears to the sayings that the 
 men make use of among themselves, and it is that which I 
 am repeating to you now. I should not like to cast any 
 reflection whatever upon the agent in any shape or form. 
 If the agents get the majority of votes at any meeting, we 
 are justified in saying that the agents are reflecting the 
 opinions of the men. 
 
 (8957.) [Are you of opinion that they have not had a 
 sufficient majority to justify them in carrying on the agita- 
 tion for reducing the hours from bank to bank ?] I would 
 not like to say that, because when the ballot was taken, it 
 showed quite a contrary result to that. 
 
 (8962.) Undoubtedly there is a misunderstanding among 
 the men. They did not think that by stopping off at a 
 certain time the law would have any effect upon them at all. 
 That was undoubtedly the opinion among a number of the 
 men until recently. In fact, I have conversed with men' 
 myself, and have said : < Now look here, if the law steps an 
 " and prohibits you from working more than eight hours, 
 " you would haye to stop this," and the answer I have got 
 "is, "How is that?'.' I iiave xeplie^, "Simply because it
 
 161 
 
 " will be a legal enactment, and if you stay over the time it 
 " will be illegal and you will be breaking the law." Then 
 they have said they did not know that. 
 
 (8969-70.) [If it was provided that in case of emergency 
 men should be allowed to remain in to do necessary repairs, 
 would that meet the case ? ] It would not, indeed. I know 
 the drift of your question, and I have had that in my mind. 
 If there is a proviso made of allowing men to stay in to do 
 work of various kinds, it would only tend to cause the law 
 to be broken with impunity. They could all say it was a 
 case of emergency, and nobody would be there to witness 
 what kind of work was done. They could say so-and-so, and 
 the law would be evaded and broken continually. 
 
 (8980-1.) The whole question put to the men was, "Are 
 you in favour of an eight hours' day by Act of Parliament, 
 or are you against an eight hours' day by Act of Parliament ?' r 
 And therefore, in my opinion, the men, if they had voted 
 against an eight hours' day by Act of Parliament would 
 have felt they were voting against an eight hours' day. 
 
 (8983.) We have not formulated a demand for eight 
 hours upon the employers through our Union. 
 
 (8985.) There is no reason why we should not do that. I 
 have always thought that we ought to have done it long 
 before now, and so cease the agitation. 
 
 (8992.) [Do you mean eight from bank to bank ? ] No ; 
 I do not think it would meet the requirements of the 
 market at all. To reduce the hours to eight from bank to 
 bank would mean this : the men would be walking in and out 
 in their masters' time, instead of walking in and out in their 
 own time ; consequently they would have to be paid for walk- 
 ing in and out from their work in their masters' time. I 
 may perhaps be allowed to further explain myself in this way, 
 Stallmen contractors who have had men working under
 
 162 
 
 them, sometimes seven men and sometimes less, pay them 
 at present an average wage of about 6s. ; and supposing you 
 adopt a system of eight hours from bank to bank it would 
 mean a considerable reduction from these men's time in 
 turning coal; consequently they would not be able to pay 
 the same amount of wage to their day men unless they get a 
 material advance upon their contract ; and, as a matter of 
 fact, the day men express themselves as totally against any 
 reduction ; and the stallmen say, " "Well, if it comes off, we 
 shall have to reduce you unless we get a substantial rise," 
 and that is where dissatisfaction exists. 
 
 (8993.) [In order to be quite clear upon this, what you 
 desire is not an eight hours' from bank to bank, but an eight 
 hours' day of coal-turning ? ] Quite so. 
 
 (8994.) [And that you practically have in your district at 
 the present time ? ] Yes, that we practically have. 
 
 Mr. ROBERT SMELLIE (20th January, 1892) : 
 
 (9783-5.) I appear here on behalf of the Larkhall coal 
 miners, Lanarkshire. 
 
 (9823-4,) With regard to the hours of labour, the men have 
 been repeatedly tested on the question of a legal eight hours 
 day, and they are unanimous in its favour. In my opinion, 
 and in the opinion of the men generally, eight hours is quite 
 long enough for anyone to be underground, and I believe that 
 an eight hours' day never will be gained in Lanarkshire by 
 organisation that it must be a legislative or legal eight 
 hours' day. The hours wrought at present are about ten 
 per day, from bank to bank. 
 
 (9922.) You say that the men are unanimously in favour 
 of a legal eight hours' day, and you add that you believe that 
 an eight hours' day will never be gained by organisation ; is
 
 163 
 
 "that because you do not believe that you will ever get an 
 organisation sufficiently strong to secure it?] The reason 
 is this : I have seen our organisation adopt an eight 
 hours' day. On the organisation agreeing to adopt an 
 eight hours' day, the employers brought such pressure to 
 bear upon individuals and upon sections of their work- 
 men as to get them to break away from it in spite of 
 all that could be done by the Association. I have known 
 men dismissed because they told their fellow-workmen that 
 the eight hours was up, and that it was time they were 
 going home. I have been told myself in the pit that un- 
 less I went home myself at the end of eight hours, without 
 telling anyone else that the eight hours was up, I would be 
 dismissed. 
 
 (9923.) [Then I presume the employers in your district 
 have a very strong objection to a working day of only eight 
 hours ?] It seems so. 
 
 (9924-5.) I do not know what their objection rests upon. 
 I do not know what their objections are at all. 
 
 (9959.) [You spoke of the miners being almost unani- 
 >mously in favour of the legal eight hours' day, and you said 
 that their opinions had been tested; in what way have they 
 been tested ?] *We balloted the men on the question 
 :about four years ago. Then again we placed before them a 
 petition which we said was to be presented to Parliament, 
 and we asked them to sign their names to it. I would say that 
 about three-fourths of the miners in our district signed the 
 petition in favour of the eight hours day. We have tested 
 
 
 *N.B. In revising his proof Mr. Smellie regretted that he had made 
 a mistake in saying that the men were tested by ballot. He gives as 
 the correct statement : " Pit meetings were held at every pit in the 
 Larkhall district, at which the men were tested by an open vote. We 
 found them unanimously in favour of the eight hours' day." G.D.
 
 the matter openly at several mass meetings, and in every/ 
 case the men have voted in favour of a legislative eight 
 hours day. 
 
 (9960.) [Was this ballot of fonr years ago in the Lark- 
 hall district, or throughout Lanarkshire ? ] In the Larkhall 
 district. 
 
 (9961.) [Did the men generally sign, vote that is ? ] The 
 vote was pretty general at the time. 
 
 (9962.) [By ballot ? ] Yes, by ballot four years ago. 
 
 (9963.) And a large majority were in favour of the eight 
 hours day. 
 
 (9964.) There have not been any recent ballots on the 
 subject. 
 
 (9965.) [You have already expressed the opinion that 
 so far as Lanarkshire is concerned, the eight hours day 
 could not be got by organisation, at least, you are not 
 hopeful that it could ? ] My whole experience for the last 
 17 years has been that it never will be brought about by 
 organisation. I am sorry to have to confess it, but I believe 
 that is the fact. 
 
 (9966.) I do not know anything about the Fife district. 
 
 (9967.) Do you know as a matter of fact that they have an 
 eight hours day by organisation ? ] Ye?, by organisation. 
 
 (9968.) [And that they have had it a long time?] Yes, 
 they have had it a long time. 
 
 (9969.) [Do you not think that there would be very con- 
 siderable difficulty in carrying out and enforcing an eight 
 hours' Act, unless the men had an active and powerful 
 organisation to back it up ?] I think that a legal eight 
 hours' day if passed just now would be carried out, but I 
 consider that it would be carried out a great deal better if"
 
 165 
 
 the men had an organisation to see that it was properly 
 carried out. I believe it would be a great improvement, 
 And fairly well carried out without organisation on the part 
 of the men, but I believe it would be a great deal better 
 carried out, and more to the benefit of the men if they were 
 organised. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAM SMALL, (21st January, 1892). 
 
 (10,157.) I appear here on behalf of the Blantyre Miners 
 .Association, and mining in Lanarkshire generally . 
 
 (10,229.) I wish to speak with regard to the hours of 
 labour. The almost unanimous opinion of Lanarkshire 
 iminers is in favour of an eight hours day by legislation. 
 'This question has been frequently tested by vote throughout 
 the country, and I may say the unanimous voice of every 
 meeting that I have ever been present at was that the 
 legislature should establish immediately an eight hours 
 working day for miners. It has been held out to the work- 
 men by the employers that they are thereby running great 
 risk of foreign competition. The workmen, as a rule, hold 
 this as a bogeyman, and there is no truth whatever in the 
 suggestion that there is any dread or fear of foreign com- 
 petition. The truth is, statistics show that it is the British 
 miner who is handicapping the Continental miner, instead 
 of the Continental miner who would be handicapping the 
 British miner. The output per man in Great Britain is 
 much higher than on the Continent, and the value of coal 
 raised at the pit mouth is much higher on the Continent 
 than it is in Great Britain, so that in those circumstances 
 it is impossible that any fear should arise from foreign 
 competition in the coal trade. The men have studied the 
 .subject thoroughly, and they have looked into it, and they 
 ;are convinced that the dread of foreign competition is 
 simply a bogus cry to divert their attention from the 
 -reform which they want.
 
 166 
 
 (10,231.) All employers are dominated by a spirit of 
 commercialism. They only look at things through com- 
 mercial spectacles. They conceive that the more trade they 
 do the better for themselves, whereas the opposite is the 
 case. 
 
 (10,232.) It is a want of knowledge and enlightenment on 
 their part ? 
 
 (10,233.) I think the interest of the employer equally 
 with that of the workmen would be assisted by the change, 
 and of the nation also, because it is now becoming current 
 thought that we are depleting the country of minerals, and 
 by-and-bye we will be running short of it, whilst the 
 continental nations are saving their mineral wealth, and we 
 ought to direct the attention of the country to that fact. 
 As a national safeguard I think that an eight hour day is 
 necessary. Here are some figures as to the relative output 
 per man of the Continent and British mines, and the average 
 value at the pit bank. 
 
 (The witness put in tables.} 
 
 (10,296.) Although the Lanarkshire miners have not been 
 able to form a strong organisation among themselves, they 
 have nevertheless given the lead to Scotland in the matter 
 of raising wages. 
 
 (10,297.) By limiting the production; that that is the 
 weapon which they use. 
 
 (10,298.) They are unable to combine to obtain for them- 
 selves an eight hours day, because the difficulties in the way 
 of obtaining an eight hour day are very great. I know in 
 Blantyre district, Dixon's workmen, to the extent of 600 
 men, established an eight hours day. They worked upon it 
 for about two months, and the employers, in order to root it 
 out, resorted to evictions from their homes, and the result
 
 167 
 
 was this, that the men rather than submit to those evictions 
 in the winter with no place to go to were coerced into 
 working long hours. 
 
 (10,301.) A five day week is more easily obtained than an 
 eight hours day, because we can watch the men who seek 
 to violate the five day policy by preventing them going to 
 their work, and can prevent them from going to their work 
 by picketing, but you cannot drag a man out of the pit at 
 eight hours. 
 
 (10,304.) I do not suppose the economic conditions would 
 be one whit altered by an eight hours day, because the same 
 amount of coal could be produced in eight hours. 
 
 (10,306.) I am perfectly convinced that the employers are 
 mistaken in supposing that their interests would suffer. 
 
 (10,323.) I think that although competition may be a 
 reality, nevertheless it is not so important as to prevent 
 Parliament legislating for an eight hours' day. 
 
 (10,324.) Paradoxical as it may seem, it is a fact that 
 the more the miners do the less they get for it. I happen 
 to have in my hands the return of a colliery in Durham 
 for 14 years, collected by Mr. Lowthian Bell, and I find that 
 in the six years ending 1869 each man raised per diem 
 80-39 cwts., for which he received 4s. ld'27, and every 
 year, as he decreases his output, so? in proportion does 
 his pay increase. And the very same holds good with the 
 employer. If they would not produce such a large amount 
 of coal they would have a better price and bigger profits. 
 
 (10,449.) [Now how is it then that while you are able 
 to take the initiative in seeking advances of wages (and in 
 enforcing them by strike even when you deem it necessary, 
 notwithstanding your comparative disorganisation) you are 
 unable also to shorten the hours by united action ?] I have
 
 168 
 
 instanced a case already, where one large colliery adopted 
 the eight hours, and a series of evictions and ejection from 
 houses resulted. That broke up the movement. I have 
 seen the sheriff going to 10 one day, to 12 another, to evict 
 men from their homes because they had adopted the eight 
 hours system. 
 
 (10,688-90.) Our standard hours of labour are 10 per day, 
 but I am aware that in another part of Scotland in Fife- 
 shire they are only working eight hours a day, and have 
 been for upwards of twenty years. 
 
 (10,691-3.) We have established the eight hours fre- 
 quently, and we have urged the men over and over again to 
 adopt the eight hours system. I have seen it almost unani- 
 mously adopted in the county, by the workmen themselves, 
 and abandoned in the course of a week or two, or it may be 
 in the course of a month or two. 
 
 (10,710-12.) I have only been speaking on this Com- 
 mission in the interests of miners, but I am of opinion that 
 it ought to be enforced for all trades. I am not going to 
 discuss the merits of the eight hours question, I am 
 simply giving my opinion. I think that an eight hours 
 day is desirable for railway servants above all others. 
 
 (10,713.) I do not assume that there will be any such a 
 thing as forcing an eight hours day upon anyone ; there will 
 be a good deal of permission about the matter. 
 
 Colonel JOSEPH BRAMAH COCHRANE (22nd 
 January, 1892); 
 
 (10,825.) I am Chairman of the South Staffordshire and 
 East Worcestershire Coal Masters' Association, also Chairman 
 oi the South Staffordshire and East Worcestershire Wages 
 Board.
 
 169 
 
 (10,908-9.) The hours of labour are from 7 till 4, with 
 practically an hour out for descending the pit and for the 
 meal. That is eight hours' work. Nine hours from bank 
 to bank ?] 
 
 (10,910.J The ascending cornea out of the nine hours. 
 "The men descend at 7 o'clock, in the employer's time, but 
 they ascend at 4 o'clock in their own time. 
 
 (10,911-12). The skilled men, the hewers, can do their 
 work in much less time, and are allowed to come out as 
 soon as they have done what is called their stint. 
 
 (10,913.) That would only refer to the hewers. The 
 loaders and drawers would be there, as a rule, their full 
 time. 
 
 (10,914.) The hewer I should say, as a rule, would be out 
 in from seven to eight hours according to whether his place is 
 unfavourable or favourable. His place may be difficult or 
 easy, and he would in that time have done from a day and 
 a-quarter to a day and three-quarters, based on the nominal 
 day. 
 
 (10,915-6.) I should put the average hours of the hewer 
 from bank to bank at 7| including descending, but not the 
 ascending. 
 
 (10,917.) Including the ascending time I would make it 
 from 7 to eight hours, I think. 
 
 (10,919.) If their stint was such that they could not do it 
 in the hours, they would at once apply for a reduction of 
 their stint. 
 
 (10,970.) I do not think there is at all a strong feeling 
 in favour of an Eight Hours' Act, making it imperative that 
 underground workmen shall not be in the pit for more than 
 eight hours from bank to bank. I think the miners them-
 
 170 
 
 selves are very divided as to the desirability of it, and I would 
 just add that I think if the eight hours were given with a 
 corresponding reduction of wages it would cause extreme dis- 
 satisfaction. 
 
 (10,971.) The application for eight hours may have been 
 mentioned at our board, but it has never been taken up 
 seriously. 
 
 (10,972.) So far as the coal getters are concerned, they 
 now have practically eight hours' work. 
 
 (10,973.) 7 to eight from bank to bank, but they may 
 work nine if they like. 
 
 (10,974.) No doubt some do j but then they earn so much 
 more money. 
 
 (10,975.) So far as the employers are concerned, no 
 difficulties are thrown in the way of their coming away at 
 eight hours, that I am aware of. 
 
 (11,043.) I do not think that the hours which are now 
 worked are injurious to the health of the men. 
 
 {_!]., 046.) If it were made illegal for anyone to be down 
 more than eight hours, it would reduce the output very 
 considerably, and be very disastrous to our district, from 
 the fact that we have at the present time a commission for 
 draining the mines, and we are very much over head and 
 ears in debt at the present time in that commission, and it 
 depends entirely on oiir increase in trade as to whether we 
 can carry on the mines of the district satisfactorily, if at all. 
 We are now applying for a loan of 100,000, in order to assist 
 in draining the remainder of our district, and to enable us to 
 pay off our present debts, with the interest accruing thereon, 
 and if anything arose whereby our output was considerably
 
 171 
 
 reduced, it would be disastrous for the whole of the district,, 
 and to all the miners and trades in the district. 
 
 Mr. JACOB RAY (22nd January, 1892) : 
 
 (11,078.) I appear here as one of the three representatives 
 of the Colliery Officials' Association for the Ehondda Valley 
 and District. 
 
 (11,079.) The constitution of the Association is of colliery 
 officials of all grades, from the manager down to the fireman. 
 
 (11,080.) It has been in existence for four years. 
 
 (11,099-100.) I have been deputed to say a word upon the 
 proposed eight hours from bank to bank. I have a resolution 
 passed by the association on that point which I will en- 
 deavour to read to you, it was passed last Saturday at our 
 meeting. 
 
 (11,101.) It was the annual meeting. That is the reason 
 why you had not the proof before ; we could not send any 
 points until we met to get the mind of the association. 
 
 (11,102.) There were present at this time certainly 50 or 
 60 in the meeting. The resolution reads : " In the opinion 
 of this meeting the system of eight hours from bank to bank 
 is totally impracticable in its application to the South Wales- 
 coalfield." My reason for supporting that resolution, which. 
 we consider to be impracticable, is that the number of hours 
 that would be allowed by the collier to form his day's work 
 would not be sufficient. Eight hours from bank to bank 
 would not mean more than about 5^ hours' to six horns'" 
 work in the face of his stall ; it would not mean more than: 
 five hours in some cases. In the majority of our pits it 
 would take us now three-quarters of an hour to put the men,
 
 172 
 
 -down every morning ; it would take the men as a rule half 
 an hour to reach their respective working places ; we put 
 it that they take half an hour for meals during the day ; 20 
 minutes are allowed for all men for meal time out of the 
 hours worked at present ; it would take again the men half 
 an hour to get back to the bottom of the shaft in the even- 
 ing, and another three-quarters of an hour to raise all the 
 men out of the shaft ; so taking out the time of descending 
 and ascending, and travelling to the working faces, we find 
 that there would not be more than five hours of actual work 
 at the face. 
 
 (11,130.) I do not say that I would be in favour of any 
 shortening of the present hours of the boys ?] 
 
 (11,131.) I don't think that they are at all too long, 
 comparing the hours they work with the hours I worked as 
 as a boy myself. 
 
 (11,186.) I think there are a great many now of the older 
 -collieries in our district where they could not work more than 
 5| hours if an eight hours' day from bank to bank became a 
 rule. 
 
 (11,187.) I think that it would take about three hours 
 per day for these men to be put down the shaft, walk to 
 their working faces, and the usual 20 minutes for dinner and 
 back again. There is the time of looking to lamps, and in 
 the summer-time they have to wait till their eyesight comes, 
 to see their way. After walking for a mile or a mile and a 
 half, naturally they must have a rest. You could not expect 
 :a man to start working after walking a mile or a mile and a 
 half underground. 
 
 (11,188.) If the proposed eight hours from bank to bank, 
 compulsory by Legislation, was brought about, there would
 
 173 
 
 not be more than 5^ hours work in the face of the collieries'' 
 that are in rny charge now. 
 
 (11,190.) [But do you know a case where, between the- 
 descending and ascending, travelling back and for the &c., 
 three hours a day is taken up ? ] Yes, I do. I can give- 
 you a case or cases where it takes a man to be sent down in 
 the morning 45 minutes, and I know cases where it takes 
 over an hour. I should say 45 minutes is the average time- 
 now taken for putting men down in our district. I put it 
 down that a man would be 10 minutes at the bottom of the 
 shaft locking his lamp and getting his eyesight. I put it on 
 an average, then it would take him half-an-hour to get to- 
 his working face, and it will take more to some of our 
 furthest places. I give him 20 miuutes for meals, according 
 to the custom of the colliers, to eat their food, lunch about 10 
 or 1 1 o'clock, and again about 1 o'clock. Then I take it that 
 it takes half-an-hour to come back again, and another 45 
 minutes to ascend the shaft afterwards. 
 
 (11,191-4.) It is so in the Mainby Colliery now, including 
 meal times and time of ascending and descending from bank 
 to bank. 
 
 (11,196.) [Of course the same thing will exactly apply as 
 to the amount of time to go down and to walk then as it does 
 now. From what you say, I think we are right in inferring 
 that from the nominal number of hours in the pit, these men 
 take three hours to go down to work, to eat their meals, and 
 to come back again ?] Yes. 
 
 (11,207.) I object to the men being debarred from working 
 less than eight hours, in other words I object to an eight 
 hours' bank to bank day. 
 
 (11,208.) I do not find that the hours, as now worked, are- 
 injurious to the health of the people employed in the mines.
 
 174 
 
 <1 1,209.) I have lived among them all my life. 
 Mr . GRIFFITH THOMAS (22nd January, 1892) : 
 (11,214-5.) I am President of the Khondda Collieries 
 Officials' Association, also Certificated general manager of 
 Lockett's Merthyr Collieries. 
 
 (11311) [Do you hold the same opinion as the former 
 witness with respect to the hours of labour?] I should 
 leave that to the Owners' Association to make a start with, 
 not for us to make the start first. I decline to make any 
 remark about it. 
 
 (11,312.) [You do not wish to answer that question?] 
 Not, now; but I am of opinion that it will never answer 
 in South Wales to make eight hours from bank to bank in 
 gteam coal collieries. 
 
 (11,313.) [Then, you are of the same opinion ? ] I have 
 this opinion upon that point. It will never answer in South 
 Wales. I may not see it in my time, and I may see it ; 
 but I am of this opinion to-day before the Commissioners, it 
 will not suit the steam coal collieries in South Wales. 
 
 (11,314.) [What class of men, in your opinion, are they 
 for whom eight hours would be too little for them to do 
 their work in?] Even the ordinary collier himself. If 
 you take eight hours from bank to bank that means 45 
 minutes to go down, 45 minutes to come up, fully half an 
 hour to travel to work, fully half an hour to come back. 
 You put those periods together, and deduct the total from 
 eight, and you will see what will remain, and then you need 
 not ask any more questions about it. 
 
 (11,315.) [But you certainly do not suggest that it takes 
 45 minutes for a man to go down the shaft ?] For every
 
 175 
 
 man to go down the shaft. If every man is to be up in 
 eight hours it means eight hours from bank to bank; that 
 means eight hours for everything, going down, coming up, 
 travelling in, travelling out, meal-time, etc. 
 
 (11,316.) [And you think there is no class of collier in 
 South Wales that would be able to do his work in the remain- 
 ing time ?] We cannot keep going in the steam coal collieries, 
 taking it through and through. That is my experience. 
 
 MR. HOWELL JOHN (22nd January, 1892) 
 
 (11,326.) I am the general manager of Messrs. Perch 
 ,& Co., House Coal Collieries in the Ehondda Valley. 
 
 (11,327-8.) I have worked underground as a collier for 
 .about 23 years, and I am now the certificated manager of 
 these collieries. 
 
 (11,340-1.) With regard to the eight hours' day from bank 
 to bank, I have the resolutions which have been read. In 
 one of the collieries under my charge an eight hours' day 
 from bank to bank would reduce the actual working hours of 
 the men to six hours at the face. The distance to travel 
 underground is nearly three miles ; so that if you take 
 off the time required by the men to walk backwards and 
 forwards, and the half an hour for meals it reduces the work- 
 ing hours by two ; so that instead of eight hours actual 
 working it would only mean six. 
 
 (11,342.) At present they work nine hours. 
 
 (11,343.) They have the privilege of working nine hours. 
 I do not say they all do it. 
 
 (11,344.) [What do you say are their present hours from 
 bank to bank from entering the cage to descend to leaving
 
 176 
 
 the cage after ascending ?] I differ a little on this point 
 from the previous witnesses. Ours are drifts and levels which 
 the men work themselves. It is at present reckoned to be 
 54 hours per week actual working. 
 
 (11,351.) [You think that if the hours were shortened 
 even to the extent of two per day, on the principal working 
 days of the week at any rate, that would not lead to more 
 days being worked per man per month ?] No. 
 
 (ll.,368.) [You spoke of a colliery in which an eight 
 hour day would reduce the working at the face to six hours ?J 
 Yes. 
 
 (11,369.) May I ask if that applies to the whole 
 colliery, or only to some stalls in it ?] To the whole of the 
 colliery. The nearest point of our present workings in 
 that particular colliery is about 2^ miles from the mouth to- 
 the level. 
 
 (11,370.) [May I ask if in that colliery the present hours 
 from bank to bank are longer than in collieries where the 
 workings are not so far off from the surface ?] No. They 
 are not longer than the general rule of the district. 
 
 (11,371.) [So that the time of working at the face in 
 this particular colliery is shorter than at other collieries ?} 
 It is owing to the distance to travel. In the steam coal 
 collieries it takes a longer time to put the men down. 
 
 (11,372.) [Are the men handicapped by that in respect 
 of their wages ?] Of course it is a loss the lees time they 
 work the less money they earn. 
 
 (11,373.) [And they do not try to recoup themselves by 
 working somewLat longer hours from bank to bank ?] Some- 
 of them do.
 
 177 
 
 (11,374.) [It would be possible for them to do so so far 
 as the regulations of the colliery are concerned ?] Yes ;. 
 but not further than 9^ hours or 10 hours. 
 
 (11,375.) [If, however, a legal eight hours' day was 
 established, these men, who are already somewhat handi- 
 capped, would be more heavily handicapped ?] Yes ; it 
 would be impossible then for them to work any more than 
 six hours. 
 
 (ll,37f>.) They would be at a disadvantage in respect of 
 their wages, and the colliery wodld be at a disadvantage 
 compared with other collieries in respect of its output. 
 
 Mr. DAVID EVAN DAVIES, Certificated Manager of 
 the Cwmamon Collieries (23rd January, 1892.) 
 
 (11,441.) We believe that eight hours is impracticable 
 for the coal mining of South Wales. It would reduce the 
 number of actual hours in the face at our colliery to five 
 hours, counting descending the pit 40 minutes, getting eye- 
 sight at the pit bottom 10 minutes, travelling to face 30 
 minutes, meal time 30 minutes, returning 30 minutes, 
 ascending 40 minutes. 
 
 (11,442) The hours we are at present working are the 
 equivalent over a week of the former uniform nine per day. 
 
 (11,443.) And the men may be said now to be from bank 
 to bank an average of nine hours and 40 minutes. 
 
 (11,444.) If they were limited to eight hours from bank 
 to bank that would be a loss of an hour and 40 minutes. 
 
 (11,445) And unless there was any curtailment of meal- 
 times underground, or any expediting of the men going in 
 or coming out, that reduction of an hour and 40 minute* 
 come off the time at the faoe. 
 
 N
 
 178 
 
 (11,446-7.) In this statement I am taking into consideration 
 the half-hour for dinner, the time for winding, and the time 
 occupied by the men in going to and from the face, which 
 would be 180 minutes less than the eight hours, or three 
 hours less than the eight hours of actual working. 
 
 (11,449.) At present there are six hours and 40 minutes 
 at the face. Another objection raised to the eight 
 hours' question is that the nature of the work of hewing 
 coal in South Wales is such that to hurry the men at their 
 work would have a tendency to increase the accidents. The 
 nature of coal mining, especially coal getting in the face, is 
 very dangerous, and should the men be hurried in any way 
 it would have a tendency, in our opinion, to increase the 
 number of accidents in the face. 
 
 (11,450.) I think the limitation of the hours would cause 
 them to hurry, because the time at their disposal in the face 
 to complete the day's work would be so reduced that they 
 could not complete more than two-thirds or three-fourths at 
 the outside of what they are doing now unless they hurry 
 very much. 
 
 (11,451.) lam taking it for granted the rates of wages 
 would continue the same. 
 
 (11,452.) They would endeavour to earn more per hour 
 in fact. 
 
 (11,453.) [Do I understand you to say that the tendency 
 to accidents would be increased by the desire of the men 
 to work harder during the hours that they are at the face, 
 or simply this, that having fewer hours at the face they 
 spend time in working at the face which they would other- 
 wise spend in repairing their stalls ?] No, not exactly 
 that ; I mean that the time at their disposal to work in thej
 
 179 
 
 face would be so reduced, and compulsorily so, and their 
 anxiety to earn as much as they can would have a tendency 
 to compel them to work with greater speed, and in doing 
 that they would neglect the careful examination of their 
 working place, which has to be done every quarter-of-an- 
 hour or half-an-hour ; instead of looking at the danger they 
 would be looking at the tram they would have to fill. And 
 .again, working against time would have a tendency to in- 
 crease the accidents, because the men would be almost 
 compelled to risK more than at present. They would do 
 their utmost to fill their trams, or to complete their cogs, 
 and run out for fear of being prosecuted. Even their hurry 
 to reach the pit in time would have a tendency to increase 
 the number of accidents when the men would be on their 
 way to the pit. We know in South Wales that the men in 
 coming out, when they are a little bit late, now come in such 
 a hurry I do not blame them at all that there is a ten- 
 dency to be too much so, and therefore a liability to lead to 
 an accident. 
 
 (11,454.) [You say "a tendency to be too much so;" 
 to be too much what ? ] In too much of a hurry. 
 
 (11,455-6.) [Do you desire to say more upon the subject of 
 the shortening of the hours ? ] Yes, it has been stated that 
 the greatest number of accidents takes place about the 
 last hour worked, and as a reason for this it is said that the 
 person becomes lethargic or too exhausted to be able to take 
 the necessary precautions against danger. In 1891 the col- 
 liers worked less time, or a less number of hours per day, 
 than they have done at least since 1873 ; and after all we 
 find that the number of accidents in our district was greater 
 in 1891 tian it was in any year when all the men were work-
 
 180 
 
 ing longer hours every day. This proves that the statement 
 is incorrect. 
 
 (11,457.) [Do you mean a greater number absolutely, or 
 a greater number in relation to tons wrought, or number of 
 men employed, or what ?] The greater number of accidents 
 in the district from falls of roofs and sides. 
 
 (11,458.) [Do you mean without reference to the number 
 of men employed or tons raised ?] In every respect in that 
 respect a greater number. 
 
 (11,459.) [Of course, if your output in 1891 was con- 
 siderably more than in 1873 the number of accidents might 
 be larger merely in proportion ?] Yes ; but what I am 
 stating is this: that the number of accidents in 1891 is 
 greater than in any year previous even in proportion to the 
 number of men employed. It is my opinion that the 
 number of hours a person works has nothing to do with 
 the accident he receives until he has worked too many hours 
 or becomes lethargic on account of overwork, or suffers for 
 want of sleep. If we examine the reports of the inspectors 
 for 1890 we find that in some districts, such as Lancashire 
 and Ireland, the greatest number of accidents underground 
 take place on the third floor, while other reports prove 
 that there is no real difference in the hour. My own 
 experience of 33 years confirms this statement. But in 
 the steam coal collieries of South Wales, especially in bad 
 roof, it is certain that there is more danger and more 
 liability to accident in the first two or three hours of every 
 shift, because during the 16^ hours or so that the place has 
 been standing, the roof, bottom, and coal have been 
 "working" or moving, and the' collier does not know 
 to what extent. It takes him some time to become
 
 181 
 
 familiar, as it were, with the real dangers of his place. 
 Anything that is working while he is there he can 
 tell very nearly as to the real extent of the danger caused 
 by this squeezing. I firmly believe that it is upon the 
 individual workman we must rely for the best results so as to 
 prevent all kinds of accidents underground. No Acts of 
 Parliament, no inspectors, and no scientific appliances can 
 liminate from our mines the sources of danger or remove 
 the necessity for individual and constant care on the part of 
 our workmen, who are actually engaged in a work which is 
 surrounded by so many sources of danger to life and limb as 
 coal mining. Those workmen must be (and are continually,' 
 educated more, and convinced of the importance of taking 
 care of their own lives and limbs. 
 
 (11,506.) [You say that the introduction of an eight hour& 
 day would reduce the hours of working at the face in your 
 colliery to five ?] Yes. 
 
 (11,507.) [That at the present time the hours worked at 
 the face in your colliery are six hours and 40 minutes ?] 
 About that. 
 
 (1 1,508-9.) [The time therefore actually lost in descending 
 the pit, travelling to the face, meal time, and so forth, 
 amounts at your colliery to no less than three hours ?] Three 
 hours. 
 
 (11,510.) [Is that exceptional or common?] No; our 
 colliery, I think, is a typical colliery of the Aberdare and 
 Merthyr Valleys. 
 
 (11,511.) [You mean in most of those collieries there 
 would be, from the causes which you have mentioned, a loss 
 of three hours as between the time from bank to bank and 
 the time actually worked at the face ?] Yes ; the average I
 
 182 
 
 (11,592-3.) [Working eight hours would be rather too 
 much ?] I believe so ; continually working for eight hours is 
 rather too much continually working I mean, 
 
 (11,594.) [Then the difference between you and the body 
 of the miners is a difference of degree, and not of principle ?] 
 I suppose so, but I do not exactly know what the opinion of 
 the miners is. 
 
 (11,626.) I have had over 30 years' work underground. 
 
 (11,627.) I know a great many people who also have 
 worked a long time underground. 
 
 (11,628.) I have friends and relatives who are working 
 underground now. 
 
 (11,629.) [Do you find that the number of hours they are 
 worked is injurious to their health ? No ; they always work 
 in a temperature varying from 64 degrees to 70 degrees. 
 
 Mr. EDWARD JONES (9th February, 1892) Mining 
 Engineer and Colliery Owner, and Past Chairman of 
 the Monmouthshire and South Wales Colliery Owners' 
 Association : 
 
 (11,686.) The proposal of reducing the hours of labour to 
 eight per day would have an unfortunate effect on the work- 
 ing of collieries in Monmouthshire. At present the steady 
 and attentive part of the men can do about 50 hours' work 
 in the face per week, and if, from any cause, time is lost on 
 one or two days, it can to an extent, be made up on the re- 
 maining days of the week; but eight hours per day would pre- 
 vent this being done unless the conditions were modified to 
 48 per week. Some of the advocates in favour of limiting 
 the day to eight hours from bank to bank appear to believe 
 that neither the earnings or the cost of production would be 
 materially affected, but my experience is entirely the revei&e
 
 183 
 
 At a pit where the wages are made up and paid weekly 
 I have succeeded in arriving at the cost for the 12 
 months ending June 1891. In 25 weeks the colliery 
 worked 6 days per week to 54 hours from bank to bank, 
 In the remaining 27 weeks only 429 hours were worked from 
 bank to bank, the loss being on account of colliers' holidays 
 and bad trade. The increased cost in the 27 weeks as com- 
 pared with the cost in the 25 weeks of full time was 9d. per 
 ton and the loss caused as a direct result of Mabon's holidays 
 was o^d. per ton. It has been said that by more diligent 
 attention to work a man would produce in eight hours nearly 
 as much as in nine. From this view I entirely differ, but 
 even if this could be done the difficulty would not be over- 
 come, as the daily output of each pit is limited to the wind- 
 ing and hauling power of the engines and other machinery, 
 and the loss of one hour's winding daily must necessarily and 
 absolutely reduce the output more than 10 per cent.; besides 
 there is no sound reason to conclude that the large number 
 of men who voluntarily absent themselves from work in the 
 early days of the week would be different under the new 
 condition of things ; the abstentions over a year in one pit I 
 have taken were 41-3 per cent, on Mondays and 14*3 per 
 cent, on Tuesdays. The double-shift system appears to me 
 the only remedy to meet shortened hours of eight per day. 
 
 (11,725.) With regard to the hours, ten is the maximum. 
 
 (11,726.) Nobody would be engaged under ordinary cir- 
 cumstances underground for more than 10 hours, very 
 rarely, I think ; they go in our district at 7 o'clock, and 
 they come up about 4 or half- past. 
 
 (11,727.) The average hours of the coal-getters : .n the 
 face, I should say, would be about seven and a-half hours per 
 day. 
 
 (11,728.) And from bank to bank it would vary of course 
 with the distance from the bottom of the pit to the top, at
 
 184 
 
 the surface. That would average three-quarters of a mile, I 
 should say. 
 
 (1 1,746.) Some men go to work with more method and with 
 more care than others, and can do, perhaps, quite as much as 
 other men merely throwing physical strength into their 
 work in a limited number of hours. I think it would be 
 very prejudicial to some of the best of our men to hurry them 
 over their work. I think it would add very much to the 
 number of accidents. They can do a certain amount of 
 work and get a certain amount of money by their earnings 
 to support them and their families, but if you hurry them or 
 rush them, and tell them they must do a certain amout of 
 work in so many hours less, I think it would certainly tend 
 to increase the number of accidents. 
 
 (11,747.) No, I do not think you can come to any conclu- 
 sion on that point. 
 
 (11,748.) At one of our pits we wind about 51 ; at others 
 we wind, I think, about 52; that is assuming that the 
 machinery and everything goes smoothly during the whole 
 week, but you cannot guarantee that for any individual week. 
 51 hours in one pit, which I have in my mind, would be the 
 maximum, but possibly we should not be winding coal more 
 than 48 or 49, from such accidents happening as a rope 
 breaking or something of that kind, which you cannot avoid. 
 Occasionally we are short of trucks for ten minutes, and 
 therefore I think we must deal with the matter in a practical 
 way. I do not think the actual winding would be more than 
 48 or 49 hours. 
 
 (11,751.) The average of the appointed winding hours 
 does not reach 54 per week. On Monday they wind from 7 
 to half-past 1 o'clock. 
 
 (11,754.) The average number of hours that the men aie 
 in the colliery in our district, I think, would be 54. The 
 winding is, as I have told you, 51 hours, and we add to
 
 185 
 
 that half an hour each day for the men being in the pit. 
 They commence at half-past 6, and they are supposed to be 
 all down at 7. That gives a mean average of a quarter to 7 
 every morning, and at night they commence coming up at 
 half past 4 and finish at 5 That would make an average of 
 a quarter to 5, which would give 54 hours per week from 
 bank to bank ; that is the maximum. 
 
 (11,755.) In our district, as regards the hours worked, 
 they are certainly not more than 54 hours. That is the 
 maximum. There is nothing to preclude a workman re- 
 maining underground a little later, but I think it is very 
 rarely they do so. 
 
 (11.756.) He is able to come if he likes, and I should say 
 95 or 97 per cent, of them do come out. 
 
 (11,757.) I speak in regard to that in connexion with the 
 Monmouthshire and South Wales Coal Association as a body 
 spreading over the whole district. 
 
 (11,814.) The effect of reducing the working hours from 
 54 hours per week to 48 hours per week would be an increase 
 of the cost of production of above 9^d. per ton. It would 
 make at least that difference. 
 
 (11,816.) Increasing the general cost of production of coal 
 in our neighbourhood would affect manufacturers prejudi- 
 cially, especially the tin-plate trade. That is a trade there 
 is a very keen competition in now, and I think that any 
 additional cost upon the coal would fall upon that, arid would 
 tend to limit the production of tin-plates very much in the 
 country. Our district is the large producing district of tin 
 plates, and just as present the state of that trade is in a very 
 poor condition. 
 
 (11,817.) It would in many cases have the effect of closing 
 a portion of the works in our district. It has had that 
 tendency. The high prices lately have had largely that 
 tendency.
 
 186 
 
 (11,831.) With regard to the hours of labour I do not con- 
 sider that the hours at present worked are prejudicial to the 
 health of the men employed in the mines. I think they are 
 quite as short as they ought to be. I have had nearly 40 
 years' experience, and they are very much shorter now than 
 they were then, and the rate of wages paid is certainly double 
 what it was 40 years ago and the hoars are several per day 
 less than they were then. 
 
 (11,832.) Certainly I do not consider the men are un- 
 healthy by reason of working the number of hours they now 
 work. 
 
 (1 1,833.) I have the greatest objection to limiting the hours 
 of labour of any adult person. One may may do quite as much 
 as he is able in nine hours ; another man may do it in eight 
 hours ; but I think it would be very disastrous to limit the 
 hours of adult labour. 
 
 (11,849.) [I should like to know from you whether it is 
 your opinion that the work of miners would be carried on 
 under safer conditions if the hours of labour were reduced by 
 legislation to eight ? ] I think the accidents would increase 
 as compared with the present time. I think the number of 
 hours that the stall would be idle would be greater than at 
 present. The men would also know that they would be 
 limited to eight hours a day. What they are now doing in 
 a methodical and careful manner would afterwards (that 
 would be the tendency) be done in a hurry, and what is done 
 in a hurry generally is not well done. I think it would tend 
 to increase accidents. 
 
 MR. WILLIAM THOMAS.- 
 
 (11,899.) I am a colliery owner and mining engineer 
 practising in South Wales.
 
 187 
 
 (11,900.) I am a member of the Monmouthshire and South 
 Wales Coalowners' Association, and also of the Sliding Scale 
 Committee. 
 
 (11,901.) Have had over 50 years' experience of under- 
 ground work, having commenced working as a miner boy 
 when eight years old, and continued working as a collier till 
 T was 24, and have been immediately concerned with collieries- 
 ever since. 
 
 (1 1,902.) Am now in charge of a number of collieries, some 
 of them being the most important in the coalfield, the 
 aggregate output of them being nearly a million and a half 
 tons per annum. 
 
 (11,903-4.) I have heard the evidence that has just been 
 given by Mr. Edward Jones, and I generally concur in that 
 evidence, 
 
 (11,906.) I desire to say something with regard to an 
 eight hours' shift. I am far from approving of restricting 
 the hours of labour of adult workmen. My experience is that 
 even now with the nine hours' shift many of our steady men, 
 even when the pits are regularly going, are working occasion- 
 ally more than nine hours. Men are not all constituted 
 alike. Some, owing to their being naturally slow in their 
 movements, and their habits of doing everything in a 
 methodical manner, take longer time to do their work than 
 men of smarter movements and less concise habits. It 
 would be most unjust to the slow workmen to have the hours 
 curtailed below nine. I am certain from my own experience 
 that the result of compelling the men, under a penalty, to do 
 their day's work in eight hours would very largely increase 
 the accidents in our mines, for the men in their eagerness to 
 fill coal would, especially about the end of the shift, not take 
 the necessary time to do what was necessary to secure their
 
 188 
 
 .safety. In slack times we are not able to give oar men any- 
 thing like regular work ; other times accidents occur, and. 
 depending as we do upon our shipping, stormy weather often 
 prevents their working regularly. In such cases, when a man 
 has been idle for two or three days, it would be a pitiful 
 thing to stop him working either early or late to earn all the 
 money he could when work could be had. Let one picture 
 to himself a good honest collier having been kept idle two or 
 three days through no fault of his own, owing to an accident 
 to the machinery, or a storm, being prevented from working 
 two or three hours extra when he gets a chance to get an 
 honest living for himself and family ; the idea to me is pre- 
 posterous. I know that when I worked as a collier I should 
 have looked with great dissatisfaction upon any attempt by 
 legislation to regulate my hours of working when I had the 
 opportunity and felt inclined to earn as much money as I 
 cmld. Working the collieries of my district now is much 
 different to what it was when I was a youngster. In my 
 younger days miners used to work 12, 14 and 15 hours per 
 day, and for weeks at a stretch in the winter time we would 
 not see daylight except on Saturday afternoon and Sunday, 
 and had often to work in atmospheres so vitiated that to 
 obtain some glimmer of light we had to place the candles 
 -almost horizontally before they would burn. At that time a 
 man must have been a very good workman indeed, and work 
 hard, to earn from 15s. to 18s. per week, while the datal men 
 were still lower. The collieries at work in those days had but 
 little gas to contend with, and were worked by a naked light, 
 .and were badly ventilated, and men and boys greatly 
 suffered for want of ventilation. Thank goodness the 
 collieries are now well ventilated, the exudation of gas in 
 them demanding a large volume of air to clear it away, so 
 that as a matter of fact the atmosphere in most of our 
 collieries, and especially so in our largest collieries, is as pure 
 and perhaps purer than it is in many public places and many
 
 189 
 
 places of business in large towns. So as far as our collieries 
 especially steam coal collieries, where a current varying 
 from 100,000 to 300,000 cubic feet per minute is being 
 circulated through the workings are concerned, it is not 
 right to assume that to spend nine or ten hours in the pits 
 is detrimental to health. In fact, a collier's occupation in 
 these days is emphatically a healthy one, working as he does 
 in good fresh air and in an even temperature. The work of 
 a collier in our steam coal pits has been greatly changed of 
 late years, since the sinking of our deep pits and the 
 introduction of the long wall system of working. There 
 is more creep, squeeze, or crush now in the deep pits 
 than there was formerly in the shallow ones, and this 
 squeeze loosens the coal, making it easier to get, but at 
 the same time it makes the roof more troublesome and 
 dangerous, and though it gives the collier less trouble 
 to get the coal, it no doubt gives him more trouble to 
 keep his roof up, and the net effect is that the Welsh steam 
 collier of to-day does not do anything approaching the 
 amount of manual labour, nor does he require as much skill 
 to get his coal as the colliers of 30, or 40, or 50 years ago, 
 when the old system of pillar and stall working was in 
 vogue, while his earnings for the same amount, or rather 
 the lesser amount, of manual labour is more than double 
 what it was then. The happy result is that the colliers 
 of to-day and their families are better fed, better 
 clothed, and better housed, while his children are far 
 better educated. 
 
 (11,910.) [You have spoken on the subject of a legal eight 
 hours' day ; but I do not think you told the Committee 
 what, in your opinion, would be the economic effect of such 
 a measure ?] The economic effect would be that it would 
 increase our cost pro rata to the reduction in the hours of 
 labour ; that would be the economic effect.
 
 190 
 
 (11,911.) [It would reduce the output ?] It would reduce 
 the output ; it would reduce all labour. 
 
 (11,912.) [While the permanent charges remained the 
 .same ?] The permanent charges remaining the same. 
 
 (11,913.) [Would the effect of that be so serious as to 
 cause the closing of collieries in your district ?] I am afraid 
 it would. With the exception of the last two or three years, 
 we have had hard work to live, and I have known many 
 .collieries that have been making nothing at all for some 
 years. 
 
 (11,914.) [And you are afraid that in many cases, if such 
 an enactment was passed, it would just make the difference 
 between a colliery being kept open and being closed ?] I 
 have no doubt that many of them would be entirely closed. 
 
 (11,915.) [Especially in times of pressure?] In the 
 ordinary times ; take the first seven years of the last ten, I 
 liave no doubt it would have that effect. 
 
 (11,916.) [The collieries that would be closed would 
 naturally be the weakest, those least favourably situated 
 from the economic point of view ?] Yes, that would be so ; 
 they would be closed first, and then the others would follow, 
 may be. 
 
 (11,917.) [A similar effect, I presume, would follow from 
 the enactment of an eight hours' day upon those miners 
 who were less skilled or less strong than their fellows ; the 
 weakest would have to go to the wall ?] Well, those who 
 work by piece-work would not earn the same money. 
 
 (11,918.) [And the owners would also, I suppose, naturally 
 prefer to retain in their employment the men who would 
 produce the largest output ?] Yes, they would naturally. 
 
 (11,919.) [There would be a kind of selection going on 
 therefore in which the weaker men would constantly be
 
 191 
 
 thrown out of employment ?] Yes ; we could not afford to 
 pay them the money that we are paying them for a less 
 amount of manual labour. But almost a more serious thing 
 than that would be this. I believe it would be very greatly 
 attended with more accidents; men would hurry I am 
 speaking from my own personal experience 
 
 (11,920.) [I am coming to the question of accidents in a ' 
 moment, if you do not mind. You think that the economic 
 effect would be to close the collieries that were least favour- 
 ably situated, and to deprive of work the men who bad the 
 least advantages of strength or skill ?] Naturally ; and the 
 result of that would be a competition on their part in the 
 labour market. 
 
 (11,922.) [I now ask you if you do not think that an eight 
 hours' day might nevertheless be justified by considerations 
 of the miners' health or of the miners' safety ?] It would 
 take a great deal to convince me that an hour more or Jess 
 in the pit would prejudice the miner's health ; that is my 
 opinion. 
 
 (11,923.) [Your opinion is that the miner's health does 
 not suffer by an additional hour a day ?] Not in the least. 
 
 (11,924.) [Do you know whether there are any statistics 
 existing that bear on this point ?] No, I have not gone 
 into that. 
 
 (11,925.) [You are not aware whether any such exist or 
 no t ?] No, I have simply confined myself chiefly to the 
 district and my practical knowledge of mining. 
 
 (11,926.) [Speaking as a practical man your impression is 
 that if the hours of labour were reduced from nine or ten to 
 eight it would not make any serious difference in the health 
 of the miners ?] No, not the slightest. 
 
 (11,927.) [And it is further your opinion that at the 
 present time mining must be regarded as a healthy occupa-
 
 192 
 
 tion compared with other occupations ?] Yes, certainly ; I 
 see nothing in it otherwise, 
 
 (11,928.) [Now with regard to accidents. If you were to 
 reduce the hours of working in mines from nine to eight, 
 what effect would that have upon the safety of the miners ; 
 would it reduce the number of accidents ?] I believe it 
 would increase the number of accidents because a man would 
 feel that he must do the work within a certain period and he 
 would omit or neglect to do what is necessary for his own 
 safety. Take this, for instance ; the collier has to stand the 
 timber posts, cogs, and so forth in the face of his working. 
 The collier now fills possibly his last tram of coal, the last 
 tram comes to him and he fills it just about the time of 
 leaving off. While filling that tram he finds a slip running 
 up in the roof. Slips are the great cause of accidents in our 
 district. If he is bound to be on the top of the pit by a 
 certain time he cannot stand that post ; he cannot stand 
 that timber ; he cannot stand that cog to make his place safe 
 for the next shift. Perhaps he will see the necessity of 
 standing a post in the middle of filling his tram ; he knows 
 he has only a certain time to do it ; he neglects standing 
 that post ; the result would be an accident, whereas now 
 there is no obligation upon him to be out within a half an 
 an hour or an hour of the end of the shift, and he does as a 
 steady man and a good workman what is necessary, even at 
 the cost of being in for an hour later than his fellow men. 
 
 MR. WILLIAM JENKINS (10th February, 1892.) 
 
 (12,074.) I am a Mining engineer of upwards of 30 years' 
 standing, and indeed have been engaged in coal mining all 
 my life. 
 
 (12,075.) I am now, and have been for about 21 years 
 past, the general manager of the Ocean Collieries, and 
 a director of the Ocean Company.
 
 193 
 
 (12,076.) These collieries are situated partially in the 
 Khondda Valley on the South Wales Coalfield. They are 
 steam coal collieries. They are also partially situated in the 
 Ogmore Valley and in the Grarw Valley, and also at Ynysybwl, 
 adjoining the Aberdare Valley. 
 
 (12,077.) I have heard the evidence given by Mr. Jone.s 
 and by Mr. Thomas. 
 
 (12,078.) And I think I agree with Mr. Jones' evidence 
 throughout. 
 
 (12,085.) The day's work is nine hours generally at the 
 pits throughout the district, or 54 hours, less two hours for 
 meals, per week. Any time worked beyond 54 hours per 
 week for any class of men connected with the pits is paid for 
 extra. 
 
 (12,086-92.) What that really means, is this : that the pits 
 are occupied in winding for that 54 hours continuously 
 excepting 20 minutes in the middle of the day when they 
 stop for meal time. That really applies to the people who 
 are immediately connected with the pits. After a workman 
 has reached the bottom of the shaft it may safely be assumed, 
 if a collier, that he is on the average about three-quarters of 
 a mile from his working place, and as a matter of practice 
 after a workman has reached the bottom of the shaft it is 
 necessary for him to be a little time between the bottom of 
 the shaft and the lamp locking station, where he has his 
 lamp examined and locked by an official, who is also in 
 immediate charge of the district where he works, and who 
 gives him any necessary directions before he proceeds to his 
 work. The time thus occupied and the time occupied in 
 walking to his working place cannot be accomplished on the 
 average in less than half-an-hour. The working place 
 reached, examined, the tools looked up, the victualling box 
 put down together with the jacket, it is certainly on the 
 
 o
 
 194 
 
 average a quarter to 8 before there is a stroke of work done 
 in the face. Some of the earlier men may have reached 
 their working place a quarter of an hour earlier. Work will 
 then go on by the average man until 10 o'clock, when as a 
 rule he will take 20 minutes for his lunch, then will work on 
 again until 1 o'clock when at least 20 minutes to half-an- 
 hour will be taken for his dinner. Again work will be 
 resumed until about a quarter to 4, when if everything is all 
 right in the face, work will cease, and the collier will be 
 wending his way out. On the other hand, if there is any- 
 thing special calling for his attention, as frequently happens, 
 a piece of top requires ripping, a cog requires wedging, a 
 pair of timber or some post requires standing, he sets about 
 the performance of those requirements, which frequently 
 necessitates his staying in the working place a quarter or 
 half-an-hour, sometimes an hour after the regular time for 
 ceasing work in his working place. 
 
 (12,093.) What he does in this way is paid by his tonnage 
 upon the coal, by so much per yard, for the thickness that he 
 rips for his ripping, and so much for the cogs. The setting 
 of the posts is included in the cutting price of the coal. 
 
 (12,024.) And if he had done this work within the nine 
 hours, he would have got less coal. What happens very 
 frequently is this : that after he ceases work, and has filled 
 up his last tram of coal, he finds that it is necessary for him 
 to stand a post or possibly that the top may have taken to 
 what we term " work," and he may possibly have to stand a 
 pair of timber, for the safety of the place. This is substan- 
 tially the daily practice of colliers who are employed at 
 piece work, so much per ton for the coal, and so much per 
 yard for the ripping. The actual time such a workman will 
 be in 'the face of his place will average, say, irom 7.45 until ; 
 until 3.45, less three-quarters of an hour for meals, or, say 
 hours' -work. 

 
 195 
 
 (12,096.) This working time of 7 or 7 hours is quite little 
 enough for a man to give out his labour in a manner that 
 shall earn to him a reasonable reward for his toil, and not in 
 any manner to overstrain his energy or to deprive him of 
 reasonable enjoyment of life. I am firmly of the conviction 
 that any reduction of the working hours would be wholly 
 impracticable in our collieries, and would result in the 
 failure on the part of the workman to give out his labour to 
 the best advantage. If he were hurried he would be doing 
 an injustice to himself, by running unnecessary risks, and by 
 the strain upon him physically the fatalities in the face 
 would be increased. Eight hours from bank to bank would 
 reduce this working time of 7 hours by, first of all, one hour, 
 leaving 6 hours, and, again, by the mean time taken for 
 men to descend and ascend ; and assuming that it takes, as 
 it does in our collieries, three-quarters of an hour to descend 
 and ascend respectively, and taking the mean of the descend- 
 ing and ascending time at three-quarters of an hour, the 6 
 hours worked will be again reduced by three-quarters of an 
 hour, or, say, to 5 hours as the maximum time that a mean 
 time collier would be at his working face. This is on the 
 assumption that the same time is taken for refreshment in 
 both cases, which I think substantially would be the case. 
 
 (12,097.) [That is to say, that, in the calculations that you 
 have made and placed before us, showing the time that a 
 collier is now at the working face, you have not taken into 
 account the time occupied in ascending and descending the 
 shaft ?] No ; he is actually at the face for that 7 hours. 
 
 (12,101.) [I do not know whether I have correctly followed 
 the last answer, that a reduction to eight hours from bank to 
 bank would practically leave only 5| hours work in the face ?] 
 That is what I mean. That is excluding the time that is 
 (usually taken for meals.
 
 196 
 
 (12,102.) [That is 5| hours' work?] Five and a-half 
 hours' work. That is what I said. 
 
 (12,103.) [Of course, that is equivalent to saying, you 
 know, that the time now from bank to bank is 9| hours ?] 
 Quite so. 
 
 (12,104 ) [You say that to reduce the time from bank to- 
 bank to eight hours would make a difference of an hour and* 
 three-quarters, hence, at present, it must be 9| from bank to- 
 bank ?] Clearly so, the mean time now. 
 
 (12,106.) [Eight hours from bank to bank ?] No. These- 
 are eight hours shifts ; that is, eight hours work, less half- 
 an-hour for meals, or a net working time of 7| hours in the- 
 face of the work, relieving one another at the face, or, in case 
 of shaft-sinking, at the bottom of the shaft. 1 think it would 
 be impracticable for us to keep our collieries open with only 
 working 5i hours on the coal and o hours on repairs out of 
 the 24 hours, and if only such proposal is to be entertained,, 
 it can only result in either the closing of the collieries or a- 
 complete revolution in our system of working, the outcome- 
 of which I do not at present see through. At the present 
 time, for every 100 colliers we have at work cutting coal and 
 doing necessary repairs in the face of their own working 
 places, we have employed 100 other men in hauling, hitch- 
 ing, labouring, ostlering, and officials engaged in repairing 
 and keeping open the roads. These men, at present, work 
 the same hours as the colliers, and if the proposal for re- 
 ducing the number of hours of the colliers is carried out,, 
 which really means something like 24 per cent, reduction in 
 their hours, the same will have to apply to the repairers and 
 others ; in other words, the repairers and others will have to- 
 be increased in number by 20 to 24 per cent. And this is 
 further aggravated by the fact that the collier at present de- 
 votes some 35 to 40 per cent, of his energy in his working.
 
 197 
 
 place towards repairs and maintenance of his own working 
 place open ; and unless the collier can give out his energy 
 under the altered state of things in 5^ hours to the same 
 extent that he does now in 7 hours, which, in my opinion, 
 is physically impossible, the colliery is bound to close, not- 
 withstanding that the staff of repairers is increased by 20 to 
 24 per cent., or again increased in proportion to the failure 
 of the collier to produce the same quantity of coal as he does 
 now when working 7 hours. There is a limitation to the 
 number of men that can be put on to work in repairing ad- 
 vantageously, or they become in one another's way. I should 
 like to say that our thick seams of steam coal, and their sur- 
 surroundings, are totally different from any other seams of 
 coal in this country that I know of, and that it is quite im- 
 practicable for a collier to leave his working place at any 
 stated time day by day. This, I submit, is demonstrated 
 >by the fact, which I believe to be the fact, from my in- 
 spection of nearly every coalfield in the country, and that 
 is, that we are obliged to use in our steam coal collieries 
 about three times the quantity of pit wood for a given 
 quantity of coal to what is used in any other district in the 
 country. 
 
 (12,108.) For the collier to curtail his labour by the pro- 
 posals made on his behalf would mean a reduction of the 
 output from him by 20 to 24 per cent, ; in other words, the 
 quantity of coal upon which everybody is to be paid out of 
 would be reduced by either one-fourth or one-fifth. Assum- 
 ing a collier on the average at present sends out 2 tons of 
 <*oals per day, he would only, under the altered state of 
 things, send out 1^ tons or 1 ton 12 cwt. This quantity 
 would have to bear all the charges now payable in respect of 
 the 2 tons, or a con sequent distributed increased charge. 
 
 (12,109.) The tonnage prices to the collier would be 
 -exactly the same. But in consequence of the disproportion
 
 198 
 
 of the quantity of the reduced quantity of coal from the 
 collier all the other staff would be the same. 
 
 (12,117.) The present staff, outside the colliers, is only 
 sufficient to keep the colliery in proper repair. If their time 
 is to be reduced in the same manner as the colliers, it will be 
 necessary to increase the number in proportion to the limita- 
 tion of hours, especially as to timber-men and labourers. 
 They would have to be increased to the full proportion of the 
 reduction of hours, as there are now only sufficient to main- 
 tain the colliery in repair. Some of the other classes would 
 not necessarily be increased. This is not all, nor anything 
 like it. With a lapse of four hours between the shifts the 
 falls would be nore numerous, the roof will be more friable, 
 and more men will be injured, in my opinion, and a con- 
 siderable number of the working places will daily be stopped 
 by reason of falls. 
 
 (12,123.) Assuming that an eight hours day from bank to 
 bank was established, and that the repairing shift went down 
 at 7 o'clock in the evening, as they do now, then there would 
 be an additional number of hours between the time of the 
 hewer leaving his place, and the repairer going in to attend 
 to the repairs. 
 
 (12,124.) Consequently that there will be a greater amount 
 of work to be done by reason of falls of roof and crush, and 
 those other things which you refer to. 
 
 (12,126.) I would also like to point out to the Commission 
 that eight hours from bank to bank limits the winding power 
 of the colliery by the time which is occupied in letting the 
 men down and up, and which I have put at three-quarters-of- 
 an-hour on each occasion. I wish to submit that it is not 
 restriction in getting coal at the face which is necessary, but 
 rather the very opposite more coal from the face is required 
 so as to enable the faces to advance quicker and safer. I
 
 consider myself that one of our weaknesses in our system of 
 coal mining in South Wales is the slowness at which our 
 faces advance. Now, with reference to the double shifts, it 
 has been suggested that we should have double shifts. I am 
 not strongly in favour of double shifts, at the same time, I 
 feel strongly the necessity of getting more coal from the 
 faces in the interests of safety and economy, and, as a matter 
 of opinion, some system of double shift would be of advan- 
 tage. If we could only see that the colliers can really render 
 their labour out in shorter hours, it is clearly to the interest 
 of the colliery owners to afford every facility for so doing, on 
 the ground of the economy and safety in getting the coal 
 worked quicker from smaller areas. 
 
 (12,130.) [It is your conviction that a limitation of the 
 hours must have the effect of reducing output ? ] Yes ; that 
 is a limitation of the hours of the colliers. 
 
 (12,131.) [Now, I suppose that that would not necessarily 
 involve a reduction in the tonnage rate paid to the miners, 
 although it might affect the total wages that they are able 
 to earn ? ] It would not affect the tonnage rate at all, not 
 even the yardage rate. 
 
 (12,132.) [But the permanent charges would remain the 
 same, while the output would be diminished, and therefore the 
 permanent charges would be heavier in proportion than they 
 are now ? ] They, of necessity, I think, would be in greater 
 proportion, they certainly would remain the same, but I 
 think they would be considerably increased necessarily. 
 
 (12,133.) [Do you think the permanent charges would 
 actually be increased ? ] That is my strong conviction. 
 
 (12,134.) We should have to employ a larger staff of 
 people, for the maintenance of our collieries and for the 
 repairs.
 
 200 
 
 (12,135.) [Now, what do the permanent charges princi- 
 pally consist of the payment of wages to men other than 
 the hewers ? ] Yes ; the hewers are only 50 per cent, of the 
 total number of men employed. Roughly, the gross wages 
 earned by the hewers would possibly be about 10 per cent, 
 larger in amount than the gross wages earned by all the other 
 class of workmen employed at the colliery underground. 
 
 (12,136.) [And your permanent charges would include the 
 wages paid to these other men ? ] Yes. 
 
 (12,137.) [Supposing the hours of the hewers were reduced, 
 you would, at the same time, proportionately reduce the 
 hours of these datal men, would you not ? ] I think it would 
 follow as a matter of necessity. 
 
 (12,138.) [So far as they work underground, the proposal 
 would be that their hours should be limited in the same way 
 as the hours of the hewers ? ] That is what I understand 
 the proposal to be. 
 
 (12,139.) [Would it be possible, under those circumstances, 
 to reduce their wages ? ] I do not think so. 
 
 (12,140.) [The wages of the hewers themselves would be 
 reduced if the output was reduced, because, assuming the 
 tonnage rate to remain the same, they would receive payment 
 for a less quantity ? ] Yes, because they would be paid by the 
 quantity. 
 
 (12,141.) [Do you think it would be impossible to make a 
 proportionate reduction in the wages of the datal men?] 
 I think so. I do not think that they would take a reduc- 
 tion. 
 
 (12,142.) [You believe they would refuse to take a reduc- 
 tion ? ] I think so. 
 
 (12,143.) [Do you think the hewers would be prepared to
 
 201 
 
 accept a reduction but on the total wages that they receive ? ] 
 I do not know. Of course, I do not know exactly what the 
 guiding principle is. I do not know that they really believe 
 that they are going to have a reduction possibly. 
 
 (12,144.) [Supposing the legal limitation to an eight hours 
 day made it necessary either to close the collieries or to re- 
 duce the total amount received in wages by the men, you 
 believe that that is a consequence which the men do not in 
 t he least foresee ? ] Yes. 
 
 (12,145.) [And that, if such a consequence came about, 
 they might be willing to go back to the old system again ?] 
 I do not know. Of course, it would come that some other 
 system would have to be devised, there is no doubt ; there 
 would be two parties to the arrangement afterwards. 
 
 (12,146.) [In short, your belief is that a legal eight hours 
 day in your district would make the colliery industry prac- 
 tically impossible without a change of system ?] That is 
 my conviction. 
 
 (12,165.) [Now, putting aside for a moment the question 
 of an eight hours from bank to bank, have you ever been 
 approached, may I ask, by your workmen, with regard to 
 shortening the working time by mutual arrangement ?] No. 
 I hav.e not. 
 
 (12,166.) [You never have ?] No, never. 
 
 (12,253.) [Can you give us an estimate of the extra cost 
 per ton, say, at your own colleiries, of adopting the eight 
 hours from bank to bank, compared with your present 
 hours ?] I am afraid I cannot, because the figures would be 
 so extravagant. 
 
 (12,254.) [I would ask you to give an estimate at any 
 rate, if you can ?] First of all, you reduce your quantity ;
 
 202 
 
 it is only half the men that we work who are producing coal 
 at all, and they only produce to about two-thirds of their 
 time at the maximum. We have got to keep the whole of 
 the other staff employed and paid for out of the reduced 
 quantity. 
 
 (12,255.) [Did you hear Mr. Edward Jones' evidence 
 yesterday ?] Yes. 
 
 (12,256.) [He gave it as his experience at one of his 
 collieries that the difference was 9d. per ton ?] That was, I 
 think, in respect to losing one turn a week, or one turn a 
 month. 
 
 (12,257.) No, it was practically applying this number of 
 hours to a colliery under his control, and it is on the notes 
 that it made a difference of 9d. per ton in the cost of work- 
 ing. [Would you say that at your collieries it would be 
 more or less than that ?J I have no hesitation in saying 
 that it would be very considerably more. 
 
 (12.258.) [And, in addition to that, would you say that 
 the risk of accident would be increased or decreased ?] In 
 my opinion it would be increased. 
 
 Mr. GEORGE WILLIAM WILKINSON :_ 
 
 (12,316.) I am a Mining engineer in the Monmouthshire 
 district, and also in the Glamorganshire district. 
 
 (12,317.) Having charge of several collieries in Monmouth- 
 shire and Glamorganshire. 
 
 (12,324.) [Do you desire now to say anything as to the 
 eight hours working day ?] Yes. I have gone carefully 
 into the result of eight hours from bank to bank ; it will 
 really mean little more than about 7 hours' work in the 
 face. This would have the effect of reducing the output in 
 a large colliery to the extent of 150 tons a day, and would 
 increase the cost Is. per ton.
 
 203 
 
 (12,325.) [What is thai based upon ?] Upon actual 
 figures. 
 
 (12,326.) [But is it based upon the contraction of hours 
 from 9 to 8, or from 10, on certain days of the week, to 8 ?] 
 From the same hours now taking the hour each day. 
 
 (12,327.) [But are the collieries of which you are speaking 
 collieries working 9 hours or working 10 hours ?] Ten hours 
 during the long days. I will give you a little later on the 
 exact times at which they ascend, the time taken in going 
 to their working places, and the time employed there, and 
 m returning. 
 
 (12,328.) [You are now speaking of a colliery which on 
 Monday works seven and on Saturday works seven, and on 
 the four intervening days works ten hours ?] That is so. 
 
 (12,329.) [And you are contrasting the present output and 
 costs, and so on, under that system, with a system under 
 which eight hours would be the limit ; and are you assuming 
 eight hours to be applied also to the Monday and Saturday 
 in that case ?] Certainly, the same reduction. In proportion 
 there would be a reduction. 
 
 (12,331.) [Therefore you are assuming that if you were 
 obliged to reduce your hours on Tuesday, Wednesday, 
 Thursday, and Friday to eight, your hours on Monday and 
 Saturday would also be eight ?] That is what I mean ; it 
 would not only have the effect of increasing the cost, but I 
 believe it would, in very great measure, affect our roof. 
 The coal face travelling so slowly would be very much more 
 broken than it is at present ; it would also have the effect of 
 crushing the coal. You will have a larger percentage of 
 small coal by the faces travelling slower ; the men would 
 also have very much less time to repair their working places 
 and to secure them. These are all serious matters to be
 
 204 
 
 considered. Mention has been made of the dangerous nature 
 of our seams as compared with those in the North of 
 England. I have had considerable experiences in the North, 
 both in Durham, in Staffordshire, and in North Wales, and 
 undoubtedly the South Wales collieries are very much more 
 dangerous, the top is much more friable, the seams are 
 thicker and more dangerous to work than they are in the 
 other districts. 
 
 (12,359.) Your objection to shortening the hours of labour 
 is, because you think it will advance the price of production ? 
 No, it is not only the cost of production, but I think it 
 would render the colliery unsafe. The working places would 
 not have that attention that they have now from the colliers. 
 
 (12,360.) What reason have you to think that? They 
 will not have the time ; they could not possibly do it. 
 
 (12,361.) Have you any reason for suspecting that the 
 collier does not now give that attention which he ought to 
 do just now ? We are aware that he is giving every attention 
 by our constantly examining the working places ; he has 
 time to do it now, whereas he would not have time to do it 
 then, and to earn the money that he is getting now. 
 
 (12,362.) It is simply that you anticipate that that would 
 be the case ? I anticipate that that would be the case. 
 
 Mr. THOMAS GRAY: 
 
 (12,390.) I am a Mining engineer, a member of the Insti- 
 tution of Civil Engineers, and manager for Messrs. Vivian & 
 Sons' Collieries, near Tynewydd. 
 
 (12,391.) I was also for some time an inspector of mines, 
 acting as assistant to Mr. Thomas Wynne, in South Stafford- 
 shire.
 
 205 
 
 (12,392-3.) I have heard the evidence that has been given 
 by Mr. Jones, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Jenkins, and Mr. Wilkinson, 
 and I concur generally with that evidence. 
 
 (12,398.) Have you anything to add to that which ha& 
 been already laid before us by Mr. Wilkinson in regard to 
 the effect of an eight hours limitation ? I think not, except 
 that I think the collieries of any size, say from 500 to 1 ,000 
 tons a day, would not be able to draw the quantity in the 
 reduced number of hours. 
 
 (12,399.) May we take it that the views expressed upon 
 this subject by Mr. Wilkinson are shared by you ? They are 
 shared by me. 
 
 Mr. J. KEIR HARDIE, President of the Ayrshire Miners* 
 Union. 
 
 (12,449.) [Perhaps you can tell us to what extent in- 
 Ayrshire the system of limiting the work to five days per 
 week, and eight hours per day, is enforced ?] There are only 
 two districts, employing between 800 and 900 men, who have 
 a weekly holiday. They observe every Saturday as a holiday. 
 Over the remaining districts of Ayrshire, each workman 
 takes a holiday during the course of the week, as it best 
 suits his own convenience. The eight hours day is not at 
 all general. We have one large colliery, where over 600 men 
 are employed, where the eight hours day has been worked 
 since the year 1873 without break ; but over the remaining 
 districts of Ayrshire the hours vary from seven per day to as- 
 high as 10 per day. There is no rule fixing a limit of a 
 number of hours. 
 
 (12,459.) [Generally, what are the hours of the hewer or 
 actual coal getter in Ayrshire?] There is no number of 
 hours which would apply generally. It depends very much 
 on circumstances and chance. The pits wind coal from 7 in 
 the morning till 4 and half-past 4 in the afternoon, with a
 
 206 
 
 dinner-time of from half-an-hour to an hour in some cases; 
 where they drop work at 4 o'clock the dinner-hour is half-an- 
 hour ; where they go on till half-past 4, it is an hour. The 
 miners, with the exception of one very large colliery, are free 
 to leave the pits when they please, and if circumstances be 
 favourable, a good workman may have his work over at the 
 end of six hours, whilst other men in the pit, equally good 
 workmen, but having to suffer under more unfavourable 
 conditions, may be compelled to stay 10 hours in the pit to 
 get a day's work. 
 
 (12,566.) [You are in favour of a legal limitation of the 
 hours of labour to eight ?] Yes. 
 
 (12,567.) [Do you mean underground labour ?] Yes ; now 
 I am speaking for the Ayrshire miners, I mean for the under- 
 ground workers. We have found by experience that it is not 
 possible to have an eight hour day by voluntary effort. We 
 have made repeated, attempts to establish it, and these have 
 always failed. The system of working in mines, in Ayrshire 
 at least, lends itself to playing upon the credulity and the 
 selfishness of a section of the workers, and these have always 
 succeeded in winning them away from their allegiance to 
 the eight hours day ; and under those circumstances, we 
 claim that the eight hours day should be enforced by law. 
 If that were done, we know it would neither result in a 
 diminution of the men's income, restriction of the output, 
 nor an increase in the cost of production, but that these 
 three, so far as Ayrshire is concerned, would remain the same 
 as at present, the difference, if anything, being in favour of 
 a lessened cost of production. 
 
 (12,568.) [Do you mean that the limitation of a number of 
 hours to eight would not lead to any limitation of the 
 number of hours per week ?] - -No ; but that it would not lead 
 to any limitation of the number of tons produced.
 
 207 
 
 (12,569.) [I wanted to know whether that result was to be 
 attained by the same number of hours per week really being 
 worked under an eight hours day limitation, or whether it 
 was to be obtained in some other way ?] Partly by the same 
 number of hours being worked and partly by the sama 
 number of tons being produced in the eight hours as is now 
 produced in the greater number of hours. 
 
 (12,570.) [You do not say that you think that the output 
 would not be reduced, because they are at present, in fact, 
 not working more than 48 hours a week ?] The produce is 
 not equal to 48 hours' produce in the course of the week. 
 
 (12,571.) [I am only anxious to draw out your views 
 clearly?] The pits may in some cases be nominally working 
 60 hours per week, but the output even from those pits does 
 not exceed what could be produced without much extra cost 
 in the way of production in 48 hours. The system of haul- 
 age, and so on, is so loose that a very liitle improvement 
 there would mean a great improvement in the output, and 
 the output is determined by the demand of coal, and the 
 demand has never exceeded never come up to, during my 
 residence in Ayrshire the past 12 years what could be sup- 
 plied in an eight hours day. 
 
 (12,572.) [Then your view, speaking for Ayrshire, is that a 
 better system of getting the work out and getting it away 
 might enable the same output from the same number of 
 men to be got as at present, although no man was down the 
 pit more than eight hours ? Would enable.] 
 
 (llth February, 1892): 
 
 (12,776.) [Going back to the question of limitation of work 
 either by restriction or otherwise from your experience 
 before you took to journalism would you be of opinion that
 
 restriction and shortening of hours and working fewer days 
 in the week would have any effect upon the cost of producing 
 the coal?] Not unless it was carried to excess. When we 
 speak of restriction we mean regulation, limiting the output 
 to the requirements of the trade, and not raising coal for 
 which there is no demand. 
 
 (12,777.) [Then do you suggest that the men are to be the 
 judges as to the requirements of the trade or the people who 
 invest their capital in the collieries ?] The men, certainly. 
 
 (12,778.) [Would you consider that the experience of the 
 men, and their occupation, entitles them to be better judges 
 than these people who invest their capital, and who are under 
 covenants to work their properties, and also to carry on their 
 colliery subject to the Mines Regulation Act ?] The men 
 are concerned in securing a wage for their work, and as soon 
 as trade begins to affect their wage they have a fair indication 
 that something is wrong, and they are entitled to take 
 measures to protect their wages, and regulation can be proved 
 to have protected their wages in the past. 
 
 (12,872.) [Then in suggesting the adoption of the eight 
 hours, would you agree that the men should in any event 
 work 48 hours per week ?] No. 
 
 (12,873.) [Then the obligation would be upon the owner 
 to keep the colliery open that the men should only work 
 eight hours per shift, but that they should decide as to what 
 number of shifts they would work in the week ; is that it ?} 
 Yes. 
 
 (12,874.) [Do you not think that that would be a very 
 serious additional expense upon the production of the coal ?] 
 No. 
 
 (12,785.) [But perhaps -you have never had to do with the 
 working out of the cost of producing coal, have you ?] No, I 
 never was a mine owner.
 
 209 
 
 (12,876.) [And, therefore, you are saying without knowing 
 anything as to what goes to make the cost of producing 
 coal ?] I am speaking as a man with a practical knowledge 
 of mining in all its phases, and knowing what does tend and 
 what does not tend to increase the cost of production, and 
 the eight hours day, so far as Scotland is concerned, would 
 not add to the cost of production. 
 
 (12,877.) [That is your opinion, and I will take it.] You 
 have never had any experience in the making up of cost 
 sheets at any collieries, have you ?] No. 
 
 (12,901.) That is just what I was going to ask you what it 
 really meant. I am much obliged to you. I think you also 
 said that if the Eight Hours Act came to pass, the output 
 would not be lessened. I did not quite follow your reason 
 for that, but I gathered it to be this, that you thought the 
 working would be more regular, is that so ? That is so. 
 
 (12,902.) [Then supposing a district in which full time is 
 now being worked, and more than eight hours, would it or 
 not increase, or would it decrease the output in such a dis- 
 trict as I have named ?] Unless the machinery could be 
 correspondingly improved, it would decrease the output. 
 
 (12,903.) [Then assuming that they are collieries which 
 are up to modern requirements, and are well equipped with 
 machinery, and of the best fashion, it would decrease the 
 output ?] Yes. 
 
 (13,053-4.) I believe, as a whole, that an eight hours' day 
 would have the effect of diminishing the output. 
 
 (13,056-7.) [Would it not, then, increase the cost of pro- 
 duction?] The cost of production would be increased in some 
 districts, in others it would not. When the cost of produc- 
 tion would be increased employers in those districts at present 
 
 p
 
 210 
 
 have an unfair advantage over the others where the cost 
 would not be increased. 
 
 (13,058.) [Are they by means of that advantage gaining 
 greater profits and paying relatively smaller wages to their 
 workmen ?] Both ; as a matter of fact, where the hours 
 worked are longest wages are smallest, and in many instances 
 the profits are higher. 
 
 (13,059.) [But do you mean to tell me that at the present 
 time in the Ayrshire coalfield profits are higher than they are 
 in the other coalfields ?] I am certain that in Ayrshire the 
 profits are higher than they are, for example, in Cumberland, 
 where the eight hours' day is in force, or in any other short- 
 hour districts. 
 
 (13,085.) [I will not pursue the question further but only 
 ask this : if it could be proved that the mining industry in 
 any particular district would be seriously prejudiced by the 
 establishment of an eight hours' day, so seriousl}- prejudiced 
 that many of the collieries in that district would have to be 
 closed, would you, nevertheless, insist upon and press for a 
 legal eight hours' day ?] No. 
 
 (13,086.) [You would not ?] No. 
 
 (13,087.) [If it could be shown that the economical result 
 of it would be disastrous in certain districts, you would 
 abandon your advocacy of an eight hours' bill ?] I should 
 meet the case in the way in which similar difficulties are 
 met under the Coal Mines Eegulation Act. There are certain 
 clauses of that Act from which exemption can be obtained on 
 application to. the Home Secretary; and if it could be shown, 
 and the miners in any given district declared by a majority 
 of their members that the operation of the Act would injure 
 them and their trade, I would give them power to obtain 
 exemption from the Eight Hours' Act so long as it was that 
 way.
 
 211 
 
 (13,088.) [I see; this is rather an important modification 
 of the proposal for a universal eight hours. I gather from 
 you now that you abandon the suggestion that there should 
 be an Eight Hours' Bill universally applicable to all the 
 mining districts in the country, and would leave it to the 
 miners in each district to determine whether a Bill should or 
 should not apply to them ?] I have always done so. The 
 resolution which I had the honour to propose, and which was 
 agreed to at the Trades Union Congress at Newcastle, recog- 
 nised that principle, that where a majority of the workers in 
 a trade I did not say a district desires exemption from the 
 operation of the Eight Hours' Bill they should thereby be 
 exempt. 
 
 (13,089.) In the case of the miners, not that I believe 
 that any disastrous results such as are anticipated would 
 follow, but in order to obtain our Eight Hours' Bill for the 
 benefit of those districts which at present work unduly long 
 hours, I would be prepared seriously to consider a proposal 
 of that kind. 
 
 (13,201.) [You are rather in favour of some option on the 
 part of the workman ; and you at the Trades Union Congress 
 moved a resolution in favour of allowing trades to contract 
 out of the Act, as we may call it, or to appeal to be exempted 
 from the operation of the Act ; that is so, is it not ?] I took 
 that line, not because I was in favour of it, but with the 
 object of securing a common ground which those who, whilst 
 not opposing the principle of a legal eight hours' day, were 
 afraid it might be injurious to their trade (being imposed 
 upon them from the outside) would accept as a compromise 
 on the eight hours' question. 
 
 (13,205.) [Now, suppose you have a body of men who are 
 fairly well organised and who have, after considering the 
 subject very fully, have come to the conclusion that an
 
 212 
 
 Eight Hours' Bill would be very injurious to them, would 
 you enforce an Act of the kind upon them, regardless of 
 their wishes and opinions ?] I would not. 
 
 (13,402.) [You advocate the eight hours' day for all trades?] 
 All trades and occupations. 
 
 (13,403.) [Do you advocate that in the interests of the 
 working men ?] Yes. 
 
 (13,404.) [How would that improve their position ?] By 
 giving them more leisure more time for recreation more 
 time for reading for improving themselves. 
 
 (13405.) [You do not anticipate that it would increase their 
 wages ?] Ultimately I believe it would. I believe wages to 
 be determined by the standard of living. If you improve 
 the condition of the men you make a higher wage neces- 
 sary. 
 
 (13,406.) [Assume for a moment that the population 
 increased so fast (as it probably would do under those cir- 
 cumstances of perfect comfort and happiness), that there 
 were more men than could be employed eight hours a day, 
 what would you do then ? Would you reduce the hours to 
 six ?] Certainly. 
 
 (13,407.) [And if the limit of six was found to be too long, 
 would you reduce it to four ?] If necessary, yes. 
 
 Mr. ROBERT BAIRD. 
 
 (13,416.) I am managing director and agent for the 
 Dechmont Colliery Company, Limited. 
 
 (13,417.) Am also secretary and treasurer for the Lanark- 
 shire Coal Masters' Association. 
 
 (13,463.) Our Association hold the opinion very strongly 
 that a legal eight hours' day would be very detrimental to 
 the interests not only of the miners but of the country.
 
 213 
 
 (13,465.) We hold that the limitation of the miners' work 
 to eight hours from bank to bank would very largely increase 
 the cost of production, that it would very sensibly do so. 
 We had some experience of that in the year 1886, when the 
 miners voluntarily restricted their output to 2s. 6d. a day 
 and it had the result of raising our cost very much. We 
 have no doubt whatever that were such a day enforced upon 
 us it would add to the cost of coal very materially. 
 
 (13,466.) [Taking your corrected answer to the question at 
 the top of page 3, " Miners and underground workers as a 
 " rule average nine and a half to ten hours from bank to 
 bank," the limitation to eight hours would therefore, of 
 course, produce a reduction of one and a half to two hours ?] 
 Just so. We account it a great hardship and a great 
 grievance that the miners should abstain from working one 
 day a week, that the pit should remain idle this one day 
 when all our fixed charges are running on. 
 
 (13,467.) [You do not mean that the pit is drawing coals 
 or attempting to draw coals on that day ?] No, the pit is 
 idle so far as drawing is concerned. 
 
 (13,468.) [You mean that the standing charges, clerks, 
 managers, and rates and taxes, and so on ?] Yes, and 
 tradesmen. 
 
 (13,579.) [You stated your opinion that a reduction of the 
 hours of labour would increase the cost of production ?] 
 Yes. 
 
 (13,580.) [And lead to an increase in the price of coal ?] 
 That would follow, I expect, as a matter of course. 
 
 (13,581.) [Have you any reason to doubt whether the 
 increased price of coal might not compensate you for the 
 increased cost of production ?] At the moment it would,
 
 214 
 
 but we think if coals were unduly raised in price it would 
 injure other trades in the country, and then it would come 
 back upon ourselves in a diminished demand. 
 
 (13,582.) [The men, of course, who defend it hold a 
 different opinion ?] That has been stated so here. 
 
 (13,583.) [They think that the price of coal would be 
 maintained ?] So I heard. I heard the previous witness 
 say he thought that the price of coal would be maintained, 
 and perhaps increased, but that is a matter of opinion, and 
 I do not think it. 
 
 (13,584.) [If it were made general, and every coalowner 
 were put in the same position, still you would apprehend an 
 ultimate reduction in price ?] Of course, we have to take 
 into account the foreign competition. "We send a great deal 
 of coal out of the country to Germany, France, and other 
 places. If the cost of coal were unduly raised in this 
 country, it would affect the export of coal, and consequently 
 the price. 
 
 (13,585.) [Perhaps you will state what, in the opinion of 
 members of your Association, would be the effect of cost of 
 production and prices of the reduction of the hours of 
 labour ?] I cannot speak for the Association as an Associa- 
 tion, because the matter has not been discussed by us, but I 
 know that individual coalmasters think, and that is my own 
 opinion, that that would be the effect of a limitation of the 
 work. 
 
 (13,586.) [State what you think would be the effect ?] I 
 think that, while at the beginning it might have the effect 
 of raising the price of coal, ultimately a reaction would set 
 in, and our latter state would be as bad, if not worse, than 
 the first, because there are a great many industries depen- 
 dent upon the coal supply, and if the price of coal were
 
 215 
 
 raised to them above a certain figure, then they might not 
 be able to carry on their work, and would have to close or 
 limit their work in some way. We know that during recent 
 years the price of coal has been considerably above the 
 average, and that some trades have been injured thereby. 
 
 (13,587.) [Then you apprehend that the demand would 
 be reduced ?J That would follow if the consumption is 
 reduced. 
 
 (13,588.) [The consumption would be reduced, the cost 
 of production would remain enhanced, and the price would 
 again fall ?] I think so. 
 
 Mr. ANDREW KIRKWOOD McCOSH: 
 
 (13,613.) I am Vice-President of the Lanarkshire Coal 
 Masters' Association, and a coalmaster in Lanarkshire. 
 
 (13,615-6.) I have heard the evidence just 'given by Mr. 
 Baird, and I generally agree with that evidence. 
 
 (13,650.) [Do you desire simply to confirm the statement 
 made by Mr. Baird as to the effect of an eight hours' limita- 
 tion ?] Yes ; I believe it would increase the cost of pro- 
 duction very considerably. 
 
 (13,670.) [Are we to gather from that last observation that 
 in your opinion the men in asking for an eight hours day 
 have in view rather a diminution of output than a diminu- 
 tion of hours ?] That is my opinion. I do not think there 
 is any feeling in favour of an eight hours day on the score 
 of health or for increased leisure. There may be a little 
 feeling in favour of it simply arising from an idea that 
 wages will be increased by limitation of output. 
 
 (13,671.) [You think that is their real object ?] Yes. 
 
 (13,672.) [And they put forward these humanitarian 
 motives, you think, as a cloak to their real views ?} I think
 
 216 
 
 the argument of health is not being put forward now because 
 when it is inquired into it is found that miners are one of 
 the healthiest classes of the community. I think that will 
 be proved by statistics everywhere when inquired into. 
 Certainly it has proved so in our experience. I have an 
 instance that came under my own observation. 
 
 (13,674.) [I asked you first whether you thought that the 
 object of the demand for an eight hours day was a dimin- 
 ished output or a reduction in the hours, and you said the 
 real object was a diminished output ? Now, I ask you, do 
 you think that the statements that out of the men a dimin- 
 ished output would not be the result of an eight hours' day 
 are insincere ?] I should prefer to put it in this way, that I 
 believe it is a desire for increased wages. The men have an 
 indefinite idea that by these means their wages will be 
 increased. That is the real feeling. 
 
 (13,676.) [Therefore I ask you again, do you go the 
 length of saying that, in your view, the statement that the 
 output would not be diminished by an eight hours day is an 
 insincere statement ?] I think so ? 
 
 Mr. JOHN CONNEL. 
 
 (13,734.) I am Honorary Secretary of the Fife and Clack- 
 mannan Coal Owners' Association, and Managing Director of 
 the Lochgelly Iron and Coal Company, Ltd. 
 
 (13,738.) The present working hours for underground men 
 are 8$ from bank to bank. 
 
 (13,739.) Those hours have been in operation for fully 
 liO years. 
 
 (13,740.) Eight, and a half hours from bank to bank. 
 That includes all classes of underground men. 
 
 (13,741.) [Not only the hewer but the men who get the
 
 217 
 
 work away ?] Quite so, the hewers and the bmshers and so 
 on. Of course that does not represent the number of hours 
 at the face ; they will not be more than 7| at the face. 
 There is half an hour for breakfast, and the travelling time 
 to come off the 8^ hours. 
 
 (13,742.) [The difference between the 7^ and the 8^ would 
 be represented as to about half an hour by meal time, and 
 as to the other half hour by going down the shaft and going 
 to the working place, and reversing the operation ?] That is 
 so, that is about an hour. 
 
 (13,748.) Of course we have seen the desire for the legalised 
 time of eight hours, which would inflict greater cost upon us 
 even, than we have just now. We have suffered very much 
 indeed relatively with other districts in being restricted to 
 the 8^ hours from bank to bank, but if a legalised time of 
 eight hours were made we would then be worse off even than 
 we are as to costs. We have shown to our miners, time after 
 time, in conference with them, the hardship that we suffer 
 in comparison with other districts. We compete with the 
 West of Scotland in the same markets for our coal the 
 shipping markets and they have all the additional time to 
 work, and of course the costs are all the same with us 
 against the longer time that they work. 
 
 (13,750.) The effect would undoubtedly be that the costs 
 of raising coal would be increased (that is our experience) by 
 the shortening of time. I do not know that it would affect 
 prices to any material extent, because I suppose that prices 
 would be regulated in the future as they have been in the 
 past, by supply and demand. It would certainly affect the 
 profits or losses of the coalowner ; if he could not raise his 
 coal at a certain price, he must endeavour to get a price to 
 pay him from the public. If the public refuse to pay him 
 that price, of course the loss will be to him, and I fear that 
 if prices were abnormally increased it might affect the
 
 industries of the country, and thereby affect the coalowners 
 in restricting the consumption'of coal, and thereby lessening 
 their profits or increasing their losses, but I cannot very well 
 see that it would regulate prices in any way, because, of 
 course, prices would be regulated according to the demand of 
 the country. 
 
 (13,806.) What I (mean is this. Our costs have been 
 very much increased from the reduction of the ten hours day 
 to eight hours, and if a further reduction of time is made it 
 would necessarily increase the cost. If the thing was 
 universal, then we would be on a level with our neighbours 
 in competition. 
 
 (13,807.) [If there were an Act of Parliament passed for 
 the United Kingdom, it would be universal ?] Quite so ; we 
 would be all on the same level then. 
 
 (13,808.) [Then, relatively, what would improve rather than 
 injure your opportunity of competing with other districts ?] 
 That is so. If it was general all over the country, it would 
 put us in a better position ; that is what we complain of at 
 the present time that we are unequally matched. 
 
 (13,883.) [Do you consider that the necessities of health 
 require a reduction in the hours of labour ?] No, I do not. 
 
 (13,884.) [Or safety?] No, I do not. 
 
 (13,888.) [Do you think it is desirable (having given the 
 answer that you have as to health and safety) that there 
 should be an Act of Parliament to prevent a man compul- 
 sorily from working more than eight hours?] I cannot 
 see it.
 
 219 
 
 EXTRACT FROM MEMORANDUM AS TO MINING 
 AND IRON INDUSTRIES. 
 
 Submitted to Group "A" Committee, 9th August, 1892. 
 B. HOUES OF LABOUR IN MINKS. 
 
 25. Recent official returns enable a comparison to be made not 
 only of the hours of labour, as between different mining districts 
 in the United Kingdom, but also as between different countries 
 engaged in this branch of industry. Manifestly in considering 
 the wages paid, the hours of labour must be taken into account, 
 and the economic circumstances of the workers generally, before 
 the actual comparative conditions can be ascertained. 
 
 26. GREAT BRITAIN. There appear to be only two principal 
 coal-mining districts in the United Kingdom where the hewers 
 at present work more than eight hours per day, namely, 
 Nottinghamshire and Monmouthshire, and even in these districts 
 the hours are about eight at the face, as will be seen from the 
 following statements, collated from Mr. Provand's return ; 
 
 UNDER-GROUND LABOUR. 
 
 TABLE I. -Statement showing the Average Number of Hours per 
 Day from Bank to Bank, and at the Face, in the Principal 
 Coal-Mining Centres of the United Kingdom in 1890 
 (Hewers only). 
 
 
 Hours 
 from 
 
 Hours 
 
 Days 
 
 Hours 
 
 District. 
 
 Bank 
 
 at the 
 
 per 
 
 week 
 
 per 
 week 
 
 
 to 
 Bank. 
 
 Face. 
 
 at Face. 
 
 at Face. 
 
 East Scotland (Lanark) 
 
 9-28 
 
 7-88 
 
 5-5 
 
 43-34 
 
 West Scotland (Ayrshire) - 
 
 9-26 
 
 7-55 
 
 5-2 
 
 39-26 
 
 Northumberland - 
 
 7-08 
 
 6-07 
 
 K.Q7 
 
 5-26 
 
 K.fif) 
 
 31-92 
 09.07 
 
 Yorkshire - 
 
 8-8 
 
 o< 
 
 7-5 
 
 O DU 
 
 5-0 
 
 OA Ol 
 
 37-50 
 
 North and East Lancashire - 
 
 9-25 
 
 8-0 
 
 5-17 
 
 41-36 
 
 West Lancashire -^ 
 
 9-32 
 
 7-86 
 
 4-83 
 
 37-96 
 
 Derbyshire - 
 
 9-28 
 
 7-88 
 
 5-11 
 
 40-26 
 
 Notts 
 
 9-6 
 
 8-23 
 
 4-93 
 
 40-57 
 
 North Staffordshire 
 
 8-95 
 
 7-63 
 
 5-22 
 
 39-82 
 
 South Staffordshire - / "!!! 
 
 7-82 
 
 7-32 
 
 5-23 ! 
 
 38-28 
 
 Monmouthshire - 
 
 9-22 
 
 8-01 
 
 5-61 ! 
 
 44-93 
 
 Glamorganshire - 
 
 9-13 
 
 7-66 
 
 57 j 
 
 43-66
 
 220 
 
 SURFACE LABOUR. 
 
 TABLE K. Statement slwwiny Number of Hours worked per Day 
 and per Week in Different Districts in 1 890. 
 
 
 Hours 
 
 
 
 
 per Day 
 
 Average 
 
 Total 
 
 District. 
 
 exclusive 
 
 Days 
 
 Hours pel- 
 
 
 of Meal- 
 
 per Week. 
 
 Week. 
 
 
 Tirnes. 
 
 
 
 East Scotland (Lanark) 
 
 9-05 
 
 6-0 
 
 54-30 
 
 West Scotland (Ayrshire) - 
 Northumberland - 
 
 8-75 
 9-34 
 
 5-95 
 5-60 
 
 52-06 
 52-30 
 
 Durham - 
 
 9-43 
 
 5-84 
 
 55-07 
 
 Yorkshire - 
 
 9-00 
 
 5-2 
 
 45-18 
 
 North and East Lancashire - 
 
 9-25 
 
 5-5 
 
 50-87 
 
 West Lancashire - 
 
 9-41 
 
 5-34 
 
 50-24 
 
 Derbyshire - 
 
 8-70 
 
 5-25 
 
 45-67 
 
 Notts - 
 
 8-57 
 
 5-D5 
 
 43-27 
 
 North Staffordshire 
 
 8-57 
 
 5-86 
 
 50-22 
 
 South Staffordshire 
 
 8-75 
 
 5-23 
 
 45-76 
 
 Monmouthshire - 
 
 9-34 
 
 5-83 
 
 54-45 
 
 Glamorganshire - 
 
 9-03 
 
 5-7 
 
 51-47 
 
 27. The two foregoing tables show (1) that the hours of under- 
 ground labour and the average number of days worked are con- 
 siderably less than those of surface labour, and (2) that in general 
 the average week's work is less than 48 hours for under-ground 
 labour, and not much over that limit for above-ground labour. 
 
 28. The hours of labour in mines have been greatly shortened 
 within recent years, not in Great Britain alone, but throughout 
 mining countries generally. Some descriptions of labour, how- 
 ever, have had their hours reduced much more than others. In 
 the Northumberland coalfield, for example, the average hours of 
 miners between 1850 and 1890 appear to have been reduced from 
 60 to 38, and much the same movement has taken place in the 
 adjoining Durham district. In Derbyshire the hours of miners 
 generally have been reduced, within the same interval, by 14| 
 hours per week, in the Wigan district by 6 to 1 2 hours, in South 
 Staffordshire by 12 hours, in the Burnley district by 20 hours, in 
 the Normaiiton district by 18 hours, and so with other districts. 
 The following return of the hours of work in mines in 1850, and 
 the reduction of hours between that year and 1890, is abstracted
 
 from the Parliamentary return ordered on Mr. Broadhurst's 
 motion (375 of 1890). 
 
 TABLE L. Hours of Work per Week in Coal- Mines in 1850 and 
 the Reduction of Hours in 1890 on that Year. 
 
 District 
 
 1850. 
 
 Decrease on 
 1850 in 1890. 
 
 
 Hours. 
 
 Hours. 
 
 Northumberland 
 
 
 
 Hewers (Newcastle) - 
 
 66* 
 
 22 
 
 Shifters 
 
 48* 
 
 1 
 
 Boys- 
 
 72* 
 
 6 to 12 
 
 Durham 
 
 
 
 Deputy oversmen 
 
 48f 
 
 None 
 
 Mechanics- 
 
 66|t 
 
 13 I 
 
 Labourers- - 
 
 54f 
 
 No change 
 
 Lancashire 
 
 
 
 Miners generally (Wigan) 
 
 M 
 
 l*i 
 
 Under-ground men (Bolton) 
 
 54* 
 
 4 
 
 Miners (Burnley) 
 
 56* 
 
 20 
 
 Other workmen- 
 
 64* 
 
 8 
 
 Hewers (Clifton) 
 
 50* 
 
 6 
 
 Surfacemen (Clifton)- 
 
 61* 
 
 6 
 
 Miners generally (Wigan) - 
 
 60 to 66* 
 
 6 to 12 
 
 Derbyshire 
 
 
 
 Miners generally 
 
 66* 
 
 14| 
 
 Staffordshire 
 
 
 
 Miners generally (Burslem) 
 
 59 
 
 11 
 
 Yorkshire 
 
 
 
 Miners generally (Barnsley) 
 
 60* 
 
 18 
 
 ,, (Normanton) 
 
 60 to 66 
 
 18 
 
 Smith Wales 
 
 
 
 Miners generally (Aberdare) 
 
 58 to 72 
 
 4 to 18 
 
 Scotland 
 
 
 
 Miners generally (Fife) - ..; ' - 
 
 60 \ 
 
 16 
 
 29. Mr. Broadhurst's return gives the hours of labour worked 
 in 1850, 1860, 1870, 1880, and 1890, for a large number of 
 leading industries, taken sometimes from employers and sometimes 
 
 * Employer's Return. 
 
 t Trade Union Return.
 
 from trade-union sources. Explanatory and qualifying marginal 
 remarks are introduced, which throw needed light on the figures, 
 in a certain number of cases, but even so they are often ambi- 
 guous and doubtful. It would be well if in giving miners' wages, 
 the average number of hours at the face were in all cases taken 
 as the standard ; but in some cases the hours evidently comprise 
 the time from bank to bank, which adds from one to two hours 
 per day to the stated time of labour. In other cases, again, the 
 hours of labour vary as between summer and winter, the shorter 
 hours generally prevailing in the former season. Meal-times 
 introduce another disturbing element, which is not always made 
 sufficiently clear, and when the hours of " colliers " are spoken of 
 it is not evident whether this generic term is intended to apply to 
 hewers alone, whether it is meant to include other labour under- 
 ground, or whether it does not cover all labour at and about a 
 colliery. All these points, which cannot be adequately cleared up 
 from the return, must be considered in handling the figures. 
 
 30. It appears to be difficult to secure really trustworthy com- 
 parisons of the hours of labour worked in mines in different 
 districts, and the difficulty is increased when any attempt is made 
 to compare the hours worked at one period with the hours worked 
 at another. However carefully questions may be framed with a 
 view to avoid all possible sources of error, it will almost inevitably 
 happen that those who furnish the answers will, without any 
 conscious intention to mislead, and even with every desire to state 
 the facts in the most accurate way, supply figures that do not 
 mean quite the same thing when brought to the test of critical 
 examination. Thus, for example, in filling up the returns of the 
 hours of labour already cited, many districts give the hours for 
 " miners generally," and it is impossible to say, on the face of the 
 figures, whether the hours of hewers, labourers, and other 
 employees, are averaged, or whether it is meant to convey the 
 idea that all employees alike work the same number of hours, or 
 whether the "miners generally " include only underground labour, 
 or whether the hours of hewers are taken as at the face or from 
 bank to bank ; and if these qualifying conditions were uniform 
 and understood as for one period, it is not always possible to say 
 if the same conditions are taken for another. 
 
 31. There are very considerable differences to record, in other 
 countries besides our own, as between one district and another, PO 
 that it is practically impossible to give an average that would be 
 fairly representative of the country as a whole. But there 
 appears to be every reason to believe that the average hours of 
 miners are as short in Great Britain as in any other country, and 
 shorter than in most others. If the average is taken in this
 
 223 
 
 country at 9 hours per day from bank to bank it will not 1* t. r 
 wide of the mark. In the United States it varie from 9-.^, fo 
 hours per day and in Prance, Germany, and Belgium Tt j * to 
 
 hours of^munng labour in the different mining district varied ^ 
 
 Localities. 
 
 Hours per Day. 
 
 Upper Silesia J 
 t 
 
 12 for 51 per cent, of workers. 
 W 8 " 11 
 
 Lower Silesia $ 
 
 10 I! 88 
 811 j 
 
 Dortmund - 
 
 Saarbruck - 
 
 8 practically the whole. 
 
 Aix-le-Chapelle 
 Brown coal mines - 
 
 8 " 
 9-6 average. 
 
 11. Q 
 
 Hartz metal mines - 
 
 11 
 
 Rhine metal mines 
 
 8-6 to 9-2 
 
 Salt mines - 
 
 8-4 for average. 
 
 /. ^iAuuu. Belgium compares unfavourably with the 
 record for Germany. A recent official census showed that the 
 hours of labour in Belgian coal mines were :- 
 For 1,650, less than 9 hours. 
 62,507, 9 to 11 hours, 
 30,477, 11 to 12 hours. 
 115, over 12 hours. 
 wMle^s regards labour in metallurgic establishments the record 
 
 For 508, less than 9 hours. 
 3,976, 9 to 11 hours. 
 10,136, 11 to 12 hours, 
 
 so that probably it would be fair to place the average day's labour 
 m Belgium at 1 01 to 11 hours. 
 
 34. FRANCE. The following data as to the miners in the
 
 224 
 
 coalfields of France are abstracted from the latest official report on 
 
 the subject.* 
 
 TABLE N. 
 
 . 
 
 Hour. 
 
 Minutes. 
 
 Under-ground workers 
 Average hours per day underground for 
 
 
 
 coal-miners 
 
 9 
 
 45 
 
 Average hours per day's work at the^face 
 
 
 
 (travail effectif} - 
 
 8 
 
 13 
 
 Above-ground workers 
 Average hours per day on the ground 
 
 10 
 
 46 
 
 Average hours per day's actual work 
 
 
 
 (travail effectif] - 
 
 9 
 
 39 
 
 
 D 
 
 ays 
 
 Average number of days worked in 1889 
 
 290 
 
 35. In the iron mines of France there were employed in 1889, 
 3,440 hands under ground, and 872 above ground. They worked 
 on an average 268 days during the year, their average hours 
 being as under : 
 
 Hours. 
 
 Minutes. 
 
 Under-ground 
 In the mine 
 
 9 
 
 51 
 
 At the face -.',. 
 
 8 
 
 55 
 
 A bove-ground 
 
 
 
 About surface - 
 
 10 
 
 56 
 
 Effective labour 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 UNITED STATES. A recent report of the Bureau of Labour 
 Statistic in Illinois gave the average hours of coal miners as nine 
 in winter, and nine and a half in summer, the average being 9'25. 
 
 * Bulletin du Ministere des Travaux Publics, June 1891, p. 162.
 
 225 
 
 APPENDIX B. 
 
 [56 VICT.] Mines (Eight Hours) Bill, 1892. 
 
 A 
 
 BILL 
 
 Restrict the Hours in Mines to Eight Hours per Day. A.D. ms. 
 
 WHERE A s it i expedient to limit the hours of work under- 
 ground of pei-sons employed in mines : 
 
 Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty 
 >y and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and 
 Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled 
 and by the authority of the same, as follows : 
 
 1. This Act may be cited as the Miners (Hours of Work) Act, short title. 
 893. 
 
 2. A person shall not, in any one day of twenty-four hours, be Limit of eight 
 employed underground in any mine for a period exceeding eight %****' 
 hours from the time of his leaving the surface of the ground to 
 
 the time of his ascent thereto, except in case of accident. 
 
 3. Any employer, or the agent of any employer, employing or Penalty for 
 permitting to be employed any person in contravention of this con 
 enactment, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding forty shillings 
 
 or each offence, to be recovered in the same manner in which 
 any penalty under the Acts relating to factories and workshops is 
 ecoverable.
 
 '[ io baoo-1 f 
 > e-ro'la-ieri 
 > -jilt dt 
 
 r;i TO SiTU 
 raio Vff A. 
 
 oi a 
 
 AT 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 T YTVO A T>V
 
 LONDON: 
 
 E-. E. MILLER, PA H i. i A M EXT A K y PK INTER, 
 52. LONG AU;E, W.C.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-25m-9,'47(A5618)444 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 AT 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 LIBRARY
 
 IT Ob. Brit. 
 242 Roal connls- 
 
 A 001 328 752 
 
 TN 
 242 
 
 G7A5 
 1893