North, East, South and West, voted by overwhelming majorities for the rejection of the Coalowners' offer-i some cases substantially larger than those which voted for the original strike at the first ballot. Men who ha enthusiastically followed Mr. Smillie as a warmaker declined his leadership as a peacemaker, and contemptuously rejected his twelfth-hour advice to accept the proposal as a temporary arrangement until some better system could be devised Under 200,000 miners voted for acceptance and over 600,000 for rejection. In fulfilment of this mandate the Executive of the Miners' Federation advised that the strike notices should expire on October 16th, a decision ratified by the delegates by 154 votes to 27. That the miners have for many years been deplorably led goes without saying, bu it cannot be maintained in the face of the interminable and wearisome discussions of the issue throughout the past two months that they have been kept in the dark while their voting suggests that they were literally spoiling! for a fight. They have now attained their hearts' desire Whether they will enjoy it to the bitter end remains to be

seen.

THE public had become so "fed up" with the Coal Strike which had been hanging over us almost since the Armistice that many persons regarded the news tha Down Tools the miners had "downed tools" with relief At any rate, certainty had now replaced tension and the question would be settled one way or the other. There was likewise the feeling that, despite the moderation of their wisest leaders, there are certain elements of Organized Labour who were bent on having a big row and would never settle down until they had it out" with the Government and the State. Bad as a coal strike would be at any time, better have it now and get it over, rather than put it off for another year, when things might be much worse. So it was argued, while it was pointed out that the miners had manœuvred so clumsily as to put themselves out of court in the eyes of their countrymen and countrywomen, on all hands condemn this as a cruel, callous, greedy strike

who

7oy the best-paid section of the community and the spoilt wher hildren of the industrial world. We understand this

cause

oint of view, and recognize that conflict may have been Manevitable and that nothing Sir Robert Horne could have mal one would have prevented it-we are certainly all under ohe deepest obligation for his admirable handling of the astrisis, as well as for his success in stiffening wobbling coldkeagues. Still, we cannot regard a coal strike as other than national calamity, that must in any event inflict serious malamage, and might do immense harm to this country at hat time she could ill afford it. It can only give satisfaction onto the enemies of England. It can only anxiety to nerer friends and wellwishers. There are some very black patches in certain coalfields, notably South Wales and intanarkshire, which are in intimate touch with the Soviet Government of Russia, which has doubtless had an active and in fomenting strife through the entourage of Kameneff nd Krassin, who should never have been admitted in ur midst. The mass of British miners-especially the English miners-are, however, in the opinion of all who ame in contact with them during the war, men of fine qualities reckless and extravagant, if you like, but brave, onourable, loyal, who would do anything rather than 'let down a pal," and it is this very loyalty which makes them formidabl when they start on the war-path. The eader will know much more about the strike than the writer. At the moment, none can say whether it will be ong or short; whether it will be confined to the mines or pread to the Triple Alliance; whether it still be with is at the New Year or whether Peace will suddenly break but between the parties; whether it will be quiet and orderly or violent and dangerous. We can trust Sir Robert Horne o be fair and firm, to neglect no reasonable opportunity, and we hope he may be strong enough to prevent the pass from being sold by some Deus ex machina.

Will

MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL is reputed to be one of the few. Cabinet Ministers who are not frightened of the Prime Minister, to whom he occasionally stands up. Others are

us

terrified, or, if you prefer it, "hypnotized." At any rate they don't count, though Mr. Balfour would still count if he ever took the trouble to assert him "Rally" self. It is an unhealthy situation which prompted some cynic to define "the most powerful man in the country as "the last man who spoke to Lloyd George." Such a dispensation promotes unrest at home and abroad It is all very well for the Downing Street Press to summon to rally round the Government in defence of the country," as every one without an axe to grind would wish to do, but experience teaches us that the moment you rally" to the Prime Minister he, as likely as not, has "rallied" elsewhere. This is peculiarly the case in a time of strikes, when there is keen anxiety lest Mr. Lloyd George should meet some casual passer-by who advises him "to try a private deal with the miners, who will take more from you than from anyone else." It is common knowledge that one element in their intractable attitude was the rooted conviction that, however firm Sir Robert Horne might be, the door of No. 10 Downing Street would never be closed against any Trade Union Secretary, and that before the twelfth hour sounded there would be the usual Ministerial wobble, if not earlier. Mr. Lloyd George finds it extremely difficult to pursue any consistent course of action, despite his vaunted "driving-power," and we should never be surprised to hear that one of his henchmen was fixing up "the Coal Strike round the corner on the basis of abandoning the very flag round which we are invited to rally." "to

Clearing up a
Mystery

POSSIBLY our opinion may be discounted as "prejudice," but. Mr. Churchill's evidence cannot be thus disposed of In the course of a vigorous defence of Govern ment policy (Dundee, October 16th), he let several considerable cats out of the bag, which fully justify any mistrust of his Chief, whose idiosyncrasies are partially responsible for the coal strike, which should remain exclusively in the hands of Sir Robert Horne. We have always believed that Mr. Lloyd George

Atas in favour of Nationalizing the mines when he appointed ie Sankey Commission to pave the way in that direction. it surprising, considering that he was in favour of ationalizing the railways ?-which is the only possible terpretation of Mr. Churchill's disclosure at Dundee in ply to the following question:

and At Lochee in 1918 you stated that the Government had decided upon a tolicy for the nationalization of the railways. Mr. Bonar Law stated in the ouse of Commons that the Prime Minister and he had never discussed nationzation. Will you say who was the Ananias on that occasion ?

I am quite certain there would be no difference of opinion between Mr. nar Law and me upon this subject. I had full warrant for the statement I ade when I came to Dundee then. I certainly should not have made that tement unless I had good reason to believe that a measure for the nation. zation of the railways would have been included in the Government proamme. .. So many statements have been made since on this question at I wish to point out I had warrant for my statement.

his is germane to the present crisis, because undeniably he cause of the miners' exasperation is belief that their? ey would get Nationalization via the Sankey Commission. e trust they were not tricked, but they certainly think ley were, and all the world knows that the Coalition was at e moment in one of those periodic panics that are liable seize them and which keep everybody else on tenterhooks.

o wonder Coalition orators and Coalition journals have come effusive over Mr. Smillie, who did the Government Godsend an extraordinarily good turn when it was most needed, by threatening a hateful strike ich necessarily rallied the public of both sexes to the pport of Coalition candidates. The Ilford by-election

a case in point. "Liberalism" and "Labour" had

en confident of making an impressive demonstration in is promising constituency. But as the mining menace veloped, "Progressive" parties received a sharp set-back, id ultimately the poll was declared as follows:

The Coalition nominee, it will be observed, actually polle more votes than his combined opponents in a distric regarded as particularly favourable ground for Daily Heral propaganda. No one pretends that Ministers are popula or would be heard to suggest that their candidate would have polled as he did, but for the blunders of their enemies The Wee-Frees, under Mr. Asquith, have become but feeble edition of Coalition Liberals under Mr. Lloyd George and encourage the Government in its worst follies, whethe in Europe or in Asia. The country could gain nothing by putting them in-we should have rather more "Montag ism" in India, still more Scuttle in Egypt, yet mor cottoning to the Bolshevik and the Boche than we have at present. The function of this section of the Opposition is apparently to make things easier for Mr. Lloyd Georg in making a mess of our external affairs. Then we hav "Labour ever ready to help him over awkward domesti stiles by frightening the mass of our sober and sensibl people by the relation which the Lansburys, the Williamses etc., have established with Lenin and Trotsky. It wa Mr. Williams-Mr. Smillie's alter ego in the Triple Allian -who declared this summer at the Albert Hall (July 1 1920): "I will vote for the revolution. I will strike an practise direct action for the revolution. I will engage moral and intellectual propaganda for the revolution, an believe me, friends, when the time comes I will use fore for the revolution." It was Mr. Tom Mann, the Secretar of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, who declared, an interview: "I entirely approve of all that he [Leni does," and on another occasion, "I will do my best imitate Russia." The British people now know too mu about Bolshevist Russia to follow these maniacs, and the have no alternative but to vote Coalition against "Labour candidates. However susceptible to Soviet overtures may be, for electioneering purposes Mr. Lloyd George constrained to assume an anti-Bolshevist attitude on platform, and consequently secures the anti-Bolshevi I vote. It is unfortunate that he is temperamentally unabl to pursue a similar policy elsewhere.

''