Sheffield Daily Telegraph – Tuesday 30 December 1884

The Dispute at Denaby Main

Interview with the Manager

Yesterday a deputation of miners waited on Mr. Chambers, manager, Denaby Main Colliery. They afterwards adjourned to the Masons’ Arms Inn, Mexborough, where a joint meeting of the deputation and executive of the South Yorkshire and North Derbyshire Association had been arranged.

Mr. Chappell, secretary of the Association, stated that after three hours’ interview with the manager, during which time the subject had been viewed from every possible standpoint, Mr. Chambers still contended that it was not a reduction which the company were seeking.

Mr. Chambers argued that if the terms he suggested were to be acted on by the men, the latter would get no less than 10 per cent. more out of the pit than had previously been the case. He admitted that nearly 30 per cent. of small stuff was made, including “mitts” and “smudge,” but making what he considered a fair allowance for breakage in filling the coal, being trammed to the bottom, and its being shot down the screens, that quantity would be reduced to 25 per cent.

Mr. Chambers also stated that he was sanguine that 10 per cent. more round coal could be made, thus making it appear that only 15 per cent. of small coal would be made, with 85 per cent. of round. There was not a man in South Yorkshire prepared to maintain that statement. At the best collieries in South Yorkshire no less than 25 per cent. of small coal, including nuts and smudge, was made, and he was sure that rule would apply to Denaby.

The men said that in view of Mr. Chambers’ statement, to the effect that he did not want a reduction, and falling back on the document they had in their possession stating that the price ought to be 1s. 6d. for round and 10d. for small coal—that the difference between those rates and the position now was 1d. and 2½d. per ton. While admitting that that statement might be correct, Mr. Chambers repeated his conviction that an improvement on the output of 10 per cent., for which the higher rate of 1s. 6d. per ton would be obtained, would place the men in a better position than at present. While that was a matter of opinion on Mr. Chambers’ part, and untested, it could not be accepted.

The deputation then set the matter in another light, and said if Mr. Chambers would give 1s. 6d. for round and 1s. for small, and allow all other questions to drop, they were prepared to recommend that to the men. Mr. Chambers could not see his way to do that, but wished the men to go to work and give his suggestions a trial, when he said it would be soon enough for the men to object. That, however, would be a very dangerous thing, and would be open to grave objections.

They then offered a third, inasmuch as there were grave doubts about Mr. Chambers’ statement as to the results. The deputation asked Mr. Chambers to put aside two or three stalls and appoint a couple of men on each side to watch the holing of those stalls, and let the results be known when they could fix the price accordingly. Mr. Chambers was not willing to do that.

Mr. Chappell informed Mr. Chambers that in nearly every place in the district where disputes had arisen they had recourse to arbitration by inspection, and in others to arbitration of work. Mr. Chambers then said he was not in a position to alter the matter, that he had no power, and that it rested with the owners.

The deputation suggested that the notices should stand over for 14 days or three weeks until terms could be fairly discussed; but Mr. Chambers was not in a position to do that. He stated that he would communicate with Mr. Buckingham Pope, the chairman of the company, but as that gentleman was at St. Moritz it would be some time before they obtained an answer. No men could have tried harder to arrive at a settlement than the deputation. They, of course, must admit that if the company wished to put a different system of work into operation, they had no power to stop it, but they required payment for their work. There was not the slightest doubt but that the men had the best of the argument.

Upon the packing question, Mr. Chambers said he wanted the miners to get coal. The deputation informed him that the men could very often make a pack, when there was nothing else to do, and that the best regulated collieries in the district were not free from intervals of stoppage arising from causes over which no one could have any control. They said they fell back on the original agreement. The packing was interwoven and made a condition of the colliers’ work on the understanding that the prices for coal getting were fixed at a certain rate. They were connected together, and their relationship could not be severed without serious damage to the men, unless compensation were made in the direction of getting a higher price for coal.

Four years ago, Mr. Warburton, the manager at that time, offered, if the men would give up the packing, to give an additional halfpenny per ton on the coal in acknowledgment of the concession. Some conversation took place among the delegates, in the course of which it was stated that only the manager’s version of mixing the hard with the soft coal, in the matter of losing the orders, had been heard. Several of those present said they could depend on the Denaby men standing firm, and that they would mend the roads again rather than submit to a reduction. Another speaker said if the pit once stopped it would be warm weather before they started again.

Eventually, the following resolutions were passed:—

(1) That this committee, along with the deputation which has waited on the manager of the colliery, regards the suggestions which have been made by the deputation and reported to the committee as showing the strong disposition on the part of the men to avoid any rupture between the owners and the workmen of the colliery.

(2) That this meeting is also of opinion that the terms mean a serious reduction in the wages of the men, and that considering the conduct of the men during the last six years towards the company the terms are unfair, uncalled for, and therefore cannot be accepted.

(3) That this committee is of opinion that considering the terms offered imply a reduction in wages, the men are entitled to the support of the Association.

(4) That this committee is of opinion that there is no way by which the questions at issue can be settled so equitably as by one suggesting that the differences should be put to the reference of four men, two to act on each side, and the rates for round and small coal to be fixed by the result found by the parties herein referred to.

(5) That this committee strongly urges that another effort be made to get a postponement of the notice until the terms of the men have been fairly considered by the directors.

(6) That this committee believes that the packing question is so interwoven with all the other kinds of work that to separate one from the other would be a very serious reduction in the wages of the men, besides being very inconvenient.