Symud i'r prif gynnwys
Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

12 erthygl ar y dudalen hon











Correspondence. NEGLECTED ABERAMAN. 51R.-I am grateful to Amyaedd" for the good advice he gave me in your last issue but. alas we have done too much waiting, and now it in time to be doing, and to let the new council know what we require them to do. Perhaps "Amynedd" is a D.C., and if eo, I shall be pleased if he take* to heart what we have asked for and will kindly put it to practical use.—I am, YOUR ABKRAMAN CORRESPONDENT. DOWLATS MECHANICS. Sill,—Believing you are a person that would not wilfully hurt the feelings of anybody, we, the Dow- lais Mechanics, wish to appeal to you with regard to statements which have been made from time to time by your Dowlais reporter. He seems to have taken it as a hobby to probe into our business, and by so doing is creating ill-feeling between us and our employers. You can believe us when we say that we, as a body, feel strongly about this matter, and [condemn the indiscreet writing of your reporter. We would advise him, if he cannot find better use for his pen than creating animosity between the respected manager and ourselves, he would serve both you and the public by not writing at all. Hoping you will put a stop to his wrong and unfair statements, we are, your? truly, 22nd January, 1895. DOWLAIS MECHANICS. [NOTE.—It would have been well if our correspon- dents had specified or rectified Home of the errors alleged to have been committed by our Dowlais repre- sentative. The columns of the Times are always open to the discussion of matters of public interest. It is possible that our reporter may have received informa- tion which was not absolutely correct; if so, let him be put right. We have no reason to doubt his good faith, and we feel sure there is nothing further from his mind than to create animosity between employer and employed.—EDITOR.] ROAD METALLING. SIR,—The foundation of science is observation, and it has occurred to me by that faculty of observation that it would be advantageous if the persona in charge of the macadamizing of our roads wonld adopt the plan of covering the metal utilised for that purpose with some fine material, such as small metal, or even earth. Maybe the officials I allude to will consider it presumption on my part to suggest such a thing but to prove to you that it will be beneficial to all, I will just give you a sample of the defectiveness of the process of laying stones as they are at present effected. Now, Sir, the broken metal is laid down on the road in a loose condition. Presently a cart and horse come rattling along, and the horses hoofs and [rolling wheels scatter some of the stones, thereby giving labour to the road men to return them to their posi- tion. This proceeding goes on repeatedly, and by and by a tract is made for the horses hoofs and the wheels, while the other still keeps loose. Later all disappear somehow, and leave an uneven road instead of the expected ideal road surface. Now, I hold that it would be economical to the ratepayers and everyone using the roads if my idea is utilised. I do not wish to appear dictatorial, but can prove it a fact that this plan is used by the road mender who overlooks that part of the highway between Hirwain and Penderyn with eminently satisfactory results. But to be more precise respecting the financial economy of such a method. l'irst, it would save the time of tho road men who are constantly clearing and raking the stones. Secondly, it would save the time, as well as the ungainly and dangerous method as used in Cardtff-road, Aberdare, of placing sleepers across pal.t of the road where it has unevenly worn. Thirdly it would relieve the extra strain upon the horse flesh and the extremely vindictive wear upon vehicles which travel our roads. Even, Mr. Editor, if it were only the humanity of the latter it were worth the extra trouble and ex- pense but it will prove to be economical. Hoping our new Council will take this in hand.—Yours, &c., Aberaman. Jonx JONES. P.S.—If the officials are it all disbelieving, I would suggest that a hundred yards or so of road where the traffic is heavy should be utilised as I advocate, and another similar piece macadamised in the usual manner; and the question could be proved, and I infer that less dust and loss of metal would be the result of the adoption of my plan.— LIBERALISM THE ENEMY OF THE WORKING CLASSES. SIR,—The letters of "Disgusted" aud Progres- sive" in your last week's issue show the want of pluck and coinage in fighting the cause of the present waning and discredited Liberalism. Your corres- pondent Disgusted says that the opening up of new territory and land would not help Dowlais or ¡ Cyfarthfa, because there are others likely to compete I and get the orders for rails. Does he wot know, or is it pretended ignorance on his part, that any new trade orders, not perhaps received by the Dowlais or Cyfarthfa Works, but given to other firms in Great Britain, would give increased impetus to the steel and iron trade, which would certainly be felt, and benefit our local works ? What does the Economist" report on the Iron and Steel Trade of 1894 say ? It says the only hope for any expansion in the rail trade is the possibility of some new railways being made in Africa or China, and this is a little uncertain, now that the present Liberal Government is against and stops all progress in Africa. Trade always follows the flag, and foreign flags now exclude British trade by hostile and prohibi- tive tariffs. Compare the Gladstonian Government from 1880 to 1886 and the Unionist Government from 1886 to 1892. You will find that the Unionist Government added 1,642,480 square miles of new fieldw and resources to our countrymen more than the pre- ceding Liberal Government, not taking into account the loss of that rich and promising country of the Transvaal (112,600 square miles), also the Cameroons and Angra, Pequena. (115,000 square miles) handed over to Germany, and part of New Guinea (70,000 square miles). All these losses were due to Liberal aud Radical policy. Instead of us receiving the trade and commerce of these rich countries, it now goes to foreign firms. Our colonies and our possessions are our liest customers and buyers. To no class of the community at home can the maintenance and exten- sion of these be of greater importance than to the I working men. They are always accessible to our manufactured goods, and while we retain the com- mandof thesea.even war will not shut us off from them. The Britain Abroad affords the best field for the energies of Britons here at home, and supplies the best sphere for judicious emigration. The vast population which our being the workshop of the world during the last generation has developed in these islands requires some outlet abroad, and surely it is something that those who leave our shores should remain in the same country as the relatives they have left, and without change of allegiance, work their way to fortune under the old flag. Forward is decidedly right when he says that Liberalism is the enemy of the working classes in every way, and I may put it that they cause five D's Doubt, Disquiet, Dread, Disappointment, and Dis- couragement to investment of capital and enterprise, which is the cause of the present bad state of trade and wages. I trust in the future that both Disgusted" and "Progressive" will kindly treat you, Mr. Editor, with a little more facts, and prove, with courage if they can, that Liberalism is not the enemy of the working classes.—I am, sir, yours, &c., UNIONIST. LIBERALISM THE ENEMY OF THE WORKING CLASSES. SIR,—My opponents still number only three, the same three as before. And, sir, I will as before begin with yourself. Permit me to say, without being in the least offensive, that you come very badly out of the ditch into which your honesty, coupled with your refusal to see good in anyone who is now labelled Liberal" have landed you. You admitted in your comment upon my first letter that our precious Literals had done nothing—I refer now to local matters—and yet you asked the public over and over again to vote for them in-preference to such men as Dan Thomas, Henry Lewis, and Henry Martin. I pointed out the absurdity of your position, and what is your reply ? It is this: That the Liberals had done nothing because the wicked Tories wouldn't let them the Liberals had tried to do many things, but the Tories, had prevented them the Literals had tried to get the Free Libraries Act put in force in Merthyr, but the Tories had prevented them accom- plishing their purpose. Now, sir, as I said in my first letter, you have not been in Merthyr long enough to fully measure up our precious Liberalism rulers, and therefore {you will pardon me for saying it), I feel it to be in no sense in accordance with what I consider fairplay that 1 should claim a victory when I tumble your house of cards. With that remark as a preface, I will go on. Is it not extremely comic to see the apologist for Liberal shortcomings putting the fault upon the Tories in a borough where the last Parlia- mentary vote showed eleven Liberals to two Tories ? Such a contention is a" ridiculous as it is untrue. I say it is untrue, Mr. Editor, and there is not a Liberal from Dowlais Top :o Treharris who can say it is not. The one instance you give of .'successful Tory obstruc- tion is woefully wide of the mark. The free libraries agitation of a dozen years ago was killed by the splendid organisation of the Dowlais people, who cast ;I. vote of ten for the Act, and 509 against it. I am writing from memory, but those figures are within two of the official couit, if indeed they are not abso- lutely correct. Aud now, whom think you was the leader of the Dowlais people in resisting that move- ment? Only Mr. William Morgan, J.P., Pant, who surely M not a wicked Tory. And whom think you was Mr. Morgan's lieutenant? Only Mr. Thomas Evans, who at the recent election descried himself aa determined to fight all the Tories and publicans. Pretty Tories are they not, Mr. Editor, the two lead- ing prophets of Calvinistic Methodism in Dowlais? Do you want further information on this interesting point, air ? If you do, just say the word, and I'll give you the names of some more of the agitators of that time. Now, sit', as I said before, you have shown your honesty by candidly confessing that in the past our precious se't fawr men have done nothing for the people. Why, then, in common fairness to the people whose interests I really believe you have honestly at heart, did you not say to the electors, These men have proved themselves to be a pack of incumpetents; send them to the right-abcut-face, and give others a cltauce." No, you would not do that, because the others were Tories; incompetence might reign supreme, and taxation might go up still higher but what mattered it so long as the Liberals were in power ? Everything must be sacrificed to the Moloch Of Liberalism. And yet have places where the Tories rule supreme beeu such awful examples to us that sooner than have them on our boards we would have so many jackdaws to represent us? Is the condition of Tory Liverpool and Belfast, and of Unionist Birmingham, so much worse than that of Merthyr, that a Unionist candidate for that place must be looked upon as a leper ? Throw off the miserable pre- judice of years, sir, and admit, as you must, that there are not on the whole face of the earth three places better governed than the three towus I hmo named. And why is this ? Simply because the people pick the best men as representatives without troubling about their politics. As to "Disgusted," I must really tell him I have not time to quibble with him life is too short to wrangle over such hair-splitting as is seen in his letter of to-day. If it were not in furtherance of the cause of Liberalism," that the woikinj-ineu of M: Dowlais were to be pensioned, what was it for any- way ? When the Tories are in j>ower trade is brisk enough, and one hears nothing of the parades of the unemployed in London and the big towns. So why talk of pensions? And if you must talk of pension" why give them only to Dowlais men ? What of the tens of thousands of workers all over the country who have been thrown out of employment since this precious travesty of a Government came into office ? Are they to have pensions too? Sir, it is my turn to feel disgusted, when I see presumably rational beings talking of pensioning honest men who have been thrown out of employment by the shilly-shallying policy of the lovel-every -country -except -your own party. So long as we have in office a party that is willing to pander to every set of factionists and anarchists at home, and who basely surrenders to anvone who wishes to apply the lash abroad, so Ion«- will trade be paralysed. Without confidence in the ruling powers, there can be no prosperity, and bitter experience has taught the men of money and the speculating ones that to a Radical Government thev can look for no assistance. Disgusted's" talk about the time when Africa shall be covered with rails, and about the barren Sahara, is very pretty, but'con- foundedly silly in u. serious discussion. Does he take me for one of the Yahoos, whom he is so fond of, and imagine I have not got intelligence enough to know that even in our own possessions—India for instance -there are still wanting hundreds of thousands of miles of railway, and that with railway facilities, the trade of India would increase, and so would that of England. In Africa have we not, thanks to the trulv British policy of Lord Salisbury, acquired some millions of square miles of territory within recent years ? And is that territory to remain closed to our commerce for ever ? It is this cheese-paring, halting cowardly policy that lets our working-men starve ab home, while there are untold millions of miles of railways awaiting construction in our own dominions without our annexing any more territory. It i* characteristic of present day Liberalism, that it can neither govern at home or abroad it can apologise to Austria, it can surrender to Boers abroad, and to assassins and rebels at home.; it can betray the Swazis in South Africa, and leave the noblest Englishman of the century to be done to death in the Soudan it can rave against the House of Lords and seek to plunder the Church all these things it can do, but it can't find a market for British industry, nor work for thn British unemployed. "0, our Government, our Government, what will they not have to answer for wrote the noble hero when he found himself betrayed in Khartoum, as the result of triumphant Radicalism But the avenging hand was turned aside when the new electors, who as all new electors will, voted for those whohad made them theifnest promises,and taught them to regard all existing institutions as being inimical to their advancement. But education is spreading and education will make even the most servile Briton patriotic again, so that he will lor ever consign to oblivion those who aro the enemies of everything tlta is British. Progressive, my boy, your little game won't do. ou want to lead me from my point into a discussion on mashers, but such a subject has no interest for Too, and your disquisition on that point shall stand over' if you please. In his first letter, Progressive had the usual laudation of the Liberalism that gave the working man his penny newspaper, but when I asked him how many of the Liberals of those days who are still alive, are advocates of the new Liberalism, he I- indiscreetly silent. Liberalism in those day's, Mr Editor, was a British policy it did not go and sing- songs m praise of murderers in its meeting nor bow the knee to Kruger and Joubert in the Transvaal Hence, frnnd Progressive. until you can establish a connection between filters, Harney and the others, and the new Liberalism, I will thank you to be silent about the penny newspaper and the tax on bread. Nom about that famous phrase, yahoos and ignoramuses," once more. My 18-carat friend amidst his sermonising on mashers, contrives to put forward a dishonest plea. He says I find fault with ungrammatical men, as if grammar were the mam thin^ Jind ftrguey that & iujxn injiy much business ability, and yet be unable to write grammati- cally. Xvith the last part of this sentence lcordiallv agree out, sir if I found fault with all the Liberal candidates at the recent elections simply because they could not write with strict grammatical accuracy there would not be a dozen—mark my words, my 18 carat friend—who would pass the scrutiny. My con- tention was, and I repeat it now, and can prove it up to the hilt, that at the last election certain men were brought forward as official Liberal candidates who could not write two sentences in presentable, not to say grammatical, English, and who knew abso- lutely nothing about the duties of the office to which they aspired—men who had no mors intelligence than an Australian aborigine, and no more education than a hedgehog. Is this plain enough for you, my 18-carat friend ? If it is, will you dare tell me and the readers of this journal that such persons were to be preferred to Dan Thomas or Henry Lewis? You cannot be ignorant of the men to whom I refer, and yet remember they were brought out as official Liberal candidates. Will anv one of my opponents defend the selection of such men-' And now, Mr. Editor, I must conclude. I have taken up far more of your space than I had intended, and worse still I have left the principal point of my contention untouched. You will remember I put a proposal to "Disgusted," and the preacher on masherdom and its ways to produce the official statistics of the trade and timuico of this country during the two last administrations, and to explain as best they could the tremendous difference between the two sets of figures. I promised, in the event of their not doing so. to publish tho statistics myself • but after taking up so much of your space this week' I do not feel that I am justified in taking up more I will therefore repeat the proposal to my opponents, and in the event of their not taking it up I will ask Disgusted to split no more hairs, and "Progres- sive" to sermonise less. Let them deal with tho question at issue, and lea, e all extraneous matter on one side. Let them remember, too, that hair splitting and sermonizing will not keep from the public the statistics to which 1 have referred -1 am, &c., January 17th, 1895. FORWARD.



[No title]