The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1888-06-02 00:00:00

SAVED FROM A FIERY DEATH.

A fire imperilling the lives of 50 men occurred the
other evening at the Maritime Colliery, Pontypridd.
The fact that the whole of the framework on the pit
top was in flames became known at eight o'clock, and
it appeared certain that the 50 men who were known
to be in the pit must be beyond the reach of help.
Happily the upcast was clear, and a vast crowd hurried
thither to render aid. An ample supply of water was
obtained by means of a hose from the Union Work-
house in the neighbourhood, and the efforts of the
firemen began to tell. One man, named Delaney,
snatched a bucket, and, despite all remonstrances,
mounted the ladder leading to the top of the burning
mass, and hurled water on the flames. Then, throw-
ing away the bucket, he pulled off his coat and beat
back the fire, at the imminent risk of falling into the
seething mass beneath him. He at last descended,
having sustained but slight injury. Meanwhile it was
decided to take the serious step of stopping the
ventilating fan, so as to avoid the danger of the
flames being drawn down the shaft into the mine.
About ten o'clock the fire was practically extinguished,
and then came the terrible question whether all or
any of the 52 men in the pit were alive. It soon
became known that the bulk of the men were at the
mouth of the upcast, waiting to be drawn up, and
these were quickly at the surface. The rescued men
state that they had given themselves up for lost, and
must certainly have perished but for the closing of
the ventilator. There was at one time imminent
danger that the pit shears would fall into the shaft,
and thus drive the burning timber into the pit. The
foreman, William Bees, led 30 men into the lowest
part of the pit out of the fumes. The fire is believed
to have been caused by the upsetting of a paraffin
lamp used by the brakesman, which ignited the
platform already saturated with oil.

•
MIKE'S NEW MEASURE.—A two-foot rule was given
to a labourer in a Clyde shipyard to measure an iron
plate. He, not being well up to the use of the rule,
after spending a considerable time, returned. "Now,
Mike," asked the plater, " what size is the plate ?"
1, Well," replied Mike, with .a; grin of satisfaction,
"It's the length of your rule and two thumbs over,
with this piece of brick and the breadth of my hand
and my arm from here to there, bar a finger."

LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
MR. GLADSTONE' ON.MR. RITCHIE'S BILL.

Mr. Gladstone addressed'a body of excursionists al
Hawarden on Saturday. Referring to the South-
ampton election, he showed that the Liberal victory
had been attributed to the licensing clauses of the
Local Government Bill. Speaking at some length of
these clauses, he said that while he would welcome
the transfer of the licensing power from nomins.ted
justices to elected bodies, he strongly objected to the
compensation which tile Government proposed, as
licenses would thereby be converted into an estate,
only to be abolished at an enormous cost. The
license, which is a document enduring for twelve
months (proceeded Mr. Gladstone) is proposed now to
be made by Act of Parliament an estate. The price
of it is to be fixed by arbitration, and you know well
that arbitrations in all such cases mean high prices;
and therefore the meaning of it is this, that these
licenses entail upon the premises where the trade is
carried on not merely a high price, but an artificial price.
I willl show you, as practical men, what sort of artificial
value the possession of licenses and of the monopoly
which a license carries or imparts to buildings in our
town. This is a case of license in one of our large
towns, and the gentleman who gives me the informa-
tion )s the man who built the premises in 1886, and
they host him £1230 Bs. He carried on the trade,
lind he enlarged the premises, and he estimated the
cost 01 the enlargement of the premises at £BOO, so
that
,the premises cost him, when considered as so
much bricks and mortar, £2030 Bs. But then there
was the license, and the monopoly which the license
entails, and now you will see how the people would
have to be scourged under the licensing clause if they
were to attempt to purchase these monopolies. This
same public-house was quite lately—not many
months ago—sold by anction. It had cost £2030,
had got a license and a monopoly, and the license,
with I the monopoly, raised the price of that which
had cost £2030, when sold by auction, to £16,100.
(Shame.) Well, you will judge from that, gentle-
men. I cannot assume that the licensing clauses
will be withdrawn, for Mr. Ritchie was asked, repre-
senting the Government in this matter—he was asked
a little while before the recess whether he would
withdraw the clause or not; but, on the contrary, he
used rather high language in intimating the determi-
nation of the Government to pass the clause, to press
the clauses, and press them as rapidly as they, with
propriety, could. Now, gentlemen, it is a question,
and a great question, for you to consider whether
these clauses pass or not. The Government look to
these public-houses with these licenses as the great
mainstay, foundation, and backbone of their political
party throughout the country. (Loud applause.)
When they win a town election it is either through
the direct influence of property or through the influ-
ence of the holders of these licenses. (Hear, hear.)
Suppose the Government press the clauses, will they
be defeated? That is a question, a very great ques-
tion, and it is my duty to tell you if you are in earnest
about these clauses, and I suppose you are, that you have
got a very serious business in hand. lam afraid that
ff they choose to press the clauses the clauses will be
carried in the House of Commons. If they are carried
in the House of Commons and sent to the House of
Lords we may, I believe, think they will be carried.
Because, and here I am afraid to bring in a word
which is almost banished from the political discus-
sion of the House of Commons, for the moment of it
lies at the root of every political discussion at the
present juncture—the word Ireland—if England is to
be saddled with these licensing clauses I will tell you
why it will be. It will be lest Ireland should obtain
the benefits of Home Rule. (Hear, hear.) I believe
myself the majority of the members of the House of
Commons are opposed to the licensing clauses on their
merits, but they dare not vote so. Remember the
Government, the Tory party, though in a thriving
condition compared with what they have often
been, yet are a minority of the House. If all the
gen emen who call themselves Liberals would
unit with us, we should have also the support
of he Irish Nationalists, and we should by a
very fair majority throw out these licensing
clauses. But they will not do it. The Tories and
Unionists as a body on every occasion hold together,
and they on every occasion go with the Govern-
ment. It does not signify what the question is.
Sometimes it is the question of the death duties,
whereby Parliament has enacted, that personal pro-
perty shall pay upon death three times the amount
that' is paid upon landed property; or perhaps it is
the question of the wine duties, where, for the sake
of a most insignificant item of revenue, £lOO,OOO, or
a little more, trade with France, amounting to, I
think, over £50,000,000, is disturbed and put in
hazard by placing arms in the hands of the French
Protectionists, who say we are endeavouring to tax
French wines unduly, and for this they voted. They
vote anything upon any question affecting their in-
terests and the interests of England. Ireland, Mr.
Gladstone went on to say, was still the key to the
whole position; but if the Irish question was going
backwards in Parliament, it was going forward with
the nation, upon whom the Liberal party relied.