Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1885-05-02

| ION III lHiuluS wages Nds INC dppeAi
ance in the Cumberland Netes and
Times of the following address to
the Miners and Laborers OF Allegany
and Garrett counties, Md, from the
Executive Board of the Knights of
Labor OF District No. %:
FRosTBuRG, 9lp., April IS. 1885.
4 circular appeared in our county papers,
which you are all aware of, requesting the
| presidents Of the various coal companies of
| the Georges creek region to pay 50 cents per
| ton for mining, and other labor in proper
| ton, on and after May /, 1885. The circular
was signed Your Employees This docr,-
ment has gone the rounds of most all the
papers of our State and coal journals of the
East
Stockholders, coal presidents and the
canal president have been interviewed in
regard to this circular and have given
their opinions. Editorials have appeared
in many newspapers of our State Civ
ing opinions on the matter, and all, as
with ono voice, condemn the circular, and
call it bogus and as coming from some per-
sons unintormed, not miners-politicians
who for their own selfish ends, wish to pro-
ducc a recurrence of the disasters and distress
Of 1882, etc.
We feel it cur duty at this time to say few
words on this matter to the miners and la
borers and the public. We as an Order are
slow to rush into print on matters OF this
kind. But at times circumstances compel us
to do so.
We have inquired about the author of the
much abused circular Of April IS, 1885, and
have satisfied ourselves that it came from
number OF miners Ill this region whom we
thought were satisfied. with their present sit
uation. In this we were mistaken, and can
safely say that the circular referred to did
come from miners, and not from politicians
or others, as the operators would wish the
public to believe. And Furthermore, we do
approve Of the request made by those men in
the circular and agree with them in saying
that wages are too low at this time in this
region Not only the miners say this but
every good-thinking business man in our re-
gion.
The query is: Why did not the miners
sign their names to this document?
To those familiar with the treatment the
men received who have III the past endorsed
documents an explanation is unnecessary.
But to those unacquainted with the working
Of the miners or their grievances few words
will explain
Before union was formed among the mi
ners it was the custom to settle all matters
between both parties by means OF committees
trp,, u - l. a. r.
that men who served on these committees
were discharged and could not get work
thereafter in the region. This compelled the
men 70 form union for selfprotcction. Not
long after this we We're led to understand that
the companies would not recognize any union
men, but would deal direct with tho separate
miners.
In lso2 committee representing the MI
ners of the Georges creek region met the
presidents OF tine different coal companies in
Baltimore, MARYLAND, for the purpose Of ar
bitrating the troubles then in existence The
operators would not act with them, because
SAID committee were members of the Order of
Knights OF Labor, and nothing could he DONE
Later the president of the Consolidation com
pany asked for a committee of miners, as the
companies would confer with the miners
from each mine, but no committee of Knights
ct Labor y committee Of two men from
each mine met the executive board of the
coal operators combination, and they said i'll
very few words that they would not give
one inch from what they proposed i'll their
manifesto, and OF course nothing could be
done. There were about twenty miners on
this committee and fifteen of them never got
work since.
Last December circular was sent to the
operators asking for q conference when the
miners were reduced to forty cents per ton.
This document was properly signed, but it
was not honored. &c. from past experience,
those men who sent out the last circular did
not care to put their names at the b ottom,
and in vic" Of the past who can blame them?
As to the business of the request we would
call Tie attention Of miners and operators and
others to lew facts that cannot be denied.
Last year the average output OF coal per
miner was $50 tons. Figure on this at 10
cents per ton and he would have at the end
Of the year about $3.50. From this amount
the miner pays to the company one cent per
ton for sharpening tools, ETC., termed smith
ing, making 50 per year; his house rent is on
an average S50a year; doctor whether need
ed or not IS S12. Deduct this from 1920 and
Il miner has left about $3.50, or an average Of
about 60 cents per day with which to feed and
clothe his family.
So, because the miners know they cannot
feed and clothe family on SO cents per day
IS why they have requested an advance in
wages. But it seems, as usual, that the re-
quest will not be entertained by the operators
But they are free to say (when intervicwed)
| that the miners will not strike, as they are not
in condition to do So and they are not uni
ted, Us they bursted up their union in 1882, etc.
We admit that the miners uuion did get
good shaking up, and believe also that the
| coal companies combination was as tired of
the struggle as the miners, and would not care
| about having it repeated. But the miners
organization did not fall with the strike. |
still lives and is very healthy. And as to the
| miners not being united, we would say this
| might have been the case before the reduction,
but bear in mind that every miner in the re-
gion is united in saying that 40 cents per ton
is not enough, and they cannot keep out of
| debt at it.
We hope strike W Il not take place. But
4 A.