Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1889-06-01

malicious irony" 1t says if the
JOURNAL is not 1.-THE subsidized organ
of the coal companies it ought to be,
for IT cannot account for Its treach-
cry to humanity" in any other way.
1t speaks tcndcrly of ''its cringing ser
Witty to the coal MogulS and its infer
nal injustice to the underground wage
slaves" and all that.
We venture to say that no ''coal
/ Mogul" would resent the critics malice,
/ but if it should come up here and call
our miners 'underground slaves" its
/ head would be knocked off and shov-
eled i'll the COB.
But so far Us this region is concerned
| the critic does not know what it is talk
| ing about. and if it has the circulation
up here it claims it is time subscri-
Der with intelligence enough to open
his mouth should set his little Mentor
right. For instance, the critic combats
the theory that the companies stand
| between the consumers and the miners.
| Ignoring its argument that such can
not be the case we challenge it to
prove its claim by intelligent tcstimo-
ny from this region. This will be easy
to do if the testimony is here. We will
want that testimony to show that it is
the miners who deal direct with the
| thn IL u-in
not do to say this is an unfair propo-
sal, for we give the critic leave to ap.
! peal to its own witnesses.
Here is the material portion of its
argument;
| The CONSUMERS Of coal are enemies TO the
producers no more than the wooden factory
operatives who weave cloth for miners
clothes are the enemies of the miner who
exchanges therefor the coal that runs the en-
gine of the wooen factory. But the man
who stands between and charges the factory
- for Il ton of coal which the miner dug for
81 cents is the enemy of the miner to the cx-
tent that the miners coat is enhanced in
price rhi. il what is done by the "organi
2ation of the employing element" which the
JOURNAL claims as being that which enables
the companies to obtain more for the miners
than they can obtain for themselves" This
is on the principle of protection advocated in
the last campaign, that was to help rich EN-
ployers become richer that they might, if
they choose, pay higher wages Do they chose
to do it? Well, not much.
''Do they choose to do it ?" The
critic answers its own question well,
not much"
Will the critic learn from the JOUR
NAL that to Charles f. Mayer, more
than all other men put together, is due
the retention of the current duty on
coal
Will if learn that one of Mr. Mayors
most telling arguments before the
committee Of the 18th Congress WAS
that the price of mining this coal
should not be less than 80 cents per
ton, the price then paid being 40?
The duty was undsturbed. What
did Mr.. Mayor do next =? Gaining the
cordial cooperation OF his competitors,
he sought union of all the semi~btu-
minous interests-a consummation
achieved after long and incessant la
Dor. What followed The price Of
mining tcos mised from ~ 10 30 cents per
ton. Did not the companies choose to
do il Who in this region says-"well,
not much ?"
But what is the use of expending
argument on a paper that does not
know enough about the matter to state
correctly the price of coal at its own
door The manu- 'acturer in Baltimore
who pays - per ton for this coal ought
| to die or resign He is much too libe-
raj for this world. The wholesale
price there is $3.50. Of this sum quite
$50 is taken up in transportation and
other fixed charges. That leaves 80
cents for the miner and company, or
30 cents for the underground wage
| slave" and 40 cents for the "coal Mo
gull"
This is not all ~. 80 is the outside
price, certainly for all eastbound coal.
If coastwise freights go up the ''Mo-
| gul" loses to that extent the 'slave'
loses nothing. If accidents happen on
land or wafer the "Mogul'' loses to
that extent the "slape'' loses nothing,
Still not all out of the companies
10 cents comes all expenses of hand
ling the coal in market; all Office ex-
penses all salaries all dividends,
with nothing then to show for depl"-
ton of the property, for coal once
taken out is gone forever.
Meanwhile the ''slaye's" 80 cents is
untouched and untouchable.
Now what becomes Of that ''miper's
coat ?" If the critics. logic be correct,
instead of paying $40 for it the ''siaYe"
should be made to pay about $50, and
the "Mogul's" coat ought not to cost
over $4S.
The critic is inclined to call mean
names and make mean insinuations.
Such things do not move this paper.