Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1898-12-03

promised such measure, that the
promise was not kept, and that the bill
is no good with this feature left out.
When the news arrived in LonacOn-
ing from Annapolis that the elective
clause of the mining bill was lost every
miner hung his head in humiliation.
We felt that it was strange state of
affairs, and we We're surely disappoint-
ed.
But time passed on. The Mine In
spector was appointed, AS before.
Shortly afterward Senator Dick wrote
long letter to the Frostburg Forum,
in which he stated that he had heard
complaints about the Mine Inspector
not doing his duty, that the air was
bad in some of the mines. and so on.
Ltad 1t not been for this letter Of Senator
Dick / acouM not haze ocritten one rord
about this mhole Affair."!
But this was too much. concluded
then that | had as much right to de
fend my fellow-miners over the name
of "JacksOn' as members of the Leg
islature had to let the elective clause
go to its death under the pseudonym of
compromise
We have been fooled these many
Yeas by people pretending to De
friends of the miners. Aud what do we
find again? Senator Dick has bill,
including the elective clause, passed
through the Senate, but passing it
through the Senate does not make it a
law. Hon. James Campbell says, in
compromised to satisfy the coal oper-
ators. Before the compromise was
cold Senator Dick, who surely knew of
the compromise, comes back and
writes about bad air in some of the
mines, and what should be done for
the miners, who have big vote, and
intimating the Mine Inspector is not
doing his duty-all in the teeth of the
fact. as learned from these men them
selves, that the operators wanted the
elective clause left out
But Mr.. Campbell says that Senator
Dick fulfilled his promise in passing
the bill through the Senate. And now
will Mr.. Campbell tell uS-why the
operators wanted the elective clause
left out. and why a delegation of
miners was not called to Annapolis to
be heard in favor of the elective
clause9 Or why some other part of
the'bill was not compromised
| will close with few remarks on
another sample of Mr.. Campbell's
method OF controversy:
You accuse Senator Dick of not Keeping his
platform pledges, of failing to pass the min
ing bill as he promised the miners, and by
lrrevelant questions would lead the people to
believe that the elective clause was lost while
in the Senate. jackson" did you know you
were lying when you made such accusations?
| made no intimaton that the elect
i've clause was lost while in the Senate,
for | knew better. But this kind of
argument does not explain away my
contention. Nor did | ask-was the
elective clause lost IN the Senate
This is not quoting me correctly.
What did ask was-"did the bill die
in the Senate, House, Committee or in
Caucus?" "Where was it lost -
SO far the matter has not been clear
ed up, but Mr.. Campbell is slowly but
surely helping US to more it in that di-
re3tlon. And now, in order to reach
my aim more exactly, will Mr. Camp
bell aid me farther by explaining how,
if Mr.. Dick passed the bill through
the Senate uualtered before the com
promise-how did he get it through
the Senate, amended, without giving
his approval to the compromise which
lost the elective clause
When this is answered frankly and
fully, all the mystery which covers it
with what appears to be an opaque
fog will be cleared away.
JACKSON