Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1901-03-12
Scale Committee Reached Import
ant Question Last Night.
REGARDS WORK IN FIRST DISTRICT
Miners Want Same Provisions There
as to Responsibility for Long Wall
Twenty Feet Out From Face-Most
of Other Work Finished.
From Fridays Daily.]

AT the session of the joint scale
committee held last evening the all
important question, the one upon
which the miners disagree most de-
cidedly with the operators, was taken
up In the regular order of the settle
ment of the scale for sub-district No.
!. The present scale reads as follows
on this much mooted question:
ut is agreed that in mines where
brushing is done, the miners shall
continue to brush, as heretofore, and
the company will take the coal from
the face, the miners to be responsible
for the long wall 20 feet outward
from the face as set forth in the Cen
terville agreement. In all other mines
the present conditions shall prevail;
provided, that any company that is
now having the brushing done by min
ers may require the miners to deliver
the coal at the switch, by the COM
pany doing said brushing.
The foregoing resolution shall be
construed to mean that where two
men worked on one road under the
Centerville agreement, they shall so
work under this agreement ~
The miners wish to strike this
whole section from the scale, claiming
that there is no like section in the
scales for other districts. They say
that they are willing to work under
the agreements made for the other
districts, but will not be responsible
for the long wall 20 feet outward from
the face, as set forth in the Centerville
agreement and as quoted above. John
p. Reese stated that the resolution, as
embodied in the scale now in use, is
the greatest trouble in the southern
field, and that the miners want it
knocked out. He said that they want
exactly the same conditions to govern
them as govern the miners in other
districts. According to his view of
the matter, which was not disputed,
the miner is in the second, third and
fourth districts responsible in meas
= ure for his wall, because he is respon-
sible for the work being done in a
good, workmanlike manner. What
the miners wish to guard against, how
ever, they say, is the necessity of hav-
ing to, under the rules, be responsible
for falls of material which would
come whether they were OF We're not
careful. These, they claim, should be
attended to by the company.
According to Mr.. Reese, the miners
object is to have uniformity, which
has been their aim thruout the conven-
ton. They want the same conditions
for all operators and the same condi-
tions for all men, in the same dis
tricts.
L. L. Lodwick, of Willard, an opera
tor. ventured the assertion that Mr..
Reese does not understand the condi-
tons of mining in the southern field
which are, he says, entirely different
from those of other fields in District
No. 10.
This, however, was denied by the
miners, who claim that the section
they want struck out is, as it reads
an injustice to any fair man; Edwin
Perry, vice president of the miners
made the statement that mine own
err might just as well ask the miner
for an insurance policy on the com.
pany house in which the miner lives
as to ask him to be responsible fol
the face as provided in the section in
question. He said farther that there
is no telling when a fall may occur
and that if the miner has done his
work in a workmanlike manner he
should not be responsible for thse &C
cidents, which may happen, it is said
at any time.
At this point in the discussion the
operators of the first district decided
to withdraw for short time to make
proposition to the miners with q
view to settling this difficulty. They
were in closed session for some time
and after their return to the room the
miners of the first district held a eau
Gus. The proposition of the operators