New-York tribune., 1902-10-30

4 Philadelphia correspondent sends Us a let
Ter on the relation Of labor unions to the militia
which we take pleasure in printing another
page of this issue 1t is an excellent example
of the confusion of thought common on this sub
ject, and viii repay perusal by students anxious
10 learn the state of mind which Mr.. Hill and
his fellow demagogues have developed among
muddle headed people by their appeals TO class
hatred Our correspondent. following the lead
OF the political octopus hunters holds that the
Pennsylvania militia were sent into the coal
regions "for the purpose Of terroriZing men who
had protested against the notification" of con-
stitutional rights and statute laws. He holds
that the operators had violated various laws
in the conduct of their business, that the miners
had been unable TO secure enforcement of those
| laws, and therefore he objects to sending the
militia to protect the men accused OF breaking
these laws against the protestants who had
"asked to have the laws enforced. If the accu-
"sations were unjust. the accusers could have
been hauled into court for libel"
Probably the man who wrote that believed
/ il. lie had heard much talk about military
despotism. and as he sympathlzed with the
| strikers he denOunces as tyrants and oppres-
| sors those who would not let strikers murder,
/ not the operators, but innocent wage earners.
| Yet if he viii think II over calmly he viii see
| that the militia had absolutely nothing 10 do
| with the case Of the strikers against the opcr-
/ ators. The men whom the militia restrained
| were not protesting against the operators law
| lessness, and they were not terrorzed No
/ militiaman interfered with lawful proceedings
/ against the operators or forced any man 10
/ work. The strikers could have continued their
! struggle within the lines marked out by Mr..
! Mitchell himself as lawful and proper for ten
! years without seeing a guardsman II was
/ only when some ignorant adherents Of the
strike, in defiance of Mr.. MltchelIs instructions.
| began TO murder wOrkmen and maltreat their
| wives and blow up houses and shoot from am
| bush at citizens going about their lawful occu-
pations that the militia was called I'm. II II be
'terrorizing" labor to keep one crowd OF labor
ers from killing another crowd OF laborers who
| see lit 10 work under conditions which the first
company do not like, then little 'terrorizing"
is not bad thing.
| If the operators violated laws they certainly
ought to be punished. We have not one word
| to say in their defence against the charges our
! correspondent makes. Those charges however
! nave absolutely nothing 10 do with the ques-
| ton. OF course. II our correspondent wants 10
| take the position that government Is so bad as
20 justify resort 10 revolution and bloodshed TO
overthrow il, he IS entitled TO regard the militia
as an enemy 10 his cause. Otherwise he must
admit that the troops were properly employed
| Certain men resorted to violence and bloodshed
against other men. They say they did ii as an
! incident in their struggle against still other
men, the lawbreaking operators. But their
grievance against the operators, however just,
did not warrant murder OF innocent men and
women, and those innocent men and women
were entitled to protection. We are fallen upon
strange times. indeed, when any citizen thinks
| 1t wrong to give them such protection. Our cor
respondent may believe that every coal operator
ought to be in Jail. but that Is no reason why he
should be permitted to murder people who think
otherWlse and persist In working contrary To
his advice Yet that is Just what his argument
against the use Of the militia amounts TO-