The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-08-17
NEWS OF LABOR UNIONS
TWO CATHOLIC PRIESTS IN CON-
TROvERsY OVER COAL STRIKE.
One Attacks John Mitchell. the other
Defends Him-A New C~hfId-Labor
Law I'm Germany.

A new phase has been added to the an
thracite coal strike by the Catholic clergy
taking I'D the issues. The Rev. II. f.
O'Reilly, OF Shenandoah, has incurred en-
nifty by denouncing the strike and partic-
ularly the leaders Of the United Mine
Workers. He personally attacked Presi-
dent Mitchell, Of the United Mine Workers,
and John Fahy, president OF district No. g..
OF the anthracite region. The Rev. John
F. Power, a priest Of Spring Valley. Ill,
President MitchelIs home, wrote an open
letter TO Father O'Reilly. denouncing him
for his utterances. This controversy be
tween the two priests over the casus has
grown until now it is becoming a topic of
general discussion throughout the anthra-
cite region. The priests generally in the
anthracite field have been Of great assist
ance 10 the miners, especially In keeping
peace by administering the pledge 10 keep
away from drink while the strike lasts.
President Mitchell wrote a letter to Father
O'Reilly concerning the attack, and the
priests caustic reply, saying that Mitchell
had no right to c~riticise his sermon. has
placed the miners and clergy farther apart.
The United Mine Workers Journal while
ACN NoAiAiiCiAAll6 III ne controversy AlIN
ed part Of the sermon Of Father O'Reilly
beside the letter of Father Power, under
the caption: Assertion VS.. Facts" The
part of Father O'Reilly's sermon that
caused commOtion follows:
ut is a law of God and Of man that every
human being has a right to earn enough TO
feed himself and his family. His children
cry for bread. He has the right to get that
bread honestly, and no man living has a
right TO tell him he shall not. The man who
interferes is a lawbreaker and an enemy
TO public good.
II know there are men in my congregation
WHO want 10 work. They didn't want to
quit work and they would go back tO-mor-
row if they did not fear for their lives. ]
say this is wrong.
You should have the manhood to go back
to work and defy these organizations
known as the United Mine Workers. 1t is
a blOOd-stained organization, and it will
be bloOd-stained until it ceases to exist. II
was formed TO promote crime and protect
criminals.
Every one was happy and ~contented
here until Mitchell and Fahy came and
organized unions. These men are not work
ingmen, they are not respectable, and
wouldn't give 2 cents for the opinion OF
either of them. They draw big salaries and
live on the best in the country.
Did any one ever hear of either Mitchell
or Fahy doing a days work? They live
by preying on the paltry earnings of you
poor. deluded men, while your u~nfortunate
families are starving.
lneN tell me Fany OHered 100 union men
to the sheriff 10 prevent disorder. The sher-
if was wise in refusing their help. If he
had accepted God help this community.
Father Power disputed Father O'Rielly in
the following open letter to him:
Rev. Dear Sir-I don't know that / ever
read an utterance more unbecoming a
Catholic priest than that attributed to you
by the press. If what was said of Mitchell
really came from you, then you must, as ar
honest man, take II back as publicly, for il
Is pure Islander. and you know the obliga-
ton of restitution is involved. I know Johr
Mitchell from his boyhood days; know him
to have worked for years in the coal mines
here: know him to have always been re-
spectacle, fair-minded and worthy of conf
dence. / am proud to see the miners of the
country have in him that confidence. I'm.
just men, whether operators or editors, OF
even priests, cannot shake that confidence
/ have spent the best part of my twenty
six years OF priestly life here among the
miners. Have experienced all phases o.
strikes and labor troubles, and If we have
been free from them of late John Mitchell
is to be thanked more than any other man
He is endeavoring to do the same for yoI
on the only lines IL can be done, and i
would be to your best interests and those
of your people TO second his efforts instead
of opposing them"
FATHER GAvISK'S OPINION.
The Rev. Francis II. Gavisk, OF st. John:
Church. of this city, when asked about tn,
controversy. said he was not familiar
enough with the subject to express al
opinion. He said the strike is perhaps be
coming bitter and that Father OReilly
would like TO see it settled and possibly
reflects the feeling Of members of his con
gregation. As TO the criticism of Presiden
Mitchell. he said he did not know hin:
but from what he had heard of him and tn,
statement of Father Power, he though
Father O'Reilly was not well acquainted
with him.
Whatever may be said" continued Fa
ther Gavisk, Il think the miners are at
taching too much Importance to this on,
saying. L do not believe that il will hav,
much bearing on the strike. one way O.
the other, and l think that if / had Pres
ident Mitchell here L would tell him Il
go on and not pay any attention to it. T.
say that President Mitchell lives in Iuxur,
and gets a big salary and possesses M
broad. A man of his ability. capable n
managing such a great organization. woul,
certainly be worth more than he gets from
the miners organization were he in som
other business. AS to the first part of Pa
Their O'Reilly's address, I am not prepare,
to express myself. No doubt the striker
are now beginning TO feel the differenc
between the assistance they are recivin,
and their full wages, and it is but natura
that there should be some feeling of regre
and discomfort. Ii may be this sentimen
that Father O'Reilly expressed"
Secretary Wilson, OF the mine workers
said he thought the sermon of Fatha
O'Reilly will have no material effect ~
the strike, and that IL has really becom
a controversy between the priests.