The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1902-11-19

Mr. Ross was proceeding TO analyZe the
constitution OF the Illinois branch of the
United Mine Workers with relation TO It's
bearing on the contracts with the btu
minous operators. when Judge Gray In
terrupted with an inquiry as to the OBJ
3ect OF this line OF questioning
MR.. ROSS REPLY
purpose OF showing that since the advent
OF the union the bitumnous operators
have been unable 20 employ any man un-
iii he first Joins the union. He did not
proceed further with the question.
when Mr. Ross concluded his examina-
ton. Mr.. Mitchell was cross-examined by
former Congressman Simon r. Wolver-
ton counsel for the Philadelphia ana
Reading Coal and Iron Co.
Mr.. Mitchell said II would he impossi-
Bile for him 10 give In detail the conui-
( tions at each mine or even unoer eaSn
. company. He also declared That IL wouiu
peither be possible nor desirable TO di-
.,ide the United Mine Workers into two
8 separate organizations. one bituminous
and the other anthracite. The anthra-
cite miners" he said. have had inde-
pendent and separate organizations In
them. They have gone. They do NOT wan.
nny more OF their organizations TO go the
The reply of Mr. Mitchell excited some
interest because OF the fact that this was
a suggestion made by Carroll ID VIRGIN.
In his report on the strike TO President
sRoosevelt
cupied but Ave minutes.
RIoTrNG AT SHENANDOAH.
James III. Torey OF Scranton. represent
ing the Delaware & Hudson company tol-
& lowed with a number OF inquiries on the
subject OF the riot that occurred at shen-
andoah. Mr. Mitchell was emphatic IN
saving that the reports sent out were
grossly exaggerated and that but one lie
was lost. The sheriff's appeal to the gov
ernor for aid he said. was overdrawn.
The Individual operators, who have not
ND 10 the present time pressed their case
before tho commission. through one OF
3 their attorneys Ira n. Burns OF Scranton,
= inouired OF the commission II they would
be given the opportunity 10 examine Wit
nesses when questions arise which are diff
ferent with them than with the COM
panies.
Judge Gray answered that they would.
DOES NOT GIVE UP JOB.
Mr. Mitchell. in reply TO Mr.. Burns,
said that when n man strikes he does not
voluntarily give up his job, but he strikes
for an Improvement In the conditions or
Z his lob IL ne wins he gets back the po-
sitlon, II he loses he goes back with his
hat In his hand and asks for job. Judge
Gray here interrupted 20 explain the un-
derstanding OF the commission with re-
spect to the returning 10 work OF men
who had been on strike. lie said:
II think the understanding Is that
pending the consideration OF the qucs-
sions by this commission, the strikers
were 10 return Immediately 20 work and
] think the further understanding is
don't let me be n1lsunderstood--is that
the non-union men should not be inter
fered with nor displaced from employ
mene generally by the return OF the union
men"
JUDGE GRAY's INTERRUPTION.
Mr. Burns was examining the witness
regarding unlawful acts committed dur
ing the strike and had asked Mr. Nit
chell II he approved OF them, when Judge
Gray stopped him and said that nothing
could he gained by asking the question.
because the commission had n moral
sense Of It's own which he presumed
agreed with the moral sense OF the com
munity and society.
Mr.. Mitchell declared with emphasis IN
the course OF subsequent examination
tndt the miners VIII carry the decision OF
the commission out 10 the letter "or 80
out Of our union"
THE NoN-UNIoN MEN.
JudgecGr then announced the decision
OF the commission I'm the matter OF the
application Of John I. Lenahan and John
T. OBrien attorneys for the non-union
men 10 appear IN the case
In the light OF all their claims. said
Judge Gray they would be allowed To- ap-
pear. but the commission could not con-
cent 90 the Withholding from the public Of
the names OF the non-unon men, az their
attorneys had desired After Mr. Lena
han assented 20 this Judge Gray an
nounced that the commission would see
that no unfair use would be made Of IT,
names.
Mr.. Darrow Insisted that Messrs Lens.
f, han and OBrisn really represented the
t operators and not the non-union men.
Whether they be here IN that way or
not, Judge Gray quickly replied. they
represent an implement IN the investIga-
-