Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1902-10-11
some ACTION.
Coal Operators Arrogant Demand for
Action Upon the President of
the United States.
Allege That the Organization of the
Miners is Illegal and in Restraint
of Trade.
Asserts the Federal Government Has
Power to Take Action Under
the Circumstances.

New York, Oct. 11-David wilcox,
vice president and counsel for the
Delaware and Hudson Railroad COM
pany and one OF those present at the
recent conference called by President
Roosevelt at Washington, has sent. to
President Roosevelt a letter demand
ing that the federal government pro-
ceed against the miners organization
in the courts on the ground that it is
conspiracy to prevent interstate
commerce. ..,.-n
Mr.. Wilcox, it is said on authority,
represents all the coal operators in
this action and was selected as their
spokesman. The letter was made
public during the day, together with
a letter written several months ago
to the president along the same lines.
The letter follows: ~,
ITO the President of the United
States:
"Sir-Upon June Z, last, had the
honor to address a letter to yourself
calling attention to the character of
the United Mine Workers of America.
The illegality Of that organization is
fully established by the authorities to
which then referred and it's methods
have since been again condemned by
the circuit court of the United States
Omitted States VS.. Weber, ia Fed.
Rep. $50; United States vs. Hagerty,
116 Fed. Rep. 51O).
In the Weber case the court said:
1T is hardly open to serious question
that the ultimate purposes of the un-
ion is not legal Some question has,
however, been made whether the ma
tional government has power to take
action against it on that account and
I therefore desire to respectfully sub
NIT some considerations which seem
to establish that it has such power.
Violation of the Sherman Act.
"The statute of July 2, 1890, gener-
ally known as the Sherman act, pro-
vides that every contract, combina-
tion in the form of trust or otherwise
or conspiracy in restraint of trade or
commerce among the several states
or with foreign nations is hereby de-
clared to be Illegal Commerce among
the states begins when the subjects
thereof begin to move to that place OF
destination and ends when they are
sold. The question, therefore, is
whether the mine workers combina-
tion constitutes a restraint upon such
commerce. The view that it does not
is based upon the contention that this
combination affects only production
of coal within the states and not ship
ments OF coal from one state to an
other. It is submitted that this dis.
tinction is without foundation in the
law or the facts. e*
"The coal of the country is the
most important subject of it's inter
state commerce. The mine workers
association consists Of combination
of persons employed in the production
of coal in many states of the Union.
Its object and effect are to control
the terms upon which this subject Of
interstate commerce may be produced
at all either for state or interstate
shipments. It's direct and necessary
effect is that no coal shall be shipped
anywhere within the country unless it
so permits. This combination, therc-
fore, not merely restrains but de-
stroys interstate commerce by pre-
venting the existence of the subject
matter of such commerce of the great
est public interest and Importance
No more effective or radical restraint
Of interstate commerce could be imag-
ined.
Absolutely Destroys Commerce.
AS already said the mine workers
combination does not merely restrain
interstate commerce, but absolutely
destroys it. Can it be seriously claim
ed that while a combination which
restrains shipments of the state
would be Illegal, one which absolute
ly prevents them would not? Mani
testify the greater includes the less,
and combination which directly and
Immediately destroys interstate com
merce by preventing the existence of
its subject matter is quite as illegal
as one which merely restrains the
shipment of such matter. Otherwise
combination which restrained inter-
state commerce would be unlawful,
while one which destroyed it would
be beyond the reach of the law. It Is
submitted that the national jurisdic-
ton is subject to no such limitations.
1t seems very clear, therefore, that
a suit would lie against the members
Of the United Mine Workers associa-
tion as a combination in restraint Of
interstate commerce within the act Of
July 2, 1890, and that preliminary
Injunction would be granted which
could be enforced by all the power Of
the national government This pre-
else course was followed in the Debs
case and was supported by the courts,
not merely on account Of interference
with the mails, but also on the ground
of restraint OF shipments from one
state to another. It is submitted that
this course would be proper in the
present case. It would destroy the
Illegal combination to which the nres-