The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-11-17

ten has steadily dctcriorated. At tho
coal produced under the mine run syS-
TEN the coal operators of the state We're
assured that the mine run system would
make better miners which would result
in a better quality of coal being produced.
| sincerely regret TO say that this prom
iSc has not been fulfilled as the results
conclusively prove: for no one can dis
putc the fact, whether on the side of the
operators or miners, that the quality or
coal produced at the time the mineriin
system was adopted became bad and has
gradually but surely grown worse from
year to year. 1t is due to the officials Of
the state organization ] want To
give you the good side as we'll as the bad
and L believe also due the officers of
the local unions generally to say that an
honest effort has been made to correct the
abuses OF which the operators complain
and I have not tho slightest desire in
the form Of question 1 put TO question
your perfect good faith and the good
faith of the gentlemen associated with
you-'that an honest effort has been
made to correct the abuses of which the
opera tors complain, but as get they have
been powcrlcss to produce the desired
change, and their efforts, besides being
vain, have tended to make them unpop-
ular with few men at every mining
camp whose chief mission in life, it seems,
is to give trouble. This state of affairs
seems to me most deplorable and dis
couraginG in the extreme, for the reason
that mine labor is nowhere else well
organized as in the state of illinois,"
That is true. isn't it? A. 1t is MS wcii
organized there as elsewhere. Q. And as
well paid? A. Their wages compare ia
vorably with other states.
@. Now. Mr.. Mitchell, frankly, consid-
ering that as the experience of the bitlm-
Gus operators III the favorable state of
Illinois, which You select as one of thr
favorable states, do you stili ask this Gem
mission TO compel us to enter into an
agreement with your organization! \, /
think that possibly in order for the com
mission To know the conditions in llll-
nois 1t would be advisable TO invite the
operators who make that statement IL
come here,
Q. should YOU ask me, as | have been
frequently asked, why do we not dis
charge such olfenders''-this is the opera
tors asking the question of you, Mr. Mil
chcll and as the representative of the
owners of these two ncOnsiderable prop
critics, | ask it-''why do we not dis
charge such offenders, I will reply that
It is well nigh impossible to discharge a
miner in Illinois mines without laying
the mine idle in which the offender has
been employed. To discharge Il member
Of your union for any cause gives Of
1rhse, even Nhen ms oltcnSe is admitted,
which the miners very generally resent.
This being the case, your organization
must tnd the remedy for our trouble the,
owners of the mines themselves being
powerless To act.' Is that true, or not?
a | think by referring to the Illinois
agreement YOU will find that whatever
objections they had We're overcome by in
serting in the agreement thcS right to
hire and dismiss the men. q Under the
limitations which Mr. WILCOX explained
this morning, A. Yes, sir .. Well that
is one of the things | wish you would
offer to put in this agreement, and see
what privileges you propose to afford us.
We win be very thankful for small
favors. | have been readlng-Mr. Dar-
row requested me to state-frOm letter
transmitted by you under date of August
3, 1901, To gentlemen generally designated
as brothers" ana hope | come within
ttat designation, 1t Is addressed to YOU
and transmitted by you to the brothers
of the organization, Would YOU be sur
prised to lind that the same conditions
cAist today i'm the bitumnous mines of
Illinois as that letter describes?