Barre evening telegram. (Barre, Vt.) 1898-19??, 1902-11-19


others, but they believed they had Oh.
tanned as much information az they were
likely to get on the subjects touched
upon. Judge Gray announced, how.
ever, that II there was any new line Of
examination the commission would not
.Jject to hearing the testimony
To Make Examinations Brief.
Former Congressman Simon +. VOL
vcrton, representing the Philadelphia
and Reading Coal and Iron company,
Informed the commission that future
examinations would be very brief.
Francis X. G0wen, representing the
Lehigh Valley Coal company, followed
Mr.. MacVeagh and questioned Mr..
MITCHELL regarding his comparison Of
wages paid in the bituminous fields az
against those paid in the anthracite,
Nj. Mitchell was unable to say how
many mines are SO equipped as to ell
able them to weigh coal, but he did
not think the expense would be very
great.
Mr.. Mitchell, answering further
questions by Mr.. Gowen, reiterated his
former statement that one of the prin.
cipal grievances of the men was the
amount of topping required on each
car. Mr.. Mitchell added that he had
heard of cases where the men had
"cribbed" their cars to make it appear
that there was more coal in them thar
actually was the case. A discussion
followed OH the question Of weighing
coal. In answer to question from
Mr.. Watkins Mr.. Mitchell said that the
present system is not fair to all men.
For instance, where two men are
working at adjoining Breasts he said
where the conditions are similar. one
man loads Il car of pure coal and tho
other man sends out a car half OF
which contains impurities. The frs,
one under the present system suffers
the same as the other. l believe d
man should be locked for impurities.
but it is not right to penalize the mar
who sends up the pure product"
A System Recommended.
Mr.. Mitchell recommended system
by which if at the end of the month it
is found that the company has paid
for more coal of all sizes than has been
sold or stocked the miners might have
a certain amount taken of all of them
to compensate the company. But, on
the other hand, II the company sold
more coal than had been paid for, then
the miners should be paid dividend. =
Answering question by Mr.. GOwen,
Mr.. Mitchell said that the proportion
of operators in Kansas who had made
contracts with the union was 60 or &c
per cent. He admitted that In the west
the operators and miners had disa agreed
as to the methods of payment for coal,
the operators insisting on payments be-
ing based on lump coal, while the min
ers invariably demanded pay on the
basis of run of mine coal. This latter
method, Mr.. Mitchell cOntended, was
the only fair one.
For the first time during the session
the members of the commission then
entered into a general cross examina
ton of the witness on points which the
previous testimony Adu liOA bIouS Al
out.
Replying to Bishop Spalding, Mr.
Mitchell said that operators could form
a coalition and stop the mining of coal
throughout the United States. 'The!
could do the same as We could said
he, land especially now, when the coal
fields of the country are passing int
the hands of few men,"
Commissioner Watkins thought tho
law would prevent the operators doing
that by reason of their Incorporation
but Mr.. Mitchell said that they had the
right to shut down their business. l
Mr.. Mitchell. answering the commits
sioners. said the United Nine Workers
did not incorporate because the ster
was not necessary. An organization to
beome financially responsible, he said
must have large fund. and this the
working people did not have He said
that employers who object to treating
or contracting with the union because
it is not incorporated would oppose
treating with it anyhow.