The Indianapolis journal., 1902-10-11


eral months ago TO the President along
the same lines. The letter follows:
New York, Oct. s, 1902.
ITO the President of the United States:
address a letter to yourself. calling atten-
ton to the character of the United Mine
Workers of America The illegality OF that
organization is fully established by the au-
thorlties TO which | then referred, ana It's
methods have since then been again con-
Semned s by the circuit courts OF the GnIted FeS
Report. $50; United States VS.. Haggerty. ll6
Fed Report. 51O.) In the Weber case, too
the court said: 1t is hardly open to serious
question that the ultimate purpose OF the
union Is not legal. Some question. how
ever, has been made whether the national
government has power 10 take action
against IL on that account, and /, therefore,
desire to respectfully submit some con-
siderations which seem to establish that ii
has such power.
THE statute of July 2. 1890. generally
known as the Sherman act, provides that
every contract, combination in the form
of trust. or otherwise, or conspiracy in re-
several States or with foreign nations is
hereby declared to be illegal. Commerce
between the States begins when the sub
jects thereof begin to move to their place
OF destination, and ends when they are
sold. The question, therefore, is whether
the mine workers combination constitutes
a restraint upon such commerce. The
view that 1t does not is based upon the
contention that this combination affects
only production of coal within the States
and not shipments of coal from one State
TO another. 1t Is submitted that this dis
tinction is without foundation in law or
fact The authority tol such view upon
which l. reliance ELI is placed is found In the
Company, 156 u. s. /. In that case several
sugar refneries in Pennsylvania had been
united unit DIN in one organization. The court held
come within the statute because IL affected
merely the process of manufacture, and
OF the manufactured product out Of the
state. IL will be seen that these facts were
widely different from those involved in the
present case.
portant subject of its Interstate 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 inter-
state commerce may be produced at all.
direct and necessary effect Is that no coal
snail be shipped anywhere within the coun-
Try unless 1t so permits. This com binat1on,
therefore, not merely restrains, but de-
StroyS interstate commerce of general pub
lie interest and Importance No more ef-
fectlve or radical restraint or Interstate
commerce could be imagined. The Della
the State of New York on April %, 1923, for
the purpose, as expressed In its charter. of
furnishing to the State of New York
supply of coal found in the State of Penn
sylvania- AS the result OF the mine work
ers' organization this interstate commerce
of this corporation has been, for the time
being. in great part destroyed. Obviously
combination which has this direct effect
upon an established interstate business is
in every sense restraint thereon.
Accordingly, since the knight case, it
has been settled that combinations which
have the effect of restraining shipments
Out OF the state are within the prohioition
Of the statute. In Addyston Pipe Company
VS.. United States, IT'S u. S. 211. there was
a combination of manufacturers within GER
tain States which restrained shipments by
the parties out of their respective States
in competition with each other; the court
said (P. 240), The direct and immediate re-
suit of the combination was therefore neces-
sarily a restraint upon State commerce in
respect to the articles manufactured by
any of the parties to it to be transported
beyond the State in which they were made
In Chesapeake & Ohio Fuel Company VS..
United States, lis Fed Rep. 10, there was
a combination of miners of coal within
certain territory to sell all their product
TO one corporation, and the product was in
the natural course of business shipped to
other States. Both these combinations
were held unlawful for the reason that they
manufacture out of the State save on terms
dictated by the parties to the combination.
The fact that a combination has that di-
the statute its form is of no Importance,
for the statute says that every such COM
bination is illegal. AS already said, the
mine workers combination does not mere
| ly restrain interstate commerce, but abso-
| lutely destroys IL. Can 1t be seriously
| claimed that while a combination which
| restrains shipments out of the State would
| be illegal, one which absolutely prevents
| them would not? Manifestly the greater
| includes the less, and a combination which
directly and Immediately destroys inter-
| ence of its subject matter is quite as i'll
legal as one which merely restrains the
| shipment of such matter out of the State.
interstate commerce would be unlawful,
while one which destroyed it would be be-
yond reach of the law. 1t is submitted
| that the national jurisdiction is subject to
no such limitation.
ut seems very clear. therefore, that a
suit would lie against the members of the
| combination In restraint of interstate COM
| merce within the act of July 2, 1890, and
| that preliminary injunction would be
granted Wnieh could be enforced by all tt the
| precise course was followed in the Debs
case and was supported by the courts. not
mails, but also on the ground of restraint
of shipments from one State to another
[64 Fed. Rep. 724] 1t is submitted that
case. 1t would destroy the illegal combina-
| tion to which the present strike is due
The Delaware Hudson Company. there
| fore, most earnestly requests that proper
action be taken under the aforesaid statute.
Very respectfully,
| DAVID WILCOX"
John Markle, independent coal operator
| gave out a statement to-day regarding the
| statements made by President Mitchell to
| the effect that the local unions have acted
unanimously against returning to work.
| Mr.. Markle said:
| .Those resolutions are the action of To-
Gals composed Of professional agitators and
| boys under twenty-one years old The
| great majority of the workers in the an
thracite coal fields to-day refuse to attend
the meetings of the United Mine Workers
| organization This is the condition of af-
| fairs existing in the regions where our col
lieries are located, and / am reliably in.
| formed that this condition exists in the
| other regions.
"As soon as the powers that be put into
| the anthracite coal fields sufficient troops
| to protect the men desiring to work and
| to protect their families day and night you
will then have a gradual resumption OF
| work and the anthracite coal market re-
| lieved.
LAS 1 stated before to the President of
the United States that 1 believe federal
troops were necessary, / reiterate it that
they are. Every politician or other indi-
vidual and every organization negotia tine
with Mr.. Mitchell and his United Mine
| Workers organization is prolonging this
strike and keeping coal out of the market "
Received at Washington.