The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1902-12-14
MITCHELL MAKES ADMISSIONS
ACkNOU LEDGI THAT NE COULD
NAVE VETOED THE STRIKE.
DodEes when Asked n tie Gould Make
the nion Men stop interfering With
Non-l Mon Men says He Gould Punish
Inion Men u, Withdrawing Charters.

SCRANTON. Pa, Dec. i3.-Bv keepin &
the Anthracite Strike Commission in SEES
sion up 30 nearly " clock this afternoon.
Mr. barrow -lccredei in Introducing
practically all the testimony that miners
have to oNrr. II" might dctain tn" COM
mission ior an hour or two on Monday. lie
said
The Delaware and Hudson company
wi ln ~" first Of the respondents 10 in
trodu l'stimouv. but il expected to ask
fora r,ca,- until after the holidays This
the commission is ayers" 10 granting.
John Mitchell, recalled for cross-ey-
animation to-day was practically forced
TO admit he could Nav" prevented the at
tacks by strikers upon non-union men dur
ing the strike"
The first witness this morning was A.
Schoctteu &c Hazelbrook, miner for
the Wcn'z company who testified that the
company houses near him, standing al u
little distance from them. looked like barns
They are very cold in winter and the rain
comes through the roof
The witness on cross-eNamination said
that h., had ample tim, To- mend the roof
lie mover complained about the homes and
was not forced ~ trade nj a company store.
Mr. Dickson called the attention 81 III" wit
mss to tho fact that he had earn" sjit %
in 1901 The witness further admitted
that many nl.o arc iii" b. tI,", owing 20
the siril>" of tine steam mon, three levels
n, the mine warr A.. Il 4 an only on" has
been pufupri ou' ru tate. The now m"r
who came to rual the pumps were driven
away, he admitted.
John Mitchell was then called Ia the
stand for cro~l-"xanlins'iou by Mr.. Torrev.
He admitted that when he said that the
bi,iininous mine workers received from
40 to 50 per cent more for days work
than anthracite men, ha meart the men
who wer. paid by the day. He was not
sur. that the figures that he possessed
with regard To the soft coal workers were
accurate.
MIR Mitchell thought that shorter hours
increased the efficiency OF labor about
20 per cent There followed a discussion
between Mr. Torrry and the witness rola-
tive to thr figures showing the wages OF
the htuuroIs men thai the representa-
,iyeS Of a." miners had prepared. Mr.
Torrov minated that tn" miners had
luEGl,d with tn" figures and that II they
were accurate they would show that the
anthraCi'" miners received morr than those
in tine soft coal fields. Mr.. Mitchell praC-
ticalv admitted this last assertion, but
said that the Delaware and Hudson figures
were for 1891, which was AN abnormal
wear. and not one that should be- selected
for fair comparison. Seeing a chance to
score a point. Mr.. Torrey said quickly:
"Unfurt uuatrly for your answer II shows
that YOU pr,GI itatod this strike in the
year 1901, " hen tn" conditions were "a,
favorable for a continuau"" ofprosptritv
in the business as /; NiIs in the previous
wear Comparing the bituninOus and
anthracite fields, it seems 10 me that your
comparison i, entirely unfair. because
YOU carry ont the annual wage. DIDN'T
YOU say to Mr. Wilcox that the only fair
basis on which to determine the question
OF increase or deduction III wages was the
annual age2"
Mitchell answered that he did not REGAL.
that but h" had no desire to change any
thing that he had said Mr. Torrey pointed
out that Mr.. Mitchell in preferring state
inent a. to the Wages paid the men prepared
a statement of the earnings of the work
men paid hv the day, for whom no increase
was asked, but no statement Of the earnings
of tn" contract miners for whom an III
crease was requested
MIR Mitchell -aid that he admitted his
own re-pul-itiuty IN the matter of the
strike. lie said that he tried to avert il
He admitted, however, that he had right
90 veto the action Of the convention de-
clariug the strike aud had not done 80.
He thought that his offer To arbltratc
took much Of the responsibility of the
,trlke OIL his shoulders.
Nr Burns then asked Mr.. Mitchell
II inc coal operators snOuld make a
contract with you a. the head OF your
urgai. i2atiOn, and ole of the provisions
of that contract should be- that the men
under your Coltro would not IN any way
interef"rc with the non-union men EN-
ployed at tho mile. could you enforce that
part Of - ColtraCt''
Mr.. ltChcH hcsitated and stammered
He finally said he thought that the miner.
were Gni" 70 enforce any coi.tract that they
might make. He SAID later that il the
"A wi IN ,
the conditions of "A contract but they will
not tell ia advarC" what they will do. Tho
ers have the power 10 enforce such a
provision
Then, in the last six months you could
have stopped your men from iit"rfcrir g
with ~" Iou-uuiu' me. about the miI esq"
"Ther" was no contract then
4 am getting al your power and not at
your contract. All that time the last six
months you could have prevented your
men from interfering with the non-union
men il you had the power"
Il don't understand what Won mean.
am not assuming that the union men
mtcticr"d with th" non-union men.
presum" that they would obey such a con-
Tract ana IN" union. We would take their
charter from them and put them out of the
'.HlOn If they would not. "
Il want to know whether YOU can or
cannot prevent this Interference with the
nOn-unlOu men.
Il simply say that our power * the power
we have to revoke the charters or suspend
the men from the union. They would have
To obey or 60 Oh, ut tine union"
Did you take any such measure during
the last six months to prevent this?"
Il have no knowlcdg" that at any time
any of the United Aliur Workers Of Americ,
violated any law during the strike. Some
men, of course, violated the law, but If it
was dom II was done hy the individuals
and not by th" United Mine Workers OF
America
SIhY, aruourtnI g., "a hon, ia, Same, II e., i,,,,