The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-10-18
THE SCOPE OF THE COMMISSION.

apprehension as to the scope Of the COM
mission appointed by the President to end
the strike and as to the points IL may de-
eide. Several OF the Journals exchanges
enumerate nine alleged demands of the
miners and name four which they say they
demanded. but which the operators refused
TO submit to arbitration, viz: First, recog-
milton Of the union; second, investigation of
opposition of union miners to work with
nonunion men; third, systematic examina-
tiou of working cards of the miners;
fourth. right Of union miners to strike at
collieries employing nonunion labor. None
OF these points was included in the de-
mand of the miners. The same papers
mention as among the miners demands
that will be decided by the commission,
recognition of mine commissioners in add
justing disputes or grievances; more
thorough organization of all skilled me-
chanics employed in and about the mines;
revision Of the contract system and aboli-
ton Of the blacklist system. None of these
points was included in the demands of the
miners. and they will not come before the
commission.
Equally misleading is the suggestion
made in many quarters that the commits
sion will probably recommend separate
anthracite miners union, including, per-
unions. One paper says: 1.-The composition
Of the commission justifes a belief that
1t will report in favor of and perhaps SUBJ
NIT a bill for the creation of national
board of arbitration" If it does it will
go quite outside of the scope of its duties,
entitled to respect, they would have no
binding force.
The present commission was appointed
for one specific purpose and no other,
namely, to end the strike by settling the
matters in controversy between the oper-
ators and the miners. The original de-
mands of the miners were few and simple.
Hon. Carroll d. Wright. United States
commissioner of labor, said in his report
to the President regarding the strike:
The specific demands of the miners, as
given to me in writing by Mr.. John
Mitchell. president of the United Mine
WORKERS, were as follows: i. That there
shall be an increase of 20 per cent to the
miners who are paid by the ton-that is
for men performing contract work. These
men involve about 40 per cent. OF all the
miners g A reduction of 20 per cent. in
the time of per diem employees. The mines
are operated about 200 days per year, ten
hours per day. This demand, IL granted
would result in reducing the day to eight
hours, so that the mines would be oper-
ated 240 days at about the same pay, hence
an equivalent of 20 per cent. increase in
the earnings. no increase in the rates OF
per diem employees being demanded g..
That 2.24O pounds shall constitute the ton
on which payment Is based for all coal
This wonG appn n ans pad by
weighing coal would be practicable. and
to those miners who are paid by the
quantity and not to those paid by the day,
These constitute the SPECIFIC demands or
the coal-mine employees. and there Is no
disagreement as to the substance of the
demands. No grievances were presented.
This official statement of the original de-
mands Of the miners shows there was no
reference to the union. to the blacklisting
system. to the employment of nonunion
men, to the right of union miners to strike,
or anything Of the kind. Colonel Wright's
report adds: These demands being re-
jected, the miners subsequently offered to
accept one-half-that is to say, 10 per cent.
increase in the pay per ton where mining
is paid In that manner, and 10 per cent.
decrease in the working day. The en-
ployes are willing to make a three years
contract on the offered terms-that is. one
half the original demands" In the cor.
respondence which took place between Mr..
Mitchell and the operators before the
80
any other points of difference than those
above stated. If there are other points of
difference between the miners and the
operators they were not included in the
official statement regarding the basis of
the strike. The statement issued from the
White House regarding the proposition
of the operators said: THE operators
have agreed to the appointment of a COM
mission to be appointed by the President
of the United States, to whom shall be re-
ferred all questions at issue between the
companies and their own employees, whether
they belong to a union or not. and the de-
cision of the commission shall be accepted
by the operators"
The fair inference from the foregoing
is that the commission will only decide the
points admitted by both parties to be ar
| issue as formulated in the demands of the
miners, and that If they pass upon other
points or alleged grievances, neither the
operators nor the miners will be Obliged
to accept their decision. On the points
| included in the above extract from the re.
| port Of the commissioner of labor as con.
stituting the basis OF the strike, both the
| operators and the miners are pledged tC
accept the decision of the commission, bu
| neither side is under any obligation to ac
cept its decision on any other points. i
| is evident. therefore, that while the ap
pointment of the commission will end tn,
present strike 1t will not prevent futur,
ones nor solve the labor problem further
than it is involved in the present contro
versy. These are matters for future con
sideration.
MIR. CLEVELAND AND THE TARIFF