New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-11-15


second-There should be committee Of conserve
tive representative mine workers selected by the
eHpioKes At each coeIg ~ shou5I De ,b he i
foremen IN the adjustment OF local disputes which
me mine worker or mine workers involved.
Thrd-Should the mine foremen and mine com.
mittee fail adjust the grievances complained OF
the matter in dispute should be referred to the
commries %Rich should 6e constitutes Of repre-
sentative mine workers from each coeTy operated
II. II should he referred the general manager Of
miners organization and should they fail 10 ad-
Just . they should call on the services S6 some
pending adjustment in the manner set forth
Tho mines ard The miners should continue at work.
When his address was finished Mr.. Mitchell
sent 90 the stand by Mr. barrow, and there
elucidated the chief points he made in the state
mont He was calm and confident and his
answers were carefully considered. Much Of his
examination was A comparison of wages and
conditions in the hard and soft coal regions.
He said that the in the bituminous region
on company work made 80 per cent more. and
ON contract 20 per cent to 30 per cent more. than
in the hard coal region; their conditions OF liv-
ing were better, there was not 50 much Illness
owing to the wetness Of the mines, miners
asthma was not prevalent. and there was gen
orally more satisfaction with working cOndi-
tOns He followed this with explanation Of
the agreement system. and was emphatic in
declaring that the agreements would not be
violated.
AGREEMENTS SUPERSEDE LAW OF UNION
If body Of our did violate one" he
said. their charter would be revoked The
agreements take precedence of any law of the
union at present or any which might be passed
in the future. They must be kept invioate.'
At once. when the cross-examination opened.
M Wilcox made Mr.. Mitchell admit that there
was no provision in the constitution OF the union
mr. 70 puUiSh
violstors OF them. Mr.. Mitchell explained that
the agreements themselves provided for these
Two things and read portion Of the Illinois
agreement TO substantiate what he said Mr..
Wilcox. however. showed that no power for the
expulsion or other punishment OF members vio-
lating agreements was expressed in the con-
stitutjon. In the afternoon Mr.. Mitchell ad-
United that when the Hazleton convention called
for a national convention. 10 consider the ad-
visibility OF a national strike he knew that there
would be no national strike. because the soft
coal men could not break their agreements. He
did not enlighten the hard coal men, however.
for reasons of his own, but proceeded to call
the convention. The primary object" he said.
was 10 act on the anthracite strike. and the
convention decided 70 contribute relief money.
This has amounted to sl.5oOo0"
He was asked if the demands Of the Halle
ton convention did not provide for an increase
i'm wages of 40 per cent, but SalQ tnal ne hau
not aided I'm making the scale. OF the IV per
cent increase then granted by the operators. he
said. some OF the companies compel their EN-
ploy'es to pay back IA per cent OF IT.
Then the treatment Of non-union men was
taken up. He was asked II there was any law in
the union for the protection OF these men.
There is none" he said. because there is no
Interference with them. In most OF the soft
coal districts there are non-union men. but
in the Pennsylvania soft coal region union and
nOn-union men work together. Ihey nave no
trouble in the anthracite field
RESOLUTIONS AGAINST NON-UNIoN MEN.
At once were read several resolutions passed
by the locals declaring that their members
should not work with non-union men, and or
dering them on strike If non-union men worked
in the mines. Mr.. Mitchell explained this by
saying that it was largely a measure Of protec-
ton Some OF the companies had shown de-
sire TO get rid of union men, and the resolu-
tions were partly adopted to show that the men
intended TO maintain their right 10 work
Being examined TO the violence In the
region during the strike, he said: II have no
record that any crime committed during the
strike was committed by a union man"
Were not the strikers concerned in much VIC
Ienee?" asked Mr.. Wilcox.
There were many non-union strikers" ex-
planned Mr.. Mitchell. he continued: Not
union man was arrested for any serious crime,
and not one has been convicted. Our organiza-
ton has rule TO punish members who break
the law because so few OF our members commit
He was asked IL ne approved the acts OF Judge
Jackson in West Virginia, and it was here That
Mr. barrow interpOsed the first obJecuon
Judge Gray said: Mr. Mitchell seems very
capable of taking care Of himself II he knows
the facts in the case he can answer"
Mr.. Mitchell did not directly express disap-
prevail but said that he thought the men had a
right 20 hold public meetings.
The relation OF the union TO boycotting was
next considered
NEVER AUTHORIZED A BOYCOTT.
II never authorized a boycott said Mr..
Mitchell hut I understand through some of
the papers that there some boycotting dur
ing the strike"
Several boycott resolutions passed by locals
Of the mine workers were read.
The organization recognizes the right OF its
members 20 petition storekeepers TO sell or not
sell TO their friends or TO people they con-
slider are not their friends" Mr.. Mitchell said.
I'm fact, TO do anything members OF the union
they could do II they were not members"
A speech deleverd by Mr.. Mitchell at the time
of the Scranton streetcar strike. In which he
said that $4,000 mine workers would not ride in
the cars. was read. All this was not direct
enough. and Judge Gray came 10 the point with
the rrst question asked by the commission.
ures 20 prevent the so-caled ecabs who work
IN the places OF union men during the strike.
obtaining the necessaries OF life, food and drink
and lodging"
The union never sanctioned such measures"
replied Mr.. Mitchell.
Does the union countenance them?"
1T does not
This ended his testimony for the afternoon
The non-union men who are still working
toFneys this morning Judge Gray replied that
as they We're not formal parties to the agree
ment 20 appoint the commission the question
would have 10 he considered The decision will
be announced tomorrow morning.
RECEIVER FOR COAL COMPANIES.
Simeon n. Robinson. OF West Orange has been
appointed receiver OF the Lenake Coal Company, OF