Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1902-11-19
HOLDS HIS OWN.
Continued from page ~

spirit of violence and disregard of law
In your organization and that your in
huence over them is insufficient to keen
them law abiding and peaceable as you
desire them to be-"
Under this arraignment Of the union,
Mr.. Mitchell retained his complete
composure. The question met with a
ready response. THE fear that my in
fiuence." said he, lis not sufficient to
deter men from the commission of
crime is a contradiction of the claims
often made about me-
He was free to say that some men
may have been deferred from going to
work because of violence, but the
strike itself lost more in public opinion
by reason of that than it could pos
sibly GAIN
The cross-examiner and the witness
then plunged into a spirited colloquy
over the question whether one man has
right to prevent another man from
selling his labor.
The best answer Mr.. MacVeagh could
draw from the miners chief was that
he did not approve of any one COM
uniting an unlawful act.
Mr.. MacVeagh read statement re-
garding ,he right to strike as belong
ing to the personal freedom of working
men. He also took the view that in
exercising that freedom those who
cease to work must not interfere with
the liberty of others who wish to work
we do not want anarchy" said Mr.
Mitchell, and that is anarchy pure
and simple-the right of every man
to do absolutely as he pleases regard
less of it's effects on society,"
This is the language of very care
fully disguised anarchy" Mr.. Mac
Veagh remarked. because it is the
language of Archbishop Ireland. The
archbishop never expected it to be used
in that sense. l might say Archbishop
Ireland is a member of committee of
which l also am member which has
declared for a trade union idea"
Answering a further question. Mr.
Mitchell declared that if Archbishop
Ireland's statement meant that men
have no right to picket he disagreed
with him. Mr.. Mitchell added that he
did not know that the archbishop was
regarded as a supreme court on trade
union matters.
The attorney and the witness
wandered from the rules of crOss-ex-
animation and INDUCED in an argu-
ment over the propriety of any one
criticising actions and decisions of
courts. Mr.. MacVeagh thought it was
| wrong to follow such course and that
it tends to breed anarchy. Mr..
Mitchell said he was pleased to say the
courts as a rule are fair but he re-
| GREETED that in the course of his ex-
| ha l,n1 Ind
| against labor He referred to Judge
Jackson of West Virginia, who. he said,
| had made a great many serious re-
| Elections on men who gave up their
| lives to the cause of labor. He added
| that there were no anarchists in the
| trade unions.
Replying to Mr.. MacVcaghs ques-
tons regarding union men belonging
to the National Guard. Mr.. Mitchell
said no local branch in his union had
ever expelled a man for belonging to
the Guard and that no national labor
union of any kind had ever done such
a thing A little union in New York
| state. he said had taken such an action
and it mad been heralded over the
country He was not responsible for
what some other organization did.
Mr. MacNeagh concluded his cross
examination at this point. AS soon as
| Mr.. MacVeagh had finished Judge Gray
| announced that the commission did no,
wish to limit the liberty of any one ap-
| pearing in this case as representing
others but they believed they had OBJ
tanned as much information as they are
likely to get on the subject touched up
on.
! Judge Gray announced. however, tina
if there is any new line of examination
the commission would not object t.
hearing the testimony. Former Con
gresham Simon p. WolvertOn. repre-
senting the Philadelphia & Readin.
Coal & Iron Co. informed the commits
sion that future examination would b.
very brief
Francis Il. Gowen; representing tn
Lenigh Valley Coal Co, followed MI
MacVeagh and questioned Mr.. Mitchell
| regarding his comparison of wages PAL
in the bituminous fields as agains
those paid in the anthracite. MI
Mitchell WAS unable to say how man
mines are so equipped as to enabi
!, them to weigh coal but he did not thin
the expense of cquipping them woui
.. be very great. Mr.. Mitchell reiterate
| his former statement that one OF tn
} principal grievances of the men was tn
amount of topping required on eac
: car. He added that he had heard
cases where the men had cripped
: their cars to make it appear that thei
was more coal in them actually wa
, the case.
{ | A discussion followed on the questio
Of weighing coal. In answer TO que'
d tion from Mr.. watkins Mr.. Mitche
r said that the present system Is not Ia
I to all men.
For instance where two men al
working at adjoining breasts. ne sal
..where the conditions are similar OF
man loads a car of pure coal ana u
. other man sends out car nan
which contains impurities. Inc NJ
one under the present system suHe
/ the same as the other. l believe ma
IS should he docked for impurities OUT
5, is not right to penalize the man WI
}, sends up the pure product.
# Mr.. Mitchell recommended syste
1, nv which IL at the end of the month