The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-10-15
THE NEW PLAN FOR ENDING THE
STRIKE.


Mr.. ]. Pierpont Morgan's proposition for
ending the strike by arbitration opens the
way to that end. but it is done in grueg-
ing and dctatorial manner. The argumen-
tative part of the proposition-that which
discusses the relations between the opera
tors and the miners and seeks to THROW the
entire responsibility for the present situa-
ton on the latter-is a repetition of what
the public has heard before. The really i'm
portant feature of the proposition is offer
to leave all questions now at issue between
the operators and the miners to the de-
cision OF a commission to be appointed by
the President. and whose decision the OPP
orators agree to accept. The ungracious
feature Of the proposition is the seeming
attempt to dictate the character Of the
commission. This could with entire safety
and more propriety have been left to the
President. though 1t must be admitted that
the classes to be selected from leave a wide
range for the exercise of his judgment.
commission composed of one officer in the
United States engineer corps, one expert
mining engineer. one United States judge,
one prominent sociologist and one practical
business man acquainted with the coal bus
mess, all selected with care by the Pres
ident Of the United States should be able
enough and fair enough to suit anybody.
Whatever the outcome of the proposition
may be 1t marks a new phase OF the sitUa-
ton. Thus far from the beginning of the
strike the operators have refused to ac-
cept arbitration. They emphasized this
refusal at the Washington conference be-
tween President Roosevelt and the opera
tors and miners on Oct. g. At that time
Mr.. Mitchell won considerable credit for
offering TO submit the whole matter to the
decision Of a commission to be composed
of the President and other persons Of his
| selection, without designating the number,
| and the miners agreed to abide by their
decision. AS his proposition involved recog-
| milton of the union the operators refused to
consider il and made a counter proposition
| to continue the wages existing at the be-
ginning Of the strike and to adjust griey-
| ances with their own employees. and If the
employers and employees at any colliery
could not reach a satisfactory adjustment
of any alleged grievances the matter should
be referred to the judges of the Court Of
Common Pleas of the district In which the
| coIliery was situated. This also struck
| many persons as fair proposition, but it
was rejected by the miners. The present
| proposition differs essentially from both of
| the others, and it involves a distinct con-
| cession by the operators. Heretofore they
have refused TO submit anything to arbitra-
| ton, whereas now they offer to submit all
| the matters in controversy to the decision
| of tribunal to be selected by the Presi-
dent and to abide by it's decision. If the
miners reject the proposition it will prob
ably be on account Of the following clause:
1t being the understanding that immedi-
| ately upon the constitution of such COM
/ mission, in order that idleness and nonpro-
duction may cease instantly, the miners
| will return to work and cease all interior
1 ence with or persecution of any nonunion
| men who are working or shall hereafter
| work. The findings or this commission
shall fix the date when the same shall be
| effective and shall govern the conditions of
| employment between the respective COM
| panies and their employees for term of at
least three years.
The miners may hold that returning to
work In a body pending the decision of the
| commission would be a surrender of their
| contention as union. and may decline the
proposition on that ground. If they do they
| will put themselves in the wrong. AS the
| operators have yielded their original con-
| tention In agreeing to submit to arbitration
the miners can afford to yield the point
| regarding recognition Of the union by re-
Stunning work Immediately. The difference
between the present proposition and the
one made by President Roosevelt for the
appointment of a commission was that in
that case he promised to do all in his power
| to have the decision Of the commission
adopted, while in the present case the OPP
orators agree in advance to abide by it. If
the present proposition is rejected by the
miners the public will hold them responsible
| for continuance of the strike.