The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-10-10
STATEMENT OF MINERS
BIRMINGHAM MEN PRESENT
 THEIR SIDE OF TROUBLE.
W. R. Fairley Says Strike Did Not Grow Out of Assessments, But is to Preserve Life of
 Union.

Birmingham, Oct. s.-(special) )-wil- liam R. Farley. member of the Execu- tive Board of the United Mine Workers of America for the State of Alabama, today issued an official statement of the position of the miners fer the Tennessee Coal. Iron and Railroad Company in their strike on that company's mines.
 He replies to the statement of Presi- dent Don H. Bacon of the Tennessee Con- pany, and says that MT. Bacon is incor- rect in setting forth the issues of the contest. He asserts that a committee of miners from the District Board conferred with General Manager McCrery of the Tennessee Company, on October 1, and in- formed him that the miners were not in- sisiing on the company 1educting the an- thracite assessment without the consent of any of their employees. but that the miners union had disciplined refractory members and expelled them from the union. and. therefore, would refuse to work with them. Mir. McCrery after wards saw President Bacon and in an- swer to the miners committee, he stated that the position of the company was unchanged; that 1t would neither forcibly collect the assessment nor discharge the men who had been expelled from the union.
 hitcH thho Toplyp tnc uiucT D were called out. together with Blocton and Blue Creek. The committee had pointed out to MT. McCrery that with the miners it was a question of the union or non-union, and that the miners pro- posed to preserve their organization at all hazards, and that to keep on expell- ing members and to continue to work with them meant that the miners union would only make allies for the operators at some future time Therefore, halt was called at once.
 Mir. Fairley then continues:
 ''The Tennessee Company is trying by pretense to deiude the public on the real issues at stake in this matter. They take the position that they will not com pei any employe to pay this assessment against his will. while the facts are that at Blue Creek on last Saturday. October f. we had reliable information that they informed certain of our members who had refused to pay the anthracite assess ment that they must pay that assess ment or they would be discharged. The reason for their different action at Blue Creek on the anthracite assessment as compared with their action at Pratt mines and West Pratt is clear and evident. They expected that when all the men at Blue Creek had signed the list to pay the an- thracite assessment that we would be un- able to induct them to stop work.
 Tn other words, it fs not the assess ment that is causing the trouble between the Tennessee Company and it's employees. The real reason Is that the action of the Tennessee Company for some time past has been to destroy all labor organiza- tions in the district In proof of that statement, they have discharged all union bricklayers, blacksmiths. boilermakers
 l-A- Al N,,v ployed non-union men in their places at lower rates of wages. It is only ques- ton of time until the same attack would have been made on us; in. fact, 1t is made on us now, because no self-respecting trades unionist can work with men who have been so disloyal that the organiza- ton has been compelled to suspend them.
 Tn further proof of the intention to destroy the United Mine Workers of America in Alabama they submitted a new contract Monday evening to the Blue Creek miners. calling for reductions in the day scale, which contract the men promptly refused to sign They (the Ten nessee people) have, however, submitted a second contract offering the same rates of wages for two years. but with condi- tions of the contract very materially changed so far as the United Mine Work CTS of America are concerned, and in direct contradiction to the contract en- tered into on July Il of this year
 The following clause of the new con- tract reads: No collection to be made for any purpose except at the request Of the employe'
 ''The assessment clause in the contract entered into between the operators and miners on July Il. 1902. reads as follows:
 The expenses of the representatives of the miners to be regulated and paid by them, such expenses to be pro-rated by the committee at so much per miner whose name appears on the roll, and to be collected by the company and turned over to the committee
 "The difference between these two clauses Is so great that it requires no comment from me furthr than to say that the public will readily understand that this change is e direct attempt to destroy the miners organization.
 q repeat that this Suspension is not to enforce the anthracite assessment from unwilling and disloyal members of the United Mine Workers. I desire to place the issue between the Tennessee Com pany and the miners squareiy and plain ly before the public"
 Considering the action of the Tennes- see Company in dealing with other classes of labor under their employ, namely, the union bricklayers, black smiths, boilersmiths and machinists-in destroying their organizations at the fur mace plants operated by the Tennessee Company, this suspension could not be avoided. Everything was done by us that could be done, to avoid an open rup- ture, but bearing in mind the fate of other classes of labor. no alternative was left to us but either to keep expelling de- linquent members and continue to work with them or cease work.
 "In July of this year the operators of this district, of which the Tennessee Company is a part met in convention and agreed on a contract. They did bus mess on that occasion as they have done for several years. They did not make a contract with individuals, but with the United Mine Workers as an organization. Yet they seek to force the contracting marty (the miners) to work with non-