Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1903-03-25
CONTINUED from FIRST page,

the conditions which brought about
the strike, and they make the follow,
Ing summary of their work.
They have gone through mines and
inspected the various conditions which
the production of anthracite coal in.
wolves; they have visited the break.
ers, the engine houses and pumping
stations; they have examined the ma.
chinery by which the mines are pro.
tected from water and foul air; they
have talked with the miners at their
work and In their homes and they
have given attention to the economic,
domestic, scholastic and religious
phases Of their lives; they have lis.
tened to and directed the examination
and cross-examination of 55S witness.
es; they have given free scope to the
counsel who represented the non.un-
ion men and the miners and they have
devoted an entire week to hearing
their arguments.
The commission also say that while
there have been differences of opin-
ion among themselves. there never has
been a time during the five months of
the existence of the commission when
there was an unpleasant word spoken
among them, "or any indication what.
ever of thought or desire of aught
save truth and justice"
The commission then takes up the
demands of the mine workers and the
answers of the operators, giving in
detail the reason for the findings. In
a general way, they say that the con-
ditions of life of a mine worker out
side the mines does not justify to their
full extent the adverse criticisms made
by their representatives. They also
find that the social conditions in the
mining communities are good and they
fail to find that the wages are so low
among the miners as necessarily to
force them to put their small children
to work. The commission also finds
that the average daily rate of earnings
in the anthracite regions does not
compare unfavorably with that in 9TH
er industries.
On the subject of the recognition
of the mine workers union, the CON-
mission says that they do not consider
that this subject is within the scope
of the jurisdiction conferred on them.
They do say, however, that "the sug.
gestion of a working agreement be-
tween employees and employers en-
bodying the doctrine of collective bar.
gaining, Is one which the commission
believes contains many hopeful ele-
ments for the adjustment of rela.
TONS"
The commission reports more than
once their incapacity to make an
award on the demand of the miners
for the recognition of their union, be-
cause, they say, the union is not a
party to the submission. Attention is
called to the fact that Mr.. Mitchell
appeared before the commission as
"a representative of the anthracite
coal mine workers." and not In his
official capacity. They also call at
tention to the fact that the agreement
to arbitrate was reached between
the operators and the coal miners
convention. The commissioners say
that trades unionism" is rapidly be-
coming a matter of business. II the
energy of the employer is directed to
the encouragement and repression of
present unions he need not be sur.
prised If more radical ones are more
frequently heard of. They express the
opinion that the differences can best
be settled by consultations by an en-
ployer with a committee chosen by
his employees" but they add that lin
order to be entitled to such recogni-
ton to the rights of employers and OF
others which it demands for itself and
for its neighbors."
They add: THE union must not un.
dertake to assume, or to interfere
with, the management or business of
the employer"
They also pronounce as untenable
the contention that a majority oil the
employees of an industry, by voluntar.
lily associating themselves in union,
acquire authority yer those who do
not so associate themselves"
Touching the question of discrimi'
nation, lawlessness, %boycotting and
blacklisting. the commission states
that during the continuance Of the
late strike disorder and lawlessness
existed to some extent " the whole
region, and throughout the whole per
iod. Continuing the commission says:
1T is admitted that this disorder
and ~lawlessness was incidental to the
strike. Its history is stained with
record of riot and b~loodshed, culmi
mating in three murders, u~nprovoked
save by the fact that two OF the vic
tins we're asserting their right t.
work; and another. as an officer Of th'
law was performing his duty In at
tempting to preserve peace.
Men who chose to be employed o.
who remained at work, we're assaileC
and threatened and they and theiI
families terrorized and inundated
In several instances the house of sucl
workmen we're dynamited or other
wise assailed. and ~unoffensive womel
and children put in jeopardy. Armet
guards, employed to protect the col
lieries and the men who worked II
them appear not to have been an IN
necessary pr~ecaution and the governo
of the state was. as evidence befor
the commission shows, justified 4
calling out the citizen soldiery OF tn
commonwealth to preserve its peac
and y.LGlCate is laws.
Resentment expressed by man
persons connected with the strike a
the presence OF armed guards and tn
militia of the state does not argue we
for the ~peaceable character or pul
poses OF such persons. No law-abit
ing person has reason to fear or r.
sent the presence OF either.