The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-01-29
OF THE
PRODUCT OF HARD
COAL
This Has Been Done by the
Coal Roads, Not the Min
ers, Says Mr.. barrow, Who
Wants Coal Presidents
Called as Witnesses.

commission today. The matter was
brought up by Attorney Darrow, coun-
sci for the miners, who requested the
commission to summon the presidents
of the coal carrying railroads as wit
nesses. The demand resulted in a
long discussion between Chairman
Gray Lawyer Dickson, counsel for the
independent operators, and Mr.. OAR
row. Chairman Gray said the COM
mission would consider the matter of
calling the presidents for the stated
purposes, and if the issue was regard
ed as being before the body they would
be called. Otherwise the presidents
would not be asked to testify. ,
Counsel for the Miners union an
nounced that he had received numer-
Gus letters from large operators and
governors of states in the bituminous
coal region and desired to have some
representatives of that district appear
before the commission to give informa
ton concerning trade agreements. If
this could not be done, the Miners
union would like to have the letters
read before the commission. The chair
man said the subject was being held
under Amusement by the commission.
Darrow's Charge in Words.
In asking the commission to request
the attendance of the coal road preSi-
dents, Mr.. barrow said:
There has been evidence offered
here on the part Of the operators for
the purpose of showing that the miners
have limited production in the past
year. We believe the fact to be that
the coal roads have placed a limit on
production for years So long as they
make the charge to this commission for
the purpose of influencing it's decision.
I want them to bring into court for
our examination the presidents of the
roads so that we may find out the stu
alton"
DO you mean to charge or express
the belief" said Chairman Gray, that
there has been a limitation by the
presidents of the coal roads other than
the limitation that the market demand
creates? OF course there is a natural
limitation. Apart from the interests
of the operators and the miners, it
would be a most lamentable waste to
the country to keep on mining coal for
which there was no demand"
The chairman said the deposit of
hard coal should be conserved for the
benefit Of those who come after this
generation, and a Wasteful competitive
output was a serious thing. He did not
know but that in some crude way the
consolidation of these interests had
tended to more economic manage
ment of this storehouse that Provi-
dence has given us in this region"
Unfair to the Miners.
Mr. barrow said in reply: II do not
see that anybody could intelligently
consider this case without considering
that question. But this is the aspect.
l say It is unfair to charge up to the
miners that they have been restricting
the output when 1t has been done by
somebody else. If the operator has the
right to conserve the coal fields, so has
the mine worker, and he has the same
right to conserve himself and his fam
lily and those who are to come after
him as has the mine operator. l have
never believed that a reasonable limi-
tatiOn of work or production was a bad
thing. What I do claim is that it is
unfair to charge us with a limitation
of production over a series of years
and say the miners do not earn more
| money because they are lazy and have
been limiting the supply, when, in fact,
the operators have done it."
1.-THE only question I have in ad-
verse criticism" said Chairman Gray,
SIS this: Take a contract miner He
| can limit his own hours Of labor. The
question is whether the man who
wants to work four or five hours
| should put an inhibition upon the man
who wants to work eight or nine
hours"
Under our present theory regard
| Mr.. barrow, where a man has right
| to own a coal mine he has a perfect
| right to work tWenty-four hours a day,
with all the men he sees fit. Now, the
other operators come in and because
! they own railroads or because they are
| stronger, they say: No, you can mine
| coal only three days a week or eight
| hours a day; whatever it is. 1t is ex-
actly parallel whether it is done by the
miners or by the ODoratOrS'
| Independent Operators Lawyer Speaks
Mr.. Dickson said that as he under
stood 1t the position of the operators
was that during the year. 1901 and
down to the time of the strike, either
through some concerted action or as a
| fact, the output of coal was restricted
and limited so that in reality it was
| impossible to fill the storage places.
| All of the companies, he said, of late
years had been going to large expense
| to store coal at their terminal points.
| The coming of the strike was fore
seen and it was the effort on the part
| of the companies to get the coal in adj
vance, but they did not succeed in do
| ing so.
THE great difficulty in the control of
the anthracite trade continued Mr..
Dickson lis that the market will not
take it regularly and equallya through
out the year. The whole question is,
! therefore, that the companies feel that
| during 1901 the men have not been
| willing to take advantage of all the
| facilities that were offered to them"
Miners Should Have a Chance.
Chairman Gray expressed the opin-
| ion that if the operators attempted to
| charge the restriction to the disadvant-
| age of the public upon the miners, the
| latter should be allowed to show that
it was not themselves so much as the
operators.
Assume that the question is strict
ly between the operators and the min
| erS," said Mr.. barrow, have the ope-
rators any more right to say to the
miners you shall not, restrict the num-
| Der of cars you load than the miners
have to say to the operators we will
only load six cars?'"
Chairman Gray said the proposition
was the same.
"Then," said Mr.. barrow, has one
operator the right to say it to an
| other?"
mo sir, I don't think he has," re-
piled the chairman. He said that he
| did not believe the commission had
given the question Of restriction any
serious thought. There had been no
| conclusive evidence that concerted or
systematic restriction had existed.
Mr.. barrow then asked that the COM
mission request Baer, Harris, Thomas
and Truesdale to testify concerning the
| question. All the witnesses called
today were examined by counsel for
the miners with view to elicting in
| formation concerning the alleged re-
| striction of coal production
The Lehigh Coal & Navigation COM
pany began the presentation of it's case
| to the commission.