New-York tribune., 1903-02-11
REPLY TO THE WINERo.
Counsel for tie Non Union Men
and the Operators argue.

Philadelphia. Feb. 10-President baer Oh 'ne
Reading Company was an interested LISTENER
again to-day TO the arguments before 'ne olriAe
Commission. John T. Lenahan, representing
the non-union men. who was the first speaker
denounced the Mine Workers organlzatloh as
fomenter of crime and anarchy. He supnitted
three propositions-tha the commission must
find the United Mine Workers responsive Ior
the violence and other unlawful acts which
deprived the union miners of their ia"Iui
right to work; that all authorities agree that
the law guarantees to every man the Tlght 10
work where when and for whom he pleases'
and that nothing could justify a finding by
the commission that non-union miners must
deal with their employers through the union
he subject in the slightest degree 10 the
control or dictation of the union.
James II. Torrey counsel for the Delaware
and Hudson Company, followed Mr. Lenahah
He said that the recognition of the union was
not an issue before the commission. but devoted
considerable time to arguing against that de-
mand. He also paid particular attention TO the
demand of the union for arbitration agree
rnent. The operators, he said. were opposed 10
such an agreement, because they believed that
they should be permitted to conduct their ousl-
ness in their way and because the union
irresponsible organization
Major Everett Warren, counsel for the Hill
side Coal and Iron Company and the Pennsyl-
vania Coal Company, answered the demands OF
the miners in detail He declared that the So
cialistic theories of the union, or some or its
leaders, were responsible for unreasonaoie
claims. He said III part:
Throughout the discussion to the rate OF
wages no matter how it may be presented WIiettlsI
nv figures oral testimony argument II Il duoo
luteiy necessary to bear IN mind tIldl tHS 49,
earnings of the mine workers are uInlteu y - LIZ
men thenseIye, i am perfectly Wiling tha5 yOu
should take into consideration all the evlaelice te
offered on the other side to the e1ortS Hdue ~
il remains J...rIy established before you tndt
since the adve1t of the union the earning CsPait
of the contract miner has been limited ana 1StSdd
of the union being ar advantage 70 nun II IL
worked to his disadvantage IN RESTRICTING MS ea'
/ do not charge this upon the great body of the
mine workers themselves They do not understdnd
why it is done. They are not tapliIidT Wltl ttie
oreanization Whatever may be the motive on tne
part of the union the evidence is OVERWHELMING
that the result is a restriction the industrious
miner. limiting the amount Of work ana me cor
ing him to the dead level of his lazy and 1ndlf-
ferent associate This cannot be blotted out from
record. 1t appears in the testimony or every
company and every employer OF LABOR IN the re-
gion.
Socialism proposes TO establish equality among
UNEQUAL men, by reducing them to the dead leVeI
of this possible majority. Instead of allowing
every one to determine for himself what he wants
to do it is TO be done for him. That is nothing
but slavery What Is the theory OF the union II IL
is this? 1 do not dispute the right OF men 70
organize, and I hold no brief against orgaIlzeI
Ia Dor. The methods Of the United Mine WORKERS.
however, appear to be exquistely adapted to de-
grade intelligent labor, to paralyZe honest 1ndus-
try. to crush spirit. hope and ambition