The daily morning journal and courier., 1903-01-29
AFTER COAL PRESIDENTS.
(Continued from First Page.)


 deposit of hard coal should be conserved for the benefit of those who come after this generation, and a Wasteful cOmpe- titive output is a serious thing. He said he did not know but what in some crude way the consolidation of these interests has tende to a more economic management of 'tdhis store house that Providence has given us in this region .''
 Mir. Darrow said in reply:
 T do not see that anybody could in- telligently consider this case without considering that question. But this is the aspect. say 1t is unfair to charge up to the miners that they have been restricting the output when it 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 family and those who are to come after him as has the mine operator For my part have never believed that a req sonabIe limitation Of work or produc- ton was bad thing. All I do claim is that it is unfair to charge us with a limitation of production over 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.''
 '"The only question have in adverse criticism" said Chairman Gray, ''is this: Take a contract miner. He can limit his own hours of labor. The question is whether the man who wants iA fxyA 1l1o an inhibition upon the man who wants to work eight or nine hours"
 Under our present theory regarding the rights of property" responded Mir DarroW, where man has a right to own a coal mine he has a perfect right to work tWenty-four hours c 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 only mine coal three days week or eight hours day or whatever it is. It is exactly parallel whether it is done by the miners or by the operators"
 Here, MT. Dickson said that as he un- derstood it the position of the opera tors is that during the year 1901 and down to the time of the strike, either through some concerted action or as d 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, have been going to large Cx- pense to store coal at the terminal points. The coming of the strike was foreseeen and it was the effort OF the part of the companies to get the coai in advance, but they did not succeed in doing so
 "The great difficulty in the control of the coal trade" continued MT. Dick son, lis that the market will not take it regularly and equally throughout the year. The whole question is, there fore, that tke companies feeel that dur ing 1901 and 1902 the men have not been willing to take advantage of all the fla cilities that were offered to them" Chairman Gray expressed the opin- ion that if the operators attempted to charge a restriction to the disadvan- tage of the public the miners should be allowed to show that it was not themselves so much as the operators. Assume that the question is strictly between the operators and the miners" |" said MT. Darrow. Have the operators any more right to say to the miners You shall not restrict the number of cars you load than the miners have to say to the operators We will only load six ears
 Chairman Gray said the proposition was the same.
 Then" said Mr. Darrow, "has one operator the right to say it to an- other?"
 No; I don't think he has" replied the chairman. He said also, that he did not believe the commission had given the question of restriction any serious thought There has not been any conclusive evidence that concerted Or systematic restriction has existed"
 MT. Darrow then asked the commits sion to request Messrs. Baer. Harris, Thomas and Truesdale to testify con- cerning the question under discussion.
 All of the witnesses called to-day were examined by counsel for the min CTS with view of eliciting information concerning the alleged restriction of coal production.