Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-02-14


Huhers Oh the soft coal districts at Indian
apoLs the other day everybody interested
III the anthracite coal business was in good
spirits and confident that there would be
no strike. There was not a cloud In the
sky. The utmost cordially prevailed and
there did not seem TO be any doubt that
the existing agreement between the men
and their employers which was made under
the influence of the Roosevelt commission in
lSoz' which would be renewed for another
three years, with perhaps a few minor mod
Hcations- But now everything is in the air
asdln and the soft coal miners seem deter
IllHeo 10 drag the hard coal miners into
'heLr controversy for an advance of wages
ana provoke a general strike throughout
inc coal fields of the United States.
talked with Mr.. George F. Baker. Mr.
Morgan's people, Mr. Truesdale. president
u me LackaWanna road and the Reading,
ERIE, pennsylvania and New York Central
ccal managers the other day and | found
That they were all hopeful of a friendly
agreement with the committee of miners
l1a by John Mitchell and the three
olstrlct presidents of Pennsylvania who are
coming 10 New York Oh the 18th instant
Tor a conference. While the railway presi-
oents nave had no formal discussion, they
All agreed TO meet the miners In a. friendly
way and discuss the issues at stake on
even terms. Mr.. Morgan, Mr.. Baker, Mr..
Baer, Mr.. Truesdale Mr. Underwood and
az sne other big men controlling the coal
ROADS, expected to be present and Mr.
Cassatt of the Pennsylvania company was
intending to take part in the conference
rms was not 20 be a recognition of the
United Mine Workers Union but the rail-
way presidents wanted to show their friend
~ disposition toward the committee as
representatives of their employees both
union and non-union men. The operators
claim that at least one-third of the men
employed in the anthracite mines do not
belong to the union. The union. however
intended to interpret the presence of the
raL"ay presidents as a recognition of its
authority to represent the men and Presi-
dent Mitchell, who is not an active miner
and is not employed in the anthra cite re-
glons, and the three district presidents Of
the United Mine Workers who are not on
the pay rolls of any of the companies, were
to be present and do the talking. Such
conference, the miners argue could not
be anything but q recognition of the union,
and 1t was arranged that Mr. Mitchell and
the three district presidents should sign
the agreement, as the representatives Of
the miners, which. from their point of
view, was conclusive evidence that the
union had been formally recognized.
Effect of, Action at indianapolis.
But it looks now as If the situation would
be upset by the action of the executive
board at Indianapolis in adopting a reso-
luton declaring that all miners under the
Union will stand together in their demands,
and that no district whether anthracite
bttuminous or block coal in the United
States or Canada. shall make any agree
raent for scale of wages unless all dis
tricts are included"
The hard coal operators and railway nres-
identS were taken entirely by surprise and
do not understand what the Indianapolis
resolution means. Since Saturday last their
friendly disposition and cordial intentions
cd md Mr.
chell and his executive committee intend
TO place the hard and soft coal operators
on the same footing. and demand the same
concessions from both, general strike Is
absolutely certain.
The eastern operators do not pretend to;
be Ignorant of the significance of the action
at Indianapolis. 1t means that when a
strike is ordered the fuel supply of the
United States IS to be entirely cut off Dur
Ing the anthracite strike of 1902 the BIZ
luminous operators kept the factories GO
Ing and furnished fuel for the customers
Of the anthracite mines. and they made an
enormous profit. They were even accused
of contributing money to the strike fund
in order to prevent the hard coal miners
from resumlng work long as possible
but this time when a strike is ordered in
the soft coal districts, the committee Is
determined to see that the anthracite mines
shall shut Gown also, so to bring the
public into the controversy and force the
operators in both the hard and soft coal
districts to yield.
Conditions Not Parallel.
The hard coal men here in New York
claim that this is unfair and unjust They
complain that hard and soft coal mining
are conducted by entirely different methods
and on an entirely different basis. The
same rules Will lot apply to both, and IL
the SHo are combined 1t will only increase
the complications.
There is very little sympathy between the
hard and soft coal operators. There is a
lack of confidence, and in some cases had
blood on both sides. The bftuminous coal
operators have recognized the union for
several years, and even go so far as to per-
NIT their paymasterS to deduct the dues of
members of the union from their wages
twice a month. The union committees in
the anthracite regions want their employees
to do the same, because as soon as a scale
is settled and controversies quiet down the
miners stop paying their dues. After the
last strike the membership of the union
dropped off so per cent or more, and Presi-
dent Mitchell was working all last SUMMER
to get the men back into the organization
The anthracite operators have declined to
permit their paymasters to collect union
dues-frst. because they assert that they
have no right to do so, and that If any
miner should appeal to the courts they
could not justify such a practice for
moment In the second place, at least one
third of the miners are not In the union
and thirdly, such a rule would be recog-
tically give the control of the management
to the employees instead of the owners.
Question of Recognition
Without discussing the force of this argu-
ment. the anthracite men claim that the
bituminous operators, by recognizing the
union, have made them P. great deal of
trouble, The Roosevelt, commission recog-
nized the difficulty of dealing with soft and
hard coal miners on the same basis and
although tn question of recognizing the
United Mine Workers organization was not
before the commission, suggested that the
same conditions and arguments did not APP
ply. The commission pointed out that 1t
would be different 'if there was an inde-
pendent and autonomous organization of the
anthracite mine workers, and IF 1t were
within the scope of the commissions turis-
diction, they might have reasonably granted
a demand for a trade agreement" The
commission felt that long as the an
thracite miners belonged to the same or
ganizatiou as the bituminous miners and
the soft coal operators were in active COM
petition with the hard coal operators, 1t was
not fair to involve the latter in disturbances
In the soft coal regions; that 1t was not
just to compel conflicting interests to sub
init to the same conditions. II the anthra-
cite operators forced into a strike be-
cause Of a controversy between the soft coal
operators and their men, the situation
would give very striking emphasis to this
opinion OF the commission
fl,r1r To l,oxx