Waterbury evening Democrat., 1906-03-19
MITCHELL TO BAER
Mine Workers President Puts Case to Operatore.
KEEN DISAPPOINTMENT FELT BY MEN
"we Are. Not Unmindful of Great PsbIic Interests Involved, Oar Demands Wore Rejected and
 Our ArGune uts Ignored.o

Public Interests 1nv0lvedj Oar
 Demands Wore Rejected and
 Osr Arguments Ignered.'
 INDIANAPOLIS, Ind, March 19.-- President John Mitchell of the United Mine Workers of America has sent to George F. Baer, chairman of the an- thracite coal operators committee, his reply to the committees communica- ton rejecting the demands of the min- CTS organization. The letter follows:
 Referring again to your communi- cation dated March 10. with accompa- nying documents, and to our reply thereto, I write to say that have sub mitted to our committee the answer made by your committee to the propo- sitions presented by us It is unneces- sary to state that we were keenly dis appointed to learn that our demands were rejected in toto and that our ar- guments in favor of them had received SO little consideration at your hands that they were practically ignored in your reply to us.
 "We have again reviewed the scale presented for your consideration, have compared 1t with the scale of wages paid for similar classes of labor in other coal producing states and dis tricts and we are satisfied beyond the peradventure of doubt that the wages proposed are not il, excession of, in- deed that they are not so high, as the wages paid in the bituminous mining districts of our country.
 Judging from the language employ ed in your answer to us, it is perfectly evident that we failed to make clear or that you failed to understand the real import of the propositions submit ted by us.
 We wish to assure you that we are not unmindful of the great public in- terests involved in this controversy as to our future relations, neither are we unappreciatiye of the splendid efforts made by the anthracite coal strike commission to establish a relationship between us that would insure just ana permanent peace. but If you will refer to the award of that commission you will find that the commission itself was in doubt as to the permanency of it's findings and expressed the hope that at the expiration of the award the relations of operator and employee would have so far improved as to make impossible such condition as existed throughout the country in con sequence of the strike in the anthra- cite region.
 Ut would seem from reading your reply that all our propositions have been rejected and that your final de- cision has been given. We trust that this conception of your intention is. in- correct. It is our opinion that neither you nor we can afford to break of ne gotiatons in this abrupt manner. So far as we and the interests we repre- sent are concerned we are not willing oto aecepts1A3s.share of the respsnsE bility this action entails. We believe that further meetings should be held and that ye should strive earnestly and conscientiously to reconcile our differences.
 While it may be true that on the part of the operators there has been no serious cause for complaint during the past three years, we wish to assure you that in expressing this opinion you do not reflect our views. Not on- Iy has there been criticism among the miners, but what is more important there exists much cause for criticism and complaint. To such an extent is this true that we feel it incumbent upon us to say that we cannot with any degree of contentment or satisfac. ton continue to work under present conditions.
 However. we repeat that the inter- ests involved are so vast that we are not willing to break on negotiations without first making further efforts to reconcile our differences. We there fore propose that further conference or conferences be held between now and the list of April.
 "If this suggestion meets with your approval we will be pleased to ar range with you date upon which our joint committee may reconvene.'