The daily morning journal and courier., 1906-04-18
NOTHING FURTHER TO
 OFFER TO TIE MINERS
OPERATORS SEND THEIR PROM ISED LETTER TO PRESI-
 DENT MITCHELL.

Shall be Any ArbftrattOn--Declafe
 All Differences Between Miners and
 Employees Have Already Been De-
 cided by the Strike Commissions
 Mitchells Latest Plan, However, is
 Not Refused Point Blank.
 New York, April 17.-A sub-commit- tee of presidents of the anthracite coal carrying roads and mine operators held meeting in this city to-day and drew up a letter to President John Mitchell of the United Mine Workers of Ameri- ca, in which the operators again de- clare that there is nothing to arbitrate except the question whether there shall be any arbitration. This reply is made in response to President MitchelIs re- cent amended proposition of arbitra- ton. The operators do not, however, refuse point blank to accept MT. Mitch elrs latest plan. They assert that all the differences between the miners and their employers have been decided by the strike commission, and that there is mo reason why another attempt should be made to arbitrate them. After de- scribing the previous steps of the two sides and commenting on the plans suggested by the miners, the operators aver that the miners have rejected all the propositions and that they have nothing further to offer.
 The letter follows:
 April 1T, 1906. ITO MT. John Mitchell, and others.
 Committee of Anthracite Mine
 Workers.
 "Gentlemen-In 1902 you assented to the proposition of the operators that all questions at isSue between the re- spectiye companies and their own em- ployes, whether they belong to union or not should be decided by the an- thracite coal strike commission; ac- cordingly the award of the commission covered and decided all such questions; therefore, we have heretofore proposed to you that the relations thus estab- lished by arbitration be continued for a term of three years-the same period as that fixed by the strike commission. This offer you have rejected.
 Your present proposition is that all relations between every employer and his employees shall be fixed and con- trolled by single instrument. Origin ally you suggested that this should be a form of contract with the United Mine Workers of America; now you suggest that it shall be with your com naittee as representatives of the an- tjhracite mine wc-kers.' lnaSmuch as 4he authority and standing of your ,conmittee as representing any one de- t5ends wholly upon Its designation by aeonyention of the United Mine Workers sas the representatives of that body It lis clear that the change proposed is a1ot substantial, but merely formal and raises no new question. This is evil dent also from the fact that your prop osition contains numerous provisions for action by the organization and the district officers of the United Mine Workers of America.
 This proposition restricts production by strictly limiting hours of labor, and providing that no miner can work Ill more than one chamber, or have more than two laborers; it seeks to equalize wages with reference merely to the name of the employees position, and not at an +o his capacity or the rork which he actually does provides that no new vains, ar collieries can be opened with out an arbitration as to wages, and that no contract of employment can he terminated without an arbitration; If makes the employers the agents of Hha union to aid it in levying upon the 1vag ages of the employees the dues fixed Inv the union; it provides for increase sn wages and rates of payment which would approximate 2.6 per cent ana rvn,ild increase the cost of the domestic sizaa of coal about S1,20 per ton, and IL suggests diluting the present concili- ntion board into three boards having co-ordinate powers. It provides stlll further that the arrangement proposed sba1l continue in force merely for one year. , o4,,on +hor abose regarding wages, and the ad- 4,,strnent of complaints, concern raalcal and fundanental principles Tn refer- ence to the management Of the ousl-
 ss which are vital to its success. Tbesa nuestions have all been settled h., +be award of the strike commission, rsrbioh has established the existing con ditions, , ..4o :.
 .sso far as concerns the matter ot waqes and adjustment Of compialhts ,va have offered to submit to the mem- hare of the strike commission the ques- tion whether any changes in conditions have occurred since the award or the commission requiring that the award sbo,ld bA modified as to those matters and if so. how 1t should be changed Those are the only subjects in regard to which you have made the least " restion that the conditions have chang ed since the award of the commission and as to those no facts in support oi tbat suggestion have been made pub lie, But the claim for a change ln the existing relations must obviously rest mon some change in conditions since those relations we2e all established by arbitration. You have rejected this proposition of arbitration. You now propose that 1t shall be submitted tc the strike commission to decide wheth- CT the terms contained in your amend ed proposition, which are stated above shall be adopted In other words, you seek to have every subject which has been already settled by arbitration re- considered and every issue retired