Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1906-04-28
MINERS OFFER REFUSED
Anthracite Operators Reject Latest PROPOSE
ton from President Mitchell.
SAY PROFITS or MINE OWNERS ARF
Any Increase Must BE NlNO Sn-
sumers and They Do Want
10 Throw Additional
Burdens on Them.

NEW YORK, April H-rhe anthracite
mine operators, through their subcommittee
of seven, at a meeting here today drew
up a reply TO the latest proposition of the
mine workers for an adjustment OF the
existing differences in the anthracite fields
in which they refuse to modify their po-
sition heretofore announced. The operators
call upon the mners to renew for period
of three years the award of the Anthra-
cite Strike commission, OF else to accept
the operators proposition that the strike
commission aTbitrate the question as to
what changes, IL any, shall be made IN
the scale of wages fixed by the commits
sion in its original award The miners
have heretofore declined this offer.
The reply which is addressed to President
Mitchell and others Of the miners sub
committee. says the miners present propo-
siton abandoning all the various demands
of the original communication. seems to
be based on the impression that wages
in the anthracite industry are unduly low.
Even before the advances which were
granted by its award" says the letter,
''the strike commission found to the con-
tragy."
Thirty-Six Cents a Ton.
The operators after giving figures in de-
tail say that to accept the sliding scale
Of wages proposed by the miners would
mean an increase In the price Of coal to
the public of 36 cents ton. The present
| profit to the operators, they say, is but 20
| cents a ton. The letter continues:
But II we disregard the sliding scale
and assume that you simply mean to add
| 10 cents ton as the final increase in cost,
this would result in increasing the wages
| OF our employees S6,1O0000 per annum; that
| is 10 cents per ton on 100000 Of output.
You say 1t will not result in imposing
additional burdens upon the coal consum-
ing public How can this be done? Where
Is the $6,1O0,OO0 TO come from? We have
shown you that in the largest companies,
the profit, without interest and royalty,
has yielded less than 3 per cent on the
capital invested. The operators, there
fore, cannot afford to pay this large annual
increase without imposing additional bur-
dens upon the coal consuming public
'fYour propositions are wholly incon-
sistent with our position in the premises,
from which we have not varied
Arbitration Oner Renewed.
The letter then quotes the commission's
decision as to the proper basis of wages
and continues
1--WE have offered to refer to arbitration
by the strike commission the question,
what change, IL any. should be made in
these conditions. but this offer you have
rejected. You haYe stated no facts vary
ing from those passed upon by the com
! mission The advances made by the strike
commission have practically absorbed this
increase in price. Therefore there has beer
no increase in the profits of the business
upon which could be based any claim fol
increased wages. These considerations are
all the more important because. as we have
shown, your proposition, If II included th'
sliding scale, would add 50 cents per tor
to the cost of the domestic sizes and woulC
increase the aggregate cost to the public
of the entire product in the amount o.
over S12OO0,00O.
The letter says the true course Of settle
nent was indicated in the original propo
sition of the operators, that existing con
ditions should be continued for a period o
three years.
In conclusion. the letter says:
I'VE trust that on Thursday next the de
liberate judgment of the anthracite work
ers will result in an acceptance Of tina
proposition, but II not they will join will
us in the arbitration we have offered.
Failing TO meet us on either propo
: sition. the responsibility Of a strike mus
rest upon YOU"
The letter is signed by George F. BaeT
4 L, B. Thomas. David Wilcox, w. II
( Truesdale. Morris Williams. ]. b, Kerr an
j. L. Cake.