The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-05-03
The Coal Strike Situation.

The coal strike situation, to a be-
nighted westerner who expects to pay
the freight whichever side wins, is as
clear as unfltered Mississippi water. 1t
seems to be equally transparent to the
leading eastern journals much nearer
the seat of trouble and presumably
much better informed than one further
away could hope to be. 80
Here are two Numerically opposing
views of the merits of the question. The
New York Sun said editorially April
29:.
The coal case has now reached a
point where the proposal Of the opera
tors should be accepted. that is, the
submission to the anthracite coal strike
commission of the only issue properly
remaining for consideration, the ques-
ton of wages for certain classes Of
employees. This is a matter in which
the public is concerned rather than the
operators. The claim made by the
mineowners that the public paid the:
advance. which resulted from the set
Element three years ago and that the
operators profits were little or not at
all Increased is susceptible Of proof.
So, too. is their claim that the increase
tentatively demanded by the miners
would tax the public further the amount
of over $12,000,O00. ,.,
The Sun quotes Mr.. David Wilcox
in the North American Review as say
ing that the award Of 1902 compelled
the consuming public to pay during
1904 Sic, 100000 more than would have
been paid had the prices Of 1902 con-
tinued.
These are rather startling figures If
Mr.. Wilcox is correct and if the Sun
is also right, that the profits Of the
operators were not increased. then the
sum Of 16,4O0,O 900 went in that yea,
to increase the wage fund Of the miners
To make the public believe Mr.. Will
cox s statement may. be- possible, since
1t is based apparently on known facts
but to establish the proposition Of the
Sun will be a tri1e harder. The pub
lie does not believe that the operators
charged this tremendous tariff upon the
public and handled the money without
any of 1t sticking to their fingers.
On the other side is the Philadelphia
North American, which agrees with thu
Sun in saying that the question is
public one rather a private quarrel be
tween the operators and miners, AM
adds:
AS things are, nobody can question
that public sympathy is with the min
ers. Their original demands were no
extravagant, altho there is a :possibi]
ity that they may have asked TO
more than they expected to get. B;'
o1,,4o y~+O Of h
mine owners they have receded, yielc
ing point after point, until there
nothing left Of their claim than wha
appears to be a. naked plea for justice
and now that is refused. Their fns
request was that either there shout
be an advance equal to 10 per cent Q
the total production Of coal to be adde
men getting less than 81 day sha
have an advance Of IS per cent, til
increase grading downward until thos
receiving $1.75 shall have but "a pr
cent advance. Their claim is that tt
total increase if put upon. the price ),
stead Of $1.20 as the owners have COZ
tended. ~ 49, ..4s. !,
The production of anthracite CO..
In 1904 was 65OO0,0O0 tons, so th,
the miners are asking for $6,500,0(
instead of $16,40O,0O0 claimed by M
David Wilcox, or $7S,000,000 !;
claimed by the. owners.
There is such wild discrepancy b
tween these figures that the freigh
paying public ought to 7Gbe inform
what are the actual facts: The publ
the North American suggests, won
be glad to know why every advance
wages should be charged directly
ks the public. It claims that the COZ
panies received much the larger sha
Of the award of three years ago a.
calls attention to these facts. 7
lowest market price Of Reading "a
way common and preferred stock
1898 was $31, 1885 900. March 1, 49,
it's market value was $162,000,0'
There are seven railroad compani
holding the anthracite coal trade a
The anthracite mines in their gr
The market value of these propert
has increased since 1898 more th
$500 100000. Here is no evidence
b pauperism nor lack of power to mi
8 o reasonable wage advance Witht