The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-11-15
Conservation Policy of Republi-
can Administration Bars COM
petition in Utah.
CAPITAL SHUT OUT FROM
OPENING NEW C0LLlERlES
Gimlet HOwls TO Distract Atten-
ton From the Real Cause
for High Prices.

several mornings since the election, has
appeared under a scare head this state
ment; "Coal Must Come Down. Then
follows a long story showing how the
high rate for transportation Of coal and
the 81 j ton profit which the retailer
receives is responsible for this advance.
But this statement is not true.
Those who arc responsible for the
high price of Goa in Utah is the church
Republican party that the federal
bunch represents, for the administrator
has absolutely barred ont competition In
coal III Utah and III Wyoming,
This has been done through the poi
icy inangurated bv Pihcbot and Koose-
Welt during the administration of the
latter and continued by Taft slucc hls
administration was inducted into Of
fee. This alleged policy to conserve
the resources OF the country Is directly
responsible for the high price of coal
in Utah and which has imposed great
burden upon the people of the state.
TUESDAY last the country al large sat
down upon the people, who have kept
up prices TO the maximum, with the
exception of Utah. Here TO sustain the
administration. to keep the Utah dele
CATION in congress. which sustains that
of a church by command of ccclesiasts
switched its voters to the church Re
publican party and iii doing this sus-
tanned an administration which has ab.
solutely barred one competitor in the
matter OF mining and selling coal In
this great state and enables the giant
corporations controlling collierics which
supply this state with black diamonds
TO exact whatever suits their whim or
caprice, from the consumer
Coal Is too High.
There is no question but what coal is
too high in Utah, Every consumer in
bility for this rests with the Republi-
can party, for as said, the national
administration has barred out competi
tor in tins state by Withdrawing coal
lands from entry OF by refusing TO issue
patents for coal lands long after cash
entries have been made. And then
should those who desire TO develop col
licres on properties for which they hold
certificates of purchase. litigation is IN
stituted which stops development and
thus allows the coal combine TO exact
whatever 1T desires.
To develop a collicry: that is, to opcn
up a property which would produce say
500 tons per day. would ncccssitate An
outlay of quarter million of dollars.
Capital will not make this investment
upon an uncertainty. To illustrate;
Wanted to Open Mine
Eighteen months ago Il party Of cast
ern people, twenty IN number. came to
Utah 10 make investment. They wanted
to open n collicry, hence wanted coal
lands. Under the present law r coal en-
try by an indiyidual cannot contain an
acreage greater than 100 acres, and no
combination or company can own more
than 1850 acres in the mining Of coal.
The members Of this party filed upon
coal lands in Carbon county TO the limit.
The entries were cash entries and the
party paid into the land Office $50 per
acre or $12S.000. No patents have yet
to whether or not these patents Will
| issue.
But suppose they did7 Suppose these
easterncrs opened this colliery upon the
certificates issued by the land officials
and prior to the issuing of patent. Then
what7
What Happens,
A quarter million dollars has been in
vested. Affairs at the mine are moy.
ing along splendidy. There is pros
perity- Patents have issued The title
to the property apparently tx clear The
patent to the property has issued. Until
! =
the patent the. government can come in
and allege fraud in the entries. Mean
while the company has complied with
all requirements Of law. IT is only a
short while until title should be vested
in the owners.
Then a campaign is on representa-
tive of The federal bunch calls upon the
collierv. The bunch wants funds for
the church Republican campaign. The
colliery management refuses 10 ante.
Contest proceedings arc begun. Liti-
CATION, which can be prolonged indcfi-
nately, is on.
No wonder no new collieries arc
paw S6.25 per ton for coal tint should
sell for 81. No wonder investors keep
away from Utah, Capitalists who have
invested i'll Utah collierics know where
the money goes; know where the holdup
is; know who gets the dough.
1t will be recalled by older citizens
Of Salt Lake that several years ago
nearly every consumer in the city
signed slip of paper agreeing to buy
coal from the Coalville mines at SIS per
ton. This was done to aid n proposed
railroad from this city to the mines in
Coalville. But the road failed to pan
out. 1t was not built and coal was adj
vanccd % cents per ton. And every
time there has been agitation on the
subject of cheaper fuel, conl has been
advanced. Why7 No competition. due
to the absurd conservation icy Of the
administration.
just Facts
These are Just facts This is why the
howl Of the ''Gimlct' II is to attract
attention elsewhere than from the adj
niuist ration, whose alleged conservu-
tion policy is killing Utah coal mining
by any one other than great corpora
tons who control thousands of acres of
coal lands in Utah
Everything Indicates that after holi-
da' editions of papers are gotten out
that howls about high priced coal will
cease. Coal companies can be held up
just MS brewers and liquor men can be
held mp. There WAS once n loud howl
for prohibition in boxed, articles on the
front page Of q Salt Lake publication
The howl all Mt once ceased. Why? Are
the same tactics being adopted in the
matter of coal? Are new lnotype ma.
chimes needed7 Must some one else. the