New Britain herald., 1919-10-30

if it must be settled upon the field
 of industrial battle, the rcSponsi-
 bility rests fairly and Squarely
 upon the coal DarOnS ulOne.'
 Thus John l.. Lewis concludes a statement authorized by the Mine Workers and issued yesterday. It is d reasonable statement at first glance, it incorporates many arguments for the miners Among other things it claims that there has been no adVa,ice in the wages of the workers for two years: it remarks that the workers arc ready to conclude d wage agreement on a fair basis at any time that it is seen fit to call d conference.
 But the general public and many labor unions, has no sympathy with the strike. We know that the miners have been getting big wages, even as wages go these days. It does not benefit the cause to any great extent to point out that these wages have been forthcoming for two years since n time when the existing scales for most labor were much lowc". The miners undoubtedly have been the recipients of more than their share of the gold that has been diverted to the Workingman from the pockets of the public. whether labor or capital. And in the statement nothing is aid about the thirty hour week, which we believe was one of the biggest causes for con- tention at the recent meetings of the "coal barons'' and the would be "coal barons,' the miners. We do not doubt but that, should a conference be ar ranged again, the short week would be demanded. No, MT. Lewis, you have not convinced us. We rCalizo that, in a mighty clever piece of propaganda, you have done your best to win the public to your side. you have advanced what reasonable argu- mcnts that you might. some of them would be worthy Of support did we not know more of the history of the mines and the mon that work them.
 The responsibility may rest upon
 
 who made the strike to come about But nothing but abject surrender on their part would have allowed the mines to be worked at all. Is not that so? And, unfortunately for the min CTS, their surrender meant the loss of money and comfort to the public for the benefit of the miners alone. Did it not, MT Lewis? The public is with labor of any sort just as long as it's requests coincide with reason, there can be none in this instance, despite the miners statements. We arc sorry but this is the situation as it exists to- day, we arc ready for the strike and the outraged public, this time, at least, is upon the side Of capital. It recog- nizcs labor'S right to strike, it recog- nizes the privileges of a man, organ izcd or unorganized, 10 quit his job, it recognizes the privileges of American citizenship. But it does not allow that man who is seemingly getting big money now should join his fellows to
 
 pie, should violate his agreement with the government. made during war times, which was mighty beneficial agreement. by the way, and strike. The war is not over though it ap- breaches settlement. The agreeme ent is violated and the public must lose But 1t will not do so without voicing it's rem monstrance
 And so, MT. Lewis, the miners may strike, we cannot make them keep their word, the barons may be respon- siblc for tho strike we do not own their property; we may all suffer through the arbitrary actions of your men, but the coal strike may go on. when 1t goes far enough the American people will run the mines, if for noth- ing but it's own warmth, lighting and power You are treading the path of lost faith whoever Is responsibIe Keep 1t up, you are bound to losc