Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1919-11-24
PUBLIC MAY SPLIT
MINERS PAY RAISE
WITH OPERATORS
Living Cost Is Factor il e.
fort to Reach Strike
Settlement.
CLASH CALLS ATTENTION
TO soARINGfRIcE OF COAL

RESTRAINING Hand OF the Govern
ment TO Halt Burden
Imposing.
NEW YSRk. November 24-soft
coal mjae owners made shocking
and itdefensible'' profits in 1917
and there is "grave doubt that
tb<y are entitled to increased
prices because of the proposed 81
per cent increase in miners wages,
William G. McAdOo, former Secre-
tary of the Treasury. declared to-
day in a telegram to Federal Fuel
Administrator Garfield. The own
ers' profits as shown by their in
come tax returns examined by him
ms Secretary of the Treasury in
1913, he said, showed earnings on
capital stock ranging from Is to
1000 per cent.
81 am convinced that the wage
increases proposed for the mine
workers are just and reasonable"
he stated.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.
Settlement of the coal controversy
depends as much upon whether the
government will permit the operators
to increase the maximum price of
coal as it does on the willingness of
the operators to accept as fair the
proposals of the Department of Labor
for wage increases to the miners.
Each side-miners and operators both
are asking in effect that they be pro-
tected, and the upshot of the whole
thing probably will be the transfer
fn "a fpr nf Of
the new expense and to the ultimate
consumer of the remainder. Increase
in wages to the miners is not in dis
pute any more. The miners, the OPP
orators and the Department of Labor,
representing the government, say
such an increase is necessary.
CHOW Much Increase?" Is Query.
The question no longer is: Shall
the miners be given more wages?" 1t
is How much increase shall they be
given?"
The answer would seem to be found
in the factor of the cost of living. How
much more does a miner need to, sup
port his family; today than he did in
1917, when he got his last increase in
wages? The Department of Labor,
through its various statistical bureaus,
has made an exhaustive investigation
and come to the conclusion that in the
family budget of the miner there has
been a total increase since 1914 of 70
per cent. In other words, food has
gone up % per cent, clothing 81 per
cent, housing 1 per cent, fuel and light
2A per cent, and so on.
Secretary's Method of Figuring.
Secretary Wilson thought the fair
thing to do was to subtract from this
70 per cent of increased cost of living
the amount of increased wages that
the miners got in 1917, when the last
adjustment was made. This left a
deficit, and in order to make up that
deficit and enable the miner to meet
his present cost of living he recon-
mended an increase in wages of 2S.58
cents per ton as the increase that
mining rates equivalent to the present
cost of commodities in the miners
household.
The operators say this is too much
and the miners say it is not enough.
On top of this the ultimate consumer
sets up a howl that the increased
wages would mean 0,000,O 900 more
to the cost of coal per year. But OF
this amount really the great bulk is
absorbed by big industries, and there
is only 16 per cent, or $50, 900, 900,
which would be borne by the average
man. 1t means about 40 cents a ton
more for coal that the average house.
holder would have to pay.
Strike Calls Attention to Price.
But the interesting thing about 1t
all is that if there had not been a
coal strike the attention of the gov
eminent and the country probably
would never have been focused on
the rising prices of coal to the con-
sumner and there would never have
been a return of the fuel admins
traitor and check kept on the max
ino1n1 nrina of coal In other xvnrdQ
if it had not been for the controversy
itself the price of coal might have
gone up not merely 40 cents. but sew
eral dollars. And the miners knew
that might happen and that they
might not get any share of that in
crease.
AS for the viewpoint that the i'm
position of 40 cents per ton more on
the price of coal to the consumer is
an unfair burden. the miner points
sumers-constituting the general pub
lic-have increased his cost of living
70 per cent and are asking him to
pay more for his shoes, his clothing,
his building materials and every
thing else. If the general public
would reduce the cost Of living the
miner would be content. But expert
ments in the last few months show
how futile is the effort to reduce the
cost of living.
Profiteering Can Be Checked.
Profiteering can be checked and
certain limits to profits can thus be
arrived at in certain commodities, but
the government was never permitted
by Congress to exercise any control
over the prices of anything but food
and fuel while clothing, building ma
terials, agricultural implements and
other things that are pointed to by
the farmer and the wholesaler and
retailer as the reason for increased
prices. are uncontrolled. In the alb
sence of government control over
economic factors generally, the op-
portunity to reduce the cost of living
remains out of the hands of govern
ment agencies and in the hands OF
the laws of supply and demand. When
production is brought up to demand
prices will begin to descend.
But as for coal, transportation Ia
cilities are limited, docking facilities
are Inadequate, foreign countries are
CRYING for American coal and can't
get it, and the American consumer is
demanding more than can be got
ten, Normal conditions are not ex-
pected to ensue until the whole world
situation clears up.
acct" Game Goes On.
In the meantime, it is a game Of
much as-you-can. Both OPP
orators and miners are trying to do
business at profit. The restraining
hand of the government is upon them