The Connecticut labor news., 1922-09-08

tives Tuesday to the statement on the coal distribution bill made by Edgar Wallace, legislative representative ot the American Federation of Labor.
 "I think" he said,- that MT. Wal, lace stated the case with great dea- of accuracy"
 MT. Wallace's statement follows:
 "Mr. Chairman, my attentoin was called to this bill yesterday, and derstand 1t, the bill takes cognizance bins in the country are empty; that the bitu1ninous coal miners have started to work, but that there is a danger, judging by past experience, that everyone will try to fill his coal bin completely immediately; that that will cause competition in buying, or, m fact, a buyers panic, and that there will be runaway market in which the prices will go soaring; and that Tn order to avert such a situa- ton, as I understand it, there are provisions in this bill that there shall be a coal distributor controlling it. As I understand 1t, it is provided that the industries shall get what coal they need immediately to keep them going, but that no one shall be allowed to get all the coal he desires, or so much coal as to make 1t impossible for oth- CT people to get coal ,and so, in that way, 1t is sought to avert buyers panic. We are in favor of that bill, or l would say, we are in favor of that much of the bill We think it would have a tendency to eliminate the parasite from the industry that generally appears in such circum stances as the present-that Is to say, the wash buyer, if you understand what I mean by that term. I mean the man who never does anything to- ward producing a ton of coal; the man who does not consume any coal; the man who fills no purpose, but who in times of panic will buy number of cars of coal, take a profit from it, and possibly pass it on to others who are just such buyers as himself.
 "I believe the bill could be made more explicit if 1t would outlaw just such purchasers as that As I have said, inasmuch as the buying public, or the coal consumers, would be as sured that the Government would see that they got coal as they needed it, and, recognizing that the bituminous coal industry can not only produce the peak demand but can produce 25 per cent more than the peak demand, l believe that that part of the bill will be sufficient also, to protect the public. I want to say this: That 1 am not in favor of any hxation of prices at the mines or anywhere else. The reason l am opposed to that IS based upon past experience. The ex- perience IS that the Government fixes a minimum price, and the maximum price immediately becomes the mini mum price. Furthermore, the Gov ernment can not, by it's act conhscate the property of the citizen, and hepce the mine that is not economical, or the mine that Is ineflciency managed, or the high-cost mine, becomes the standard, and the cost of coal is raised instead of being reduced at any at tempt at price hxation that the Gov ernment can make and keep within its powers granted by the Constitution. Now, 1 believe that by protecting the consumers from this condition, or by averting fear, which Is panic, and by making them recognize that the Gov ernment will see to 1t that they will get coal as they need 1t and when they need 1t, and the recognition of the fact that the industry is capable of producing plenty of coal, you will be able to prevent a runaway mar ket. It will result in distributing the coal on hand as 1t IS produced evenly over the country, and 1t will be beneficial. 1 want to say in connec- ton with this that my fear of price hxation is based upon past experience.
 "1f the gentlemen here will let their memory go back to the two in dustries that have been most dis turbed in the last few years, you vii find that they were industries that ran constantly prior to the war. There may have been local strikes here and there, but there was nothing very serious. There was never railroad strike in the 30 years prior to the war of such consequence that it en- dangeretd the public. There was never a coal strike prior to the World War of such consequence that 1t endangered the public welfare gen 'erally, but since or during the war, recognizing those two industreis as essential industries, there was Gov ernment price fixing in connection with them. There was Government price fixing and Government wage fixing at that time, and from that time there has been a tendency to demand Government interference, or a tendency on the part of the Gov ernment to interfere. Instead of pre- venting disturbance in those indus tries, they have caused a disturbance in the industries The men in look ing to the Government for their wages will hold the Government re- sponsible for the disagreeable circum- stances that arise in their everyday life because of the wage they lack, or because of the wage that they think they should have, but which they have not got. The blame is put on the Government, and I doubt whether the Government itself can stand under those circumstances. I repeat that the fact is that when the owners of the industry and their men uyere 1et on I1ntramme1ed each rec-