The New York herald., 1922-07-24
What Do the Coal Unions Mean !?

What Do the Coal Unions Mean
vELLrs SEARLEs, editor of the United
Mine Workers Journal, offers for
the settlement of the coal strike two
methods which will appear to the
great mass of newspaper readers
astounding, not as methods but as
suggestions. One method. he says, is
for the President of the United States
to call a joint conference Of the
miners and operators and command
both sides to attend.
The other method, Mr.. SEARLEs
says, is for the President to tell the
miners to go back to work at the
scale of wages existing at the time
of the strike with the promise that
he will appoint a commission to in
vestigate every phase Of the many
situations and make report which
later would be used as the basis for
a new agreement between the miners
and the operators.
But this is substantially, in many
respects exactly, what President
HARDING did. He called the joint
meeting; he got the operators and
miners into conference; he offered
them a plan for immediate return to
work pending arbitration; he en-
Joined upon them careful considera-
ton of it and left them to reach an
agreement. The representatives of
the operators, in the main, agreed;
the leaders Of the miners unani
mously refused.
1t is splitting hairs to say there is
any essential or even appreciable diff
ference between Mr.. SEARLEs's sugges-
tion and the Presidents attempted
plan. Collective bargaining was
neither abandoned nor tampered with
in the Presidents plan. There was
nothing in the Presidents plan to
prevent the operators and the miners
from reaching wage scale agree
ment before the coal commission even
came into existence. The Presidents
plan for arbitration findings on wage
scales and working conditions was
merely the alternative for the failure
of the operators and miners to reach
an agreement.
So what does Mr.. SEARLEs, pre-
sumably speaking for the miners as
whole, mean? He is not ignorant
of what the President of the United
StateSdid along the lines Mr.. SEARLEs
urges, and he is not ignorant of what
came Of 1t. The striking miners
cannot be ignorant of it. For the
editor of the United Mine Workers
Journal to put forth his suggestion,
therefore, without any reference to
the fact that this very thing had been
tried by the President but had been
thwarted by the strike leaders must
seem to the American public, thor
oughly familiar with the fact, as
said before, astounding.
Or does Mr.. SEARLEs mean that the
that the. strike leaders now realize
tLey made a mistake and would like
the chance to correct it? If that is
the case why do they not say so to
the President Of the United States ?
Surely the President would be glad
to give them the chance to rec4ify
their error and set themselves right
in this great national issue. The
mine owners would he glad. The
country would be glad.
Or does Mr.. SEARLEs mean that the
striking miners realize that their
leaders made a mistake, whether the
leaders do or do not yet realize iti
Does he mean that the miners would
like to go back to the point of the
Washington negotiations where theil
leaders left off and begin all over
again with or without the leaders
Il that is the case why does not Mr.
SEARLEs say 80 In their behalf? II
would be the straightest and the
surest way to action.
Indeed, If it is the case II would
make very easy matter out oi
what now looks like hard nut fol
the coal strikers TO crack.