Evening star., 1923-11-26

and rightly so. over the long con-
tinued and steadily increasing ex-
actions of the anthracite monopoly.
whose representatives had definitely
declined to recommend that the in
dustry shall clean it's own house."
Gov. Pinchot added:
Sees Greedy Monopoly.
THE reason for SO deep a public
feeling is that the people know the
anthracite business is a monopoly =
greedy, relentless and defiant-whose
purpose is to get out of the people
the last cent the traffic will bear"
The governor declared settlement of
the coal strike involved an average
increase in labor costs of so cents a
ton. but that operators had added
dends paid by coal companies in re-
cent years.
The governor answered the criti-
cisms of the governors of several
other states that this state first
should take certain steps with respect
to the anthracite Industry, such as to
repeal the law requiring certification
,of the miners and state tax on hard
coal. He declared Pennsylvania al
ready had vigorously attacked the
problem of rock and dirt in coal and
that the effect had been strongly felt.
Contract Runs to 102S.
No action, he said, was possible to
affect royalties which were matters
of private contract and most of which
continue in effect until December 80,
1928. The certification law the gov
ernor termed "a just and proper law"
which should not be repealed, as 1t
would open the mines to unskilled
mining and would result either in
stopping or reducing production. per-
manent injury to the productive ca
pacity of the mines or a vast increase
in accidents.
The anthracite tax. he said,
amounted to n per cent OF the cost
of coal at the mine, or between IL
and IL cents ton on domestic sizes,
and actual prices at the mines before
and after the tax went into effect did
not indicate the tax had been passed
on to the consumer. He declared he
was emphatically against its repeal.
He said that nine-tenths of the
hard coal produced in this state was
consumed elsewhere. and that as 1t
was an interstate commodity the
action of no one state could meet
the situation.
ITO paraphrase the language of the
Supreme Court in the Kansas indus
trial court decision" he said, the
anthracite industry supplies an indis-
pensable service. and in the absence
of regulations the people are sub
jected by 1t to exorbitant and arbi-
affected with n public interest and
may be regulated. In that case
Congress may authorize whatever
body 1t may select to fix prices of
anthracite coal in interstate COM
merce. establish uniform systems of
1tv.n no. nd DO
and make It's findings known.
1.-The best legal opinion does not
establish beyond controversy the
right of the. United States to fix
prices. establish uniform accounts,
examine books, or require reports in
the anthracite industry. But there
is no doubt whatever that each state
through its police power can do all of
those things If 1t chooses. Whether
the coming Congress can or cannot,
does or does not, give the consumer
clean anthracite at reasonable prices.
there Is another necessary remedy. 1
refer to the treaty or compact be-
tween the states authorized by the
federal legislation.
IF the anthracite-using states Will,
under this constitutional provision,
agree among themselves upon the
form of regulation which Will best
work to the advantage Of their peo-
pie, a compact to establish a Joint
commission to enforce 1t will be both
lawful and effective when approved
by the Congress of the United States.
Such a commission, pooling the po-
lice powers Of the states concerned,
could, in cooperation with federal
authority over interstate commerce,
completely regulate the whole indus
try from the mines to the consumers
bin. We have here powerful weapon
altogether capable of securing jus-
tice for the consumer in ali the an
thracite-using states"