Evening star., 1941-11-26

that on Satur- *
day morning,
when the Policy o@
the United Mine Workers was in
session. Mr.. Lewis was called away
from the meeting and kept the COM
mittee waiting for nearly an hour.
During that interval Mr. Lewis was
advised by some one in touch with
the White House that the third
arbitrator would be John R. Steel
man, who would have the deciding
vote.
The steel companies. on the other
hand, accepted the arbitration pro-
posal of the President a few days
before without knowing who the
third arbitrator would be- In view
Of the fact that MI Steelman was
the mediator in the coal contro-
versy last spring, settled by an
agreement which sanctioned the
closed shop, Mr.. Lewis had every
reason to believe that here was an
arbitrator friendly to his cause.
Would the steel companies. which
own the captive mines, have ac-
cepted arbitration if in advance of
the making Of their proposal it had
been stated that the third arbitra-
tor would be some one who had
been connected with the previous
coal controversy? Did they not
have a right to assume that the
arbitrator would be some one who
had not had any previous relation
ship to the very contract, known as
the Appalachian agreement, which
was now in dispute?
Closed Shop Foreseen.
1t now is confidently expected In
Washington circles that the closed
shop will be granted to Mr.. Lewis
and that he will win by arbitration
award what he could not get through
the Mediation Board previously.
There never was any doubt, however,
that the issue did not turn on what
WAS awarded in the captive coal
mines. Privately many of the steel
executives have conceded that there
Is some merit In the contention by
Mr.. Lewis that when s5 per cent
OF the miners are members OF his
union, the other S per cent should
join. The steel men, however, did
not wish to be placed in the posi-
ton OF sanctioning a closed shop
in their coal mines and thus being
compelled to grant the same thing
to all the steel employees.
1t is true that what is decided In
the captive mine controversy does
not necessarily constitute a prece-
dent for any other case. 1t is true
also that Mr.. Steelman is to retire
for brief interval from the Gov
eminent service so he can appear to
be an outside mediator in a private
dispute. But II he should decide in
favor Of a closed shop and fail to
accompany his award with any other
proposal freezing the closed-shop
issue for the duration of the emer-
gency, then nothing would have been
accomplished by the arbitration ex-
cept to enhance the prestige of the
miners union and their chief and
encourage the C. I. o. unions gen.
orally to start a Nationwide drive
for the closed shop.
Mr.. Steelman is a very able citi-
zen-perhaps the best mediator in
the country. He is fair and he is
courageous. But he has been pre-
sented with a case which, if con-
fined narrowly to the coal mine
controversy, cannot help but be de-
cided on a closed shop basis. The
President said recently that the
Government could not and would
not order closed shop. If Mr..
Steelman-as private individual
for the moment - decides for the
closed shop, and since both sides
have agreed to accept the award
the technicalities will have been
complied with. 1t can then be
called a voluntary" agreement and
as such comes within the terms
Of the Wagner Act.
Chance for Statesmanship.
The real question is whether Mr.
steelman, taking cognizance of the
arguments Of the steel side of the
controversy that the needs of
national defense certainly should
rise above Interruptions, will recon-
mend the closed shop but condition
1t on the abandonment by the C. I.
o. (of which the miners union is a
parD Of any further demands for
the closed shop In the steel industry.
If he does this. he will have made
a statesmanlike approach. Would
the other elements in the c. I. O.,
namely, the Steel Workers Organiz-
ing Committee, feel that they can