The Coal Strike Settlement

Scanned from Public Opinion, October 23, 1902.

As we go to press this week a convention of the United mine workers of America is holding a session to act formally upon the offer of the coal mine operators to submit the issues in the strike to a board of commissioners, to be appointed by the president. This offer was made in the early hours of October 13, following a conference between the president and Mr. J. P. Morgan. Owing to restrictions placed by the operators upon the president in the appointment of this commission, it was at first thought that their proposal would be rejected. These restrictions consisted of the specification that the commission proposed by the operators should consist of an officer of the engineer corps of the army or navy, an expert mining engineer, a judge of the United States courts of the eastern district of Pennsylvania, an eminent sociologist, and a man familiar with the physical and commercial features of the hard coal business.

On the 16th, following a conference with Mr. Mitchell, the president announced the appointment of a commission to be composed of General John M. Wilson, E. W. Parker, an expert mining engineer; Judge George Gray, of the third United States circuit court, E. E. Clark, chief of the order of railway conductors; T. H. Watkins, of Scranton, Pa., a man practically acquainted with the mining of coal; Bishop Spalding, Catholic bishop of Peoria, with Commissioner of Labor Wright as recorder. On the 17th Mr. Mitchell made public a long reply to the president's letter advising the mine leader of the appointment of. the commission. Mr. Mitchell thanks the president for his efforts to end the strike, and announces the calling of the convention referred to, to which will be recommended the acceptance of the plan to leave all matters in dispute to the commission named. Thus ended the strike began on May 15.

The Pittsburg Post (Dem.) estimates the cost of the strike at $145,000,000, and declares that "it has been the most esciting and dangerous labor trouble we have ever had in this country." The Dispatch (Ind. Rep.) reproaches the operators for refusing to do five months ago what they have now done, accept arbitration. The Press (Rep.) says it is idle to suppose that all the issues raised by the strike will now subside. "The anthracite monopoly is an example of odious special privilege. And thanks to its greed, it can be depended on that the pathway of special privilege in this country from now on is going to be harder."

The strike was not endend by politicians nor by strategy, the Philadelphia Ledger (Ind.) points out. "It was won by popular sentiment, controlled by the people's chief. Being so won, it is among the greatest, most important triumphs ever achieved by any means by the American people." "It was the steady pressure of public opinion," the Philadelphia North American (Ind.) says, "that enabled the miners to win the greatest battle for fair play ever fought by labor in this country. John Mitchell is the ablest leader organized labor has ever followed in this country." The New York World (Dem.) looks upon the operators' proposition as "an unconditional surrender." So does the Boston Traveler (Dem.) and the Chicago News (Ind.). The Detroit Today (Dem.) says that "the coal operators, after defying and insulting the president, have been compelled to hang their heads and put their toes to the line drawn by Mitchell at the first conference with the president," and the Chicago Chronicle (Dem.) asserts that the public is indebted to the moderation of the miners and the president's reputation for fairness very much more than to the "concessions" of the operators. Indeed, a great majority of the newspapers credit the miners with having won a complete victory.

With this opinion, however, should be contrasted that of the New York Sun (Rep.), which says that the course adopted by the operators "is in no sense a submission of the issue with the union to a board of arbitrators There is no arbitration in it. There is nothing to arbitrate with Mr. Mitchell and the union. The question is and will remain, shall the men who want to work be permitted to do so, and are the conditions under which they work fair and honest ?" The Baltimore Herald (Ind.) also points out that "what the operators suggest is a commission 'to which shall be referred questions at issue between the respective companies and their own employees, whether they belong to a union or not.' They furthermore insist that the union miners go to work and 'cease all interference with and persecution of any non-union men who are working or who shall hereafter work.' The arbitration is not between the employers and the union. It is between the employers and all their employees union and non-union. This is an important reservation."

The Mobile Register (Dem.) thinks that the operators' first affront to the president was "almost insignificant" compared to their attempt to dictate to him just how the commission they suggested should be composed. However this may be, the commission as it stands gives satisfaction to everyone. "Its character," the Hartford Times (Dem.) says, "is such as to justify the hope for a righteous and satisfactory solution of the problem presented by the situation." The Providence Journal thinks the commission "admirably constituted to command the confidedence of the public." "Neither side," the Detroit News (Ind.) says, "Can claim that the commission is packed in either interest. It is a strictly impartial body." The Indianapolis News ( Ind. ) thinks that "better selections, considering the work to be done and all the circumstances of the case, could hardly have been made,'' and the News, in common with almost every paper in the country, expects from the commission a decision equitable alike to the public, the miners, and the operators.

Now that the president's efforts have finally brought about a truce between the miners and their employers, we note an entire absence of criticism of his course and motives, such as we have heretofore reproduced in these columns. Instead there is manifested a universal disposition to divide the credit for the ending of the strike between the pressure of public opinion and the initiative of Mr. Roosevelt. The Philadelphia Press (Rep.), says Mr. Roosevelt has "gained a great personal triumph ;" the Boston Journal (Rep.) says that the president is now rewarded by the result of his efforts for so patiently bearing with the slights and misrepresentations put upon him by the operators and political opponents. The Baltimore Sun, in common with many other Democratic papers, gives to the president full credit for bringing the struggle to a close. "The American people," the Washington Post (Ind.) says, "will not soon forget their debt to Mr. Roosevelt on this score. More glorious than winning a battle is this triumph of peace and order snatched by the strong, brave hand of a fearless president from the very jaws of chaos."