I went to the strike district unprejudiced. My instructions were to tell
the truth about the situation. I did so to the best of my ability. I
believe I was fair. In my article in THE SURVEY I simply told what I saw
in the mines. I believe such conditions as exist there are brutalizing
in the extreme. I believe they are responsible for much of the
lawlessness that exists throughout West Virginia.
In regard to the cost of the houses, I was told in the mines by a well
informed man that the labor cost on a certain set of the cottages
erected some years before had been $40 each. That is not at all
unreasonable. Two carpenters at $2.50 a day each could build one of them
in eight days. As I happen to be somewhat familiar with building
operations I am confident that my figures are not out of the way,
especially when you consider that the land on which the buildings stand
cost little or nothing. The expense for lumber was only the cost of
sawing the timber already at hand, plus the cost of window frames and
doors, bricks for the chimneys, composition roofing and the little
hardware required.
It is true that some of the things sold in the company stores are sold
at prices no higher than those which prevail in Charleston. Some of the
prices may even be lower. That is really not the point. It is the fact
that men are compelled, by one means or another, to deal at the company
stores. That has always been a grievance among miners. I reported the
Frostburg strike in the George’s Creek region of Maryland twenty years
ago for the _Baltimore Sun_. While the conditions there were ideal as
compared with those now existing in the Kanawha valley, the company
store was one of the greatest grievances of the men.
I stand by what I have said about the crowding of the mines and the mine
guard system. I know the miners are not all they should be, but they are
not to be measured by the standards among men whose opportunities have
been greater. Theirs is a skilled occupation and a dangerous one. Yet
they have few if any of the advantages of the men of other skilled
occupations and live under conditions that are oppressive and
brutalizing. The stock argument that they can earn anywhere from $3 to
$6 a day if they work steadily is idle. No set of men who could earn
from $18 to $36 a week would live under such conditions as prevail in
the mines. Mr. Shaw says there is no calling which requires so little
investment on the part of the worker that has such returns in money.
That is a very broad statement. Investment in what, in tools or in time
spent in learning the trade? How about the bricklayer, the Belgian block
paver, the stone-mason, the plasterer or any one of a dozen trades that
might be mentioned?
As for the desire of the operators for an investigation. I stated that
the operators opposed such an investigation. Mr. Shaw has his _belief_
that the operators would welcome one. I have the statement of the
representative of the operators that they would oppose any
investigation, state or federal, because of “its unsettling effect on
the men.” And the letter of the operators opposing an investigation on
the part of the state, proposed by the then Governor Classcock, and
refusing to become a party to it, is on file among the records in the
capitol of West Virginia.
My statements were conservative and most of them even at this late date
are susceptible of proof by any commission of investigation. Finally it
is up to the SURVEY readers whether they take the article seriously or
not. If the criticisms of Mr. Shaw are the most serious that can be
brought against my article, I do not fear that my reputation for
accuracy will be greatly damaged.