"MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT:

"I am in receipt of yours of the 27th inst. and reply that I share with you the anxiety in regard to the coal situation. After leaving Oyster Bay, I spent the balance of the week in New York raising money for the Congressional Committee and trying to see what more could be done with the strike. Confidentially, I saw Mr. Morgan and I also saw Mr. Mitchell (the public knows nothing about that). I got from Mr. Morgan a proposition as to what he would do in the matter and I got Mitchell to agree to accept it if the operators would abide by the decision. I really felt encouraged to think that I was about to accomplish a settlement. I went to Philadelphia and saw Mr. Baer and to my surprise he absolutely refused to entertain it. You can see how determined they are. It looks as if it was only to be settled when the miners are starved to it, and that may be weeks ahead as they are getting abundant supplies from their fellow-workmen all over the country. I am not unmindful of the importance of this coal situation and will not miss an opportunity to help if I can, but the position of the operators from the beginning has put all efforts of mine in a false light before the public, so I am only able to hold the confidence of the men and serve them if I can."

The foregoing letter of Senator Hanna's was received in Washington on September 30, and it may have had something to do with the action immediately taken by the Presidentasking the operators to meet Mr. Mitchell in a conference at the White House. On October 2, Mr. Hanna telegraphed to the President wishing him every success in his undertaking; but success did not follow. The obstinacy of the operators only increased with every effort to break it down. On October 3 the President wrote the following letter:

"MY DEAR SENATOR HANNA:

"Well! I have tried and failed. I feel downhearted over the result, both because of the great misery ensuing for the mass of our people, and because the attitude of the operators will beyond a doubt double the burden on us, who stand between them and socialistic action. But I am glad I tried anyhow. I should have hated to feel that I had failed to make any effort. What my next move will be I cannot yet say. I feel most strongly that the attitude of the operators is one which accentuates the need of the government having some power to supervision and regulation over such corporations. I would like to make a fairly radical experiment on the anthracite coal business to start with.

"At the meeting to-day the operators assumed a fairly hopeless attitude. None of them appeared to such advantage as Mitchell, whom most of them denounced with such violence and rancor that I felt he did very well to keep his temper. Between times they insulted me for not preserving order (evidently ignoring such a trifling detail as the United States Constitution) and attacked Knox for not having brought suit against the miners' union, as violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Law. You have probably seen my statement and Mitchell's proposition. I regarded the latter as imminently fair and reasonable. Now it is over I may mention that if the operators had acceded to it, I intended to put you on the commission or board of arbitration. But the operators declined to accede to the proposition or to make any proposition that amounted to anything in return; and as I say I must now think very seriously of what the next move shall be. A coal famine in the winter is an ugly thing, and I fear we shall see terrible suffering and grave disaster."

The idea of a coal arbitration commission, once having been launched, found such support from public opinion that even the operators had to yield. During the negotiations which ensued, looking towards the appointment of the Commission and the return of the miners to work pending its report, President Roosevelt constantly consulted Mr. Hanna and the part which the latter played towards the end is indicated by the following letter:

"MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT:

"CLEVELAND, OHIO, Oct. 15, 1902.

"I talked with Mitchell on the 'phone' yesterday, after my conversation with you, and I think he feels satisfied with the assurances given him, although, of course, he appreciates the unfairness in the proposition of the operators in not naming an experienced miner as a member of the Commission. At his request I sent him a telegram urging the acceptance of the proposition and giving him the assurance that the men could depend on absolute fairness at your hands. This, of course, was to show to influential men among the miners, for whatever effect my influence would have among them. I sincerely hope it will end the strike, and your interest in the matter will be appreciated."

It did end the strike, and the correspondence between the President and Senator over this critical matter may be closed with the following letter from the President:

"MY DEAR SENATOR:

"WHITE HOUSE, WASHINGTON, Oct. 16, 1902.

"Late last night when it became evident that we were going to get a Commission which would be accepted by both sides, I remarked, 'Well, Uncle Mark's work has borne fruit,' and everybody said, 'Yes.' The solution came because so many of us have for so long hammered at the matter until at last things got into shape which made the present outcome possible. I hardly suppose the miners will go back on Mitchell. If they do, they put themselves wholly in the wrong. I earnestly hope you are now in good shape physically."

While not attempting to tell the whole story of the anthracite coal strike, I have for several reasons dwelt in detail upon Senator Hanna's relation to it. The public scarcely realized at the time the amount of hard work which he devoted to the business, and the extent to which, as President Roosevelt's last letter indicates, he contributed to the settlement. The incident also provides an excellent illustration of the methods and policy pursued by the Conciliation Committee of the Civic Federation an illustration which loses nothing because of the failure of Mr. Hanna's own efforts to effect a settlement. The experience convinced him that the Federation was working along the right lines, and that its unaided exertions in the present instance had proved abortive, chiefly because the operators had wofully misjudged the situation. They had underestimated the will and the ability of the Union to fight and to resist; and they had failed to anticipate that, if the Union did resist, their own position on the approach of winter and in the face of public opinion would become untenable.

The anthracite coal strike is one of the very few industrial disputes in which Senator Hanna personally participated and in which he failed to effect a settlement. Up to November, 1903, about a hundred disagreements were amicably adjusted by the Conciliation Committee; and their good offices failed in only eighteen cases. Mr. Hanna's services were constantly at the call of the Committee. He took part in many important negotiations and he contributed liberally to expenses. All his associates testify that he was absorbed heart and soul in the work, and that it was coming to occupy as much of his time and attention as was his political career.

A couple of instances of his successful interference in these disputes must suffice. For instance, there was a disagreement between the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad and its employees, which had been carried so far that the men were about to strike. The officers of the road would not consent to an interview with the officers of the Brotherhood, because the latter were not their own employees. The men appealed to the Committee of the Federation, and Senator Hanna was called up at Washington by the Secretary of the Committee. He inquired as to the real merits of the dispute and asked particularly whether "the boys were right." The next day E. E. Clark, Grand Chief Conductor of the Order of Railway Conductors, went over to Washington to state their case, and after hearing it Senator Hanna telephoned to Mr. J. P. Morgan and arranged an interview between the banker and the union leader. As a result of the meeting the strike was averted, and the incident is said to have resulted in a change in the management of the road.

In the heat of his last campaign in Ohio, when he was a candidate for reëlection to the Senate, and when he was overworked and in bad health, he responded with similar celerity and success to another demand made upon him. Mr. William D. Mahon, President of the Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employees, came to the Committee and reported a disagreement between the Public Service Corporation of New Jersey and its employees. The officials of the Corporation refused to see him, and unless he could meet them a strike was bound to follow, because hard feeling had been aroused and the men could no longer be restrained. Senator Hanna was notified of the situation by telegraph. The President of the Public Service Corporation was a fellow-Senator - Mr. Dryden; and Mr. Hanna contrived a conference between him and Mr. Mahon, whereby the strike was prevented. In both of these instances the success of the Committee was due chiefly to the personal influence of the Chairman. The men responsible for the direction of large corporations could not afford to disregard the suggestions of a man to whom they owed so much. Even in those cases which were managed by the Committee without Mr. Hanna's help, his prestige was behind it and often

enabled it to obtain a hearing and carry on its work of conciliation.

The accusation of the operators that Mr. Hanna's interest in the settlement of labor disputes was due to an ambitious politician's desire for personal popularity was frequently repeated; but as soon as a man had once heard Mr. Hanna talk about his plans and expectations they became convinced of his disinterestedness and sincerity. Mr. Ralph M. Easley states that an interview with Mr. Hanna was usually sufficient to convert not merely lukewarm and mildly antagonistic people, but radical and suspicious unionists and strong personal opponents. When an attempt was made to organize a local conciliation committee in Chicago, Judge Murray F. Tully, an able and influential Democrat, was invited to coöperate. Although he believed in the arbitration of labor disputes, he refused, because the Civic Federation looked to him merely as an annex to Mr. Hanna's Republican organization. He was, however, persuaded to attend a public meeting and hear Mr. Hanna and Mr. Mitchell talk. After the end of the Senator's speech, Judge Tully arose and said: "Mr. Chairman, I came to this meeting deeply prejudiced against the whole idea. I will be frank. I was against it because I deemed Senator Hanna to be nothing but a politician, and I did not think it was a good thing to have him at the head of the local federation. But I have heard him and I am with you."

From the foregoing account the Industrial Department of the Civic Federation may appear to have been merely a vessel wherein Senator Hanna's personal prestige was converted into a soothing industrial balm. But such a sneer would be very unjust both to Mr. Hanna and to the Federation. Undoubtedly the temporary success of the Committee was largely due to Mr. Hanna's personal influence with the heads of corporations, and the importance of this branch of the work of the Federation has since his death very much diminished. The program of the association was nevertheless based upon a sound analysis of the immediate cause of the majority of strikes, and it specified a practicable method of averting them. Strikes can usually be avoided, in case some means exists of bringing the two disputants together for the purpose of a full discussion of grievances,