calling for suppression by the government; it was, on the contrary, adjudged a force within the preserves of orderly society and entitled to public sympathy.  The public identified the anthracite employers with the trust movement, which was then new and seemingly bent upon uprooting the traditional free American social order; by contrast, the striking miners appeared almost as champions of Old America.  A strong contributory factor was the clumsy tactics of the employers who played into the hands of the leaders of the miners.  The latter, especially John Mitchell, conducted their case with great skill.

Yet the award of the Commission fell considerably short of what the union and its sympathizers outside the ranks of labor hoped for.  For by refusing to grant formal recognition, the Commission failed to constitute unionism into a publicly recognized agency in the management of industry and declared by implication that the role of unionism ended with a presentation of grievances and complaints.

For ten years after the strike of 1902 the union failed to develop the strength in the anthracite field which many believed would follow.  Certain proof of the weakness of the union is furnished by the fact that the wage-scale in that field remained stationary until 1912 despite a rising cost of living.  The wages of the anthracite miners in 1912 were slightly higher than in 1902, because coal prices had increased and the Anthracite Coal Strike Commission had reestablished a sliding scale system of tonnage rates.

A great weakness, while the union still struggled for existence, was the lack of the “check-off.”  Membership would swell immediately before the expiration of the agreement but diminish with restoration of quiet.  With no immediate outlook for a strike the Slav and Italian miners refused to pay union dues.  The original award was to be in force until April 1, 1906.  In June, 1905, the union membership was less than 39,000.  But by April 1, 1906, one-half of the miners were in the union.  A month’s suspension of operations followed.  Early in May the union and the operators reached an agreement to leave the award of the Anthracite Coal Strike Commission in force for another three years.

The following three years brought a duplication of the developments of 1903-1906.  Again membership fell off only to return in the spring of 1909.  Again the union demanded formal recognition, and again it was refused.  Again the original award was extended for three more years.

In the winter of 1912, when the time for renewing the agreement again drew near, the entire membership in the three anthracite districts was slightly above 29,000.  Nevertheless, the union demanded a twenty percent raise, a complete recognition of the union, the check-off, and yearly agreements, in addition to a more expeditious system of settling local grievances to replace the slow and cumbersome joint arbitration boards provided by the award of the Commission.