Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. EMERSON. That is what the delegate said.

The CHAIRMAN. You realize, of course, that those ships do not possess these fine quarters which will be furnished in the new ships, and this committee, which you seek to revile, has striven to establish a standard for the building of those ships, and the first thing it had in its mind was to take care of the crews.

Mr. EMERSON. That is true.

The CHAIRMAN. If you have seen that report, you know that I am speaking the truth.

Mr. EMERSON. I have read it. As far as the work of this committee in regard to technical problems is concerned, there has been very fine work. We do take exception sometimes to the labor attitude taken by members of this committee.

I remember last summer that on the floor of the Senate you brought up an incident in which a certain radio operator, I think, had been beaten up in your county.

The CHAIRMAN. That is right. Do you believe that he was?

Mr. EMERSON. I don't know. In finishing your remarks, you stated that when some culprit had been arrested for beating up the man, the culprit jumped out of the window and committed suicide, and you hoped there would be many others doing the same thing. The CHAIRMAN. I don't know that I said the latter.

Mr. EMERSON. It is in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. That is good; I am glad I had such good sense to say that.

You know very well, and I have got sworn testimony in this room, about the way you have beaten up men who wanted to go to se, particularly in connection with the "fink" book, as you call it. Men came here suffering with their wounds and swore to the fact that they acquired these damages in conflict with your beef squad, such as the incident that happened in Spring Valley, N. Y., occurred, as you know if you have investigated it.

Those are the things that have made some of us most resentful, However, that is in the past. Do you have any way to show us how we can have peace on the ships and operate the ships satisfactorily? If there is no way, we shall build no ships, as far as I am concerned, or we shall place them in charge of the Navy or place a Coast Guard officer abroard to oversee the personnel.

Mr. EMERSON. Of course, during that period there was the termination of a strike. Naturally, there was disorder, and when one man met another and differed with his opinion on the waterfront, one got the worst of it personally. But at the present time I fail to see any lack of discipline at sea, such as on the Algic. Where is the lack of discipline? Ships are running in and out of New York Harbor regularly. In fact they are completing a very heavy cruise holiday. The only ship of any size that had any trouble was the British Ship Monarch of Bermuda, over which we have no control whatsoever.

I do not see any need for any worry unless somebody is worried about the future, may be thinking that there might be a strike in the future sometime.

Senator VANDENBERG. If you were presented with case after case after case which indicated a break-down of discipline at sea, you, as I understand it, would be glad to inquire into eachone, and you assure us it is your desire to find out if there is any truth in them. It

is our desire to find out the truth, and it is certainly a responsibility that we cannot shirk. The thing that I resent is the suggestion that while we are simply in pursuit of the truth we are doing something that is supposed to be hostile.

Mr. EMERSON. No, I should think you would want to-naturally, you must understand that maritime labor has not at any time had the representation in Washington that other interests have had.

Senator VANDENBERG. There is no doubt about that, and there is no doubt that you had the worst of it in days gone by; but two wrongs will not make a right.

Would you consider that consular reports from all over the world are prejudiced?

Mr. EMERSON. I would consider a British consular report reliable, but I would give very little credence to any American consul.

Senator VANDENBERG. You would dismiss an American consul's report?

The CHAIRMAN. Are you an American?

Mr. EMERSON. Yes, sir. My name is Emerson. I came from Massachusetts.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think our Government is wrong?
Mr. EMERSON. I think we could improve our consular service.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you think we ought to have a new order?
Mr. EMERSON. We are getting a new order a better order.
The CHAIRMAN. A communistic order?

Mr. EMERSON. I would not know. I never hear about communism except when I come to Washington. I wouldn't know; I am a Democrat.

The CHAIRMAN. You are what?
Mr. EMERSON. I am a Democrat.

I vote in Congressman Sirovich's district. I did until I came to Washington. I don't suppose I have a vote now.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you have to say to this:

"I cannot say what may happen, but I do know that some people have found they could live happily, successfully, in a communal form in which the whole and not just a few were given consideration."

Does that analyze your views?

Mr. EMERSON. It all depends, I suppose, on what you would take to be a communal form. That must apply to the government in France. They have what are known as communes. I never knew they had anything to do with communism. I suppose the common impression of communism is a totalitarian state, but a commune is different. The CHAIRMAN. This statement which I have just read is from an address by John L. Lewis, at Tuscon, Ariz.

Senator VANDENBERG. You say you never hear about communism except when you come to Washington. I suppose you probably can hear more about it here than anywhere else. Have you ever heard the charge that communistic literature is circulated on your ships?

Mr. EMERSON. I have seen supposedly communistic literature on the water front. It never interested me.

Senator VANDENBERG. You have heard about it in connection with shipping?

Mr. EMERSON. The specific so-called "red" literature was on the front page of the Washington Post of a recent issue so that we could not escape it. It said something about the American merchant marine coming under control of "Red Annapolis" on the Hudson.

Senator VANDENBERG. I am referring to a letter in evidence before the committee, taken off ships.

Mr. EMERSON. I would not be surprised.

Senator VANDENBERG. So, there is such a thing?

Mr. EMERSON. Oh, I don't doubt a bit that we have Communist seamen. I would not be surprised if we had some working in the Capitol Building.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever seen this book [handing a book to Mr. Emerson]?

Mr. EMERSON. No; I have never seen it.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever seen this [handing a book to Mr. Emerson]?

Mr. EMERSON. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever seen that [handing a book to Mr. Emerson]?

Mr. EMERSON. Yes; I have. That is put out by some Liberty League outfit in Connecticut.;

The CHAIRMAN. These are communistic documents which have been found on the ships.

Mr. EMERSON. That is possible.

Senator GIBSON. Will you agree with me that the American form of government is the best form of government ever devised?

Mr. EMERSON. Yes, sir; but I hope we can give the American people back their country under this new bill they are trying to promulgate. We don't consider that they have their country at the present time.

Senator GIBSON. Who has it?

Mr. EMERSON. I think you will find, if you will read Mr. Jackson's or Mr. Ickes' speech, who are in control of this country. They explain it very clearly.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you believe in their doctrine?

Mr. EMERSON. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. You would like to change our order?

Mr. EMERSON. Well, change it to the extent that the American

people would get their country back.

The CHAIRMAN. Where is it now?

Mr. EMERSON. It seems to be in the hands of a favored few.

The CHAIRMAN. Are they in office?

Mr. EMERSON. Well, I will tell you where you will find a great class of them. We never seem to mention them. There is that class of people who are independently wealthy, who don't have to do anything. The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean the 60 families?

Mr. EMERSON. No; in addition to the 60 families. You will find them at Palm Beach, Hot Springs, in the Carolinas, Los Angeles, and things like that, taking life easy; or else you will find them traveling in Europe.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you ever had a suspicion that the delegates of the unions, the representative agents in Washington before the Government, are living pretty softly?

Mr. EMERSON. I don't know how I am living so softly on my salary of $35 a week.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a drawing account for expenses?
Mr. EMERSON. No. I may use a taxi.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a drawing account?

Mr. EMERSON. Oh, yes; I can submit it any time.

The CHAIRMAN. You do have a drawing account in your union in addition to your $35 a week?

Mr. EMERSON. I have the expense of running an office. We have three people and a secretary working out of that office. I can submit to any congressional committee a complete financial statement of our expenses at any time. It will surprise you, the smallness of the items. It would be impossible, I think, under our present living standards in Washington, for any Member of Congress to live that way. We work for our money.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you destroy the wealth and the income of those men who are living at Palm Beach and Miami?

Mr. EMERSON. No; I would not destroy it, but I would like to see it distributed so that it would do some people who are living in the slums back of the Union Station some good.

The CHAIRMAN. You would distribute it so that everybody would have an equal amount?

Mr. EMERSON. No; I am not talking socialism. That is impossible under our present standards.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you going to change the standard?

Mr. EMERSON. I am not going to try to; perhaps in time they will change themselves.

The CHAIRMAN. Who will change them?

Mr. EMERSON. The people, I suppose.

The CHAIRMAN. The rich men in Palm Beach?

Mr. EMERSON. No; the people themselves. I notice over the country-perhaps you have, too-that there seems to be a gradual-more of a gradual-interest in our national affairs by the public at large. The CHAIRMAN. Does that mean greater uniformity in receipts? Mr. EMERSON. Well, naturally, if the poorer class of people as President Roosevelt says, one-third of them are practically starving in this country, if they are to get a little more, perhaps the people at the top of the list will have to take a little less. I do not think that is a radical thing; I think that is Americanism.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you think you can do that by legislation or by changing the form of government?

Mr. EMERSON. We do not need to change the form of government. I think perhaps 1940 will have something to do with it.

The CHAIRMAN. What will it do?

Mr. EMERSON. I expect we will have a more liberal bloc of Senators and Congressmen in Washington.

The CHAIRMAN. Some of us will be retired to private life?

Mr. EMERSON. I could not say.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you anything more to say?

Mr. EMERSON. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead.

Mr. EMERSON. I shall submit for the record a report of the New York Maritime Council on the findings and recommendations of the United States Maritime Commission, and I would ask that this be incorporated in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. What is that?

Mr. EMERSON. It is the report of the New York Maritime Council on the findings and recommendations of the United States Maritime Commission. In other words, eight maritime unions compiled a statement in answer to Mr. Kennedy in his report to Congress.

(The report of the New York Maritime Council on the findings and recommendations of the United States Maritime Commission is to be made a part of the record at this point.)

REPORT OF NEW YORK MARITIME COUNCIL ON THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MARITIME COMMISSION OF NOVEMBER 10, 1937

(New York Maritime Council (C. I. O.), National Maritime Union; Masters, Mates, and Pilots; Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association; Apprentice Engineers' Association; Scandinavian Seamen's Club; Lumber Workers Union; American Radio Telegraphers' Association; Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers; 10 Bridge St., New York City. Whitehall 3-4649)

With some of the conclusions and recommendations contained in the recent report of the Maritime Commission, we are in complete agreement. We are heartily in accord with the contention that the American people should take steps to secure the largest possible return on the public funds poured into the coffers of certain steamship companies. The report intimates that the development of the merchant marine, the functions of which approach those of a public utility, should be more carefully supervised by the American people. We agree with that.

We feel, too, as does the Commission that an efficient, well-managed merchant marine is too important an adjunct to our foreign commerce and the national defense to be left any longer to the depredations of financiers interested, not so much in the merchant marine as an institution but as an instrumentality for siphoning off huge mail subsidies.

The report, considered in its entirety and with its fullest implications, raises questions of tremendous import, not only for the owners and operators of these vast fleets and for the hundreds of thousands of maritime workers bu for the American public as a whole. So vital are these questions to the American people, we believe, that any solution to the problems raised by the Commission can, and should only, be weighed in the light of the broadest principles of public welfare. The Commission offers three alternatives for the consideration of Congressone which leaves the merchant marine in the hands of the financial manipulators who have already deliberately and carefully pushed it into bankruptcy; another which would put a rather dubious check on these manipulators; and a third which would cut the Gordian knot of private operation, once and for all, and rescue this important auxiliary to the national economy from those who would use it other than in the public interest.

These were listed by the Commission as:

1. Continuation of the present system of direct subsidy.

2. Government ownership and private operation.

3. Government ownership and operation.

DIRECT SUBSIDY

On the first proposal: The Commission feels that private ownership should be given every opportunity to succeed. That, says the report, is the historical attitude of the American people. The New York Maritime Council agrees that private ownership and operation should have every opportunity to succeed and might, indeed, have succeeded had it not been for deliberate efforts on the part of distinguished financiers actually to sabotage the efficient operation of certain important steamship lines in this country.

For example, it was under private ownership that the wholesale scandals developed, which were later unearthened by the Black committee. It was under private ownership that huge salaries and bonuses were distributed for no other purpose than to throw several steamship lines on the verge of bankruptcy. It was under private operation that several steamship lines were subjected to so much financial juggling that it was impossible to tell whether the line could show a profit or not.

The Black investigation showed that, in some instances, such large sums were paid for mail contracts that some vessels could cross the ocean without a pound of cargo and still draw enough from the public till to meet the cost of operation and pay exorbitant salaries to company officials. Some companies received, for the transportation of a few pounds of mail, more than the cost of the entire trip. Huge salaries and bonuses were common, the investigation revealed, especially in those companies which were being made to show operating losses. So scandalous were some of the revelations that it seemed as if some phases of the shipping industry had developed into a huge racket and that the American public was, in

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »