I am convinced that no government or law that may be set up is going to remedy the conditions that exist in the maritime industry today. And I am going to give you my reasons why I believe this.

There are two points involved in all strikes, two distinct issues. On one or both every strike is based. One is the strike for arbitrary reasons; the other is the strike for the matter of principle. I wish to define what I mean.

Strikes arising over substantive terms, such as wages, hours, and other conditions of employment, can be adjusted or prevented by conference procedure between the representatives of both parties. Strikes in which the right to organize for collective bargaining is a major issue are, however, more difficult to adjust by conference or mediation.

I will clarify myself more. If you have a dispute over wages and a dispute as to what hours shall be worked, and things like that, there is no absolute testimony that you are entitled to 8 hours or 7 hours for $25 a week or $30 a week. These are questions that people are willing to compromise on, and can compromise on; and if it goes to an impartial third party it is a question that they can settle in the light of comparable circumstances. So ordinarily it is said that these questions are arbitrable. But when the question comes up, Shall I have the right to join a labor organization without interference by my employers? or Shall I have the right to bargain collectively with my employers? or Shall the employer have the right to determine conditions without interference by its employees?-while that is a question that is ordinarily called not arbitrative, because one side says, "While that is a matter of principle, if I recognize the union I will be letting them run my business"; and the union says, "If we let the employer lay down the terms, then we have nothing to say as to what we will get for our labor."

These questions are questions of principle.

That is just exactly the trouble in the maritime industry today. Shipowners do not want a strong union. They are using this means, especially in the last year, to discredit the union, bringing in these premeditated statements, sending these people on board ship to write these statements up, putting spies in our unions to see what they can discover, and making such a big holler over a ridiculous situation, like on the Hoover and like on the Black Falcon. The master and the whole crew were coming up here, but unfortunately they could not get here, so they sent this one man, Mr. Irwin, on that ship. I went there and talked to the master. Individually I talked to the whole crew as to the situation in the ship, to show how foolish it was to even consider anything in Mr. Irwin's letters that he had signed on the ship. All you have to do is to write to Antwerp, to the tribunal over there that controls such things. They will find out. There was a report of barrels thrown overboard. It was reported both in Antwerp and Rotterdam to the courts to take care of this situation.

In time of trouble at sea sometimes not only the deck cargo is thrown overboard, but the whole cargo of the ship is thrown overboard to save the ship and the lives aboard.

The CHAIRMAN. That was not the serious charge. The serious charge was regarding the disorder on the ship and the treatment of passengers.

Mr. WHALEN. That is on the records in New York, because they had an investigation when the ship came back from that trip. Mr.

Daly, United States shipping commissioner, with the help of, I believe, the boiler inspectors who went there and investigated this matter, gave them a clean and clear bill of health.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you quite sure that Mr. Daly did that?

Mr. WHALEN. Yes, sir; I am positive of it. He had an investigation when the ship arrived back.

I want to read from a letter from the chief officer of the steamship Black Falcon, in Antwerp, on December 18, 1937 [reading]:

In reference to Mr. Irwin's letter of December 3, 1937, we deny all those absurd and slanderous statements. All that was done during heavy weather was done for the safety of life and property at sea, in a seamanlike manner. We do not deem it just that a man of Mr. Irwin's apparent experience should be allowed to criticize or judge our actions.

As one can readily see by the ship's log book, the vessel encountered very heavy weather, shipping seas.

The writer of the letter criticizes Mr. Irwin for trying to find fault with the personnel who were more in trouble than he, but who, because of many similar experiences, did not complain. This gentleman wanted service that he could only get on a modern liner, which is impossible to get on a freighter of this type.

The cook did get drunk. He got drunk drinking with Mr. Irwin, according to the information of the chief steward and members of the crew. The steward upon one occasion was compelled to ask Mr. Irwin to refrain from drinking with the cook. After plying the cook with drinks he attempted to get special service and complained when the cook could not serve his eggs to order, as the vessel was rolling so violently at the time. All, including the master, ate boiled eggs, which was only good sense, due to the weather.

The cook did not use abusive language to the master. He was soon put in his place by the master and reprimanded by the crew. He was discharged immediately upon arrival at the first American port, Boston.

He states that he does not think the cook served the crew any beer, because they were not friendly with him. He says that the second mate was a young man from the New York nautical school whose reputation and character are above reproach; that the third mate has been in the employ for years; that he ordered some passengers from the navigation bridge, because it is unlawful to allow them there. On this occasion it was for their own comfort and protection.

Here is what happened at that time. They had "abouted ship." They had changed the course to put her into the wind

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Mr. Whalen, if you want to go into all that, go ahead; but we have had all that. Mr. Emerson went into it this morning. We have had all that discussion. It is already in the record. If you want to put more in, go ahead; but why take our time and yours to go over that same matter? That is merely one single instance.

Mr. WHALEN. But, Senator, the newspapers have played up this single instance to the public in this country. They have played the Hoover incident up. That is why I would like to put it into the record. I want to tell the truth here; and Mr. Emerson has not contacted the crew and the master, from whom I got this information. I would like to put it into the record.

Senator VANDENBERG. Have you any information on the Hoover? Mr. WHALEN. There is a man flying back here with that information, but unfortunately he is not here as yet.

Senator VANDENBERG. You have no information on it?

Mr. WHALEN. No, sir. I have some affidavits. I am not going to submit them, though.

To return to this matter, they were in extremely heavy weather and they had 260-odd barrels on the forward deck. They were wooden barrels. The ship was shipping blue seas-that means, not just the spray, but the full sea was coming aboard and it broke the lashings on these barrels and they went flying around, knocking the dogs off the water-tight doors and hammering the hatches and tearing the tarpaulin that let the water go through. There are six tarpaulins on one of these hatches, to protect the cargo from the water going through. These barrels would rise up and slam down on them. The men couldn't go forward at that time, so they brought the ship about and put her into the wind, which cooled her down and made her ride. more easy so that the men could go down there.

Then this bunch of barrels broke loose, which they threw overboard. The next moning, again, in the 8 to 12 watch, they did the same thing; and Mr. Irwin, with another young man, went forward on the forecastle head, while she was still into the wind, and he got into an agrument with the first mate because they were throwing this cargo overboard. When all this deck cargo was thrown over, he brought the ship around again on her course, and she started taking seas all over again.

The second mate was on watch. The first mate was lashing the deck cargo, and the second mate was told by the master to remove all the men off this forecastle head, as obviously they would have been washed overboard, because 20 minutes afterward she started taking seas all over her. He resented it and went up on the bridge and got into a pretty heavy argument, I understand, and that is when he was ordered down off the bridge.

I happen to be an officer. Nobody is allowed on the navigating bridge at any time, especially in bad weather. Only the men that have duties up there, when the master of the vessel calls them up there. Because Mr. Irwin a little argument with one of the officers, which any man is apt to do, he just bears down on the seamen themselves. I do not believe the seamen ever had anything to do with him. I couldn't find a man that had spoken to Mr. Irwin on the ship or had any conversation at all. He would call the stewards to come in, and he used to do down, on the first part of the trip, in the crew's mess room and stay there. In his letter he complains that he could not get waited on in his own quarters, which is wrong.

I just wanted to bring that out. We are convinced that this propaganda is being circulated by the ship owners for only one reason, and that reason is that the ship owners are determined, one way or another, to curtail the seamen; and if they could have any control at all of us, they would put us back where we were 8 or 10 years ago. The CHAIRMAN. Have they any incentive to do that on subsidized ships? They have no incentive now, have they?

Mr. WHALEN. No.

The CHAIRMAN. That was one of the great arguments used in favor of this subsidy, because it was going to give labor its chance; there was not going to be any excuse to "bear down" on the men.

Mr. WHALEN. Let us see, Senator. Maybe I can speak my theory on this.

When I came back after the war and went back into private life I was an engineer. I am a marine engineer. I was sailing on the Munson line. We were getting $226 a month for first assistant; $195 for second assistant. Men were getting $95 a month for jamming checks; that is, tending water. This was on Government ships, the big 535's that the Munson had to send the American Legion across. It was that type of vessel. But we find that the Government in subsidizing these ships also own them. The Munson line never paid for the ships. They have not today; and 5 years after that or 7 years after that a second assistant is making $110 a month on the same ship and the water tender is making $45 a month.

That

There are two reasons for that. After the 1921 strike the shipowners, with the help of certain unscrupulous people at the head of the Shipping Board, who were driven by the Black investigating committee, were there with the interest of the shipowners at heart. has been proven. They also used the Shipping Board to destroy our union, to destroy the International Seamen's Union. It only took 5 years to put the seamen back over 35 years, because in that 5 years backward movement we lost what we had gained over 35 years.

That is one of the worst conditions that ever existed on American ships, because it was more or less of an unwritten law that a man would not work after sundown and would not be put to work before sun-up. But on these ships, the Dollar ships, and all the Government-subsidized and owned ships, such as the United States Line, I have worked 22 hours often in 1 day as a machinist. There are men in this room who know when I was a machinist down there, and I never got through without producing 16 hours in the machine shop.

The CHAIRMAN. Just a moment. You are speaking now about the time when we were paying a subsidy through mail contracts? Mr. WHALEN. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. And when certain of these lines, the ones you have mentioned, were criticised because, instead of using the money to pay the seamen, they would go to hotels, and so forth? You are familiar with all that?

Mr. WHALEN. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Under the 1936 act there can be no possible incentive on the part of the operator of a ship line to grind down his men in wages, because out of the Treasury of the United States comes that added cost of operating up to the American standard. I think you are entirely right about the old times; I have no dispute with you about that. But the 1936 act changed that picture, and if we can operate under it with some reasonable degree of contentment, with the organization of the unions, and all that sort of thing, and better conditions, the determination to improve the quarters and living conditions and the comfort of the men, and to give them better food, you are not going to have those evils unless this law is wiped out. You can never go back to the old evils.

Mr. WHALEN. Senator, as long as I have been connected with labor—and that is pretty near ever since I have been born-I have watched labor rates in this country. The history of the American labor movement is wonderful to read about, because it points to the fact that we rise with good times, and then we fall. Why? Because the methods used by the shipowners and others are ready at any time to crush labor; and although you state that the money is coming from the Treasury to pay the wages, and the like of that, that

does not guarantee that the shipowners are not going to use this for their high salaries and the like of that, and push labor back.

Ever since the Maritime Commission was created and Mr. Kennedy was put at the head of it, I have been dealing directly with them over five of their biggest companies, and I know that if it were not for the fact that the union men on these ships are conscientious and are getting acquainted and getting educated in the laws of the land, and acquainted with their rights, the company would put them back, would put bum food on them. It was through the National Maritime Union that we have brought it to the attention of the Commission that the company was robbing them by getting bills for a hundred dollars' worth of food and actually getting $50 worth of food. We are the ones who brought that to the attention of the Commission, and we are the ones that still watch it to see that the United States Government gets a fair break.

Another thing I would like to point out to the Senator is that we kept a sit-down for 3 days when they put a life-boat in that had no bottom in it.

These things are a matter of record. I say that the ship owners do not want intelligent seamen aboard, because they show up their habits and their weaknesses in grabbing every dime that they can a hold of. They do not care who suffers by robbing the Government. I do not believe these people worry about the Government. From the time you have been subsidizing ships under the American flag shipowners have been robbing the Government. That was when they subsidized the old sailing ship, the old Washington

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). That is like ox-tail soup: It is a long way back. Talk about conditions as they are today. You have the act of 1936. It was a long time before the Commission was appointed, but it finally was appointed, and will give us definite instructions about wage scales, manning, and so forth. You have the legal power to see that your rates are maintained. You have your union; you have delegates on these ships. You are talking about ancient history now. We admit all that.

Mr. WHALEN. But the time has not changed. We are connected directly with ancient history, because the same things are happening today. The shipowner says that he cannot operate ships because there is drunkenness aboard ships, so consequently we must have new legislation. I would like permission to ask a question. Why is this legislation being put in, then, if what the Senator says is a fact?

The CHAIRMAN. Because the Maritime Commission, in investigating all the conditions, have found the facts and have an extensive report backing up their reasons for needing certain changes in the law. These are their recommendations, and that is what you are here for. You are here to tell us whether these are good for the future. I have said meaner things about ship operators than you ever did. But that is all past. Here we are. We are hoping to formulate some kind of legislation that will make it possible for you men to have jobs. If we cannot have peace at sea, we are not going to build any ships.

Mr. WHALEN. On that point, then, Senator, I will try to speak about peace on the sea, no mutiny, and the like of that. I am sure that this legislation is not going to curtail trouble on the sea, because with my 37 years of going to sea I have found that in the last 6 months, under the direction and guidance of the National Maritime Union, we have had less trouble on American ships than we ever had in