I know not much, I am not an expert in shipping. I know enough of our history of shipping to know that 20, 30, at least 30 or 40 years ago the seamen on the American ships were not much better off, if any, than the seamen on many foreign ships. Well, we had the same situation in American industry.

In the maritime industry then we had, as in much of American industry, employers and managers taking advantage, unreasonable advantage, of the workingman. The labor union movement has been necesasry to even up the balance. It has done it and I want to make that remark because I want it to be clearly understood that I do not regard labor unions per se as undesirable or labor union officials generally as unwise or irresponsible. Just the absolute contrary. It is only when we have a few exceptions, and we do, both on the employers side and the employees side. I would not be making these remarks but for the fact that I did receive this telegram. I happened to receive it though after I read it in the newspapers. It was carried very widely in the papers as this sort of thing always is. That is more news apparently than something less exciting and appalling.

I would simply express this hope that the labor union officials in the maritime industry would bear with us. There have been some instances where labor union people have been misled by shipowners as to what the facts are and they have accepted statements from shipowners as to the specific cases and those statements were not correct.

That happened in my opinion in regard to the Cargill waiver. So, we have this case before us, or this situation. My only purpose in commenting at this point is to make it clear that I regard such a telegram sent even to public officials, while public officials are supposed to take all that is thrown at them and then some, I regard a charge of moral turpitude or immorality or collusion, "collusion" meaning that I have sat down, Captain Goodman has sat down with Continental and for fraudulent purposes we worked out some things, the full implication there is most anything your imagination can take you to, the passing of money or anything else. As I say, it is grossly improper, it is baseless, and I will hold this record open for as many days as necessary in the event that Mr. Calhoon should have the courage to come in and support his charges against Captain Goodman and his

staff.

If he desires, I will not hear any charges against myself but I will certainly make every effort on my part to see that the proper officials who would judge me will be available to hear that same charge against

me.

Now, it is as difficult to say these things in general without leaving the wrong impression on specifics. Many matters that we have had to deal with in the last 2 months, since November, there have been different points of view, reasonable differences, and I am not going to claim and do not claim that we have been perfect or 100 percent right in everything. I do not think we have. I do say that we have reached the general standard of competence that the average competent individual would expect from the average competent Government official and I do think that, to my knowledge and I firmly believe, that Captain Goodman and his staff and this agency have acted honorably.

I say those things to get this behind us and to look ahead in the hope that the maritime unions, maritime labor, will do no more or no less than what they would ask of Government officials or of owners and that is to act reasonably under all circumstances.

Now, that is my little statement on Mr. Calhoon. I am very happy and pleased that Mr. Paul Hall who is an outstanding distinguished leader in the maritime labor movement is able to be here with us. Mr. Hall is not associated with this telegram I have just mentioned and my remarks in respect to collusion or the improper behavior I have referred to are in no way directed to him. Mr. Hall was on a different telegram with Mr. Gleason as to which I do not have any complaint.

It is a critical telegram but it is not an unreasonable one. I am very happy that Mr. Hall could be here. We shall be pleased to hear from Mr. Hall at this time.

STATEMENT OF PAUL HALL, PRESIDENT, SEAFARERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA (AFL-CIO)

Mr. HALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all I would like to express my appreciation for the invitation to attend here. It is regrettable we did not have more time to properly prepare but we understand the nature of the circumstances.

I would be somewhat less than a man, Mr. Chairman, if I did not take exception to the manner in which you have acted on this rostrum this afternoon toward my friend and colleague, Jesse Calhoon, because you have seen fit to take and make the remarks that you have and particularly at the time I am coming on this stand.

I repeat, I feel it appropriate that I should make some comment myself relative to this matter. I have listened to you conduct this meeting and I thought you were doing an excellent job. I thought the manner in which you called this meeting was a fine gesture. But I must say, Mr. Chairman, that you disappointed me very greatly with this kind of assault on the character of an individual who was not here because in doing so, in my opinion, you have done precisely what you have accused him of.

I don't attempt to justify the language of Jesse Calhoon. I don't attempt to justify his thinking, nor yours either for that measure, but it would have seemed to me, Mr. Chairman, having taken exception to the remarks that Calhoon made that it would have been appropriate to allow him to come here himself.

Mr. Chairman, in particular, I take exception to the remark you made which was an innuendo or reflection against the courage of the individual man when you asked if he has the courage to come. Mr. Chairman, I know Calhoon. He might not be the greatest author and no William Shakespeare, but Mr. Chairman, he has guts and courage and I assure you he will come to see you.

I say again, I regret very much in seeing a person in your position of such responsibility and a person who at the beginning of this hearing indicated such a fair attitude, let this thing which to me is not that important, evidently overwhelm you to such a degree that you have been busy all day soliciting character recommendations indirectly for yourself and your associates.

39-375-64- -17

I don't think that Captain Goodman needs_any_character recommendation at all. Frankly, I don't think you do. I don't think anyone on this rostrum needs any character recommendation. I don't think that that in essence is what Calhoon meant when he wrote this letter. But I would prefer to wait and let Calhoon talk to you personally, Mr. Chairman, as I am sure he will.

your

Now, relative to the hearing itself, I will make my remarks brief. As you can see I have all kinds of files I intended to read here, but I don't intend to impose on your time nor your good nature, nor of colleague sitting on this rostrum. I say that in part, Mr. Chairman, because I have heard enough here today to indicate what I believe is the basic problem in this whole situation.

For example, relative to the previous speaker here, Mr. Spalding, he indicated that the rate established had been recommended by Captain Goodman, some $18 and some odd cents, and trying to close out the deal with Continental they said if it is not $17 we are not interested.

Sitting where I was I am not sure I understood the language. I would have been greatly interested, Mr. Chairman, if you had pursued with vigor the reply to these people relative to that subject. I think that is right to the heart of the matter, Mr. Chairman.

You speak of collusion. I do not direct it to this body, I want to make this quite clear. You speak of manipulation, you speak of a lot of things. We are in an unfortunate position in the labor movement. We don't know you, we have not dealt with you over a period of years. However, we have dealt with lots of Government agencies under some of the most trying circumstances.

One of these circumstances some while back, Captain Goodman, I am sure, will recall quite clearly, resulted in the tieup of the vessel called the SS Salvada, a British ship lying in Lake Charles, La., moving rice either to Turkey or in that general area. We figured it had been moved out of position. It had been, in our opinion, a cargo that should have gone American and we tied that vessel up.

Consequently, a great amount of diplomatic heat arose. We met with State. We met with Labor. We met with everyone. They asked that we release this vessel in the interest of good diplomatic relationship. It was a British-flag vessel. On this plea and also on the consideration of an immediate meeting, or in the near future of a toplevel meeting representing the executive branch of this Government, where we could lay forth our facts and make our case.

Not in a public fashion, not name calling in public, but in an executive meeting or in the type of meeting appropriate for the occasion, because we had some rather serious charges to make. I believe, if Í recall correctly, Captain Goodman, you were at that meeting, or were you?

Mr. GOODMAN. No, I am familiar a little bit with what you are saying.

Mr. HALL. The administration or this group was represented there. So was Agriculture, so was Labor, so were a number of the agencies. The chairman of this meeting was Mr. Arthur Goldberg, who was then the Secretary of Labor. I remember that Mr. Murphy, the Under Secretary, I think, at the time, of Agriculture, was there. There were several Under Secretaries and Assistant Secretaries.

We laid forth a pretty miserable record. Unless I had the time to read it all I would not want to touch it in detail, because it involves the names of some people in this room and some companies. We made very serious allegations. We made some allegations which in my opinion should have been answered forthwith.

We had with us in our delegation, Mr. George Meany, president of the AFL-CIO; his executive assistant, Lane Kirkland; myself; and the same Mr. Calhoon to whom we have been referring. We not only laid these charges orally on the table, but documented a number of them. These are part of your record here. We supplied enough to Mr. Goldberg to supply all of the agencies and we gave him, I believe, six extra copies.

In it, Mr. Chairman, we traced the manipulations of the brokers in handling cargoes. We also described in detail the manner in which they would break the market. That is why I was interested in the $18 and $17 picture of Mr. Spalding. Some of the brokers would call up an operator and say, "I have a cargo to go, how about $18?

"OK."

He calls another guy. "He said $17."

He would call a third guy and say, "Somebody offered $17." Now he gets $16. Now he comes back to the $18. "I am sorry, Jack, I have a $16 offer," breaking the market wide open. Fair and reasonable did not mean a thing. We established this pretty well, Mr. Chairman, now what happened.

Now to go back to this other issue, I think this probably accounts for some of the bitterness. This is why I think it is unfortunate you have not been in industry a little longer in the sense of the position you are in. That may have accounted for some of the bitterness of Calhoon's wire.

We were assured action on it. We held this meeting, and presented all of the documentation. We were told we would get an answer. We checked it out later. They said this is a very serious matter. Therefore, we want an executive investigation, and within the framework of the executive itself. So we waited. These are very serious charges I repeat. We go on and we go on and we go on. We check again.

This is now a year later or better than a year. We are told that in view of a certain Supreme Court decision which in effect dealt with the runaway flag question that this became a moot question so far as the Government was concerned. Mr. Chairman, to try to relate this issue to the runaway flag where we were charging manipulation, corruption, and perversion of a public law by people who were in our opinion handling the letting of these cargoes, with or without the knowledge, with or without the consent of certain people of the Government, we made no charge in that direction.

To have tried to relate the runaway flag issue to the very serious nature of the charges we had brought up was to try to relate the most impossible things in the world. It did not add up. We have heard nothing since that time. I would point out too, Mr. Chairman, that even in the wire today you read from Calhoon, these are the vessels that had been listed as having not been employed when they should have been employed.

Mr. Chairman, again, not to dwell on a sour subject, I point out that two of those vessels have been cleared for shipping since he

notified you of this matter. Now, Mr. Chairman, he mentioned two ships. Two of them were hired as a result of this kind of discussion, as a result of gentle persuasion on your part.

Also in the same area, the same discussion, we have the issue of the dollar of Mr. Spalding, on which I am still interested in hearing some point of comment by Continental. Now, Mr. Chairman, whether you like it or not and whether I like it or not, when the record over a period of time indicates this type of record, and where even though he may have been wrong in some of the points he made-I am not saying he is right, I am not saying he is wrong-nevertheless, two of the ships were evidently hired after he made his complaint.

At the very hearing almost immediately prior to the producing of his wire for the record, two of the vessels were announced as being hired. Mr. Chairman, I submit that something, while it might not be wrong, I would submit that everything is not quite right either.

What bothers me a great deal is this. I recall that when President Kennedy made his announcement of the possibility of the wheat sale to Russia and it had been done, I am sure, after a lot of grave consideration in the highest places, on October 9 he stated they would be carried in available American vessels, supplemented by ships of other countries as required.

I could not help but think when the issue came up here and you pressed the point yourself, Mr. Chairman, why hire the foreign 50 percent first, then go in the market for the American flag? I could not help but think, Mr. Chairman, that the expressed desire of the President of these United States on this matter certainly was not meant to be implemented in this fashion.

He said to be supplemented by foreign bottoms. He didn't say to take the first 50 percent foreign. There is no implication, no inference, nothing in here that you can read in that sense. Check the speech, it is there. He said the American shall be supplemented. But I heard cold evidence today that the foreigners in this case are being supplemented. They are the ones being supplemented.

I think what I am really saying, it is a question of the implementation of the desires of this administration, of the desires of the Government. I think, Mr. Chairman, this is possibly where we have a breakdown or certainly where we have a misunderstanding. What are we to believe as workers in a free society where we have a President who gets up and makes this kind of statement, but nevertheless, at the end of that line where the implementation takes place, the reverse of what he said comes off?

What makes it worse, Mr. Chairman, is this. Those of you who sit in this room, all distinguished and honorable people, your life as such does not depend on a fireman's job aboard a vessel, nor of an ordinary seaman's. The difference in the implementation of the Kennedy message and desire or the misimplementation of it, I should say, can mean the economic death of an American worker that Kennedy himself had expressed a feeling should not die.

Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I would urge on you, possibly as a person who has not dealt with waterfront workers in maritime labor, that when we discuss this issue with you, Mr. Chairman, this is our living and our families' living. Maybe we don't express it properly in the most polite language, but I hope you take to consideration when you