[indicating]. I talked with one of the young ladies there, and I said, "Now, I don't want to interfere with the board. I am here to do what I am told and I don't want to get into this, but you see what you can do to get chairs for these poor fellows. Some of them have got injured backs and spines, and it is not the thing for them to be sitting on a hard wooden chair, straight up and down. It may hurt them more in here than they will ever get out of it."

Mr. DALLINGER. And in your opinion, Mr. McGovern, from what you actually saw yourself, as you had to go in and out of this outer office in carrying out your duties, in your opinion, was there or was there not inexcusable delay in dealing with these cases?

Mr. McGOVERN. My opinion is that there was obsolutely unnecessary delay.

Mr. DALLINGER. That is your opinion based upon what you saw every day in the office?

Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, sir.

Mr. DALLINGER. Now, I don't think you answered the question that I asked a minute ago, about the question of courtesy by the officials that they first came in contact with?

Mr. McGOVERN. So far as officials are concerned, and those who are employed by the board, I have never seen a case of discourtesy by a member of the board except-no, I have never seen a case of discourtesy by a member of the board.

Mr. DALLINGER. Do you mean a member of the board or an employee?

Mr. McGOVERN. By an employee.

Mr. DALLINGER. You never saw any discourteous treatment on the part of any of the employees of the force toward any of the service men as you went in and out of this outer office?

Mr. McGOVERN. Never.

Mr. VESTAL. Mr. McGovern, just a question or two. You say that there was a great deal of delay in passing upon these cases?

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Vestal, it is now 11 minutes until the House meets, and I think it would be better for the committee to adjourn until 2 o'clock, and you may resume at that time.

Mr. VESTAL. Very well.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will stand adjourned until 2 o'clock this afternoon.

Mr. BLANTON. This witness is to be back this afternoon?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. BLANTON. I desire to interrogate him then.

The CHAIRMAN. You will return at 2 o'clock, Mr. McGovern? Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, sir; I am at the service of the committee. (Whereupon, at 11.50 o'clock a. m., the committee recessed until 2 o'clock p. m. this day.)

AFTER RECESS.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order.

When we

recessed this morning Mr. Vestal was asking some questions, but Mr. Vestal has not yet come in now. Mr. Blanton, are you ready

to take the witness?

Mr. BLANTON. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed.

STATEMENT OF MR. GEORGE B. McGOVERN-Resumed.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. McGovern, I will ask you whether or not it is your idea of the proper administration of this work that our men in order to be placed in positions where they can earn their liveli hood should be dependent upon sympathy?

Mr. McGOVERN. No, sir.
Mr. BLANTON. It is not?
Mr. McGOVERN. No, sir.

Mr. BLANTON. Did sympathy enter into the question of placement?

Mr. McGOVERN. It should not under a proper theory of rehabili

tation.

Mr. BLANTON. That is your idea? Charity is a natural consequence of sympathy, is it not?

Mr. McGOVERN. In the word "charity," you mean in its full and entire sense.

Mr. BLANTON. You know what that term would mean with regard to placement, do you not?

Mr. McGOVERN. Yes.

Mr. BLANTON. In that meaning it is a natural consequence of sympathy?

Mr. McGOVERN. Absolutely.

Mr. BLANTON. It is a fact, is it not, that there should be no charity with regards to this work?

Mr. MCGOVERN. I would not say that.

Mr. BLANTON. Our service men would not like to be recipients of charity. You say that sympathy should not enter into it?

Mr. McGOVERN. I draw the line there. There is a vast difference between charity and sympathy, with me.

Mr. BLANTON. Let me explain the difference. Say this department store you went to that refused to take men because, you said. that they had no sympathy-the manager who employed had no sympathy. If he could have employed disabled men who could have performed the same character of service, worth just as much money as he paid to anybody else, there would have been no sympathy and he would have been willing to employ them?

Mr. McGOVERN. Quite so.

Mr. BLANTON. And if they did not occupy that position with those qualifications, and yet, in placing them, he would give them the same money he paid to other people-if he did employ them and they did not earn the money in fair industrial competition, that would be charity, would it not?

Mr. McGOVERN. That is what most people call charity. I do not. I do not call honest giving charity?

Mr. BLANTON. You do not? I just want to say to you, as one member of the committee, that no soldier who has fought for his country should in any way be dependent upon charity or sympathy for a livelihood, and that was not the object of this legislation origi nally, so far as I, being one member of the committee, had any thing to do with it. Our service men don't want charity. As one member of the committee, my idea of this legislation was that we would so rehabilitate our soldiers that we would place them in such

a position that they would be prepared to compete with the whole world in certain lines and give just as valuable service to, the country and their employers in that particular line for the money they were receiving as that employer could get anywhere else in the whole world for that amount of money. That was my idea. Is that your idea?

Mr. McGOVERN. Absolutely; you will find that written in my own words six years before.

Mr. BLANTON. Has that idea been carried out in this New York office?

Mr. McGOVERN. I do not think so.

Mr. BLANTON. In what respect has it not been carried out?

Mr. McGOVERN. The attitude there at the time I was there seemed to be to get rid of, and showing the efficiency to place two men or three men or five men or six men a day. My idea was, if you had a job give it to that man, and no one else would have to handle him. Mr. BLANTON. My understanding of the purpose of this legislation at the time it was passed, its whole scope was that we should furnish the Government should furnish-experts to take charge of our disabled service men, make a complete survey of all their maximum possibilities, and after doing that they would place them in the best positions to which their maximum possibilities, properly trained, would make them capable of. Has that idea been carried out in the New York office?

Mr. McGOVERN. I do not think so.

Mr. BLANTON. This man Constantine whom you mentioned, was he the placement officer?

Mr. McGOVERN. He was my supervisor.

Mr. BLANTON. You spoke of being an engineer, of running a stationary engine, that being your business and that you belonged to a union of such engineers, a local in New York?

Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BLANTON. To what kind of such organization, if any, did Mr. Constantine belong?

Mr. McGOVERN. None.

Mr. BLANTON. What was his business prior to engaging as a placement officer?

Mr. McGOVERN. That I do not know. I never ask men anything about their personal affairs. I might know you for 50 years and might never know that you had a brother, perhaps.

Mr. BLANTON. You spoke of another placement officer named Barnes. To what organization, if any, did he belong?

Mr. McGOVERN. He was an employer of labor at the time that he was my supervisor. That is, he had been an employer of labor. Mr. BLANTON. He was your supervisor?

Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, sir. He told me that he had been with the "Big Six" Typographical Union but he graduated.

Mr. BLANTON. "Big Six " Typographical Union of New York? Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, sir; but he graduated. He told me that himself.

Mr. BLANTON. You indicated that your work, as you considered, as a placement officer, was a failure from your testimony in the record?

Mr. MCGOVERN. So far as producing results?

Mr. BLANTON. It was a failure?

Mr. McGOVERN. To me it thoroughly proved. You see I was in doubt.

Mr. BLANTON. Did it or did it not prove a failure? That was what I gathered from your testimony.

Mr. McGOVERN. My testimony was intended to indicate that placement had no part in rehabilitation.

Mr. BLANTON. I am talking about your efforts. I understand from your testimony, the whole testimony, taken as a whole, that you considered your effort in that direction, placement service, was a failure.

Mr. McGOVERN. Yes; they were misdirected.

Mr. BLANTON. And a failure? You can say yes or no to that.

Mr. McGOVERN. You know the old story about the question of yes or no. I could ask you when you stopped beating your mother and if she was alive and if you would answer yes or no, you know where you would be.

Mr. BLANTON. I am asking you one question. You considered that your placement effort was either a failure or not. Was it or not? I gathered from your testimony that you considered it was a failure. Now, answer whether it was or not?

Mr. McGOVERN. I do. I consider it produced this result, that it proved my theory that placement has no proper position in rehabilitation.

Mr. BLANTON. Then you do say, as I glean from your testimony, that you consider your efforts a failure?

Mr. McGOVERN. I did a lot of good down there. Placement was not the only thing I did. I did everything around that office for about three months. I do not want to be in position-you know what a yes or no answer means.

Mr. BLANTON. I am not trying to mix you up. I want to be perfectly free and frank with you and want to be helpful to you and want you to be helpful to me. I do not want to tangle you up, and I do not believe I could if I tried.

Mr. McGOVERN. I do not want to admit for a moment that I was a failure, because I could show you that my work did produce money for value received. I have never been anywhere where I did not produce a profit or I would quit work, and I would never work anywhere a moment if I was a loss to the concern.

Mr. BLANTON. But in whatever direction you had, were your efforts under that direction a failure or a success?

Mr. McGOVERN. They were not a success.

Mr. BLANTON. That is all I wanted to know. Were Mr. Barnes's efforts successful as a placement officer?

Mr. McGOVERN. No, sir. He did not stay long enough.

Mr. BLANTON. Are you acquainted with Edward O. Dixon, who was placement officer in New York?

Mr. McGOVERN. No, sir.

Mr. BLANTON. To properly connect the man up and to see whether or not you are acquainted with him, at one time he was secretary of the Machinists' District Council in New York.

Mr. McGOVERN. I knew a man named Dixon; yes.

Mr. BLANTON. That is the man. You do not know about his efforts as a placement officer?

Mr. McGOVERN. No, sir.

Mr. BLANTON. You knew Mr. Bronson?

Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BLANTON. You spoke of Mr. Bronson's efforts being a failure. They were a failure?

Mr. McGOVERN. I do not think he learned much all the time he had been there.

Mr. BLANTON. Did you know Mr. Bronson's assistant, Mr. Taylor? Mr. McGOVERN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BLANTON. What would you say about his efforts as to being successful or a failure?

Mr. McGOVERN. I should say that Taylor was a mighty good man and did everything he was told, regardless of what his personal opinions were.

Mr. BLANTON. Could his efforts be said to be a success or failure under whatever directions he received?

Mr. McGOVERN. That puts it in the way. I like to speak meticulously to the truth. He did everything that he was told to do and worked hard and knew how to get what he was told to do.

Mr. BLANTON. May I ask you: You were 17 years a member of a labor union affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, and are more or less familiar with it?

Mr. McGOVERN. Yes; with one; I have been affiliated with others outside.

Mr. BLANTON. Now, as a man who is a member of a union, your union never had a strike, but where they had strikes, you have seen strikes and where other United States citizens come in and take their place, what term are they known by to members of the union?

Mr. McGOVERN. Nonunion men. You mean at the time of the strike? They are generally called scabs at the time of the strike. It depends. There are difficulties. There are nonunion men who get in there, and there are the men who get in who have violated their obligations. That latter is a man who is designated by the organization. A man is in there and given his word that he will agree to obey by the will of the majority and then breaks his word to them. That gives the term scabs.

Mr. BLANTON. Say a certain union is engaged in this line of manufacture here; say this is a manufacturing building, and the union. men go out on strike and the manufacturing people get in, say, 5,000 other laborers to go to work there in the face of that strike. Those 5.000 people are known as scabs. Are they not designated as scabs? Mr. McGOVERN. No; nonunion men.

Mr. BLANTON. Have you ever seen any of those picket posters that are worn by pickets? You have seen picketing, have you not? Mr. McGOVERN. Lots of it.

Mr. BLANTON. You have seen these placards that they wear, which say. "This establishment is a scab establishment and unfair." You have seen that?

Mr. MCGOVERN. Yes.

Mr. BLANTON. That applies to everybody that is working in there?