is to be subsidized the people employed on the vessels will be citizens of the United States 100 percent.

In that connection I wish to offer for the record copy of a letter dated January 1, 1936, that I wrote to the chairman of this committee and the chairman of the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.

(The letter referred to is here printed in full as follows:)

Senator ROYAL S. COPELAND,

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 1, 1936.

Chairman, Senate Commerce Committee,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

Hon. SCHUYLER OTIS BLAND,

Chairman, House Merchant Marine Committee,

United States House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

GENTLEMEN: Attached please find copy of a resolution for the "Americanization" of the American merchant marine. This is a resolution which I forwarded to several organizations for endorsement at their national conventions and I have been advised that the following organizations have adopted this resolution and that it is to be placed on their legislative program for the coming session of Congress. I shall list in alphabetical order the organizations which have adopted this resolution:

American Federation of Labor, at their national convention 1935, it was resolution No. 1.

American Legion, at their annual convention (District of Columbia) 1935. Military Order of the World War, at their national convention 1935, as well as 1934.

National Organization Masters, Mates and Pilots of America, 1935, as well as 1934.

Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, at their District of Columbia and national encampments, 1935.

I have been advised by officials of the Navy League of the United States that the above resolution will be presented for endorsement by the league when the annual meeting is held in January 1936. The spokesman for the league has assured me that the resolution is in keeping with the legislative program of the league and that favorable action will be taken.

The Daughters of the American Revolution, at their forty-fourth continental congress, April 15-20, 1935, adopted an American merchant marine resolution which reads in part:

"Whereas legislation is being formulated in accordance with recommendations of the President of the United States to provide for a new merchant marine, privately owned and operated, built in the United States and manned by American citizens: Now, therefore, be it

"Resolved, That the National Society, Daughters of the American Revolution, endorse this program and urge upon the Congress of the United States the passage of necessary legislation

串"

Space will not permit the listing of all organizations that have endorsed similar resolutions. However, I would like to include such major organizations as American Coalition of Patriotic Civil and Fraternal Societies, the United Spanish War Veterans, Military Order of Foreign Wars of the United States, and several others who will forward their resolutions to the above committees.

I shall forward copy of this letter and resolution to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, White House, Washington, D. C.; all members of the Senate Commerce Committee and House Merchant Marine Committee; and Hon. Daniel C. Roper, Secretary of Commerce, Washington, D. C.

All organizations listed above and to others who are interested in legislation which will lift our American merchant marine from its position of last among leading maritime nations to one second to none.

Sincerely yours,

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. McVay.

J. H. MCVAY,

I have a letter from the Maritime Commission, dated January 24, 1938, relative to sea training, which I would like to have included in the record so that it may be studied by the committee.

(The letter referred to and submitted by the chairman is here printed in full as follows:)

OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN,

HON. ROYAL S. COPELAND,

UNITED STATES MARITIME COMMISSION,
Washington, January 24, 1938.

Chairman, Committee on Commerce,

United States Senate.

MY DEAR SENATOR COPELAND: Reference is made to your letter of the 15th instant, which reads as follows:

"The attached proposal has been received by me as chairman of the Committee on Commerce.

"It will be helpful if you will write me your views concerning the same. A copy of the correspondence which accompanied the suggested amendment is also attached for your convenience."

The proposed amendment reads as follows:

"That section 402 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, be hereby amended by adding thereto a new subsection (d) to read as follows:

"(d) The Commission is authorized to adjust, within 6 months after the approval of this amendment, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) hereof, any claims against the United States arising out of the termination or breach of any ocean-mail contract made pursuant to the provisions of the Merchant Marine Act, 1928, for the carriage of mail, which claims do not arise out of any ocean-mail contract terminated by the provisions of section 401 of this title. In making such adjustment the Commission shall set off any amounts due thereon, or require the contractor to apply any amounts due thereon to payment on, any construction loans or other indebtedness of the contractor to the United States, including taxes of the contractor due, or to become due for the taxable year in which settlement is made; provided that the Attorney General shall review such adjustment within 60 days after it is agreed to by the Commission and the contractor, and if the Attorney General is dissatisfied with such adjustment, it shall be null and void, otherwise the contractor shall be paid any sum of money due him under such settlement agreement from any funds controlled by the Commission or hereafter appropriated for that purpose. If there be any set-off to such adjustment which discharges any debt to the United States, the Comptroller General of the United States shall execute a discharge of the debt. Nothing herein shall affect any right which any such contractor now has to maintain a suit on any such contract against the United States in the Court of Claims.'"

Careful consideration has been given to the proposed amendment. Should Congress see fit to authorize the Commission to attempt to adjust the differences between the Government and Seatrain Lines, Inc., which have resulted in a suit now pending in the Court of Claims, the Commission is entirely willing to undertake the task. After discussion between the office of the General Counsel of the Maritime Commission and the Department of Justice, it has been agreed that the proposed amendment should be redrafted so as to read as follows:

"That section 402 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, be hereby amended by adding thereto a new subsection (d) to read as follows:

"(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of the acts making appropriation for the Treasury and Post Office Departments for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1934, June 30, 1935, June 30, 1936, and June 30, 1937, which were approved respectively March 3, 1933 (47 United States Statutes at Large, p. 1510), March 15, 1934 (48 United States Statutes at Large, p. 239), and June 23, 1936 (50 United States Statutes at Large, p. 1850), as soon as practicable after the enactment of this subsection, and within 6 months after its enactment, the Commission shall proceed to attempt to adjust all differences with the holder of any contract alleged to have been made by the Postmaster General pursuant to the provisions of the Merchant Marine Act of 1928 for the carriage of mail, in cases where a suit, pending in the Court of Claims at the time of the enactment of this subsection and based upon the alleged termination or breach of such contract, had been filed by such contractor prior to July 1, 1937, including any claims of the contractor against the United States an dany claims of the United States against such contractor, arising out of said contract. In adjusting such differences and claims the Commission shall not take into consideration

any prospective or speculative future profits, but shall consider any and all payments theretofore made by the United States pursuant to such mail contract, and the profits realized as a result thereof, and the interest paid and the interest due according to law on construction loans, and all other facts deemed pertinent. If the contractor shall be willing to accept such determination and receive payment for the amount determined by the Commission to be a fair adjustment of such differences, the Commission is authorized and directed, concurrently with the dismissal of any suit based upon the alleged termination or breach of such contract filed by such contractor with prejudice and without costs, to enter into and execute a settlement agreement with such contractor, wherein such contractor shall release the United States from any and all claims arising from such contractor's mail contract. Provided, that the Attorney General of the United States shall review such settlement agreement, and if he is dissatisfied with such finding shall notify the Commission and the contractor in writing within 60 days, and upon such notice the settlement agreement shall become null and void; otherwise the contractor shall be paid any sum of money due him under such settlement agreement from any funds controlled by the Commission or hereafter appropriated for that purpose. Provided, that if any sum of money is payable to the contractor under the terms of any settlement agreement made pursuant to this subsection, such sums shall be applied (a) as a credit upon any amount owing by the contractor to the United States on any loan agreement entered into under section 11 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, as amended, or upon unpaid ship sales mortgage notes (b) Federal taxes of the contractor due or to become due for the taxable year in which the settlement is made, and (c) on any other indebtedness of the contractor to the United States. If any such sums are applied as a credit as aforesaid, then the Comptroller General of the United States shall execute a discharge of the amount of such debts satisfied thereby. Nothing herein shall affect any right which such contractor may now have to maintain a suit arising out of such contract against the United States in the Court of Claims unless such suit is dismissed as provided herein.'"

It is believed that this language is preferable to that of the draft submitted by counsel for the Seatrain Lines, conforms to the policy of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, and will vest the Commission with adequate authority.

As suit is now pending in the Court of Claims, it does not appear that the enactment of this legislation should result in any expenditure of Government funds which would not be expended independent of the legislation. The Commission favors the enactment of the proposed amendment as redrafted and set out herein.

Sincerely yours,

(Signed) E. S. LAND, Acting Chairman

Now, Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I should like to have incorporated in my testimony a copy of Public, No. 808-Seventyfourth Congress. We have heard so much about the "fink book," but people have not given general consideration to the law. I am referring to Public, No. 808, of the Seventy-fourth Congress, H. R. 8597. This is the law that created the so-called "fink book."

Now, Mr. Chairman, I have had a good deal to do with the so-called "fink book;" and if I may, I should like to have incorporated in the record this entire act, which is an amendment to the La Follette Act. Because section 4 of the act is the part of that law which has to do with bringing about better living conditions aboard ships. That act also is the act that brings about the 8-hour day law.

A while ago I read into the record an article regarding Andrew Furuseth. I suppose I became somewhat sentimental at that time; but Andrew Furuseth is dead and gone, gentlemen. But in his lifetime he fought terrifically to get an 8-hour law. And Public, No. 808 creates an 8-hour law for the first time in the history of the United States merchant marine.

May I submit the copy of the law, Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; surely.

'Mr. McVAY. Thank you.

(The document is on file with the clerk of the committee.)

Mr. MCVAY. I should like to say something about the "fink book," if I may. I have here a copy of the book, No. 000084, and I am referring to page 3 of it. This is an official copy of the so-called "fink book." On page 3 I read as follows:

Statement of nationality-place of birth; if naturalized, year; if first papers, year; if alien, date of head tax, nationality.

Now, that is the only way that an immigration inspector, going. on a ship, can possibly tell whether a member of the crew is an alien or a citizen of the United States. I worked very, very hard to get this particular part of the book into law; because I have had considerable experience in trying to check ships to determine whether or not the members of the crew were citizens of the United States or aliens. If they were aliens holding jobs that should be held by citizens of the United States, then that was detrimental to the citizens of the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McVay, when we consented to the passage of the alternate plan of certificate, does not that require the same? Mr. McVAY. Yes; that part remains in the law right now; and I am quite thankful to the Members of Congress that that is so. If the seamen do not care to carry the book, they must carry the certificate.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, the promise was made, by a gentleman's agreement, here, that there could be the use of either.

Mr. McVAY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I notice on page 16 of the Pilot of January 22, in the last column, near the top, the statement—

In a check-up, we found two "fink books" aboard. These will either be exchanged or their owners will get off.

So it is very apparent that the "fink book" is not acceptable, and that the sailor must have the certificate.

Mr. MCVAY. All right; but that particular part, on page 3, creates job opportunities for citizens of the United States. And after this act creating the so-called "fink book" became a law, Secretary Daniel C. Roper came out with a press release and stated,

This particular law has been responsible for creating not less than 60,000 jobs for citizens of the United States.

If I may take just one or two more minutes of your time, I should like to relate an incident which I think is very apropos. I have been here on the Hill for quite some time, on legislative matters pertaining to Americanizing the American merchant marine. And I can well remember that one afternoon I had the privilege of talking to Senator Copeland informally, regarding the program to Americanize the American merchant marine. The Senator was sitting here, in this room; and I stopped to talk to him for about 15 minutes, which he so kindly gave me of his time.

After I had told him of my opinions on these matters, Senator Copeland said to me, "Sit down for a minute, please, and let me talk to you about this. Do you think these men on the ships are getting a square deal?"

Senator, I cannot forget that statement of yours, that day.

You said, "Do you think they are getting proper wages; do you think the living conditions are fair?"

"No." I said, "I do not think so, Senator."

Then Senator Copeland said: "You are not with the labor unions. and you are not with the Government departments, and you are not with the shipping industry. I would just like to have a short personal talk with you. How are we going to attract the better element of our young citizens into the American merchant marine? What do they have in sight when they come to the merchant marine; what is their future? Do they get pensions?

I said, "No, Senator."

"Are they eligible to the Social Security Act's provisions?" "No," I said, "they are not."

"Do they get vacations?"

"No," I said, "they are not entitled to vacations."

Now, Mr. Chairman, recently I have sat here a long while, listening to the abuse that has been heaped upon you. Senator, you know that I am not looking to you for anything at all. But I have known you for a long time; and I said to my wife, after that talk with you, "If there could only have been fifty or a hundred thousand seamen listening in to that conversation with Senator Copeland that afternoon, they would not see him in such a bad light." That is all I have to say, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. McVay.

STATEMENT OF PAUL SCHARRENBERG, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Senator GIBSON. Before the witness begins-do these hearings go on tomorrow, Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. Tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock Mr. Kennedy will be here.

Mr. SCHARRENBERG. Mr. Chairman, my name is Paul Scharrenberg, and I represent the American Federation of Labor.

I want to say at the outset that we are in receipt of some information indicating that some of those witnesses who have appeared before your committee claiming to represent certain seamen do not in fact speak for them. We are in receipt of a letter from the masters, mates, and pilots of America, of the Pacific coast, West Coast Local No. 90, addressed to the legislative committee of the American Federation of Labor under date of January 7, 1938, enclosing a resolution that was unanimously adopted at the regular meeting held on January 6. The resolution was a vigorous protest against unauthorized and harmful tactics on the part of Joseph Curran, a representative of the N. M. U. composed of unlicensed deck personnel appearing officially before a Government committee on matters such as proposed amendments to the Merchant Marine Act and purporting to represent the views of the men without authority.

When Mr. Curran appeared here I looked up the record. He did claim to speak for the masters, mates, and pilots.

We are in receipt of further information indicating that the Marine Firemen, Oilers, Water-Tenders, and Wipers Association, San Pedro