Mr. BLANTON. Then the American Federation of Labor has taken no steps toward punishing these offenders? Mr. WALLACE. We do not punish without trial, Mr. Blanton. Mr. WALLACE. We have not had a trial. Mr. BLANTON. And that occurred in May, 1919, two years ago? Mr. WALLACE. A certain man made certain assertions, and that is all we know. Mr. BLANTON. If you were ever going to have a trial you would not wait until the limitation ran against it to have the trial, would you? Mr. WALLACE. We might. Mr. BLANTON. If you were going to have a trial you would have had it during the last two years? Mr. WALLACE. The chances are that the particular local or the international or the State organization of which this is a part would take up the matter, and the chances are that they have taken up the matter. I have no evidence to the contrary. Mr. BLANTON. You do not know that any more than I do. Mr. BLANTON. Then do not make a statement about it. Mr. WALLACE. You asked me the question, sir. Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I will ask the subcommittee to set a date for a continuance of this hearing during the latter part of this week. I want Judge Wright and Judge Emery to come before this committee, both of whom are distinguished attorneys here. One of them was on the bench, I believe, at one time. I hope to get them to come. Mr. WHEELER. I would like to accommodate you, so far as I am concerned, but about every day is taken this week. Mr. BLANTON. Then will next Tuesday morning at 10 o'clock suit you? Mr. SPROUL. Yes; it will suit me. I am anxious to get through with the matter. Mr. BLANTON. I hope then to be able to finish the evidence that I want to put on. Mr. WHEELER. Mr. Wallace, that case or decision that you alluded to here at our last meeting, which, as I understood, was carried to the United States Supreme Court in 1919, is still pending? Mr. WALLACE. It is still pending; yes, sir. Mr. Wheeler, may I say that if Mr. Blanton is going to send for very able gentlemen who will point to court decisions, I want the privilege of bringing in legal gentlemen to appear here. Mr. WHEELER. We will be glad to hear both sides. Mr. BLANTON. I will state this, Mr. Wallace, that the lawyers I bring here will not be lawyers who have ever represented men like Jacob Margolis, of Pittsburgh, who has recently been disbarred, or any anarchists. Now, will you do likewise? Mr. WALLACE. Mr. Chairman, I will bring in the men who are best qualified to answer the questions from my point of view. I do not know who I will bring here. I will present that case to Mr. Gompers or Mr. Morrison and tell them that what I need is legal advice in this matter to combat other advice; but Mr. Emery, as I understand, whom you intend to bring here, is distinctly the attorney of the antiunion employers. Mr. BLANTON. He is a very excellent gentleman. Mr. Chairman, the oath which has come from Mr. Morrison's book shows a preliminary statement preceding the oath itself and this preliminary statement is in a new book marked for the year 1921. This preliminary statement attempting to restrict the oath, is something new, and is not in the older books. On printed copies of this oath which have been in my possession heretofore, such preliminary statement does not appear, and I therefore turn over to the reporter the print of such oath as it formerly appeared on page 11, constitution, article 12, to wit: This is the oath they take It is found in an older Book of Laws of the International Typographical Union, on page 11, constitution, article xii, it being wholly unlimited and unrestricted, merely providing: It is stipulated that all subordinate unions shall have an article in their constitutions which shall read as follows: "Every person admitted as a member of this union shall subscribe to this obligation ***I (give name) hereby solemnly and sincerely swear (or aflirm) that I will not reveal any business or proceedings of any meeting of this or any subordinate union to which I may hereafter be attached, unless by order of the union, except to those whom I know to be members in good standing thereof; that I will, without equivocation or evasion, and to the best of my ability, abide by the constitution, by-laws, and the adopted scale of prices of any union to which I may belong: that I will at all times support the laws, regulations, and decisions of the International Typographical Union, and will carefully avoid giving aid or succor to its enemies, and use all honorable means within my power to procure employment for members of the International Typographical Union in preference to others; that my fidelity to the union and my duty to the members thereof shall in no sense be interfered with by any allegiance that I may now or hereafter owe to any other organization, social, political, or religious, secret or otherwise; that I will belong to no society or combination composed wholly or partly of printers, with the intent or purpose to interfere with the trade regulations or influence or control the legislation of this union; that I will not wrong a member, or see him or her wronged, if in my power to prevent. To all of which I pledge my most sacred honor.'" Mr. WHEELER. It is understood that we will adjourn to meet Monday morning at 10 o'clock. (The subcommittee thereupon adjourned until Tuesday, May 31. 1921, at 10 o'clock a. m.) SUBCOMMITTEE OF COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, The subcommittee met at 10 o'clock a. m., Hon. Loren E. Wheeler (chairman) presiding. Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, while we are waiting, I want to offer excerpts of a communication from Gov. Joseph M. Brown, who was governor of Georgia from 1909 to 1913. This is sent by Gov. Brown from Marietta, Ga., April 15, 1921, addressed to the Congress of the United States. Gov. Brown gives in this record, which he wants considered by Congress, the result of picketing by just one union, the International Molders' Union of North America, and he says that the records show that during 1916 and 1917 this union alone spent $847,995.53 in promoting and conducting strikes. From close study of the question and reliable evidence collected, Gov. Brown gives the following instances of strikes and force result ing from picketing by this one union, the International Molders' Union of North America, at several cities in the United States. First. At Utica, N. Y.: Joseph Holland testified that four or five strikers came upon him from behind a railroad car. He was seized from behind and struck on the head, mouth, and nose, and an attempt made to break his ankle, beaten into unconsciousness, laid across the railroad track over which railroad trains frequently passed, and was rescued by employees of the railraod company. He was taken to a hospital and confined there for a long period. Charles F. Meyers testified that in the evening, near the foundry entrance, he was approached by 25 or 30 strikers who were vehement and cursed him. He was struck in the face by an unknown striker and knocked to the ground and beaten; from the effects of the assault he was rendered unconscious and bleeding, and was confined there a long period, during which for two days his life was despaired of. Frank Hodapp testified that he was approached by four strikers. He ran to his boarding place, followed by the strikers, who continued rioting outside of the boarding house until 2 o'clock in the morning. The landlady and her son were threatened with boycott if they harbored scab workmen longer. Lewis E. Clark testified that he was called "scab," profane and scurrilous names frequently; that he was set upon by five or six strikers and thrown to the ground and beaten about the head and face and body until his face was covered with blood and he was left on the ground. Henry Brennaman testified that he was met near the foundry as he was leaving, by a crowd of 20 strikers, who tried to prevent him from passing; he was shoved against the fence and struck in the face. He was struck several times on the lip and in the eye. Was told that if he did not leave town the next day he would be killed. Albert Browne, physician, St. Luke's hospital, testified that he found Charles Meyers suffering with an incised wound 3 inches long, back of ear, contused wound on nose and bleeding, and finally hemorrhage of the brain; later unconscious and pulse sank to 48 and remained in that state two days. Harry Brennaman had a blow under the right eye, which nearly closed it. Joseph Holland, face a mass of bruises, both eyes closed, face badly swollen, bleeding profusely, clothes saturated with blood, ball of right eye injured, bruise on right shoulder, ankle swollen, and bruise on side. Mr. WHEELER. Pardon me there; was that the testimony of a witness on the stand? Mr. BLANTON. I take it this is the direct testimony he has gleaned from the records. Mr. WHEELER. Is there anything to show that that was done by pickets or was done where there was a strike? Mr. BLANTON. In his communication he shows that it was the result of picketing and strikes. Mr. WHEELER. All right. Mr. BLANTON. In other words, from this testimony that Gov. Brown has gleaned, I am trying to show the far-reaching effect that picketing has had over the United States; the evil effect of it. At Cincinnati, Ohio: The reign of terror established at Cincinnati upon the inauguration of this strike by the Iron Moulders' Union in its home city and under the immediate super vison of its national officers was considered equivalent to the most inhuman species of guerrilla warfare ever recorded. Abstracts from affidavits and statements of the iniquities of molders' union lawlessness in this city follow: "Nonunion molders went to work in the Eureka Foundry Co. shop immediately after the union men had struck; over 500 strikers and sympathizers gathered around the foundry at closing hour. Eight nonunion men, when leaving the foundry and while accompanied by small squad of police, with members of the firm, were stoned and greeted with cries of 'scab'; one man was shot, and all, including the police, were attacked and driven to cover by the mob. In this riot one man was shot in right leg, another cut over right eye by a bowlder and taken to city hospital; one man's jaw was broken and five police officers cut and bruised by stones and bricks The foundry buildings were brickbatted until hardly a pane of glass remained. "Samuel Weakley, a nonunion molder working in Greenwald factory, Cincinnati, was murdered in cold blood by William Friend, alias Patton, a union iron molder. Patton and two others met Weakley on a prominent thoroughfare of Cincinnati and shot him through the abdomen. Weakley died at the hospital after identifying his assailant. Over 600 talesmen were drawn for jury service during the trial of Patton, who changed his plea from 'not guilty' to 'guilty' and was sentenced to 20 years in the Columbus Penitentiary. After serving less than three years of this sentence Patton was paroled through the efforts of the officers of the Iron Molders' Union, who had sustained all the expenses of his defense upon the charge of murder. "During progress of strike, and after much lawlessness by striking union molders, Valentine, president of molders' union, informed representative of proprietors that if nonunion iron molders were started at work in the struck foundries of Cincinnati 'murder' would be done. President of molders' union agreed to stop all picketing and lawlessness during a truce declared for purposes of attempting a settlement of strike. All slugging, rioting, picketing, and other forms of violence ceased at once in accordance with this promise. Immediately following failure to reach an adjustment of strike former vicious tactics of the striking unionists were revived and in accordance with the statement of the president of the union that 'murder would be done,' murder did occur within a few days. President of molders' union was particularly boastful of his ability to quiet mob violence and maintain law and order in Cincinnati during above-mentioned truce. "Thomas McCarthy testified that in going to and from the foundry, molder pickets threatened him with personal violence unless he refrained from work. On September 14 he boarded a street car to go home and five or six pickets boarded the same car. Later eight or ten more pickets boarded the car. When affiant attempted to alight from the car, he was forcibly taken by these pickets to the rear of the saloon, where about 30 strikers surrounded him, and made threats of personal violence. Among these men was Joseph Valentine, president of the Iron Molders' Union of North America. Affiant was told that if he did not stop working he would be injured to such an extent that he could never be able to do another day's work: that the best thing for him to do was to leave the city. Valentine said he was unable to keep his men from doing personal violence to any one who would work during a strike. Since that day affiant has not worked for the firm. "Lillie Green testified that one Oakley, a nonunion molder, entered her store, followed by two unknown men, one of whom struck him and knocked him to the floor. Another man in waiting across the street, came into the room and assisted in beating and kicking said Oakley. "F. N. Shanley, superintendent Eureka Foundry Co., testified that a dynamite explosion occurred 44 feet from the boarding house of the non-union men, which made a large hole in the ground. jarring the building and throwing the men in the boarding house out of their beds. There was a continuous picketing and stoning of the foundry and a discharge of a double shotgun at the skylights of the foundry. Affiant saw two men near the foundry; one of them ran, and going to that locality, he found a stick of dynamite with fuse attached; he cut it off 6 inches from the stick. Another stick exploded, which threw him against the building, fracturing the drum of his ear and finally paralyzing him. After the explosion occurred four men emerged and went to a shanty to change their garments and disguises. These men were all members of the Iron Molders' Union. "Joseph Palmer, engaged in hauling for the foundry, testified that his barn and stable, containing 13 horses and much other valuable property, was burned, the loss amounting to $3,000. The fire department, in its efforts to extinguish the flames, were seriously interfered with by persons who seemed to do so purposely." At Philadelphia, Pa.: "D. H. McPherson testified that he was called upon by the business agent of the striking molders, who insisted on having a conference with officers of struck foundries, and on being refused, said: 'We will now know what to do.' He was also approached by the national president of the strikers, who said: 'Had the Philadelphia foundrymen recognized the union and himself, the strike might have been avoided; now it is a fight to the finish so far as the union is concerned.' Later, one of the national vicepresidents approached him and stated that he had struck the Allentown, Pa., shop, because they insisted on doing work for one of the Philadelphia struck shops; that any work heretofore made by the struck shops would be followed to customers who would be threatened with harm to their business if they used the product of the struck shops of Philadelphia. "Arthur Huddleston testifies that he was followed daily by five or six pickets to and from work. His boarding house keeper was threatened, and told if she 'knew what was good for her she would not take scabs to board,' and she thereupon refused to board him. "John J. Lance testified that he was called 'scab' and other scurrilous names by striking pickets who threatened to break his neck. He was followed to street car by the strikers who pushed him off and knocked him unconscious. Strikers told his boarding house keeper that he was a 'scab' and a thief and to put him out." Mr. SPROUL. Mr. Blanton, do you think it is necessary to put all of that in the record? It is something we have been told about for a long, long time. That evidence would not be admitted in a court of justice, would it? A judge would not allow you to submit testimony like that, in court? Mr. BLANTON. Under certain conditions, yes; under certain conditions, no. This is the situation, I will state to my colleague: Everybody in the United States in the business world, it seems, knows the great danger and emergency that is existing in our Government because of picketing, except, I am sorry to say, apparently, Members of Congress. Congress has sat here for the last 20 years and permitted this to go on every day in the United States, men even being murdered by pickets, and they do not seem to have waked up. The business men all over the United States are waked up, and Congress has been asleep for 20 years and I am trying to wake it up. I am trying to put in this record here enough to leave no excuse for not taking some action. Mr. WHEELER. There are some parts of that that refer absolutely to picketing which, under this investigation, is proper. Mr. BLANTON. It is all the result of picketing. Mr. SPROUL. All that has been submitted this morning has to do with picketing? Mr. BLANTON. Yes. They first strike and then begin to picket a plant and then they begin to harrass the workers and even to commit murder. Mr. WHEELER. Unquestionably there is a lot of rioting and disorder and slugging taking place where there has been no picketing and unquestionably there has also been that sort of thing where there has been picketing, but what you want to bring out and want to prove, of course, is that in one case there it showed that the pickets boarded a street car and participated in the disorder themselves. Mr. BLANTON. What Gov. Brown is proving here is that there is no "peaceful picketing"; that there is no such thing as what Mr. Wallace would call "peaceful picketing." They are there to stop nonunion men from working. They are there to stop the nonunion men who want to work, and if they can not be stopped in any other way, if they can not be stopped with threats and intimidation, they are going to be stopped with brickbats, and if they can not be stopped with brickbats, they are going to be stopped with .38 or .45 caliber bullets, with bombs and dynamite. I am just trying to present the real facts here-violence that has been committed for years, so that Congress will see that it is not a picnic affair, a pink tea affair, but that it means the life and liberty of citizens and the constitutional use of their own property in exercising their free will to work when they want to work. Mr. SPROUL. I have heard it remarked and I have heard you remark several times that you can not believe everything you see in print. I just want to know if that would be admitted in a court of law-if you were a judge-when you were a judge, would you have admitted that kind of evidence? |