Newspaper Page Text
PAGE FOUR I h? I I V ^asssss •Mast Liverpool ‘Manufacturer*. Operative* Fotttri Berald ‘FE”* OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF HOI NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF APERATmi POTTERS and trades a labor eouNeiu Publahed every Thursday at East Liverpool, Ohio, by the N. B. of O. P., owning and operating the Beat Trade* Newspaper and Job Printing Plant in th* Stat*. Entered at Po*t Office, Eaat Liverpool. Ohio, April 20, l»02, a* aacond-claa* matter. Accepted for mailing at Special Rates of Postage provided tor in Section 1109. Act of October 18, 1917, authorised August 20, 1918. GENERAL OFFICE. N. B. ef O.PBUILDING, wTsiXTH ST.. BELL PHONE 575 HARRY L. GILL Editor and Busin*** Manager One Year to Any Part of the United States or Canada—----- —------——------82.00 Jam** M. Duffy, P. O. Box 752, Beat Liverpool, Ohto first Vice President—*. L. Wheatley, Boom 215, Broad Street, National Bask Build ing. Trenton 8, Naw Jersey TIi miiI Vice President Frank Hull, 8111 Pacific Blvd., Huntingtan Park, CallL Third Vice President Jame* Slaven, Cannon* Milin, Eaat Liv*nxxl, Ohio Fourth Vice President—Cbarle* Zimmer, 1045 Ohio Avenue, Trenton 8. New Jersey Sixth Vice President George Turner. 180 W. Drury Lane. East Liverpool, Ohio Seventh Pice President T. J. Desmond, 825 E. Lincoln Way, Minerva, Ohio 'Krtth Vice Presidents————^Joshua Chadwick, Grant Street, Newell, W Va. Secretary-Treasurer F. Jordan, P. O. Box 752, Eaat Liverpool, Ohio GENERAL WARE STANDING COMMITTEE Manufacturers— M, J. LYN H, W. A. BETZ. J. T. HALL Operative* CHAS. F. JORDAN. FREDERICK GLYNN, ERNEST TORRENCE CHINA WARE STANDING COMMITTEE Manufacturer*——— —E. K. KOOS, H. M. WALKER, W. A. BETZ Operative* BE KI’ CLARK. DAVID BEA VAN, CHAS. JORDAN DECORATIN STANDING COMMITTEE „rnr:FTiT DIETZ, Sr„ W. A. BETZ. RAY BROOKES _J Mi SLAVEN, OSCAR SWAN, ROSE STEWART When People Know The American Medical Association’s multi-million-dollar offensive against President Truman’s national health insur ance program is rapidly taking form as the most brazen attempt to flood the nation with false and misleading propa ganda since the heyday of the old utility mob. Whitaker & Baxter, the public relations firm whose tac tics and strategy Nathan Robertson anaylzed for readers of The Progressive in the May issue, have now unveiled more of the program by which their client, the AMA, hopes to crush the move to give the people of the United States the protec tion of health insurance. Step No. 1 is national application of the California ex perience. In that state Whitaker & Baxter were hired to beat Governor Warren’s state health insurance program. They bought a minimum of 100 column'inches in each of 700 newspapers and then proceeded to collect in return free pub licity “far beyond anything we expected.” At a national con ference of state medical societies in Chicago recently, the publicity firm proclaimed the national strategy to be this: “We intend to work with the great newspapers and na tional magazines to get them to do special jobs and that work is already well started. Once an article has been printed, re prints will be placed in the hands of key people to be distri buted thruout the country.” __ Step No. 1 is to “locate the principal physician of every congressman and every U. S. senator and have him— the physician—send a personal letter to his patient—the con gressman—telling him of the danger of socialized medicine.” This crude exploitation of physician-patient relationship for political lobbying purposes does not end there, for Step No. 3 would make every doctor’s office, by loading it with Whitaker & Baxter leaflets and photographs, a precinct headquarters. While doctors would thus be armed with hand-outs pre pared by the AMA’s public relations counselors, they would be discouraged from using their own minds in public. Whit aker & Baxter have now directed physicians to avoid “too many” debates on the health insurance issue. It is a heartening tribute to the horse sense of the Am erican people that they use more than the prescribed gain of salt when confronted with AMA propaganda—propaganda, by the way, which the British Medical Association has twice been obliged to denounce as “gross distortion” as applied to the British medical program. The American Druggist recently published the result? of two significant polls—both suppressed by the press which is “doing special jobs” for the AMA, the American Druggist is opposed to national health insurance. It hired a poll-tak ing firm which is also opposed to the President’s program. The firm polled 1,500 presidents and program chairmen of citizens’ organizations with a combined membership of 10 million. The results: Of those who took a position, 67 per cent said they fa vored national health insurance. Of “those with knowledge of the Truman program,” 79 per cent favored it. The American Druggist also took a postcard poll of 2, 500 pharmacists. The results showed that 17 per cent favor ed compulsory health insurance double the number of three years ago. And here too, significantly, as the magazine pointed out with alarm, “The more the retail druggist knows about the Truman proposal, the more likely he is to favor it.” The results of these polls seem to us extraordinarily im pressive. What strikes us as most hopeful in the findings of a hostile journal is the fact that when people know the facts —when they know that the President’s program does not mean socialized medicine when they know that it leaves physicians free to choose or reject patients, as they do now, or free to decline to come under the program altogether when they know that it retains for patients complete free dom of choice of a physician when tfc’.v know it will mean a program of vastly expanded hospital construction, more medical facilities, and low-cost insurance protection—when tht-y know what is in the program, they support it by over whelming majorities. Timely Suggestion The American Federation of laabor, in its Labor’s Mon thly Survey, makes the timely—and soundly based sugges tion that union-management committees be revived. It points uut that in the present business situation, “wise union poli cies are of the utmost importance” in negotiating with em ployers and adds that a wage increase may depend upon a plan of union cooperation to prevent waste, save expenses, cut co s and improve production. “Such a plan,” the federation says, “can be developed •through a union-management production committee. Now is the time to revive this prewar idea and make it effective for today’s needs. The joint union-management discussion of Reduction problems, and resulting measures for improve ment, contribute greatly to plant efficiency, output, morale, and workers’ welfare.” The AFL makes a number of suggestions for organiza tion and working of the proposed committees and cites some of th• results from union-management cooperation. One ex HLuph shows the good they can do: “A garment factory and United Garment Workers of America, AFL. Union and management heartily endorse the committee. It has accomplished: Improved lighting and ven til. ion better safety measures, better union-management relations, raised unit production 10 percent first year. ll’.» percent second year, improved workmanship on garments.” Action At Asbestos Since mid-February a little publicized but mghly signi ficant strike has been in progress in the Canadian mining town of Asbestos. Its main effect has been to paralyze asbes tos production in Canada which furnishes two-thirds of the world’s supply. Many American plants are thus affected, re sulting in unemployment and hardship to 100,000 American workers and their families. Far as we are from the strike scene, it is difficult to get an unbiased picture. Suffice it to say that the strike, which affects 5,000 miners organized in a Catholic labor syndicate, has several disquieting features. Growing out of a simple wage issue, the conflict assumed serious proportions when the union leadership refused to accept arbitration as pro vided by law. Consequently, the strike was declared illegal. Since then conditions have grown from bad to worse. Rioting and other acts of violence have led to arrests, law suits, and last but not least court injunctions against the strikers. The miners and their families suffer severe want. Why an ordinary wage dispute should have provoked a longdrawn-out conflict costing millions of dollars in hard to understand. Observers are agreed that if the dispute had merely involved wages, working conditions and related mat ters, a mutually satisfactory agreement could have been reached. Be that as it may, the conflict has outgrown its initial stage. Johns-Manville Company, principal asbestos producer, charges that the union demands go far beyond legitimate aims that they infringe upon the rights and auth ority of management. The strike leaders have been rather silent on that point. Charges and countercharges will not solve the Asbestos conflict. Nor do excessive demands offer a basis for settle ment of a strike which spells serious consequences for labor and capital, not only in Canada but in the United States as well. Catholic Church leaders have taken a sympathetic in terest in the miners’ cause. The Canadian Catholic Confed eration of Labor, to which the asbestos syndicate belongs, has lent moral and material support to the strikers. A de mand, however, to call a general strike in their support has been turned down. Obviously, the dangers arising from indefinite prolong ation of the strike cannot be ignored. To let matters drift is neither in the interest of labor nor of the companies on which the livelihood of the people of Asbestos depends. This is the time for action before the breach becomes too deep and radical behind-the-scene influences make the most of the trouble for trouble sake. We hope that management and union will restrict the conflict to its original merits and that both the church and the Canadian authorities will persuade the men to return to work under a formula which leaves no room for discrimina tion. Above all, it seems necessary, nay imperative, to elim inate from the superheated atmosphere at Asbestos all de mands inconsistent with the rights and functions of manage ment, demands which, if we read the Asbestos lesson aright, constitute the principal stumbling block toward resumption of industrial peace and productivity. Taft-Hartley Repeal Still On "Must List" Reports out of Washington this week indicate that the Democratic Leadership in the Senate has decided to post pone part of the “Fair Deal” program until next year. How ever, Taft-Hartley is still on the must list for this year. The main obstacle to passage of a respectable repeal bill seems to be the writing of a “national emergency” clause that will be acceptable to enough conservatives and liberals to get a majority vote. AFL leaders agreed last week to accept a bill authoriz ing the President to “seize and operate in behalf of the gov ernment for 30 days any truck plant or industry whose idle ness threatens to bring about a national emergency”. Even conservative Senators and Representatives realize the ineffectiveness of injunctions in actually promoting peace in national emergency disputes. It is hoped that the seizure plan will secure majority support and clear this major stumb ling block. Evidently Mr. Taft’s “liberal” statements about many concessions somehow were left out of this bill. All of the most objectionable features are retained. For example it prohibits closed shop, prohibits secondary boycott, and al lows every grievance to be made into a court suit. But worst of all the substitute provides for even worse use of the in junction than under the Taft-Hartley Act. In so-called na tional emergency situations the President can get an injunc tion at any time without even an emergency Board inquiry. In the case of unfair labor practices the General Counsel has complete discretion to issue an injunction once a complaint has been issued. Since it now takes literally years to get a decision the injunction would throttle a union for indefinite periods even though the charge might be declared invalid years later. The above should be enough to show the peculiar com parison between the Taft version in the Senate and the Wood version in the House. Both are completely unacceptable. Tools Reading the news dispatches of the Judith Copion trial last week, we were startled by the disclosure that at least one manufacturer producing instruments for atomic fission had sold duplicates of those instruments to Amtorg, the Soviet purchasing agency in this country. We don’t know what the law is, but it seemed to us that the Un-American Activities Committee of Congress could profitably investigate those corporations responsible for manufacturing and selling atomic energy instruments to Governments not party to North Atlantic pact. Certainly, the Congress could by a simple resolution prevent any vital work from being contracted out to private manufacturers. Our Government has its own facilities in the Naval Gun Factory, one of the most modern machine shops in the country that is accustomed to working' in abso lute secrecy. instead of worrying about our atomic instruments, why not assign their production to the Naval Gun Factory where We know the secrets will be carefully guarded? 'Hard To Understand' Strange as it seems, in this day and age, there are still people who fight organization of workers. This is noted by the International Molders’ and Foundry Workers’ Journal, which says that organizers of the Molders’ Union run into opposition in almost every small town they enter, especially in the South. Commenting on this opi»usition, Editor Taylor T. Buch anan writes: “Every type of business and service benefits from la bor’s pay checks and the families of labor, from Dad and Mother to Son and Daughter, provide a constant stream of spenders whose needs are so diversified that every commun ity feels the strength of lalxir every pay day. “The men and women who work are constant and liber al patrons-of business and professional men everywhere. It is hard to understand why you find so many of thq^e people using their influence to keep working people out of unions, especially in the small cities and towns. They seem to think that prosperity for themeslves depends entirely on low wages and long hours for everybody else but themselves.” THE POTTERS HERALD, EAST LIVERPOOL, OHIO grfl'fl C/re The Watch On The Potomac NEWS and VIEWS By ALEXANDER S. LIPSETT (An ILNS Feature) ■a Japanese labor, newspaper reports inform us, is engaged in a largescale offensive against American occupation policies which have caused severe conflicts and general resistance in many parts of the country. Labor’s resistance, strongly supported by Japanese public opinion, is primarily aimed at orders seeking the removal of hundreds of thousands of employes and workers from socalled excess employ ment in government and industry. No thought seems to have been given of what is to become of these people and their families. What with these and other considera tions, it need surprise no one that the communists are making the Utmost of a ready-made issue which has the fullest possible public support. Postwar developments in Japan as well as in Germany prove be yond doubt the fall.-icy of the American policy to make the enemy countries over in our own democratic image. Much has been made of our efforts to free Japanese labor from feudal bondage and lift it to the status of a free and democratic trade union movement. According to .spokesmen of the American occupation authorities, “revolutjpnary labor reforms have been achieved in Japan since the end of the war under the broad minded and liberal policies of Gen. Douglas Mac Arthur.” Trade union membership had risen by March 1949 to nearly 7,COO,000, or about 38 percent of the country’s industrial labor force. v These facts, while commendable, do not tell the whole story. The truth is that while we have given the Japanese people the husk of organizational and political freedom we have at the sanfcj time been in strumental in undermining the economic foundations of the country. We have forced upon them ways and means that are diametrically op posed to the practices and traditions of the East. Hence the latest order, made in the name of holy economy, compelling government and manufacturers to discharge a large percentage of their employes it is a step which, aside from arousing general resentment among em ployers as well as workers, runs counter to the time-honored Japanese practice of job tenure. Inasmuch as the communists openly espouse, and in many in stances direct Japanese resistance to these policies, public opinion pbroad is likely to regard the movement as red-inspired and Moscow directed. But let us see what a signed editorial in the current issue of 'he Saturday Evening Post entitled, “We’re giving Japan Democracy But She Can’t Earn Her Living,” has to say on the subject. Caustically commenting on American occupation policies and political utopias of the first magnitude, the magazine states: “Utopia is expensive. To run our reform programs the Japa nese government had to set up not only the entirely new Labor Ministry but literally dozens of special bureaus nnd agencies which had to be Staffed, equipped and paid. The government also had to take over responsibility for various welfare programs which tradi tionally had been the responsibility of business. The government also had to put on its payroll hundreds of thousands of Japanese who work directly on occupation projects.” “Early in the occupation,” the editorial concludes, Gen. Mac Arthur told the Japanese that our policies were intended to pro mote the ‘dignity and well-being and happiness of the individual.’ Up to now, our policies have so conspicuously failed to do this that Gen. MacArthur finally issued another statement in which he told the Japanese that when we say ‘democracy’ we don’t mean a de cent sMndard of living. Democracy, .the general said, is a ‘spir 1 itual commodity that springs from hardship, struggle and toil.’ Maybe the general is right, but we can’t expect the communists not to laugh their heads off.” Another incisive comment on American occupation policy comes from Australia, where-a liborite Senator, Douglas Grant, bluntly tokl his colleagues that Japan will never be truly democratic while Gen. MacArthur is in charge. 11' added that the Russian iron curtain is nothing compared with the “MacArthur” curtain in Japan, concluding: “If you want to make a botch of peace, put a general in charge. Go through history and see.” Hit Proposal To Further Increase Passenger Fares On Eastern Roads The eastern railroads’ proposal to further boost passenger fares was hit this week by the Inter-Municipal Group for Better Kail Service and the Jersey Shore Protective Committee, together representing 4£ towns in New Jersey. The two groups contended in a protest presented to the Interstate Commerce Commission that the increase is not justified. They said the carriers’ estimate of costs, including that of the 40-hour week effective Septefiiber 1 for the “non-ops,” is extravagant. “No apparent weight has been given to reduction in the number of such employes, their increased efficiency or savings attributable to the 40-hour week,” they stressed. One of the principal causes of the decline in passenger traffic within the last two years has been the steady increase of fares, they said. On the other hand, a reduction of fares would increase the volume of traffic and result in additional revenue without a corresponding in crease in operating costs, they argued. This principle, they pointed out, has been recognized by the railroads in Texas which recently re duced their fares. MM BBB*»»»»iW»»B*»tt»»iB»4Mfli#B»*fli»flifliflil IIII Bfl I The Right Of Self-Restaint’ I 1 By RUTH TAYLOR Then* is one civil right which, though it is not mentioned in the Biff of Rights, should neverthless be numbered among them. It is the right of self-restraint without which the other rights would be value less. Have you ever stopped to consider what is implied in our Consti tution It is simply this—the citizens who enjoy its benefits are men and women worthy of its privileges, capable of enjoying its rights be cause they are mature in thought and trained in the spirit of freedom to show self-restraint. Democracies flourish only when its adherents practice this right and rite—of self-restraint, when they so conduct their lives that they do not infringe upon the rights of others. In the past when democra cies have gone down, they tell because individuals and groups ignored this basic civil ri»rht. When .they clamored for privileges for them selves, when they ignored the responsibilities of citizenship, they lost their freedom. Democracy is the most difficult form of government because it is a society of free men, because it does not regiment the minds of its citizens nor legislate their every act. Its laws are the outgrowth of the wishes of the majority for the protection not of themselves alone but of all men. There is no room for free rid i in a democracy. Each citizen has a part to play. The rules under which he Lives are of his-making. He WTx.' fl fl fl fl» Bui B* 1S* yi‘ Cavik-ac\e by LES FINNEGAN Thursday, June 30, 1949 THE LABOR LEDGER —In Birmingham, England, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty Animals made public protest when the carpenters’ union announced it it would hold a holiday duck-hunting contest for its new members. e entire union promptly joined the SPCA and at the SPAC*s next eting voted overwhelmingly to reverse the protest. —In Philadelphia, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania threw out a state law and ruled that anyone—union member or not—can join a union picket line. The Court acted two weeks after two striking Phila delphia unions invited Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, three Pennsylvania Congressmen and Supreme Court Justice Douglas to join their picket lines for an hour. —In Melbourne, Australia, union miners won their demand for two cups of hot tea a day to be served to men at the coal face and in Cairo, Egypt, union bus drivers threatened to go on strike if the bus company, in eliminating several city bus routes, abandoned the one going by the union headquarters. —In Chicago, the owner of a store raged helplessly at pickets carrying signs which read, “Our Employer Belongs In A Nut House.” The owner was chiefly furious at himself for having had the bright idea when he first started selling pecans and almonds of calling his shop “The Nut House.” —In Trenton, N. J., employers learned the error of opposing cer tain laws just before labor wants them. In October 1940 a top execu tive of the Grant Casket Co. notified a union officer that the firm might have to lay off some men. The union leader promptly slugged him and the executive went to the hospital. Nine years later, on April 4, the N. J. Supreme Court ruled that such a punch was “a recognized risk of labor relations.” As a result, the company executive who, ironically, was also the'son of the company president, collected $1500 from his father’s firm—under a workmen’s compensation law that New Jersey employers originally opposed! —In Berlin, Communists and anti-Communists agreed for the first time since the war—on a strike of the city’s top-hatted chimney sweeps who want social-insurance benefits but in Lima, Peru, members of two unions chased a bunch of Communist pickets down a street and into the Soviet Embassy, and the Soviet Embassy tossed them right. back out to the furious pursuers. —In Pittsburgh, the Masters, Mates ■& Pilots-AFL formally an nounced that their dispute with a barge company was all settled “ex cept for a comma in the union shop clause” and in Cuba a sugar workers’ local union refused to sign their contract until the employer also agreed to have the whole contract recorded for members who can’t read. —In France, customs inspectors all over the country went on a “slow down” strike, inspecting baggage as it was never inspected be fore. Not a shirt was left unfolded, not a package unwrapped, not a shaving kit unscattered. Examination of suit-case took three hours, a woman’s handbag required half a day to itemize. —In Buenos Aires, 200 union football players were suspended for two years when they struck against a $300-a-month maximum salary and in Lisbon, Portugal, a union of professional wrestlers demanded a law against excited lady spectators fighting and pulling each other’s hair in the box seats. The men spectators were throwing coins to the ladies instead of into the ring. —In Tokyo, labor leaders whose unions are carefully patterned after American models, learned with a shock that in the U. S. union officials are not paid by employers. A total of 150,000 union officials were ordered either to drop their union posts or keep on with the com panies which innooently thought all along it was their legal duty to pay union officers’ salaries. BEHIND THE HEADLINES FORCES OF MONOPOLY SEE CHANCE TO BLAST ANTI-TRUST MEASURES By NATHAN ROBERTSON Washington (LPA)—John Carson’s nomination for the Federal Trade Commission, which is being blocked by the inaction of Chair man Edwin C. Johnson (D, Col.), of the Senate Interstate & Foreign Commerce Committee, is tied into one of the most important battles ever fought in Congress over the anti-trust laws. Th is battle involves the basing point system, a monopolistic devicM"^ big business has been using for many years for fixing prices of steelW cement, and many other basic commodities which have a tremendous effect on the cost of living. The Federal Trade Commission, which is supposed to make busi ness live up to the rules of our so-called free, competitive system, has been trying for a generation to make business drop the use of this de vice by which supposedly competing corporations offer their products to the public for identical prices. The basing point system has been used, according to the Federal Trade Commission, to eliminate com petition and increase the prices of necessities to the public. After many years of battling before the Commission and in the courts, the Supreme Court last year upheld the Commission’s conten tion and outlawed the basing point system in one of the most import ant decisions in history. It was the biggest victory for the anti-trust laws in a generation. But the Republicans, then in Congress, immediately launched a fight to over-turn the Supreme Court decision and let business go ahead fixing prices. Sen. Homer Capehart (R, Ind.) introduced legis lation to this effect and promised action on it at this session of Con gress. His promise is reported to have brought many big contributions to the Republican party’s campaign chest in last year’s election. But to the surprise of Capehart and big business, Truman won the election—and most observers believed that the fight against the Fed eral Trade Commission’s victory would subside. But they had failed to remember that the election put Senator Johnson in control of the Sen ate Interstate & Foreign Commerce Committee which was handling the Capehart legislation. Johnson took over the fight for Capehart, and the result was that the monopolistic forces now were led by the chairman of the«Commit tee instead of a member. Johnson sponsored a bill which the Federal Trade Commission fought bitterly and finally managed to whittle down somewhat—altho it was still dangerous. Senator Francis Myers (D, Pa.) introduced a substitute proposal which was far better than Johnson’s proposal, but still unnecessary if Congress really wanted to enforce .the anti-trust laws. The Myers resolution was approved both by the Interstate Commerce and Judici ary Committees. On the Senate floor Senators Wayne Morse (R, Ore.) and Kevau ver( D, Tenn.) launched a fight against the Myers’ proposal. With the help of other liberal Senators they finally passed a substitute offered by Senator Joseph C. O’Mahoney (D, Wyo.) which was less dangerous^ It is now pending in the House. During this fight over the basing point system and the anti-trust laws, the President submitted Carson’s nomination to the Senate. Johnson, who had been fighting on the side of the corporations, saw that his nomination would strengthen the anti-basing point forces on the Federal Trade Commission. He has been blocking the Carson nom ination for more than two months by failing even to appoint a sub committee to consider the nomination. Actually, Carson has never been directly involved in the fight over the basing point system. But his whole record is opposed to monopoly and friendly to consumer interests. Big business knows that in this fight Carson could not possibly be on any side other than the public’s —which means against big business. This is a battle in which labor has a very vital interest. Every consumer, every average citizen, has an interest in seeing that Carson is confirmed by the Senate to strengthen the weakened Federal Trade Commission. The nomination will not be confirmed unless the public demands it—because the special interests are fighting Carson hard. Union men should write to Chairman Johnson and demand action on the Carson nomination before it is too late. This battle may decide the fate of the anti-trust laws. is not restrained by a master, but restrains himeslf. And a man who cheats his own laws or seeks to find a way around them—well, he is the kind who would cheat at solitaire. He is hurting himself first of all. Self-restraint is a sign of maturity. It is one of the insignia of the responsible man, the man who is first of all accountable to his own conscience and to his own ideals of what is right and wrong. It is the direct anthithesic of self-indulgence or selfishness—that fault which is the root of so many vices, the key to Pandora’s box of troubles. Self-restraint is a civil right—but it is more than that. It is a civic duty, an obligation which is ours and ours alone. To show re straint in our actions, to consider the rights of others as we expect them to consider ours, to let no untoward act of ours or desire for special privilege hamper the good of the majority, to abide by laws of our own making—that is the duty which we as citizens of a democ racy must fulfill.