public at that time, had anything to do with your employment with that company?

Mr. TORBIC. Mr. Williams.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Williams, were your instructions and duties while you were employed at the Republic, substantially different or not from those which you had when you were at Aliquippa? Mr. WILLIAMS. Quite naturally they were, being a new company. Senator LA FOLLETTE. In what respect were they different? Mr. WILLIAMS. As I testified to, in the way of organization. I think I used the words that we never had as much as a skeleton organization. Torbic is the first man that I hired from Jones & Laughlin. I was then in Canton, and my duty was such at that time that it took me all over the country, and I needed someone to look after Canton and Massillon, that being one of our largest districts. I hired Torbic, and I was more or less on the road the greater part of the time.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. To what extent, if any, were your duties, instructions, or responsibilities and the character of your work and the work of the police department different or similar to those which prevailed at Aliquippa when you were there?

Mr. WILLIAMS. My line at Aliquippa was somewhat diversified. I did a lot of special investigating on compensation claims, and it covered a multitude of things, whereas the Republic being a new organization-well, it is hard to give you a geography of my duties for the Republic. Things were fast and furious at that time. As I say, being a new company, we covered likewise a multitude of things there. There were a lot of changes in personnel, and we discovered many, many things.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You worked in the police department at Aliquippa, did you not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Were the general instructions you gave to the police under you in Republic similar to or different than those which you had received as a member of the police force at Aliquippa? Mr. WILLIAMS. They were similar, yes; in a great many ways. Senator LA FOLLETTE. How were they different?

Mr. WILLIAMS. It is rather hard to explain how they were different. As a matter of fact-oh, all the plants that we took in during the merger, we never had a police set-up, no set-up at all, never inherited any, and it made it somewhat difficult starting from scratch. You did not have anything to work with or work on, or anything else. That was one differential.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. That is not what I mean. I mean any difference in general instructions given to those who were in the police department.

Mr. WILLIAMS. No, I would say not. They were somewhat alike. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Girdler, after the Republic Corporation was formed, did you effect any change in the labor policy?

Mr. GIRDLER. After Republic Steel Corporation was forried. did I effect any change in the labor policy?

Senator LA FOLLETTE. In your labor policy.

Mr. GIRDLER. Well, as far as I was consulted about labor policies after Republic was formed, which was not very much, because I had a great many things to do, with a large new company like that, I used my offices all the time to try to establish happy relationships between the men and the management. I would say that probably in places, that conditions were bad, and probably in places conditions were good. I cannot give you anything very specific about it, because I don't remember.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Girdler, when the Republic company was formed, from that time on, when, if at all, do you remember the first change of any importance in its labor policy?

Mr. GIRDLER. I don't remember anything happening, anything specific, along that line.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. For example, did the passage of the National Industrial Recovery Act with section 7 (a), in 1933, cause any change in the Republic's labor policy or not?

Mr. GIRDLER. Republic tried to get in step with all the legislation as it went along, just as fast as it could. Specifically, I cannot tell you very much about any particular thing. I attended a meeting at Mr. Baruch's house in New York right after the National Industrial Recovery Act was formed and when they were writing up some of the things that went along. General Johnson was there and had a good deal of conversation about the famous section 7 (a). That is the first thing that I remember in connection with the National Industrial Recovery Act.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I offer for the record a statement of Republic Steel Corporation, addressed "To Our Employees" and furnished to the committee, under subpena, by the company, dated May 11, 1937.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5212" and appears in the appendix on pp. 13908-13909.)

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I will read the last three paragraphs. It may be printed in full in the record (reading):

The policy of this company has been, and is now, that it is willing to meet with anyone to bargain with him for whomsoever he represents.

Republic believes that every employee is entitled to determine for himself, free from discrimination, interference, restraint, coercion, and intimidation by anyone, whom he wishes to represent him in the matter of collective bargaining. In view of the foregoing facts, and because of the Wagner Act and recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, Republic Steel Corporation sees no necessity for signing the C. I. O. contract.

The Company is willing to continue to bargain collectively with its employees as in the past. Membership or non-membership in any organization is not a requirement of employment.

(Signed) REPUBLIC STEEL CORPORATION.

Was this statement an accurate statement of the labor policy of the Republic Steel Corporation?

Mr. GIRDLER. I think so.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. As of May 11, 1937?
Mr. GIRDLER. I think so.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Is it an accurate statement of the present policy of the Republic Steel Corporation?

Mr. GIRDLER. Yes.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I call your attention to the fact that the statement states that this had been the policy of the company. How long had it been the policy of the company?

Mr. GIRDLER. Ever since it had been a company.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Williams, when did you first learn that the policies as set forth in this May 11, 1937, statement were the policies of the company?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I never knew it officially even to this time other than what I have heard here.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you never receive a copy of it?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I don't think so.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You were one of the employees, were you not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; but I don't think I got a copy of that.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. It was addressed "To Our Employees," to all, was it not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I don't know.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Is not that what it says on its face?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I have never read it, Senator.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Will you look at it now?

Mr. WILLIAMS (examining exhibit 5212).

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Does it not say "To our employees"?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Are you one of the employees?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I hope so. [Laughter].

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Aside from your hope, as a matter of fact, are you one of the employees at this time?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I was the first of the month.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Have you received any information that you are not still an employee?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You were an employee on May 11 and thereafter in 1937, were you not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir. That may have come in the office but the first I seen one of them is here.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Torbic, when did you first become aware that the policies as outlined in this May 11, 1937, statement were the policies of the company?

Mr. TORBIC. Well, as near as I can tell, this has always been the policy of the company. This is nothing more or less than an official notice to the employees at large, I would say; just a general notice to the general employees. I did not know that there was-that was common knowledge to me, I believe.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. How long had it been common knowledge that this was the policy?

Mr. TORBIC. Ever since I had been with the company, as far as I am concerned. I had never been instructed it was not the policy. No one has ever told me it was not the policy.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Has anyone at any time ever told you the substance of this statement as being the policy of the company? Mr. TORBIC. Prior to the letter?

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Prior to the time it was issued?

Mr. TORBIC. Well, my job up at Monroe is such that I have to deal with the different men there, and I know it was my duty to discuss with anybody that comes into my office, without asking who he represented or if he represented anybody.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Torbic, when you testified before this committee at page 17276 and following, concerning the employment of men with labor affiliations who spied upon or reported upon your fellow employees, did you consider the declaration of policy contained in this statement of May 11?

Mr. TORBIC. I testified to the employment of men? What men? Senator LA FOLLETTE. Keiser, for one.

Mr. TORBIC. I did not employ that man, Senator. He was already in the employ when I came to Monroe.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You did not fire him?

Mr. TORBIC. No; I did not.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You received his reports?

Mr. TORBIC. I did; yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you consider that to be in keeping with this policy?

Mr. TORBIC. NO; I did not give it any consideration.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You took him on your pay roll?

Mr. TORBIC. That is right.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You may be temporarily excused, Mr. Williams and Mr. Torbic.

Mr. Gilroy and Mr. Butler.

TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH F. GILROY AND W. EARL BUTLER-Resumed

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Gilroy, did you receive a copy of this May 11 statement in 1937?

Mr. GILROY. No, sir; not to my knowledge.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You were an employee at that time, were you not?

Mr. GILROY. Yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you see it?

Mr. GILROY. I might have seen some around with some of the I would not say for a certainty.

men.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you ever read it?

Mr. GILROY. I cannot say that I have, Senator.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you receive a copy of it, Mr. Butler? Mr. BUTLER. Well, I was not listening to the statement when it was read.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Look at it. It will be helpful if you will

listen.

Mr. BUTLER (examining exhibit 5212). I imagine I did, Senator. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you know of the substance of this document as issued, that that had been the policy of the company?

Mr. GILROY. Yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you, Mr. Butler?

Mr. BUTLER. Well, I had no-nobody told me about any policy. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Had you never known anything about the labor policy of Republic prior to the time you saw this statement? Mr. BUTLER. Nobody ever said anything to me about labor policy. Senator LA FOLLETTE. From the paragraphs which I read and which I now ask you to read, the last three paragraphs—you need not read them out loud.

Mr. BUTLER (examining exhibit 5212).

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Let me know when you have finished. Have you finished?

Mr. BUTLER. Yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you or did you not know prior to 1937 that those three paragraphs were the policy of the Republic Steel Corporation?

Mr. BUTLER. I could not say. Senator. Nobody told me that. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Gilroy, you stated that you knew that was the policy, did you not?

Mr. GILROY. Well, I figured it to be the policy, for the simple reason that we had bricklayers, and roll turners, and like that, who are inembers

Senator LA FOLLETTE (interposing). Did you or did you not know that those three paragraphs were the policy of the company and had been the policy of the company prior to the time this statement was issued?

Mr. GILROY. I would say in a general way that that was my belief. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Gilroy, when you paid Mr. Sodders and Mr. Ray cash for information of union activities, which they obtained by virtue of official positions they had secured in the union, were you at all troubled as to whether you were complying with the letter and spirit of these declarations of policy?

Mr. GILROY. No; I was not.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Butler, when you had Mr. Vargo, alias Albert, and Mr. Vamos doing undercover work, did it or did it not seem to you to be in consonance with the policy of Republic?

Mr. BUTLER. When Mr. Vargo came down there and Mr. Vamos came down there, they went down there to go into the mill, and I did not talk to them anything about this labor issue.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You are familiar with all of the testimony, and I do not want to have to read it all to you.

Mr. BUTLER. No, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Including your own; but you know what the substance of all of that testimony was?

Mr. BUTLER. Yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. And when you were having these men, and these men were doing this undercover work outside, did you or did you not think that it was in consonance and in keeping with the policy of Republic, or did you think about it at all, or what?