Senator LA FOLLETTE. How many times did the Board meet? Mr. Voss. I believe three times.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. You attended the third meeting, Mr. White Mr. WHITE. My recollection is that I did.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you, Mr. Voss?

Mr. Voss. I believe I did.

Mr. WHITE. I did; I recall it now.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I introduce for the record the report c. the Mediation Board to the Secretary of Labor. It may be give an exhibit number and printed in full.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5245" and appears in the appendix on pp. 13937-13941.)

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I read a portion:

After further consideration the Board decided, in view of the attitude ✅ the companies, that it could not accomplish anything further by way of media tion. We did agree, however, to hold ourselves in readiness for any further service in the situation, and both sides indicated that if they thought w could be of any further service they would be glad to call on us.

After the conference adjourned the four companies handed us a joint state ment, newspaper clipping of which is attached hereto marked "Exhibit B (original copy is in the mail and will be attached to the report as soon as received). The Inland Steel Co. handed us a separate statement which they released to the press at the same time, attached hereto marked "Exhibit C." We cannot but believe that the bitterness and suspicion which separate the two sides would be allayed by a man-to-man discussion around the confer ence table between the heads of the four companies and the union representa tives, and that the only present possible hope of settlement lies in such a meeting.

We further believe that the refusal of the four companies to enter into any agreement with the S. W. O. C., regardless of the number of employees whor it actually represents, which could be demonstrated by a secret ballot election. is not the way to industrial peace.

I show you a clipping from the New York Times, dated August 1, 1937. It may be introduced in the record and given an exhibit number.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5246" and appears in the ap pendix on pp. 13941-13944.)

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I read an excerpt from it purporting to quote from you, Mr. Girdler:

"Here was a situation which could admit of no compromise whatsoever," he said, "because the least sign of concession, however slight, would have been seized upon by Lewis and the C. I. O. as a smashing victory and used as another club to coerce the men. We could not allow our men to be imposed upon."

Was that the substance of the statement which you made, or did you make such a statement?

Mr. Girdler. I have no doubt but what I made that statement. They even used things that were never said.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Do you know why?

Mr. GIRDLER. They won great victories that hadn't been won, and published them in the paper.

Senator, If I had personnally handled all the tar paper that I was supposed to have pushed into the furnaces in order to make

I

smoke during the strike to make people think the plants were working, I would be an old man.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I offer for the record copy obtained under subpena from the Republic Steel Corporation, of a letter dated December 31, 1937, signed by Tom M. Girdler and addressed to the Honorable Edward J. Kelly.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5247" and appears in the appendix on p. 13944.)

Senator LA FOLLETE. Is that copy of a letter sent by you to Mayor Kelly, of Chicago, Mr. Girdler?

Mr. GIRDLER. Yes, sir.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. It may be given an exhibit number and printed in full in the record.

I read a portion of it.

DEAR MAYOR KELLY: As the year draws to a close it is regrettable to find that, despite positive proof that responsibility for the lamentable events on Memorial Day in Chicago rested with the rioters, misrepresentations still persist. The distorted dramatizations of these events on a Columbia Broadcasting Company year end program was wholly unwarranted. In view of the many attempts from various sources to embarrass you in this matter, I desire to take this opportunity to commend you on the character of the executive action by which you impartially unheld the law during those troublesome days. What investigation, if any, Mr. Girdler, have you made of the Chicago Memorial Day clash between strikers, pickets, and sympathizers and the city police?

Mr. GIRDLER. I had reports given me by Mr. White, Mr. Hyland, Mr. Williams, and others, about the facts connected with the Memorial Day riot. I read the coroner's jury report. I heard the testimony of the police, the Chicago police captains at the Post Office and Post Roads Committee. I read that testimony afterward. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you read the testimony which this committee took on the incident?

Mr. GIRDLER. Yes.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Did you read the report of the committee? Mr. GIRDLER. I did.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Have you seen the pictures which the committee exhibited, printed as part of its exhibits?

Mr. GIRDLER. I don't know what pictures you refer to. I saw a lot of pictures.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. On page 45 and following (S. Rept. 43 pt. 6). Mr. GIRDLER. Yes, I have seen these pictures.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Do you see anything in those pictures which you would disapprove of?

Mr. GIRDLER. Î think the things illustrated in those pitcures are very deplorable; it is very deplorable that things like those have to happen.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. To your knowledge did the directors of the Republic Steel Corporation share your appreciation as outlined in your letter to Mayor Kelly?

Mr. GIRDLER. I don't know whether they did or not, I don't know whether I ever showed it to any directors or not.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. What was your reaction to the 1937 Little Steel strike, or so-called Little Steel strike, as an entirety, Mr. Girdler!

Mr. GIRDLER. I thought it was a tremendous waste of everything. Senator LA FOLLETTE. Do you know whether the board of directors approved or disapproved of the conduct of that strike by the company's executives?

Mr. GIRDLER. I think they approved, absolutely.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I offer for the record a copy obtained from the files of the Republic Steel Corporation of the minutes of the meeting of the board of directors of the Republic Steel on June 29, 1937. It may be given an exhibit number and printed in full in the

record.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5248" and appears in the appendix on p. 13945.)

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I quote from a portion:

The Chairman reported fully on the strike situation in the Corporation's plants and the subject was discussed at length. The position taken and maintained in behalf of the Corporation and the developments in connection therewith were reviewed and the probable ultimate cost in connection therewith was considered.

It was moved by the Schoellkopf, seconded by Mr. Sullivan and upon being put to vote by Mr. A. C. Brown, temporarily acting as Chairman, was unanimously adopted, Messrs. Girdler, Wysor, Gillies and Kahn, officers of the Corporation, not voting, that the action of the officers of the Corporation in the handling of the strike and the expenditure of corporate funds in connection therewith be fully approved, confirmed and ratified; and that the Board express its confidence in the continued handling of the strike by the officers, including the expenditure of corporate funds necessary in carrying out the policies of the Corporation in the continued conduct of the strike.

Was the conduct of your executives during the strike in 1937, and was the approval of such conduct by your board of directors duly conveyed to the stockholders?

Mr. GIRDLER. I can't answer that.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I offer for the record a copy of the Annual Report to the stockholders of the Republic Steel Corporation for the year 1937. The entire report may be printed as an exhibit.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5249" and appears in the appendix on pp. 13945-13967.)

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I will read a portion of it on page 19:

The success of the industrial relations policy of the Corporation was clearly indicated when the strike was forced upon our employees on May 26, 1937. In spite of intimidation, coercion and threats of violence, some 23,000 men remained at work in the plants, while thousands of others who were equally satisfied and desired to work were prevented free access to the plants by armed pickets.

When law and order were restored late in June and early in July, the employees returned to their jobs in large numbers and the plants resumed normal operations.

Republic is in full accord with the principle of collective bargaining. Employees may present their ideas, their grievances, and their ambitions to the management through representatives of their own selection, without coercion or intimidation from any source.

Cooperation and mutual understanding of each other's problems have been brought about through effective collective bargaining between Republic employees and management.

Mr. Girdler, in connection with the success of this industrial-relations policy, the record of this investigation shows that the steel strike of 1937 cost the country 16 lives and that 307 persons were injured. Complete records of the other personal injuries and of the cost of the strike to private individuals and to the public probably will never be obtained.

I offer a tabulation of casualties.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5250" and appears in the appendix on pp. 13968–13969.)

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Turning to your annual report for the year 1937 (exhibit 5249), it shows that your company expended on the strike $1,900,000, which sum equals 21 percent of your net profit from operations for the year 1937. Has your company prepared monthly statements of income and expense for the year 1937, to your knowledge?

Mr. GIRDLER. I don't quite understand the question. We have complete monthly statements.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Has your company, from such statements or otherwise, estimated the loss of business, if any, suffered by the company as a result of the strike?

Mr. GIRDLER. It can't be estimated accurately.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Girdler, was the year 1937 a profitable or an unprofitable year for the steel industry in general?

Mr. GIRDLER. A pretty good year.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. I refer to an extension of remarks by Myron C. Taylor on April 4, 1938, to the annual meeting of stockholders of the United States Steel Corporation. These remarks were given an exhibit number and will be printed in full as an exhibit. (Exhibit 4486.)

I read an excerpt from page 43:

The union has scrupulously followed the terms of its agreement and, insofar as I know, has made no unfair effort to bring other employees into its ranks, while the Corporation subsidiaries, during a very difficult period, have been entirely free of labor disturbance of any kind. The cost of a strike-to the corporation, to the public and to the men-would have been incalculable.

Have you any comments to make on Mr. Taylor's statement?
Mr. GIRDLER. None whatever.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Mr. Girdler, you stated that you had a statement that you desired to make and you are at liberty to make it.

Mr. GIRDLER. Senator, you are tired and I guess everyone else is tired, and this statement has been given to the press and I think it would probably be an imposition if I read it now.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. No, sir; it would be no imposition upon the chairman.

Mr. GIRDLER. Then I would like to offer it for the record.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. It may be incorporated in the record, but I

want it clearly understood, Mr. Girdler, that you are at full liber to read it if you desire to do so.

(The document was marked "Exhibit 5251" and appears in th appendix on pp. 13970-14000.)

Mr. GIRDLER. I have a supplementary statement I would like t read (reading):

Two weeks ago, one of the chief officers of the S. W. O. C. in testifying before this committee assailed Republic's labor policy in violent back-alley languas In that statement he exposed the rage which he feels toward a company whic has refused to be bludgeoned into an agreement with his organization against th wishes of an overwhelming majority of its workers.

We refused to betray those workers to that organization, the aim of which to levy tribute upon them for the right to work and the right to speak to o deal with their employer.

It has been revolting to me to think that irresponsible labor and politica leaders would attempt to capitalize on the misfortunes of workers in industry by deliberately promoting class hatred.

What Murray says about Republic's relations with its employees is of m importance to me. What really matters is that the attitude of our workmen refutes his statement. They have demonstrated beyond question, under almos inhuman conditions imposed by that very labor organization and its co! munistic friends, their loyalty and satisfaction with Republic Steel Corporation and its labor policies.

This same man, in testifying before this committee, challenged a statement i made concerning his veracity before another Senate committee last summer. I In support of my statement at that time, I submit to you for the record six : specific instances where this man has deliberately misled the public.

The following statement by Mr. Murray appeared, among other places, in Time Magazine of June 14, 1937:

"Girdler is not a steel man. He was chief of Jones & Laughlin police force before he was dragged by the bootstraps to be president of Republic Steel Corporation. He is a company cop, nothing more and nothing less."

My only positions with Jones & Laughlin were assistant to general superintendent of Aliquippa Works; later assistant general superintendent, Aliquippe Works; then general superintendent, Aliquippa Works, then vice president and general manager; and then president and director.

In Mr. Murray's testimony before the Senate committee on Post Offices and Post Roads he said (p. 82 of the record):

"No attempt was made by the strikers to interfere with the mails or prevent the mails from going into the plants."

As a result of the investigation into the C. I. O. interference with the mails. nine C. I. O. members were arrested by the inspectors of the United States Post Office Department, indicted in the Federal court of Cleveland and upon trial pleaded guilty. One of those men, Joe Morton, was the head of the C. I. O. lodge at Massillon.

In his testimony before this committee (p. 15812), during these hearings, on July 22, 1938, Murray said with reference to the companies with which the S. W. O. C. had contracts:

"We have not had a single strike in violation of the agreements at the prop erties of any of these companies during our eighteen months relationship with them."

On April 16, 1937, a contract was signed between the S. W. O. C. and the Timken Roller Bearing Co., of Canton, Ohio. This contract bore the signature of Murray. On June 3, 1937, a strike occurred at the Timken plant, pickets were thrown around the plant and work was not resumed until June 8. We are advised that their contract with the S. W. O. C. had much the same clause regarding cessation of work as is contained in the Carnegie-Illinois contract with the S. W. O. C, and that the strike at Timken constituted a clear violation of the contract.

The Pittsburgh Press of June 6, 1937, states that Phil Murray charged at Pittsburgh that agents of Pearl Bergoff were in Youngstown to smash the strike. According to the Pittsburgh Press, Murray made the following statement: