OCR Text |
Show GENERAL HUGH S. JOHNSON Jour: Uwadtolira WNUSnie" WHY WHIP-SAW WEIR? It is hard for me to understand why Mr. Weir should be singled out for any whip-sawing by New Deal columnists because he accepted a fund-raising post on the national Republican Re-publican committee. : If it is because he has a fortune, j then the Democrats had better pour j some ink-eradicator over their own i record. Johnny Raskob didn't hold exactly that post in 1928 but he was responsible for the financial end of the party effort. I don't know how Johnny's fortune then compares with now, but it certainly wasn't hay. Among other things he had that year was to underwrite some of the Warm Springs obligations to make it easier for Mr. Roosevelt to run for governor of New Vork. Fat Cats Not Missing. Of course, it may be said that Johnny wasn't a New Dealer. Frank Walker took over that responsibility when Mr. Roosevelt ran in 1932, and Frank is no potential pauper. The Democrats had their fat ca'.s in both 1932 and 1936. The New Dealers may kick such men around in the spotlight for the benefit of the audience but they don't do it in the wings. Such lead- ICrC NOT EXACTLY PAUPERS . . . John J. Huskob (at left) raised money for Democrats, now Ernest T. Weir will do it for Republicans. ing lights as the ambassadors to France, England, the Vatican, and 1 lately Poland and Belgium belong to their "60 families." They may mar them but they also marry them. The royal family itself is conspicuously conspic-uously overlooking no opportunity to get into the fat cat class. All of which is O. K. and above criticism, but it doesn't justify cracks at men of different political beliefs for performing per-forming their political offices of citizens citi-zens on the ground that they are far from being on WPA relief. Wealth j is as yet no crime among us and neither is poverty of itself any par- ticular passport to preference. He Appealed and Won. Of course, the attack on Mr. Weir slides off into different ground. First, that he opposed collective bargaining; bargain-ing; second, that William Green once said that he offered labor nothing; noth-ing; third, that he once resisted in the courts a workers' election conducted con-ducted by the old NRA labor relations rela-tions board. The latter statement is true. He appealed to the courts against illegal ille-gal action by that board and won his case. Since when is that a disqualification? dis-qualification? The other two statements state-ments are untrue. When the New Deal and especially NRA, began its crusade for better labor relations, especially in the then crustacean steel industry, they had no more sincere supporter than Mr. Weir. His own labor relations were good. His was one of the first great mm. panics voluntarily to seek an election elec-tion supervised by government to determine the question of majority representation. Agreed on Rules. The board held a hearing and agreed with the company and its employees on the rules for this electionwhich elec-tionwhich was then established procedure before the old NRA board a creature of executive order rath- er than or statute. Mr. Weir went back to Weirton to carry out the agreement. On the eve of the election elec-tion an officious young lawyer of the later or janissariat type of fourth New Dealer appeared to supervise it and announced a radically different dif-ferent procedure from that formally formal-ly and regularly decreed by the board. Mr. Weir refused to accept ac-cept this new ukase and was upheld up-held in court. From that time on he got the worst running around and series of kicks in the pants of any industrialist of those times. At first hand, I don't know enough about developments since to say whether that soured his view or changed his attitude, but I do know that when the New Deal started he was considered by it the most liberal lib-eral and progressive employer in his industry. U. S. KIDDED ON DEFENSE. This is the testimony of army officers offi-cers before a senate subcommittee: Question: "How many anti-air craft guns will you have at the end of this fiscal year?" Answer: "I understand that there are 144 heavy anti-aircraft and 48 medium caliber anti-aircraft in the defense of London. The guns we have on order will be dtUvered by September 1941. All but 48 will be delivered by November 1940." (This figures a rate of delivery for the last 48 of a little over 4 guns a month.) |