| OCR Text |
Show NEWS BEHIND THE NEWS I Written for The Telegram By Ray Tucker WASHINGTON Tom Girdler has suddenly awakened to find himself acclaimed by a desperately desperate-ly fighting steel industry as the hero of the most fatal clash between be-tween capital and labor In half a century, whereas for a while it seemed he might be the "goat" The Republic Steel chairman's violent defiance of both Lewis and Roosevelt forces gave hia colleagues col-leagues an attack of Jitters; they even tried to withdraw his remarks re-marks to the press at Washington. They figured he had placed them in an unfavorable light But thousands thou-sands of letters from industrialists, industrial-ists, politicos and the public reflected re-flected an altogether different reaction. re-action. They eulogised him for his bold stand against tha apparent alliance between the White House and C. 1 O. His outburst also provoked the presidential statement likening extremists In the strike to the Shakesperean "plague." But since F. D. R. had to include labor's uncontrollable un-controllable elements in his deprecation depre-cation of violence, it stirred undented un-dented rumors of a break between the president and John L. Lewis. What Girdler did was to raise doubts of C. I. O.'s invulnerability on both the industrial and political po-litical fronts. Ha rallied fainthearted faint-hearted and fleeing troops. It's impossible to appreciate the significance of the Girdler-at-the-bridge stand unless you realize how lacking In leadership and morale the steel magnates were till he bopped Into the trenches. They wouldn't admit it before, but the most powerful Independents Indepen-dents in the Industry were stunned when Myron C Taylor and Jones ac Laughlin signed up with Mr. Lewis. It looked as if the moat stubborn antiunion group In the country were about to capitulate. Then came the aupreme court'a dispiriting decision upholding the collective bargaining act By now Mr. Lewis was riding high on Franklin D. Roosevelt's coat tails, conquering whatever factory he looked upon. In a series of buddies the Indej pendents agreed to abide by the letter of the N L R B law, though contesting every comma inside and outside the courts. But they had no man on horseback. Borne firms were negotiating surreptitiously surrep-titiously for a C. L O. contract; others were urging a backdown. None dreamed they could defy Messrs. Roosevelt, Taylor and Lewis with impunity for long. ' But they changed their minds when Girdler challenged all comers. com-ers. Now, rightly or wrongly, they suspect they have got both Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Lewis on the run and in different directions, too. In publicising costs of the search for Amelia Earhart at 1260,000 a day, high naval officers are prevaricating pre-varicating politely but purposefully purpose-fully like gentlemanly graduates of Annapolis. The actual expenditures expendi-tures run nearer to $30,000 a day, consisting chiefly of fuel outlays. The padded figures are designed to arouse public sentiment against such adventures in the future. They are expected to round up support for a measure ready for congressional action as soon as excitement over the sweeping search has subsided. The proposed pro-posed law will bar the government from undertaking rescue work unless un-less the flight is sponsored by a recognized agency devoted to advancement ad-vancement of science or education. educa-tion. Despite natural human sympathy sympa-thy for the missing aviators, Washington officialdom deprecates depre-cates these emergency demands on personnel and equipment They upset carefully planned schedulea of training and repairs, they endanger en-danger valuable vessels they may even tip off a foreign power to new, secret types of apparatus. Navy officials would like to know, but can't find out why Secretary Roper sanctioned this exploit after turning down requests for less hazardous experiments in the air. In attacking the costs of rural resettlement's housing projects, Senator Byrd of Virginia is throwing throw-ing powerful bricks through private pri-vate White House windows. The driving and dominant personality behind development of these "ideal communities" has been none other than Mrs. Roosevelt . Even in the first flaming days of the new deal the idea waa frowned on by hardboiled officials, offi-cials, but the thought of a garden village where stranded souls would eke out a local factory wage with home-grown farm produce pro-duce thrilled three people Mrs. Roosevelt the late Louis Howe and Rex TugwelL But it wasn't long before Harold Ickes' subordinates, sub-ordinates, who first supervised planning, refused to approve building budgets far in excess of original estimates. Then the proj- ' ect was transferred to mora friendly hands as a separate agency. Subsequently, Mr. Tug-well, Tug-well, always sympathetic to Mrs. Roosevelt's suggestions, waa assigned as-signed the task of remaking rural America. It's bis free-and-easy handling of funds which is now under fire. Like Mr. Ickes, Henry Wallace has always been skeptical of the scheme. He ducked official responsibility re-sponsibility when it waa proposed to transfer It back to bis department depart-ment two years ago; he did not object when it was dumped on Undersecretary TugweU's desk, and later transformed into a separate sepa-rate agency. Although it has been tucked under his wing since Tug-well's Tug-well's resignation, he treats It aa if it were an "ugly duckling." He won't touch It for fear it may ruin hia reputation as an executive. execu-tive. The most Impressive evidence of congressional phobia over the C I. O. movement appears in the house judiciary committee's quiet scalping of the' Chandler bfll permitting per-mitting labor to oppose reorganizations reorgan-izations of bankrupt corporations. Originally Incorporated without protest it has been omitted from the draft written since the spread of steel and motor strikes. William O. Douglas, F. D. R.'s choice for next chairman of the SEC, advanced the labor provision pro-vision on behalf of the commission. commis-sion. He was immediately asked whether be had discussed the plan with John L. Lewis which he denied. He simply argued that labor had a right to be beard if a company's reorganization plans contemplated discharge of employes, em-ployes, closing down plants, reduction re-duction of pay. He admitted that as Miss Perkins said of the sit-down sit-down strike, his suggestion might be interpreted as conferring a "property right" on the workers. Members from sections besieged by the C. L O. promptly leaped on the proposal. Said Representative Representa-tive Michener of Michigan: "I should dislike to have a plan properly prop-erly worked out, and then have a group come in, take charge of the court and stage a sit-down strike because the plan did not suit them." The Douglas suggestion was discarded without a dissenting dissent-ing vote. (Copyright, 1937, for The Telegram.) |
