Some of the people may say that the present administration has been unduly friendly to labor. My reply to that is that labor has been fighting for a long period of years for certain laws and benefits, and, unfortunately, we had to go to 1933 before we found a sympathetic ear to some of the things that we had been fighting for through all of these years, to the end that we did get a lot of them at one particular time, but had we received the consideration which was due us back 35 or 40 years ago some of them would have been on the statute books and operating prior to the present administration. So, I feel, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, that the time is inopportune to do anything that might disturb the peace and the harmony that we feel prevails in a majority, if not all, of the ranks of labor. If there is anything that you want, so far as the Order of Railway Conductors is concerned, with respect to our finances, I will see that it is furnished to you. However, we do not like to have our reports and other documents kicked around like a football. I might say at this point that we keep data prepared in our general offices in Cedar Rapids to furnish the young men and young women who write to us for information on labor organizations and trade-unions, and we are very glad to furnish that information to them. I am sure that a copy of our constitution is in certain libraries and in universities, and in many other public places throughout the country. We will be glad to furnish you any further information you desire, but as a representative of one organization, and I am only speaking for our individual organization, the others are all just as good as ours, and those men can speak for themselves, I earnestly plead with you to let us continue to function as we have functioned very successfully for a long period of years. I do not think that you will have any cause to regret such consideration. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee. Mr. HOBBS. Are there any questions? Thank you very much, Mr. Johnson. The next witness is Mr. Jonas A. McBride, vice president and national legislative representative of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, Washington, D. C. Mr. McBride, we await your pleasure. Mr. SCANLON. Mr. Johnson, do you believe some of this legislation now is being fostered by fifth column activity in this country? Mr. JOHNSON. I honestly do. Mr. BRYAN. And unwittingly some people are being brought in to use this propaganda to cause disunity in this country instead of its being unified. It has been called to my attention in talking with different people there may be something to do that. We know our foes are very cunning. Do you think there may be some connection there? Mr. JOHNSON. I would not doubt it a bit in the world, and I hate to say it. I firmly believe that very thing. Mr. SCANLON. I hate to say it, too. But it ought to be part of the record for future reference. Mr. JOHNSON. I think we have people in this country who are supposed to be real American citizens who are cooperating with those who are endeavoring to destroy real American fundamentals. Mr. SCANLON. There are not many of them? Mr. JOHNSON. Not many of them. Mr. SCANLON. There may be one or two. That will be all, Mr. Johnson. Mr. JOHNSON. I want to comment on H. R. 804 if I may. I want to read a little bit into the record. I want to say to you if H. R. 804 is enacted into law you are inflicting an awful burden on the international labor organizations. If H. R. 804 is enacted into law it will be necessary for every one of them to convene in grand division and change their laws, and I want to read into the record from the constitution and statutes of the Order of Railway Conductors of America, laws regarding the mutual benefit department. That is our insurance department and the accident-insurance department. Adopted at convention held in Chicago in May 1941, and I read from page 8, lines 233 to 239, inclusive. Beginning in the year 1941 the grand division shall elect by ballot officers as follows: "President, general secretary and treasurer, grand outside sentinel, and senior vice president, and eight vice presidents, one of whom shall be a citizen of the Dominion of Canada, and three trustees whose term of office shall be 4 years." The same requirements are placed on our local divisions, and we have about 75 or 80 of them in the Dominion of Canada, as to how they will elect their officers. Now, this officer in the Dominion of Canada participates in all the activities of the Order of Railway Conductors so far as the disbursement of funds and other business is concerned. When a board of directors meeting is held he is present and participates in all business transacted. And he may be called into the United States to handle an assignment within the boundaries. Mr. LANDIS. Perhaps that problem was not known prior to the introduction of the bill. Mr. JOHNSON. I am telling you it would just ruin all of the international organizations. It would involve a tremendous expense. Mr. SCANLON. Now, Mr. Johnson, I understand the Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. has incorporated one of their subsidiaries under the English corporation laws, that the president of the company is an American citizen and a majority of the board of directors are United States citizens. Now what effect do you think this H. R. 804 would have on them? Would they be included in this bill? Would they have to dissolve this corporation? I do not think Congress at this time wants to discriminate against labor organizations. I believe that this particular corporation would have to be dissolved, if we would amend this bill to that effect. Mr. JOHNSON. In my judgment it would be class legislation. Mr. JOHNSON. Now, if you want to find out who he is and what he has got, why not amend the Internal Revenue Act and make income tax returns subject to public inspection? Mr. LANDIS. Are your reports open? Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; and our accounts are audited every six months by C. P. A.'s, and a copy of that report is sent to our local division and it is placed on file and every member of that division is free to go and get that report. It covers every fund of our organization. So far as our mutual benefit department is concerned, even though we function under the insurance laws of the State of Iowa-and I do not think there are any better insurance laws in any State in the Union-our insurance funds are subject to the approval of the board of directors before they are paid out. And I am happy to say that our mutual benefit department is about 120 percent solvent. Mr. SCANLON. I want to thank you, Mr. Johnson, for your comprehensive statement. I think you have enlightened us on some things we did not know at the beginning of these hearings, and with the other gentlemen who preceded you, all of you gave a very compre hensive statement and we are glad you came here and we hope we do not have to call you back again. Mr. JOHNSON. Well, if there is anything we can furnish we will be glad to do it, and, in deference to the good Congressman from Indiana, I hope that you render an unfavorable report. Mr. SCANLON. Any other gentlemen who wish to be heard? I leave it to the committee, will you be able to convene tomorrow morning, Mr. Kelley? Mr. KELLEY. Yes. Mr. SCANLON. Mr. Day? Mr. DAY. Yes. Mr. SCANLON. We will have to recess this hearing now because the House is in session and we do not have permission to carry on, and we will meet tomorrow morning at 10:30 and anybody who wishes to be heard will please give his name to the secretary so we will get you in order as soon as possible. Did you wish to say something? Mr. MILLER. I am Martin H. Miller of the Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen. It would be a great favor if I could be heard on Thursday instead of tomorrow. Mr. SCANLON. Yes, Mr. Miller, that will be all right. We will try to hold these hearings if it meets with the rest of this committee's approval Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, as long as they are carried on. If you want to notify any of your colleagues they may get in touch with us. Mr. MILLER. Thank you. (Whereupon the subcommittee adjourned until Wendesday, May 12, 1943, at 10:30 a. m.) TO REGULATE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1943 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10:30 a. m., Hon. Thomas E. Scanlon (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. SCANLON., The hearings will be resumed. STATEMENT OF JOHN T. CORBETT, ASSISTANT GRAND CHIEF ENGINEER AND NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS Mr. SCANLON. The first witness we have before us this morning is Mr. John T. Corbett, national legislative representative, Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. Mr. Corbett, you understand we are taking testimony on two bills here. One is Mr. Landis' bill, H. R. 1483, which requires the furnishing of certain information by labor organizations and to prohibit political contributions by labor organizations. The other is H. R. 804, introduced by Mr. Woodruff, of Michigan, which is a bill to prohibit aliens from voting in labor organizations or acting as their officers or agents. Do you want to speak on both these bills? Mr. CORBETT. Yes, sir. Mr. SCANLON. You may proceed. Mr. CORBETT. My name is John T. Corbett. I hold the offices of assistant grand chief engineer and of national legislative representative for the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. The headquarters of the organization is at 1118 B. of L. E. Building, Cleveland, Ohio. The local office is at 10 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D. C. Proponents of this and similar legislation have made references to alleged racketeers and racketeering. From an ordinary workman's point of view the terms have been used far too freely and, again, have been used improperly. The dictionary defines "racketeer" as one who engages in bootlegging, beer-running, or other illegal occupations. One who terrorizes legitimate business by violence, to obtain control, or to receive graft for protection. Under these accepted definitions we find it impossible to accept the statements of antilabor agitators that every effort of the individual workingman, or of labor organizations, to secure increased wages or improved working conditions shall be referred to as "a racket," that those making such efforts shall be referred to as "racketeers." The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers is the oldest of the railroad labor organizations and its history of more than 80 years reveals no instance in which it has demanded the protection afforded by socalled closed-shop agreements. It endorsed the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, in which the closed-shop agreements shall not apply to those subject to that act. Because of the many references to alleged racketeering made in connection with a decision of the Supreme Court on a case involving certain activities of union truck operators, it may be interesting to secure information that may assist in advising workers of some apparent inconsistencies presented during the discussions of that case. As we understand it there were certain union truck operators who, probably because they had become members of the union holding contracts to operate trucks to certain warehouses in the State of New York made it a part of their endeavors to have trucks from outside of the State operated by their union members. Complaints were made to the authorities. The union men were brought before the courts charged with violations of a Federal law. The case progressed through the different courts until it reached the United States Supreme Court, and the decision of that Court was not favorable to the ideas presented by the United States attorneys in their presentation of the case to the courts as a violation of the Federal statute. We write no brief either for or against the activities of the union members whose actions caused this case to travel through the courts. To the ordinary citizen it must appear as a gamble in which attorneys in the employ of the United States used their time, paid for by the taxpayers, their efforts which might have been used to greater advantage and the time of the courts, also paid for by the taxpayers, in endeavors to show that their ideas or judgment were superior to the ideas or judgment of their opposing counsel. If we may use language sometimes heard outside of the courts, it would appear that the United States attorneys surely got the hell licked out of them. There have been critical remarks made about the endeavors of those truckers to secure the work they considered their members entitled to. Suppose we give the matter some attention and that we endeavor to approach the discussion in as unbiased a feeling as possible. Then suppose we start from the view expressed by those opposing the activities of the truckers. We assume that these union members were actually members in good standing in their union and that they were sincere in the belief that their union membership entitled them to the protection to handle trucks to and from the loading platforms in the city of New York. It is our understanding that at every port of size on the coasts of the United States vessels are required to secure the services of a licensed pilot before such vessels may be docked. Why is it wrong for a transportation agency by water to secure the services of one licensed in a particular place and wrong for the operator of a different form or type of transportation to be required to secure such assistance? Again, it is our understanding that certain States have adopted laws that require attorneys who have passed their State bar requirements to join the bar association and continue to keep their dues paid up, before they may practice before the courts of those States; and, again, if an attorney from outside the State desires to handle a case |