the war the next year that we are fighting for democracy at a time when the things they have fought so hard for in the last 10 years are being taken away from them by acts of Congress.

Mr. KELLEY. What is your total membership?

Mr. RICHTER. The last paid-up report was 980,000, approximately. Mr. KELLEY. That is about 16 percent, approximately, of the membership in the armed forces?

Mr. RICHTER. That is right.

Mr. KELLEY. That is far above the average.

Mr. RICHTER. As you know, there are not many old men who can stand the gaff in the automobile industry.

Mr. KELLEY. That is very commendable. It is far above the national average.

Mr. RICHTER. I would like to submit also a copy of the last financial statement which this union has put out. As you will see, there is not very much more that we can add to that.

Mr. SCANLON. Do you want to put that in the record?

Mr. RICHTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SCANLON. That may be put in the record.

(The statement referred to is as follows:)

SUMMARY BY AUDITORS OF FINANCIAL STANDING OF INTERNATIONAL UNION

Following is a summary of receipts and disbursements of the International Union, United Automobile Workers, Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the period from May 1 to November 30, 1942. The summary, issued by Secretary-Treasurer George F. Addes, is certified by Ayling & Butler, certified public accountants.

We hereby certify that as of the close of business on November 30, 1942, the fund account of the International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft, and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (U. A. W.-C. I. O.) amounted to $864,155.99 divided as between general fund, $665,830.70, educational fund, $152,212.42, and recreational fund, $46,112.87.

(a) That the cash on hand and in banks amounted to $436,100.92.

(b) That the fund as of Nov. 30, 1942, amounted to $864,155.99, summarized as follows:

Together...

$436, 100. 92

100, 000. 00

88, 000. 00

5, 500. 97

1, 276. 00

41, 430. 88

205, 101. 87

877, 410. 64

13, 254. 65

864, 155. 99

AYLING & BUTLER, Certified Public Accountants.

Less: Amounts deducted from employees for purchase of U. S. Government War bonds, unallocated income from local unions, etc...

Fund balance, Nov. 30, 1942.

DETROIT, MICH.,

February 5, 1943.

Mr. BURCHILL. Is that a publication which you issue?
Mr. RICHTER. Yes, sir. That is our regular newspaper.

Mr. SCANLON. That is sent to all your members?

Mr. RICHTER. It is sent to every one of our members. It is the United Automobile Worker. That has a circulation of over 1,000,000. Mr. SCANLON. Are you through?

Mr. RICHTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. LANDIS. I would like to ask a few questions.

Mr. SCANLON. Mr. Landis.

Mr. LANDIS. I think almost everyone agrees that labor has done a good job. I have tried to give credit to the job labor has done and the job the railroads have done on transportation and the job that the coal miners have done. They produced more coal, I think, in 1942 than they ever produced in their lives, and I realize that we have not had very many strikes. We have had a few, and we have had some criticism of those strikes that we have had.

Of course, there are some people who believe that there should not be any strikes, but we have had some other things, like a few subversive individuals, and, of course, you may find them in every group, as you say. We find a few racketeers. You may find them in every group. We find a few people in the labor movement who have jumped into these war plants and have taken excessive initiation fees and excessive dues, which have caused a great deal of criticism from the public.

I consider labor unions as a sort of public institution, and this bill that I introduced, H. R. 1483, was to try to get to these fellows who charge these high initiation fees and these high dues, and also to get at any subversive individual and try to clean it up and really make it better so that you would have better public sentiment.

I do not believe that the labor situation has reached its peak. Of course, if you would agree that labor had reached its peak, why, then there would not be much else. I have talked to labor leaders. I have talked to employers. The employers look at it from their standpoint from the business standpoint-and are not close enough to the labor organizations and the employees-that is, they seem to be too busy with their own affairs and too busy with business really to discuss and talk over some of the matters and explain their situation and their problem to the labor leaders or the labor foremen or the management committees.

On the other hand, I find labor leaders and management committees are too far apart. They think of the labor element of it and probably are not interested in the marketing and the distribution and the producing of the goods.

I think that the ideal situation would be for labor to understand more the problems of the employer and the employer to understand more the problems of the employees. I think that they are too far apart and that we could get a better situation.

The intent of these hearings was to discuss these bills and also to discuss some other labor problems of the day. I just wondered if you have any ideas on how we could get to some of these subversive individuals or some of these what I would call labor racketeers.

Mr. RICHTER. Congressman, first I would like to ask you on what evidence you base the statement that there are racketeers and subversive elements in the labor movement to the extent that it requires congressional action, while similar problems in other associations and other organizations do not require the attention of Congress.

Mr. LANDIS. Well, the biggest labor leaders have promised to clean house and promised to do these things. I think Daniel Tobin, head of the teamsters, made a statement not long ago that if they did not clean house they would have regulation and that there were some

subversive individuals, labor leaders, who should be taken care of by their own organization.

Mr. RICHTER. If that is true, if labor has recognized that its house should be cleaned, and is cleaning its house, why should we pass legislation on it?

Mr. LANDIS. The question in my mind is that they have not cleaned house.

Mr. RICHTER. Congressman, I have just cited actual subversive activities being carried on by employer associations. Do you have any similar documents or evidence of labor circulating literature?

Mr. LANDIS. We have had evidence of that. The Dies committee has given us evidence of that from time to time.

Mr. DAY. Actual subversive literature coming from some union? Mr. LANDIS. From labor leaders or individuals. The Dies reports have records of different individuals.

Mr. SCANLON. I believe the only one that I have heard of who has been accused, who has been a labor leader, since I have been in Congress, and there was a great fuss made over him-we might as well call a spade a spade here was Harry Bridges. It seems to me that the whole labor organization is being crucified for him. I do not like to mention names, but he is the only one I have heard of, but I would like to see on what basis the Dies committee has reported. I have not heard of or known of any others.

Mr. LANDIS. They have several of them on their list.

Mr. DAY. I heard the charge about the steamship unions and the maritime unions. I think they refer to that, do they not?

Mr. LANDIS. No. They have the record of each individual. I have called up there about several individuals. They will give you the record.

Mr. DAY. Not as a union, did they?

Mr. LANDIS. No; as an individual in a union. For instance, Harry Bridges runs the union on the west coast.

Mr. DAY. That is again the same thing to which the witness has referred here. There might be individuals in associations of employers, but it is not the association itself.

Mr. LANDIS. No, but a bill like H. R. 804-of course, we are not ready for that yet-would eliminate Harry Bridges from being an official of a union. I imagine the bill was directed at people like Harry Bridges.

Mr. RICHTER. Congressman, since when is an alien ipso facto subversive? That does not say anything about being subversive. If that is the fact, let us talk about subversive activities.

Mr. LANDIS. I will ask you this question. Would you oppose a bill which prohibited a subversive individual from representing a labor organization?

Mr. RICHTER. No, sir; I would not at this time, and I do not believe any citizen interested in the welfare of the country at this time would, because that is not our problem at this time. If we are to face the critical problems of the country, that is not the kind of legislation we should be bothering with.

Harry Bridges, incidentally, is being tried by the appropriate agencies of Government on the subversive activities charges. He has been found guilty once and he has been found not guilty twice, and the