Mr. CHURCH. Forget the National Citizens Political Action Committee; forget the C. I. O. Political Action Committee. Forget those now and go back. Mr. HILLMAN. Go back to what? Mr. CHURCH. To the many special assessments that were collected from the locals. Mr. HILLMAN. What special assessment? Mr. CHURCH. He pays a special assessment. Mr. HILLMAN. Who? Mr. CHURCH. The member of the local. Mr. HILLMAN. In what connection? Mr. CHURCH. In connection with being a member. He has a special assessment. Mr. HILLMAN. You mean for politics or otherwise? Mr. CHURCH. He has some special assessment to pay. Mr. HILLMAN. What kind? Will you educate me? I would like to understand what it is that you are after. Here is a local union. Are you discussing the way the local union runs its affairs? Mr. CHURCH. I am talking about a local union. Mr. HILLMAN. A local union? Mr. CHURCH. Yes. Mr. HILLMAN. A local union is part of an international union. They have established whatever laws they have. Many international organizations have different rules and different laws. They have got certain procedure for the payment of per capita dues. Then they have rules for special assessments. It would differ with each international union. Now, the national organization may say, "You cannot lay an assessment for certain kinds of things." I could not answer you about a local union. There are 50 international unions. There are 140 unions in the A. F. of L. Each organization has its special rules. You would have to ask me, "What does the Carpenters Local 888 do on this kind of a thing?" and if I know I will be very glad to give you the information. Mr. CHURCH. What does the member for example in Local No. 25 of the United Packing House Workers do? I refer to the United Packing House Workers' contribution of $1,000, referred to on page 31 of the Senate report, that you are familiar with. What does that local member do to start that $1,000 that the C. I. O.-P. A. C. received? Mr. HILLMAN. Which $1,000? From the packing-house organization? Mr. CHURCH. Yes. Mr. HILLMAN. That is what I would like to understand. We can only discuss the proposition if we discuss one and the same thing. Mr. CHURCH. All right. Mr. HILLMAN. We are not dealing with local unions. Local unions send us contributions and we notify them that we do not want contributions from local unions. As the chairman of the C. I. O. Political Action Committee, I called in the heads, a number of the heads, of these international organizations, and told them, "Now, we need funds for educational work," and I want to reemphasize educational work, in connection with politics and many other things. We need funds. I have said before, my estimate was that we would need half to three-quarters of a million dollars to establish this Nation-wide organization, up to and including the primary dates and the conventions. The money came from the treasuries of the international unions. That is what we are discussing, not an individual member. The international union or the international organization, whatever its name is, goes through its procedure, whatever its constitution provides, whatever they have to do in order to make a contribution. Let us say that I, as the president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, convene our general executive board. The general executive board has, under our constitution, the power to make contributions. I have no power. The 1940 convention passed a resolution that we can spend money by authorization of the general executive board, for political activities. Mr. CHURCH. The board determines that? Mr. HILLMAN. Yes. I know exactly what happened in the organization. The general executive board made a determination that the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America shall make a contribution of $100,000. We published that in our papers. That is perfectly within the constitution. Mr. CHURCH. You published the thing that you had already done? Mr. HILLMAN. Yes; under the laws of our organization. Mr. CHURCH. And the board is authorized to make that assessment? Hr. HILLMAN. That is right. Then the general executive board, having taken that position, we met again in Chicago last May 1944, in convention. The convention could then censure us or upset our situation. We reported the matter to the convention and the convention unanimously approved it. And that is what we call our democratic procedure in our organization. Mr. CHURCH. That is what I thought. It is the communistic way, from the top down. Now, going back before the executive officers voted that money Mr. HILLMAN. You started to talk about a local union. It has no connection with that. I am willing and anxious to give you full information, but I must know what is the information desired. Mr. CHURCH. You have told me now what the executive officers of the Amalgamated did. Mr. HILLMAN. That is right. Mr. CHURCH. They voted $100,000. Mr. HILLMAN. That is right. Mr. CHURCH. And you and the other officers took it? Mr. HILLMAN. Yes. Mr. CHURCH. And put it in the bank up there? Mr. HILLMAN. Yes. Mr. CHURCH. In New York. Now, going backward from that $100,000 that was in the treasury, what action did any member of your outfit ever take to approve that, other than, when you went to Chicago later on, published what you had done, and you had some delegates there and told about it and other things, and they approved it? Mr. HILLMAN. Congressman, we function as organizations, and a labor organization, even in the city of Chicago, Ill., has got definite functions. Mr. CHURCH. You tell them what to do? Mr. HILLMAN. Pardon me, you are trying to put a wrong interpretation upon it. Congressman, if other organizations will conduct themselves with the same democratic process as the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, they will be doing quite well. We meet every 2 years in convention. That is the only way, obviously, that the membership can express itself, the membership as a whole. There must be an agency that will make decisions between the conventions, unless you want to wipe out any effectiveness of a labor organization. My election is by a referendum vote. And if the membership do not like the policies that I sponsor, then they have an opportunity to vote me down. Those are the possibilities that you can provide for the democratic process in any organization. Mr. CHURCH. You call that democratic? Mr. HILLMAN. Obviously it is democratic. Mr. CHURCH. Do you know of any member in your organization that had any voice in the voting of any contribution that he made that made up the $100,000? Mr. HILLMAN. Every one of these things has been discussed in the local unions. Even the organization of our committee-before we ever started. We started the organization July 7, and after July 7 I personally visited throughout the Nation with representatives of C. I. O. unions in about 40 States of the Union. It was a matter of public discussion. Then they came prepared to vote for or against in the C. I. O. convention held in November, in the city of Philadelphia. Mr. CHURCH. November of 1943? Mr. HILLMAN. November of 1943. So that when the delegates voted on that proposition, it had been a subject-matter of discussion in the local unions. I have attended conferences with labor representatives in California. In Illinois-we called a conference for 11 Midwestern States. We had over 300 people. We put a program before them. We gave them the reasons why we believed it ought to be done. They went back to their organizations and for months it was a matter of discussion. Then we came to the national convention of the C. I. O. in Philadelphia and it was unanimously approved. What more can be done than to get the approval of the people we represent? Mr. CHURCH. You got away from my illustration of the United Packing House Workers of America who contributed a thousand dollars. Mr. HILLMAN. That is an international union that gives $1,000. They must have proceeded along the same lines as I proceeded in the Amalgamated. Mr. CHURCH. You say they must have. Let me show you where they did not and the pressure used. Let me read you this statement appearing in the press. The controversy began last May when the international union took over the local that was Local 25 of the United Packing House Workers (C. I. O.) in Chicago removing from office Doc. J. Williams, Negro, who had just been elected president. Williams charged the action was taken because he defied an order to pay a $1,000 assessment of the Congress of Industrial Organization Political Action Committee, and took the issue into superior court. He was removed by the work of your district representative. Mr. CHURCH. Well, your C. I. O. organization regional director. Mr. HILLMAN. Pardon me. You know, I am speaking here for the C. I. O. Political Action Committee. Mr. CHURCH. I know. Doc J. Williams, president of his Local 25,. charged the action was taken because he defied an order from C. I. O. to pay a $1,000 assessment to the C. I. O. Political Action Committee, and took the issue to the superior court. Now by tomorrow I hope to have a copy of the complaint and proceedings in the superior court. Mr. HILLMAN. I will be delighted- Mr. CHURCH. But Mr. Williams happened to find out that I was in Chicago over last week end and brought this to my attention. Now Mr. Williams was the president of his Local 25. That was in May of this year that he was required to make this assessment, and he refused and was removed from office as president. Mr. HILLMAN. You say this is coming up in court; I feel we ought to permit the two parties to try it in court. Mr. CHURCH. You say it is a voluntary contribution. Mr. HILLMAN. Pardon me. I, in my experience, have removed officers from office for racketeering and, of course, undoubtedly they made all kinds of claims until they have had their day in court, and they were thrown out of court. Now I will say this: I do not believe a single word of that suggestion. I do not charge you are trying to misinform, but I do not believe that any organization has made any arbitrary decision. It is a matter of record that some organizations in the C. I. O. have made no contribution, and it was all right with us. This is all on a voluntary basis. A large organization did not make a contribution of one nickel. That is all right with us; that is their business. But I will say to you that this kind of thing is a prejudgment. I do not know. That man might have been thrown out because they did not like the color of his eyes, or because of something else that you and I know nothing about. And I think we probably ought to let the court make a finding; but it is inconceivable to me that this member was removed for that, because we have asked no one but for voluntary contributions. And the fact is that some have made no contribution. Mr. CHURCH. In the Senate hearing of June 13 through the 17th, you said up to that time there had been no complaint from any comparable number. Mr. HILLMAN. That is right; and I have not heard from him. Mr. CHURCH. You have not heard from him? Mr. HILLMAN. No. Mr. CHURCH. But you have heard now from Utah, have you not? Mr. HILLMAN. I have heard from Utah. Mr. CHURCH. And you have heard now from Gary, and have heard now from these other three or four? Mr. HILLMAN. Now, let us speak of Utah. What did you hear from Utah. I mean, let us get your statement. Mr. CHURCH. They are complaining about this collecting activity by these organizations of which you are president. Mr. HILLMAN. On what? Now you tell us this story. |