Alabama, and Tennessee, violated that section of the code in this way: Spinners operating 6- to 8-size spinning were given 10- to 12-size, and on warp spinning those who operated 12-size were given 12-, 14-, and 16-size.

I merely mention this because we read in the newspapers that 92 percent or 97 percent, or some percentage above 90 percent, have complied with the provisions of the code and are going to continue to do so.

I now come to the bill. I think that the passage of this bill would assist the employers, because those to whom I have talked make the statement that they are not going to be able to maintain code standards unless there is something done to prevent the unfair manufacturer from chiseling.

I have also asked the question of those to whom I have talked if they could control 8 percent of the manufacturers, admitting for the sake of the argument that 92 percent of them are fair-which I do not admit. But for the sake of the argument admit that 92 percent are fair. I asked them if they could control the other 8 percent. The answer in every case has been no, that they could not control even one manufacturer.

I say that this bill or some law would be of assistance to the manufacturers since it would remove entirely or would certainly reduce to a minimum the things that the manufacturers themselves complain of, that is, unfair trade practices and unfair competition.

In January or February 1935, in the General Assembly of South Carolina a 40-hour week bill was introduced, and the representative of the Cotton Manufacturers' Association of South Carolina was presenting an argument against the bill, that being Mr. Frank Watkins. Mr. Watkins stated at that time that the manufacturers in the industry would be willing to cooperate with any law that was universal in nature, which would maintain fair competitive practices.

That statement was made not only by Mr. Watkins but it has been made for a number of years by different manufacturers in the legislatures throughout the South.

I am not surprised that they are opposing this bill, but I cannot understand why they would oppose a bill that is going to remove, or if not entirely remove at least reduce to a minimum, the things of which they complain.

I want to discuss section 13 of the proposed bill. It deals with loans and contracts. I want to call attention to the fact that on October 31 there appeared in the Daily News Record a list of textile manufacturers who had received loans or who had secured loans from the R. F. C.

I am not going to attempt to discuss each particular case, but I have selected some of them, and perhaps two or three of the worst ones. Many of those who received or secured loans from the R. F. C. were among the worst offenders of the N. R. A. terms, who did not comply with the provisions of the Code of Fair Competition and did not comply with any provision of the N. R. A.

In Mooresville, N. C., the Morresville Cotton Mills received a loan of $800,000. After the N. R. A. was declared invalid in June the management of the Mooresville Cotton Mills began discharging officers of the local union and members of the shop committee. That continued on. They refused to meet with the committee designated

by the local union to take up their grievances, which finally brought about a strike. Discrimination against union members brought about the strike, which occurred September 7.

The Mooresville Cotton Mills had not received this loan at that time. We appealed to the Textile Labor Relations Board, and they sent in conciliators in an attempt to adjust the differences. But during the latter part of October they received the loan. The management did meet with the conciliators, but after receiving the loan they refused to meet with them, that is, with the conciliators from the Textile Labor Relations Board. They had already refused to meet with the committee designated by the workers.

In that particular case, a few days later they were awarded a contract for goods, and, if I remember correctly, it was a half million jars. The Mooresville Cotton Mills have evicted 216 families from mill company houses. That is not the entire history of the Mooresville situation, but I have stated it briefly.

Another case is that of the Chesnee Mills, Chesnee, S. C. John A. Law is president of the Saxon Mill at Spartanburg, also the Chesnee Mill at Chesnee, S. C. Mr. Law was able to secure a loan of $275,000 from the R. F. C. He secured this loan at a time when the workers in the Saxon Mill were out on strike. They struck because of a $3.50 wage reduction in two departments, carding and weaving, and an increased machine load. That strike is still in progress, and has been since last July 30. The people are still out.

He secured a loan and he is operating the Chesnee Mill three 8-hour shifts. But up to this date although he has discussed the situation with conciliators from the Textile Labor Relations Board he refuses to do anything about it. And I suppose he will continue to do so as long as he can operate the Chesnee mill on three shifts.

Oconee Textiles, Inc., Westminster, S. C., last summer reduced wages 25 percent. The statement was made by the manager of the plant to the employees that it was necessary to reduce the wages 25 percent or close down the mill. He received a loan of $35,000.

The Globe Cotton Mills, Augusta, Ga., received a loan of $48,750. I might say that the Globe Cotton Mills, of Augusta, during the regime of the Textile Labor Relations Board, did this. We had quite a bit of trouble with them because of discrimination against union members. And the Textile Labor Relations Board rendered a decision that was never complied with by the Globe Cotton Mills.

The Cherokee Spinning Co., Knoxville, Tenn., received a loan of $400,000. A hearing was held in that case also, and a statement of policy of the management as to how they would return the employees to work was made. But they have never been returned to work.

In mentioning those mills, Mr. Chairman, I say that 95 percent of those in the South that secured loans from the R. F. C. were mills that had had trouble all of the time. We had had trouble with them all of the time. They were mills which had reduced wages and stretched the workers out still further under N. R. A.

It is my opinion with respect to this bill that there has to be something done to take care of such acts as those on the part of the management of mills. We have hundreds of people in the States who are out of work and who have been out of work since the general strike. They are blacklisted. But if you should ask me the question if I could produce a blacklist, I would answer by saying I cannot. But we

know that they have a blacklist. We have tried to get hold of it. An employee who is once discriminated against by one mill management is not able to get a job any other place in any other mill. As soon as he tells his name and where he is from it means that he will not get a job, even though they may want weavers, spinners, carders, or what not.

The managements of the textile industry are not going to get together in 8 years or in 30 years and voluntarily agree to bring about better conditions in the industry. If they intended to do so they have had since 1929 and years before that. But certainly they have had since 1929 to bring about better conditions. And, if anything, conditions are worse now in many of the plants than they were in 1933. I think it is very important when we find that mills which refuse to comply with any law-and that is what they have done-are able to secure from some department of the Government loans to carry on their business and, in addition to that, can secure a contract or an order for goods from another department of the Government.

Now, in regard to section 16, wages, I heard the statement made yesterday that because of climatic conditions we do not need as much in the South as the people need in some other sections of the country. I would like to have someone who thinks we do not have to have fires down there or fuel by which to keep warm, to go down into South Carolina now and see just how long he would be able to remain in a room if it were not heated in some way. The temperature may not be quite as low as it is up here, but it bites in just as deeply as it does right here in Washington and farther north and in other places I have been.

$15 is not too much to ask as a minimum wage when you take into consideration the difference in prices of foodstuffs. I am not talking in terms of percentage because I am not a mathematician. But I am going to read some figures appearing in the newspapers in December 1933 and January 1936, showing the difference in prices of foodstuffs. Pillsbury's Best flour: December 1933, a 24-pound sack sold for 79 cents. In January, 1936, the same flour was advertised at $1.29. Lard, a 4-pound container in 1933, 25 cents; in 1936, in January, 99 cents.

Sliced breakfast bacon: A pound in 1933 cost 15 cents, but now it costs 35 cents.

We might go down to something that we textile workers can eat, so I will go down to beans.

Four pounds of beans for 15 cents in 1933, but in 1936 they were 5.5 cents a pound.

Fat back: 5%1⁄2 cents a pound in 1933, but 12%1⁄2, 15, and up to 18 and 20 cents a pound in the latter part of 1935 and in 1936.

Of course, when I mention friers and hens I am only comparing prices and I am not talking about what we eat.

Friers in 1933 were selling for 18 cents but in 1936 were selling for 29 cents.

Hens were 15 cents a pound at that time as compared with 25 cents a pound today.

When we take those prices into consideration $15 is not any too much to ask as a minimum wage. And when we say minimum wage we are not talking about a wage for weavers and spinners. They

deserve more and should have more money. But we are talking of the minimum wage for unskilled workers. A sweeper should receive $15.

I have never been able to understand how people think that because a person happens to be a sweeper in a cotton mill that he does not have to eat and does not have to buy all of the necessities of life just the same as any other person has to buy them.

In addition to the difference in the prices of foodstuffs, house rent has been increased. I am talking about company-owned houses now. The house rent has been increased from 10 cents per room to 25 cents per room. Of course, that sounds like a small proposition, but when you take into consideration a 4-room house cost a dollar a week in 1931 or 1932-and they never cost any more than that-you can see what it means. Since the N. R. A. came into existence the rent was increased from 10 cents per room to 25 cents per room. In other words, we might say four rooms for $1 a week and four rooms for $2 a week.

As to lights and water, very few of the mills in the South charged for light and water until the latter part of 1932; but in 1933 the lights and water were put on the employee to pay for. And, of course, he pays just like anybody else pays, except that he pays through the office. Whatever he is told he owes is put on his wage envelope and deducted. It is not a question of his paying for it; it is a question of its being deducted. And very often when all of these deductions are made for the company store, the house rent, fuel, and so forth, there is nothing left in the wage envelope.

On one occasion I got 23 envelopes together and I did not select them. I asked that some wage envelopes be brought to me, and I just picked out at random the envelopes from different departments, and out of the 23 there was $1 cash drawn. One employee drew 5 cents and another one drew 95 cents, making $1 cash drawn on that pay day by 23 employees.

Of course, we do have nice houses down there and nice gardens. I am sorry I do not have some pictures to present here as evidence of what I might call exhibit A, showing the lovely little cottages down there.

When I say that I do not mean to be sarcastic. But the manufacturers come with their prayer books to Washington and they tell about how they take care of the people. And there are a few mill villages in the South that are all right. The Chicopee Manufacturing Co., near Gainesville, Ga., has a very nice mill village. It is very up to date. I would say that that ranks first in the South. Goldsville, S. C., I would say, is second of all those that I know of in the South.

Then there is the Merrimac Manufacturing Co. village at Huntsville.

As to the houses in many of these places, you can throw a baseball through them. I don't mean that you can hit a windowpane and go through in that way, but you can actually throw it through the weatherboarding.

I mention those matters for your information. It is not a question of my standing up here and making those statements. If those statements cannot be substantiated by actual facts I would be afraid to make them here. But they can be substantiated.

The wages should be increased and there should be some provision made to take care of those in the higher brackets.

There is another part in this paragraph or subsection of this particular section 16 which provides that employees shall receive their wages intact.

I think that that would be very beneficial to the workers in the South if some such universal law were enacted. And it must be Nation-wide. It cannot be just a State law. We are not going to get any laws passed in any States that are going to take care of the situation.

If the employees in the 98 percent of the mills in the South want cash money with which to have a prescription filled or to pay a doctor or to buy whatever they want to buy, it doesn't make any difference whether it is whisky or whatnot, they can draw a coupon book or metal disks that are worth a nickle, a dime, or a quarter, and so on, and they can discount those at the company-owned stores at a discount of from 10 to 25 percent. It is necessary for them to do that in order to obtain the cash money with which to have these prescriptions filled or to pay for whatever they want to buy. I am not going to be silly and stand up here and tell you that every employee does that. There are some who do not have to do it. Where there are four or five working in a family perhaps they can get by without doing it. But where you have a man with four or five in his family and his wages must provide for that family, then it becomes necessary for him to discount his wages at the company-owned store in order to receive cash money with which to make purchases.

The subsection dealing with the separation wage would prevent employees from being literally kicked out of the mill or evicted from their houses with no place to go and with no money. When they are kicked out, they have no money; they live from day to day. And this separation wage would prevent their having to go to the door of some charitable relief organization or to the Federal relief office and apply for food within the next day or two following their discharge. It would at least give them something with which they could go around in search of work and something with which to take care of their families while they were searching for work.

The wages are not going to be increased just because the manufacturers feel that they want to increase them. I have worked in a mill, and I have never received any wage increases except what we were able to demand and get. That is the only way we have ever received any wage increase in the South. And I am not expecting any wage increases in the future from them unless that is done by law and unless the workers themselves are in a position to see that that law is complied with by the management of the mill.

That was proved under N. R. A. Where the workers were organized they were able to get fairly good compliance with N. R. A. but where they were unorganized they were not able to do anything about it, and wages and the stretch-out were just whatever the management decided to give them.

In my feeble way I have tried to show why we want more money, because we are now paying house rent that we did not pay for at one time. I might tell you of one place in the eastern part of North Carolina, at Laurinburg and at other places in there where they did not charge any house rent until the N. R. A. came into existence, and when N. R. A. became effective they started charging house rent at 50 cents a room. I am referring to the Marlboro Cotton Mills.