Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

come to a thorough stabilization of economic conditions in America. In my judgment, we cannot go on with 10,000,000 idle men. They are not going to remain idle, and they are not going to ride the other fellows' shoulders, and the other fellows are not going to let them do it. It seems to me that we are facing that problem above all others; and it seems to me that this little committee here, with men of your tremendous experience along this very line, ought to begin to consider that in relation to this very bill about which we are talking. And I would like to have you talk to me a little bit about that. I would like to have you say what you think about it, if you will be kind enough to do so.

Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. I think you have a problem here that is even beyond the scope of this particular bill. This bill will result in additional employment of labor in the cotton, woolen, silk, and allied industries undoubtedly; it will permit of steadier employment in that industry insofar as former employees of the industry or those in seasonal unemployment in the industry are numbered among the ten millions to whom you refer. It is going to relieve the problem to that extent by keeping them employed at regular hours during regular years of employment. Of course, so far as industrial life of the country beyond the textile industry is concerned, some other legislation will have to be enacted in addition to this. If by the same reasoning that we apply in approaching the textile industry situation other industries can be brought under the supervision of the Federal Government, then probably the solution which you have in mind is not far away, assuming that all of the basic industries of the country are sufficiently national in scope, as has been proven in the case of this industry, and that to those industries must return the greater part of the 10,000,000 people to whom you referred.

Then probably the solution is similar regulatory boards in those other industries to that which is proposed here.

Mr. WOOD. Governor, just one more question. You spoke of 90 percent of the industry agreeing to maintain the standards of N. R. A., if possible. Is that 90 percent of the employers or 90 percent of the production?

Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. I don't know, sir. That was the figure given me by Mr. Fisher. And I assume he can answer that when he gets up. I just took 90 percent and 10 percent, but I don't know upon what it is based.

Mr. Wood. Probably a smaller percentage of production have agreed to it.

Mr. HURLEY. I don't know about that. I have no objection to Mr. Fisher's being cross-examined at great length when he takes the stand.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Governor about that tariff situation.

To what extent do you think that the importations of textile products from other countries are affecting the industry as a whole? Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. To what extent, you ask?

Mr. SCHNEDIER. Yes; to what extent is it affecting the industry as a whole?

Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. To the extent their prices are so much below the cost of production in this country, and especially if new legislation is adopted maintaining the standards that we want

56725-36-11

to be maintained, they are able to undersell our American manufacturers. I do not think the amount that comes in is enough to worry about in fair competition with what we sell that is manufactured here; but because it comes in at a cheaper selling price than we can manufacture the same or comparable goods for in this country, then it is something to be concerned about.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. No one knows just the amount that may possibly be shipped in here at the present time from foreign countries, particularly Japan and Russia.

Lieutenant GOVERNOR HURLEY. I presume there are statistics available on that. I have them up until February or last year. They are compiled by Government agencies.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. I understand at the present time there are considerable linen textiles coming in from Russia at very destructive prices, and it is an indication that not only Russia but also Japan is increasing the production capacity of their industry. So the future of the industry in America with reference to destructive competition is very gloomy.

What applies in the textile industry also applies in the papermaking industry. You speak about the improvement in the conditions in the textile industry in the early days with reference to the regulation of hours. You probably remember that in Massachusetts in 1912 there was a bill introduced in the legislature to establish an 8-hour day in the paper mills in that State. At that time they operated 12 hours a day. As a result of the introduction of that measure in the legislature, which was not enacted, the paper-mill workers became organized and, as a result thereof, effected the 8-hour day.

The paper industry, like the textile industry, is now going to the South very rapidly. Long hours prevailed in the South, the 12 hours a day, two tours in the 24 hours, until the enactment of the National Recovery Act, when they went on the 8-hour day. Many of them are complaining now about not being able to produce in competition with the imports from other countries, the same as the textile industry is complaining. And there is a large importation of paper from other countries. As to newsprint, probably 75 percent is now coming from Canada, Newfoundland, Finland, and Norway, with the possibility of a very great increase, so that there may not be any newsprint made in America.

There is also coming into this country Kraft paper, from Finland particularly, at very destructive prices-$15 to $20 a ton under the American price.

The newspapers have a campaign on-that is, some of them particularly, the Hearst papers-to buy in America. But the Hearst papers, as well as most of the other large papers of the country, buy their paper foreign in the cheapest market in the world, there being no tariff on newsprint nor on pulp. Therefore, the paper industry in New England particularly will be a thing of the past within a very few years.

So the matter of the textile industry is not so much unlike many other industries.

Now, as a good Democrat, Governor, what is your position with reference to the enactment of legislation that will prevent the importation of products that will destroy American industry, and particularly the making of these reciprocal tariff trade agreements?

Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. I am in favor of establishing a quota upon importations so that we will be receiving in this country no more than the average during the normal years that preceded this general decline in business in this country. Take the average textiles, for instance, from 1928 through 1930 or 1931 from Japan, and tell the Japanese, "You cannot bring in any more than that average." Mr. SCHNEIDER. But the administration has failed to apply the quota, particularly to paper and pulp as well as to many other commodities that come in under the new reciprocal trade agreements. I recall last year the Secretary of State discouraged the putting into these agreements any quota arrangements and claimed that they would not work. I know there are quotas on some of the commodities which are included in the new agreements.

Mr. KELLER. Governor, you are such a good witness that I do not like to impose upon you. But when you talk of overproduction, isn't all overproduction simply underconsumption?

Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. Well, one seems to be the corollary of the other. But which starts the other I do not pretend to be able to say, except that we certainly should not be producing any more than we can consume and sell abroad.

Mr. KELLER. The reason I call your attention to it particularly is this: A noted economist after a great deal of work on the subject, is responsible for the recent statement that if we will increase the income which I think he takes as an average over a certain period of $1,600 and increase that to $2,400 a year, increasing it 50 percent, instead of using 11,000,000 bales of cotton in the United States we would use 20,000,000 bales of cotton here. I should think that would apply, and I understand it does apply, to every other industry. Therefore, it does seem to me that we ought to consider here the question of doing whatever is necessary to increase the income of men so that they can buy, because unless men can buy they will not buy, and just in proportion as they are able to buy they will buy, and just as they are in position to buy and do buy we will come back to a state of prosperity. And we are not going to come back without it. It does seem to me that we ought to go into basic things here. As to these States which are tremendously interested in textiles, it seems to me they should begin to study this very subject-how not to lose their textile industry; and if they are going to lose their textile industries under present conditions, then change the conditions and keep the textiles, because the minute you raise the income 50 percent above what it is, it will enable us to use 20,000,000 bales of cottonit will put every man in America at work making textiles, whether he is in Massachusetts, in South Carolina, or in any other State.

You would also find that the conditions down South, where the low wages are paid, would have to be changed and those wages would have to come up. And the real crux of the matter, as I see it, is just the equalization of wages in this country. Am I more or less right in. that?

Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. I believe in increasing the purchasing power.

Mr. KELLER. If that were applied to the textile industry and would do that for the textile industry, it would do the same thing for other industries, would it not?

Lieutenant Governor HURLEY. I think so. I do not see any reason why it would not apply.

Mr. KELLER. I thank you very much. To my mind you have been the best witness I have ever heard in committee hearings. You have given a great deal of study to the matter and have had a wide experience. I want to thank you for coming here and, finally, I want to ask you to thank Governor Curley-whom I have had the pleasure of knowing for sending us the best witness we have ever had. And that is with all due respect and consideration to the other witnesses.

Lietuenant Governor HURLEY. Thank you very much.

Mr. KELLER. We will now proceed to call the following witnesses in order, unless there is some special reason for not doing so. We will go straight on with the hearing until 4:30 or 5 o'clock and, if we have to do it, we will run a little later than that. We are going to hear every man who comes in, and we will sit until we do hear all of you. Will Harold Daust please come forward.

STATEMENT OF HAROLD DAUST, PRESIDENT, MASSACHUSETTS TEXTILE COUNCIL

Mr. KELLER. Will you please state your full name and position? Mr. DAUST. Harold Daust. I am president of the Massachusetts Textile Council. I am a weaver in a textile mill.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I represent the Massachusetts Textile Council which is composed of 46 locals of the woolen and worsted, cotton, rayon, and upholstery and tapestry workers, numbering 24,000. I have been sent here by that council to speak in favor of the bill. We have our arguments with respect to maximum hours, minimum wage, and child-labor laws. We know that Federal legislation is necessary for the stabilization of the industry and to eliminate the cutthroat competition.

I am not going to take up much of your time here because some of the previous speakers have covered practically all of the ground.

In our industry we know that the N. R. A. has been a blessing, and we also know that our own manufacturer has told us that the N. R. A. has been a blessing to the small manufacturer. Of course, in Massachusetts the mills are spread out in the small communities numbering anywhere from 100 to 1,000 workers in a plant. It certainly has helped them in competition. Therefore, on those arguments with regard to the child-labor law, these manufacturers in their zeal to get the business are employing these children in our State and down through the South, and it is eliminating a lot of these adults. The stretch-out system is also being practiced to quite an extent in our State.

So we feel, and the council has instructed me to ask you gentlemen to consider the 35-hour week and minimum wage as being something necessary to stabilize the industry.

That is about all I have to say with regard to the matter. We ask your favorable consideration of this bill.

Mr. RAMSPECK. Mr. Daust, have you ever been down in the South? Mr. DAUST. No, sir; I have not.

Mr. RAMSPECK. You do not know anything about the conditions down there?r

Mr. DAUST. No, sir; only what I hear.

Mr. RAMSPECK. That is all I want to ask you.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. I would like to ask you if you have much difficulty on the part of the workers in the exercise of their rights to belong to a union without interference on the part of the employer.

Mr. DAUST. Yes, sir; we do.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Then the Wagner-Connery bill in Massachusetts is not being well enforced? Is that it?

Mr. DAUST. With regard to the Wagner-Connery bill, there was an election held in the plant of one of the mills. That is the only place where it has been exercised.

Mr. KELLER. And what was the result?

Mr. DAUST. Do you mean with regard to the election?
Mr. KELLER. Yes; that is it. How did the election go?

Mr. DAUST. The independent organization that we had there went out for the simple reason that when our organization was in there they employed in that plant a little over 500, but they kept increasing their force and got it up to a little over 900 employees, whereas before when running full-time they never had any more than a little over 500. With these extra people in there, they lost out.

Mr. SCHNEIDER. There is quite a general feeling among the employees that they want to enjoy the provisions of the Wagner-Connery bill, the right to belong to a union that they wish to belong to.

Mr. KELLER. We are now going to recess. We will return here at 1:40 p.m.

(Thereupon, at 12:10 p. m., the committee recessed, to resume the hearing at 1:40 p. m.)

AFTER RECESS

(The hearing was resumed at 1:40 p. m., pursuant to recess.)

Mr. KELLER. The committee will please come to order.

We will now follow down the list we started on just before lunch.

STATEMENT OF JOHN A. PEEL, VICE PRESIDENT, UNITED TEXTILE WORKERS OF AMERICA

Mr. KELLER. Will you please state your name and address? Mr. PEEL. My name is John A. Peel. I am vice president of the United Textile Workers of America, Greeneville, S. C.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, before discussing the bill, I wish to say that a statement has been made in the newspapers numerous times as to how the manufacturers in the cotton division of the textile industry have complied with the code of fair competition.

If I remember correctly, section 13 of the code of fair competition reads as follows:

On and after the effective date, July 17, 1933, no employee of any mill in the cotton division of the textile industry shall be required to do any work in excess of the practices of July 1, 1933.

As I say, they have boasted from time to time as to how they have complied with the code of fair competition that those gentlemen helped to draft. I am going to make this statement without fear of successful contradiction, that on the morning of July 17, 1933, 90 percent of the manufacturers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,

« ÎnapoiContinuă »