Evening Star Newspaper, June 21, 1936, Page 33

Editorial Page Special Articles Part 2—12 Pages EDITORIAL SECTION he Sundiy Star WASHINGTON, D. C, SUNDAY MORNING, JUNE 21, 1936. Fart Two * INDUSTRY’S TRENDS BRING BITTER BATTLE OF LABOR BRITISH WATCH TREND -OF U. S. FOREIGN POLICY Needing Help in Far East, London Scans Party Platforms for Hint of Our Future Course. BY CONSTANTINE BROWN. HE attention of Europe is fo- cused on the 1936 presidential elections in the United States. | Diplomats in Washington are sending long reports chances of Gov. President Roosevelt. European news- papers have sent a sizable number o reporters and special writers to watch the political developments in country. The Cleveland convention and especially the Republican party, interest in France has aroused more and in Great Britain than any news reports from | the United States the last months. Foreign Ambassadors left their-com= fortable residences in Washington to go to Cleveland to obtain first-hand information about the possible de- velopments in America’s foreign policy should the Republican party be vic- torious at the November elections. ‘The interest in Great Britain and 4n Prance is keener than in other sec- tions of Europe. Leon Blum and in six Stanley Baldwin recognize that the | only hope of maintaining the status quo in the world, as set up by the post-war treaties and by the policies of the League, lies in a whole-hearted | co-operation of the United States with the League of Nations or with either of the two European powers— France and Great Britain. The French premier hopes to make | the improvement of American-French relations a principal achievement of his foreign policy. Not that M. Blum has any particular love for this coun- try or its institutions. But France needs a loan of $1,000,000,000 and he krows that this country has idle capital. Hopes U. S. Will Join League. Furthermore, the leader of the So- cialist party is a firm believer in an efficient League of Nations, and he hopes that by reorganizing that body g0 as to comply more with the ideals | of President Wilson this country might be induced to join the Geneva club. The American people, says M Blum, are peace loving and they ought 1o realize that peace in the world can be achieved only through interna- tional co-operation. The British, too, would like to see the United States in the League, but they realize more than the other continental nations that this will be difficult, even for an administration favorably inclined toward the Geneva organization. The British are realists. Their chief concern is the security of the empire in the Far East. An agree- ment with Mussolini is possible, at a small cost. But an agreement with the Japanese is much more difficult. The British admiralty and the gen- eral staff know that Japan's expan- sionist ambitions cannot be thwarted without the effective co-operation of the United States Navy. And that co- operation can be obtained only if the Washington administration shares the view prevalent in London, that the Japanese menace is much graver than it appears on the surface. For the time being British diplo- macy is trying to play both horses— the United States and Japan. Pend- ing the results of the November elec- tion, Downing street has been trying, unsuccessfully, to reach some under- standing with the Tokio government. Bir Prederick Leith-Ross went to Tokio, allegedly to discuss some sort of a commercial understanding re- garding British interests in China. in the meantime, at the request of the British government, the Japanese ieonsul general in Egypt went to Lon- don to talk over a Japanese-Egyptian commercial agreement. This, at least, was the official explanation of that diplomat’s visit. The real reason, how- ever, was the desire of the British government to sound out the Tokio government on the possibility of rec- onciling their conflicting interests. Results Are Negative. So far the results of those talks have been negative,” The truth is that Britain has nothing to offer in 8 deal with the Japanese. The British government suggested that in exchange for a limitation of Japanese competition in British zones f influence in the Far East Great tain would agree to the establish- ment of & Japanese zone of influence 4 weighing the | Alf Landon against | this | platform of the | down to the Yangtse River and might possibly grant official recognition of | Manchukuo as an independent state. By implication, the British demand- ed a “hands off” policy on the part of Japan in the southern Pacific. The Tokio foreign office was pleased with the suggested recognition of Manchukuo. It would be an impor- tant Japanese victory. But the military do not see the sit- uation through the same spectacles. They are no longer interested in dip- lomatic victories. After carefully ana- |lyzing the British suggestions, they turned them down. Britain, in fact. the military said, offered nothing and wanted everything. It is no longer a secret that the Japanese expansion- ist ambitions are not limited to the control of Northern China, but to the whole of the Asiatic mainland. The Japanese expansionists are at present more interested in the Southern Pa- cific, and look with a greedy eye to- ward Hongkong and the Dutch East Indies. They consider these posses- sions of the white race as ripe plums ready to fall in Japan's lap as soon as the European storm begins to shake the tree. London Aware of Tendencies. London is more aware of the ten- dencies of the Japanese imperialistic policies than any other country. Its remarkable intelligence service fol- lows every move, every gesture of the Japanese. And the reports of these able men show clearly that Japan is headed toward a final showdown with the Western powers which still “en- croach” on the freedom and inde- pendence of the Asiatics. Great Britain alone cannot check- mate Japan’s rising power. And the British cannot foresee any help from the European nations which hereto- fore had been the backbone of West- ern civilization. Strife-ridden France is interested only in the maintenance of her in- terests on the European continent. It is true that the French have a vast colony on the Asiatic mainland— Indo-China. But that colony is not | immediately menaced by Japanese ex- | pansion, and if it were, the Socialist, | anti-imperialist government of Leon Blum would not sacrifice the life of | a single worker to save the fruits of | France's imperialistic policies of 55 years ago. Leon Blum’s colonial sec- | retary, M. Moutet, is one of those | militant Socialists who, in the past, | publicly denounced France's imperial- | ism, demanding the liberation of the | subjected nations from the yoke of | the French capitalists. Under the cir- | cumstances, it would be difficult to conceive that France would be willing to co-operate with Great Britain to arrest Japan’s expansionist aims. P Italy and Germany have very little | at stake in the Far East. Mussolini | is concentrating on building his Afri- | can Empire while Hitler is absorbed in Central and Eastern Europe. Both men have their hands full and are | unlikely to join the British in any ;polmcnl or military combination against Japan. Holland, as much menaced as Great Britain in her co- | lonial empire; is a small country, which is hopefully .looking toward London and Washington for the main- tenance of her Asiatic possessions— Java and Sumatra. Russia, menaced in Europe by the Reich, is satisfied with maintaining a defensive attitude in the Far East. Trail Leads to U. S. By a process of elimination, there- fore, Britain's diplomats have come to the conclusion that the only nation capable of and interested in saving the British Empire in Asia is the United States. London realizes that it will not be easy to obtain the support of this country, where the isolationist idea is stronger today than at any other time during the last 15 years. . American commercial interests . in China are negligible. They represent barely $200,000,000. The prospects of China eventually becoming an impor- tant outlet for America’s industry and agriculture are remote. And even if we weré to take for granted that in years to come the purchasing power of the 480,000,000 Chinese could be consid- erably increased, the gains from such a trade would not even pay the inter- est on the billions which a war with Japan would cost this country. Japan's unscrupulous competition in foreign markets throughout the world N 4 NO. 1—-MEN AND STEEL BUILD A GIANT DAM. NO. 2—UNDER THE HUDSON RIVER. NO. 3—FINISHING AN AUDITORIUM. Green-Lewis Feud Explained NO. 4—LAYING A SECTION OF PIPE. NO. 5—A HARD COAL MINE, Mas; Production Heightens Tension, Though Real Causes of Trouble BY JOHN L. COONTZ. HY is John L. Lewis hurling verbal brickbats at Wil- liam Green, president. of the American Federation of Labor? What is the Committee for Industrial Organization? Where did it come from? What is the quar- rel between Mr. Lewis and Mr. is irksome and causes the American exporters a considerable loss, but it is not sufficient to change the “keep out of war” attitude of the rank and file of the American people. All this is known in London. But there is one consideration which Brit- ish diplomats believe might determine the people in this country to side with Great Britain in the Far East. that is the realization that the even- tual conflict in the. Southern Pacific will not be a conflict between the Brit- ish and the Japanese Empires, but a conflict between the white and yellow races. In view of this eventuality, the British continue to prepare their naval bases at Singapore and the adjacent islands for an eventual co-operation with America’s’ men of war. The Singapore naval and air base has cost the British treasury no less than $75,000,000. But even after such an expenditure it was discovered that Singapore could not offer the neces- sary facilities for the possible co- operation of the two fleets. And last month the House of Comons voted a supplementary credit of $11,000,000 to complete the works of the most for- midable citadel in the world. The foreign affairs platform of the Republican ‘party, however, has of- fered little encouragement to the British government. Its isolationist tendencies are more marked than in previous Republican platforms. The Republican nominee was a lieutenant in the United States Army during the war, and although he has never been abroad, he knows all the bitterness the officers and men of the A. E. F. brought beck with them from the European battlefields. Gov. Landon's running mate, Col. Frank Knox, is a convinced isolationist. The impression the foreign ob- servers obtained in Cleveland was & drepressing one—from their point of view, Should the American electo- rate decide to send the candidate of the Republican party to the White House, the prospects of an active co- operation between this country and Europe will be much fainter even than ever beforé. One diplomatic ob- server remarked that while under the Harding, Coolidge, and especially the Hoover administrations, America at Jeast participated in round-table con- ferences with the other world powers, there is little prospect that even such co-operation would be forthcoming under a Landon presidency, (Coprrigh, 1936.) L} | lies too deep for that. And | Green? Does labor really ®ace trouble? 1Is there really war? The average citizen is deeply in- terested in these questions. These are times when every phase of our eco- nomic and social life are undergoing changes. Why not labor? One reads much of mass production, of craft unions, of the Committee for Indus- trial Organization. What does it all | mean? The story is one that cannot be picked up from casual reading. It goes back a full generation. It goes back to the early 90s, but, for all its age, it is a new story. To get the picture let us sketch the background. Something like 55 years ago the American Federation of Labor was born. Its birth was a normal one in advancing times of indystry and civi- lization. It represented groups of skilled workers in the various trades then existing. Machinists, black- smiths, carpenters and kindred class workers made up the federation. These men were formed into craft unions; all the machinists in the Machinists’ Union, all the carpenters in the Carpenters’ Union. Employer Often Craftsman. 1 Often times the owner of the plant in which these men worked was a skilled worker himself. By persever= ance, the application trained intelli- gence and ability to forge ahead in the world, he, instead of remaining a worker, became an employer of labor. A cordial relationship existed thus, in more than one instance, be- tween the_plant owner and his crafts- men. This was back in the 80s. About 45 years ago or, to be more explicit, with the turn of the 90s, & great change began to manifest itself in the field of industry. What we speak of as “the industrial revolution” be- gan to take shape. The little plant, with its former skilled worker as president, began to fade out of the picture. It began to be absorbed by bigger plants. Mines, mills, factories operating in various States were inte- grated into national holding compa- nies. The era of big combines had ar..ved. At the same time this industrial change was taking place, there was taking place also a change in the banking and credit facilities of the country. One was & corollary of the other. As industry began to take on a national scope, so banking and credit began to take on like scope. Boards of directors sitting in the great financial centers of the East began to dominate the national in- dustrial pattern. Big business loomed up in the United States. With varying fortunes, political and otherwise, this industrial giant, born in the 90s, has progressed until to- day, reaching its greatest stature in the mass-production stage in 1928 and 1920, It 3 But meanwhile what has labor done? Here is the germ of the quar- rel Mr. Lewis has with Mr. Green. Industry has outgrown its swaddling clothes; it even has outgrown its hand-production clothes. It has be- come a mechanized thing, turning out millions upon millions of articles yearly, patterned on the same die, where once it turned out only a few, patterned upon the last of each in- dividual worker. The mass-production development of industry has even gone farther, where the human laborer is con- cerned. It has all but wiped out the skilled worker. In mass production the identity of the worker is lost. He may at one time have been the most skilled worker in the shop. could surpass him. ed his ability. But now! He is no longer a skilled worker. He pushes a button, he turns a dial, he places a rivet, he tacks a braid. And an endless chain carries the product of the factory along the as- sembly lime until, at the end, it emerges finished and ready for the drying or storage room. This is the declared quarrel Mr. Lewis has with Mr. Green—the care of this man and the millions of others like him in the mass-production in- dustry, the unorganized worker who fits into no craft pattern, because mass production has destroyed crafts- manship. Right to Membership. Says he: “These millions of workers in our mass production industries have a right to membership in effective la- bor organizations and to- the enjoy- ‘ment of industrial freedom. They are entitled to a place in the American economic sunlight. If the labor move- ment and American democracy are to endure, these workers should have the opportunity to support their fam- ilies under conditions of health, de- cency and comfort, to own their own homes, to educate their -children, and possess sufficient liesure to take part in wholesome social and political ac- tivities. How much more security we would have in this country for the future of our form of government if we had a.virile labor movement that represented, not merely a cross-sec- tion of skilled workers, but that repre- sented the men who work with their hands in our great industries, regard- less of their trade and calling.” But how organize them? This is where “industrial organization” comes in. It means the taking in of all wage earners in one plant or industry un- der one banner. For instance, the auto workers' union would take in all the workers in the auto industry. In a rub- ber factory maintenance and repair men would belong to the same union as production employees. The skilled and the unsiilled alike, all in the > None | His work reflect- | | Go Back Generatien. same bond—the bond being the in- dustry. This, to many craft unions, is held inimical. Hence the “crow” between Mr. Lewis and Mr. Green of the A, P. [of L. “The machinists’ union,” says Mr. Lewis, “‘claims machinists whether I they work in raiiroad shops, navy ‘;ysrds or auto plants. The electrical |- workers’ union similarly takes in elec- | | tricians in railroad shops, the build- | ing industry, power plants or any other | place they can be found. According to | this craft set-up, over half a dozen { craft internationals would operate in | one auto or rubber plant. In steel or | electrical manufacturing, there would be even worse confusion, since 20 | or more crafts international wouid | | have members in one plant, the car- penters, blacksmiths, painters, sheet- metal workers, and so on, each having their own craft union.” Not a New Movement The reader must noi ge: the view- point that the Industrial Unionists are | & new labor group sprung into exist- ence to combat the American Federa- tion of Labor. Quite the contrary. In fact industrial unionism is the brain child of the very organization with which it is at grips—the federation. Following the national convention at Atlantic City last year was set up, in November, by member unions of the federation, the Committee for Indus- trial Organization. It was born of a minority report at that convention, submitted by the Resolutions Commit- tee. The stir was brewing from the convention of 1934 at San Francisco. ‘This minority report, favoring indus- trial unionism, was born of the rec- ognition that something should -be done for the workers in the mass production industries. No appreci- able gains were being made, charged committee supporters, by the feder- ation crafts in these industries. Yet it was quite evident that here lay a vast unexploited field for membership —an opportunity to run up the mem- bership of the federation from its present strength of 3,000,000 members to0 30,000,000 At the time it was—and still is—recognized that the committee “was formed for the purpose of en- couraging and promoting the organiza- tion of unorganized workers in mass production and other industries upon an industrial basis. That its aim is to foster recognition and acceptance of collective bargaining in such basic industries; to counsel and advise un- organized and newly organized groups of workers; to bring them under the banner and in afiliation With the American Federation of Labor as in- dustrial organizations.” “Our purpose, therefore,” says Mr. Lewis, “is to encourage the formation of industrial unions, equal in economic strength to management, in the steel, automobile, rubber, glass, textile, NEW DEAL FOES LIKELY TO DELAY PARTY FIGHT Democratic Opponents of . Roosevelt Policies Due to Keep Silence Until After Election. i BY MARK SULLIVAN. S THE Democrats gather in Philadelphia for their national convention, I have found a text which illustrates their principal problem. The text consists of a letter written to Vice President Garner by an old Texas friend, and Mr. Garner’s reply. The two letters became public last April, as an incident of the Black Senate committee which was probing into private letters-and telegrams. (I pause to reflect that to the Black in- quisitors, not even a private letter ad- dressed to the Vice President of the United States, a private letter care- fully marked “Personal,” and not even the Vice President's reply, were sacred). The letter to Mr. Garner was writ- !'ten by Mr. John H. Kirby, who, as head of the “Southern Committee to Uphold the Constitution,” is appalled at what the Democratic party, under President Roosevelt, has been doing Mr. Kirby, on July 5 last, wrote to Mr. Garner: “My dear John: How long are you going.to tolerate the apostacy of the Roosevelt admin- istration to the cardinal principles of the Democratic party and the noto- | rious contempt for the plain terms of the Constitution? “Your friend, John Henry Kirby” To this the Vice President replied, | July 9: “Dear John Henry: “Your favor is just called t6 my at- tention. *“You cannot do everything you want to and I can't do half what I would like to do. You don’t control every- body you would like to and I am in a similar fix. I think tHat answers your question. “With regards, health and happiness, “Sincerely, John N. Garner.” Answer Held Apologetic. The meaning and implication of Mr. Garner’s letter is plain. The Vice President, a close official associate of the President, receives from a friend a letter which strongly criticizes the President, whereupon the Vice Presi- dent does not protest, does not rebuke | his friend, but instead answers apolo- getically, with tacit admission of what his friend charges. That exchange of letters, made pub- lic would ordinarily cost the Vice President his renomination, might lead to a demand for his immediate resig- nation. There were surmises, indeed, that in the present case itewould cause the Vice President to lose his renomi- nation. ‘What Mr. Garner wrote to his friend comports with what well-informed ‘Washington understands to be his re- lation to President Roosevelt and the New Deal. Washington has long un- derstood that Mr. Garner deplores, as many other Democrats do, -much of the New Deal—the attempt to take America away from the principles of the Democratic party, away from the Constitution and in the direction of the new conception of society and gov- | ernment in Europe. Mr. Garner de- plores it and—so Washington under- stands — protests privately to the President against some of it. His pro- tests, according to Washington under- standing, are only rarely heeded, and ‘Washington understands also that Mr. Garner confines his protests to the most flagrant cases. The degree of his success in protesting, one gathers from his letter, is less than half. The usual course is that when President Roose- velt says & measure is “must” legisla- tion, Vice President Garner seals his lips, puts on his poker face and bends himself to driving and maneuvering through Congress the measure that he disapproves, That is his notion of teamwork, of correct administration and of official loyalty. These consider- ations weigh with Mr. Garner above party principle or personal conscience. Cautious by Temperament. ‘While Washington understands that the Vice President is appalled by much of the New Deal, Washington knows that he is cautious by temperament and much influenced by considera- tions of party solidarity and discipline. Mr. Garner is & canny man; he does not talk about his distaste for the radio, and all other basic industries. (Continued on Tenth ), 4 New Deal as much as some other Democrats do. His one letter to & and wishing you | | friend itself cautiously cryptic, is the only expression from Mr. Garner that has slipped into print. In private con- versations, unless it be with other Democrats with whom he is extremely intimate, Mr. Garner puts on his poker mask (one of the best in Amer- ica} whenever the New Deal is dis- cussed. Other Democra placed as the greater freedom to their of the most exalted and respected talk openly. Everybody k ator Carter Gla: in a newspaper that “the New Deal, taken all in all, is not only | & mistake; it is a disgrace to the Na= | tion.” Everybody knows that Demoe | cratic Senator Harry F. Byrd of Vire | ginia (in a public address on May 28, 11934) said that the Triple A powers | asked for by Secretary of Agriculture Wallace would make Mr. Wallace a | “Hitler of American agriculture” and reduce American farmers to the status of “peasants in Soviet Russia.” Every- | body knows that Democratic Senator Bailey of North Carolina, speaking in | the Senate on the bill giving Secretary Wallace power to dictate how much cotton a farmer might raise, said: “I believe we have come to the crucial | hour of decision; it is going to be a | free Republic or it is going to be socialistic, regimented communism.” almost as highly P Private Talk Forceful. These and a few others have spoken out publicly. Still others, while avoid- ing public condemnation of the New Deal, express themselves .in private with force and bitterness. When talk- |ing with fellow Democrats they are almost savage in their denunciations: | when talking with Republican inti- | mates in the cloak room, they are al- most as candid. A few, practicing a caution as great as Vice President | Garner's, refrain from saying any | thing definite either in public or in private or, when they do say any- | thing, are careful to surround what | they say with precautions of con- | fidence. But the net of all is that of the entire Democratic membership in Congress a large proportion think of the New Deal in much the same terms that Senator Glass and a few others | have put into words. (I am speaking of Democrats in active leadership, Democrats who hold | office and hope to continue to hold | office and who therefore are subject {to precautions of personal prudence. | Yet quite a number of these, like | Senator Glass, have been willing to | speak. There is another class of Dem- | ocratic leaders, men whose ofice- | holding is in the past. who do mot xpect to run for office again and who | therefore need not be curbed by pru= | dent self-interest. Many of these— | ex-Gov. “Al” Smith of New York, | ex-Gov. Ely of Massachusetts, ex-Sen= |ator Reed of Missouri and others— | have spoken freel | The complete picture of the Demo- cratic party leadership is one in which | leaders out of office and with no stlf- | interest to serve have strongly pro= tested against the New Deal; in which a few of the leaders holding office have protested openly, in which per= haps half of the whole leadership feels that the New Deal is an apostasy from the Democratic party and an appalling* danger to America. To “Point with Pride.” Yet here is the Democratic party, led in large part by those same lead- ers who abhor .the New Deal—here they are, going next week to renom- inate the President who is the source and symbol of the New Deal; going to write a platform which presumably in the usual, conventional way, will “point with pride” to the record of the Roosevelt administration—which record includes precisely those New Deal measures about which perhaps half of the best Democratic leader= ship feels something like horror. It is pretty saddening. Yet one ran understand it. One can see an ex- planation of it, an explanation that is not necessarily sordid, not confined to self-interest, not a mere act of self-preservation by individual Demo- crats who wish to continue in office and know that the only way to re- tain their offices is to “go along” with the President, whom they regard a8 representing not the Democratic par- (Continued on Third Page.)