structed his attorney to have the IEU withdraw from the cases as the Board! was biased. We called for a recess to give them the opportunity to talk it over and after the recess they indicated that they had changed their minds. All in all everybody is swinging from the floor in this fight and so far we have managed to dodge them successfully. The net results of all this of course is to lengthen the hearing beyong my own estimates but it has not in any sense weakened the case that I felt I could put in the record and I feel sure the Board will be able to state on an abundance of evidence that the allegations of the complaints have been proved. I would like to continue telling you more about it but I have to go to the hearing now. I will keep you posted on what's going on. With best regards to you and the boys, Sincerely, JOHN J. BABE, Attorney. P. S. Tell our high moguls on the Board that it was just exactly a year ago today they last gave me a small raise in salary. I am beginning to feel that the old adage of "Out of sight, out of mind" is perhaps not so wrong after all. Give the boys a pep talk for me and I'll split the profits 50-50 with you. JJB. JJB:ELS. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 432-E NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, NINETEENTH REGION Federal Office Bldg. SEATTLE, WASH., 12,6. DEAR CHARLIE: I was glad to hear from you. You guessed it when say I'm too busy to write. I'm writing this after a full fighting day and an evening of interviewing witnesses. It's now after 11. Someday there'll be a labor board for Board employees. I suppose someone will cap months of hard work and preparation and this hearing with the guess it might have taken too long. I hope not, I'm a little fed up with careless and even unintended unfairness. I have the Silver Falls Timber, The Foster Bros., Corvallis Lumber Co., and the Lewis Lbr. Co. files. Unless the office is planning hearings my suggestion is they be left with me, as I use them frequently to refer to IEU organizational methods and employer cooperation while questioning here. I have no envelopes to send these files to you in case you have to have them back so have some sent to me. Frankly I'd like to keep the files a little longer if I can. It is hard to determine how much longer the hearing here will take. The Johnson attorney--King-is purposely trying by every possible expedient to delay proceedings. Cross-examinations are a long series of objections on my part as not proper. I try to shut him off as much as possible when he wanders away from proper cross. The examiner is helping out, although he might be tougher. He's too patient and King is taking advantage of it. Today I examined a witness 30 minutes and cross-exam. took 2 hours, with at least 50% of the questions on cross objected to and sustained. He's been baiting the examiner, but mainly me into error. So far with no results. We should have been through this week. Now it looks like 2 more at least. I have no doubt King will attempt to put every IEU on the stand to testify the Co. did not intimidate him. This has been to date a pretty bad dogfight. They haven't got away with a thing, and the record rather than being prejudicial to us is that for them. However, all this takes valuable time. The hearings at Spokane and Lewiston will not go beyond one week each, as those 2 Cos. have for all purposes withdrawn from the hearing. They walked out in Portland after offering stipulations of settlement that the Board refused, but which to my mind had some merit. The atty's for these Co's. stated they didn't believe they would offer any defense at those places, but would be present. They may change their minds. The IEU has already requested the hearing return to Portland later for further evidence, but I don't think they'll have much. That's the lowdown on the case. B. A. Green was so satisfied with the handling of the case in Portland that he decided not to come down to Toledo or send anyone. To my mind, we've pretty well proved our contentions about the IEU, but have not totally clinched them. I certainly hope the case is over soon, as I'm certainly anxious to return home. The pace I've kept up since coming out here is pretty >-speed, and I wouldn't mind a few quiet days-soon. Helen I'm afraid fed up with Omaks and Toledos. I think I've answered your questions so I'm going to bed and recoup my for tomorrow. egards from Helen Bud and I, incerely, JOHN. ulation In the Matter of Potlatch Forests, Inc. was received in evidence, N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 432-F," and is on file with the committee.) ision and Order In the Matter of McGoldrick Lumber Co., et al., Cases Nos. to C-642, inclusive, was received in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. ExIo. 432-G", and is on file with the committee.) ision and Order In the Matter of Montgomery Ward & Co., et al., Case No. was received in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 432-H", and de with the committee.) cision of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in ise of Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board was ed in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 432-I", and is on file he committee.) py of Petition for Enforcement of Order of N. L. R. B. in the United States it Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in the case of National Labor RelaBoard v. McGoldrick Lumber Company was received in evidence, marked 2. R. B. Exhibit No. 432-J" and is on file with the committee.) N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 433 BILES-COLEMAN LUMBER CO. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 433-A X-C-74: Biles Coleman Lumber Company, Omak, Washington 97: Puget Sound District Council, Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union -37: Filed. AFL. 8 (1) (3) (5) 8-37: Complaint issued. 8 (1) (3) (5) 7-37: Hearing commenced 4-37: Hearing concluded 3-37: Oral argument -23-37: Decision and Order 8 (1) (3) (5) 11-38: CCA issued order enforcing Board's Order 28-39: Stipulation signed by all parties -8-39: Stipulation signed to withdraw stipulation of 8-28-39 -14-39: CCA issued its order allowing withdrawal of stipulation of 8-28-39 -16-39: Certificate signed by Clerk of CCA that stipulation of 9/29/39 was filed (Decision and Direction of Election In the Matter of Biles-Coleman Lumber o., Inc., Case No. R-1813, was received in evidence, and marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 433-B", and is on file with the committee.) (Decision of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit pon petition of the N. L. R. B. for enforcement in the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Biles-Coleman Lumber Co. was received in evidence, marked 'N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 433-C", and is on file with the committee.) (Decision of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upon motion and application for leave to adduce additional testimony in the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Biles-Coleman Lumber Co. was received in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 433-D", and is on file with the committee.) N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 434 MISCELLANEOUS PAPERS (Letter dated July 29, 1935 from William H. Crawford to Mr. Charles W. English was received in evidence, marked "N. L. R. B. Exhibit No. 434-A", and is on file with the committee.) N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 434-B OCTOBER 16, 1935. Pacific Power & Light Company, Mr. WILLIAM H. CRAWFORD, Public Service Building, Portland, Oregon. DEAR MR. CRAWFORD: Received copy of you letter of July 29, 1935 and thank you kindly for same. I have read this letter with much interest and will be very glad to informally discuss these matters if you should happen to be in Seattle. We do not make it a practice of writing articles or being quoted on matters which should emanate from the National Board. Mr. J. Warren Madden is chairman of the National Labor Relations Board and I would suggest that if you desire information on any particular points that you write him. N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT NO. 434-C To: Mr. Nathan Witt, Assistant General Counsel. Subject: Edward Levinson's Book "I Break Strikes." FEB. 3, 1936. Weeks ago if you had peeked in the right hand top drawer of my desk you would have seen the book "I Break Strikes". Whenever Eagon and I have a few spare moments, you can see us reading this enlightening book. I will see that O'Brien reads it also. I wish all of the employers would read the book because I am sure our settlements would be more numerous if they would do so. The book was given to me as a Christmas present by B. A. Green of Portland, Oregon. Green, by the way, is an outstanding lawyer in these parts and for thirty years has fought the battle of labor. I sent Mr. Madden a copy of the Oregon Law Review which has an article in it by Green. I would suggest you read it. This will reply to your memo of November 11, 1936 which was received today. (1) In the State of Washington a state Labor Relations Act is being drafted by Ed Henry of the Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Copy of the draft is attached. hereto. (2) The State Federation of Labor and unions are the chief proponents of this statute. (3) James A. Taylor, 108 Labor Temple, 6th & University, Seattle, Washington. (4) Ed Henry, Prosecuting Attorney, 602 County City Bldg., Seattle, Washington. (5) Do not know state officials in favor of this statute but will ascertain same, if possible. (6) In Washington, believe such a law will pass without much opposition. (7) If the Supreme Court is liberal in sustaining our Act, believe National Labor Relations Board could handle most of cases. However, believe this state legislation necessary in order that all employers will be under the same type of legislation. Knowing as I do that the same state officers have been re-elected and knowing the activities of the State Department of Labor and Industries which department handles labor matters and believing that if legislation is passed, this department will be given an important role, I am not in favor at this time of giving the State Board much jurisdiction. It was suggested to me the other day that if such a law were passed, and it seemed probable, that any Board created should be done in conjunction this office. I haven't gone into the merits of such a plan but will do so. Will send you copy of proposed statute for the State of Washington. writing today to the Secretaries of the Federations in Oregon, Montana o and will report to you as soon as I have information. ncerely, CHARLES W. HOPE. Since dictating this letter Mr. Henry, mentioned above, walked in my He gave me a copy of the proposed state act. He intends to introduce in the House as he, himself, is a State Representative. is had some correspondence with R. Bailey Startz who can be reached in Senator Murray of Montana, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. rtz is anxious to have this legislation enacted in Montana. Green, Corbett Building, Portland, Oregon, is the proper one to contact on. Mr. tor Phil Ryan, Burke, Idaho, is the sponsor of liberal legislation in Idaho. Henry is much concerned, as I am, over the State Board. Can you give nediately suggestions on how you feel the State Board should be appointed, ould be on it and what relation should it have to our office here? would like to have our office tied into the picture in some way and I am ring if your Director could serve as one of its members. We feel here that estige of the federal government is necessary to insure the proper functionthe State Board. It is difficult to keep the State Board out of politics, I know. ›n. esterday, I wrote you hurriedly regarding proposed labor legislation in my I inclosed copy of a rough draft drawn by Mr. Edward E. Henry who state representative at this time. He realized that this draft should be aged in several places. He asked me if I would lobby for the bill at this coming ion in January. I told him I did not think so but that Mr. Eagan might do e effective work with his lawyer friends. 'he thought occurred to me that you might agree to send one of your legal f members out here to help in drafting this act and having same enacted. this state legislation is most vital. Το Mr. Henry is well aware of the pitfalls where board members are subject to itical appointment in States. We discussed this proposed legislation for some o hours and I told him I would consult with you at once as I was sure you d already prepared valuable suggestions. I assume that it is your plan to ve uniform laws passed, all in line with our Act. Of course, in some states, ere would undoubtedly be variations and deviations because of state laws. We agreed that any such Board should be a full time Board as he originally ggested. Under Mr. Henry's proposed plan, the head office would be Seattle, Washington, for this state, with probably three or four regional directors, who ould act in a similar capacity to our field examiners at the present time. We Iso agreed that members of the Board should not include any state office holders. assume that the Governor is the logical man to appoint the Board Members ut Mr. Henry is concerned over the ways and means of appointing such a Board. He feels that this office should be tied in, if legally possible. In any event, here should be the closest cooperation between the State and Federal Boards. That cooperation does not exist in the states at the present time between the Federal Board and the Department of Labor and Industries. This is especially true in Oregon and Washington. The lumber workers, numbering some 70,000 in the Northwest, are backing this proposed legislation to the limit. They are at this time devoting considerable time and money to this new type of legislation. The Prosecuting Attorneys Office here is very active as indicated by Mr. Henry. The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and the Senate for the already been contacted and they are favorable. Mr. Henry fees tat lation will pass the House but that there will be a hard fight in the S quite sure Governor Martin will approve the Bill if passed by both I am leaving today for Oregon and will get the story from that as soon as possible. Will appreciate receiving from you immediately your suggests a mendations. Sincerely yours, CHARLES W. HOPE, CHARLES N. L. R. B. EXHIBIT No. 434-F NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS & 5 Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board, 19th Region Federal Office Building, Seattle, Wint DEAR HOPE: This is in reply to your memorandum of November 18. see off-hand how there could be any official tie-up between our offre 27, of Washington and a state labor relations board. I think your pr reference to lobbying for a statute or the appointment of a board, ƒ krye should be enacted, should be strictly advisory. It should indicate snadn help the state to avoid mistakes which your experience and ours but should not indicate a desire on our part to have our hands in tion of the State Act. In the functioning of a democracy we s some chances as to whether it is going to function to suit as, and naturally, frequently disappointed. I think that the fact that there is such an interest in state labor S is a good deal of a compliment to the work of similar federal boards With best regards, I am MWAK Company et al Case No. XIX-C-175 Acting Director, National Labor Relations Board, Dexter Horton Building, Seattle, Wash win DEAR MR. EAGEN: I received this morning a notice from M- Vs: Mr. Frederickson seems unwilling to agree to any compa me validity of our contract. Do you suppose that any arrangeme out acceptable to the C. I. O. which would contemplate our tax. vidual that you suggested in our last conversation? It is my re name was Williams. In making this suggestion I want you to I have no authority from my client to agree to the reempi yr or indeed to make this suggestion. It seems to me, however might be worked out along this line, and if you feel that such an ama be acceptable to the interested parties I will be glad to take t Yours very truly, |