Mr. CULKIN. Yes. Now, that is not the practice in the English service, is it?

Mr. DELANEY. No.

Mr. CULKIN. The men stay on the ship. They may stay on a ship if they like?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes; we believe there should be an incentive in the American ship to keep them there also.

Mr. CULKIN. And that would make them more efficient in an emergency?

Mr. DELANEY. Without any doubt, and the only thing, to my way of thinking, that men do not stay aboard the ships is because that incentive is not there.

Mr. CULKIN. Yes; the incentive is not present. And you said that the original idea of the 1928 law was to give wages a boost to take care of the difference in cost of living here in America and abroad; and you say that was not done?

Mr. DELANEY. Well, the fact of the matter, Congressman, is that wages were higher and working conditions better prior to the granting of the subsidy.

Mr. CULKIN. That was a breach of the covenant, was it not?

Mr. DELANEY. It is a fact, nevertheless, and I will produce figures and a brief in a couple of days to that effect. I thought I had it with me, but I find that I have not.

Mr. CULKIN. I am somewhat impressed with the notion, I will say, that hand in hand with this subsidy ought to go along some definite provision for the building up of the merchant marine. Mr. DELANEY. Without any doubt.

Mr. CULKIN. Giving the men morale and status and encouragement to stay in the service so far as possible.

Mr. DELANEY. Yes.

Mr. CULKIN. That is your view, is it not?

Mr. DELANEY. There is no reason, Mr. Congressman, to my way of thinking, why our young men leaving high school and college would not go to sea if there were an incentive there to bring them. Mr. CULKIN. The history of them is they go to sea sort of casually; they make one trip or more.

Mr. DELANEY. They will go if the incentive is there. If the wages and the working conditions are there as they are ashore, they will go to sea, because the work is healthful and it is fascinating. But owing to the low wage and poor working conditions, why, you just could not tempt the men to go there. But I believe that the incentive can be made, and it should be made to have our American boys

go.

Mr. CULKIN. Do you think you could recruit the high-school type? Mr. DELANEY. Without any doubt, Congressman.

Mr. CULKIN. And they would stay in 2 or 3 years?

Mr. DELANEY Without any doubt.

Mr. CULKIN. Like a man would enlist in the Army or Navy?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes; and when they stayed 2 or 3 years, Congressman, they will stay practically all their life because they will become officers.

Mr. CULKIN. Of course we do not want them all officers?

Mr. DELANEY. No; they do not live forever. There is a natural turn-over in the maritime industry just the same as any other industry.

Mr. CULKIN. If that procedure were to be brought about, why, of course, we would have the most efficient marine personnel in the world, would we not?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes; and I think it can be brought about.

Mr. CULKIN. Now we have the worst.

The CHAIRMAN. I would not agree with that.

Mr. CULKIN. Well, the figures here show, according to what the colonel just read here, we have 100,000 foreigners in the service who are utterly out of touch with the American tradition, if that testimony is to be believed, subject to the provision made here by this gentleman from the floor.

Do you believe, Mr. Witness, we have got to look this subject square in the face?

Mr. DELANEY. That is right.

Mr. CULKIN. Not only in the interest of people that go on the sea, but in the interest of future America?

Mr. DELANEY. In the interest of the maritime industry itself. Mr. CULKIN. Flag waving does not do any good, does it?

Mr. DELANEY. Does not mean a thing.

Mr. CULKIN. There has been enough of that?

Mr. DELANEY. Too much of it. Not enough efficiency.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman representing the International Seamen's Union, I think, or some other organization, the other day here before us said the only place you can claim the man is actually on the sea and the ship.

Mr. DELANEY. And I will agree with him.

Mr. CULKIN. You can give some technical training.

Mr. DELANEY. You can give them some.

Mr. CULKIN. You can teach them how to row a boat.

Mr. DELANEY. Yes; you can do that.

Mr. CULKIN. You can send him out on the ships even in different kinds of weather.

Mr. DELANEY. Yes.

Mr. CULKIN. You can do that even in almost sheltered waters, can you not?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes; that will be helpful.

Mr. CULKIN. That will be something.

Mr. DELANEY. That will be helpful, but to make them real men you must put them on board ship and let them grow up with it, the same as any other business; you have got to grow up into it and know it.

Mr. CULKIN. Yes; I think that is true.

Mr. DELANEY. It is no different than any other business. You have got to grow up into it and know it. You take any of the crafts-you have got to grow up in it to know it.

Mr. CULKIN. But it will give them the preliminary training; it will give them a smattering of it anyway, so that they are of some use in an emergency.

Mr. DELANEY. Yes.

Mr. CULKIN. You can do that in the stations?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes.

Mr. CULKIN. That is what the Navy does?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes; indeed, so flagrant have these conditions become that at this moment officers of the United States Navy by Government orders are now sailing as observers on many merchant ships to observe these abuses and we hope to tabulate their causes and prescribe a speedy cure.

Our Government has donated millions of dollars to foster, build, maintain, and continue our merchant marine. A condition attached to these generous grants is that a wage differential be maintained out of these subsidies to insure American wage standards and working conditions so that we could withstand foreign competition. A dastardly breach of faith has been committed in this respect. Wage levels and conditions are lower than before grants were made. Proof that greed outstrips good faith even with our Government.

It is most unfortunate, not only for merchant marine but also the American people, that the general shipping code could not be approved. At this time more than 90 percent of American industry is codified. The shipping industry is obviously in dire need of such regulations if only to eliminate these abuses of law and sea traditions which have accumulated to the point that caused this major disaster and can easily produce others of same character.

Because the National Organization of Masters, Mates, and Pilots of America has functioned for over half a century and is peculiarly fitted to test the pulse for marine maladies nationally as well as internationally, we recommend the following measures designed primarily to promote public safety at sea and advance the cause of our merchant marine:

Establishment of a labor code for maritime industry.

The enactment of Federal legislation which would secure the rights of maritime groups, national in scope, or organize freely and negotiate wage and working agreements with shipowners or operators.

In this connection, we recommend that any form of subsidy be withheld from any shipowners or operators who would avoid such negotiations.

Mr. HOFFMAN. May I ask right there: You mean something similar to 7 (a)?

Mr. DELANEY. No; something similar to our Railroad Labor Act. It has worked a hundred percent successful on the railroads. During all the wild strikes that we have had going on throughout the country the railroad industry, I suppose, is the one major industry that has pulled out without a strike on it. And I do not think there is any doubt in anybody's mind but that a year ago when the men representing the employees were negotiating for the return of the 10percent deduction to the railroad employees, if it had not been for the legislation that was on the statute books known as the "Railroad Labor Act of 1926 ", and amended again in 1933, and also amended in 1934, as completed as it is today, was the sole and only reason that negotiations were not broken off before they got half-way through and the industry tied up on a strike. But the machinery was there, and both sides had to follow it.

There is only one reason, to my mind, that there are strikes going on throughout the country today, and that is because the instrumentality is not set up to prevent it. As I say, I believe the railroad industry has proved that, because the instrumentality is set up there by law to settle wage disputes and grievances regarding conditions. You have no strikes in the railroad industry of America, and I believe everybody will agree that that is the most important thing for efficiency and economy throughout the country is to find ways and means to build up efficiency in the industry by cooperation between managers and employees and to eliminate causes of strikes. Mr. HOFFMAN. Did that you just suggested have anything to do with the present condition of the railways?

Mr. DELANEY. No; no. I suggested a similar maritime act to what we have in the railroad labor act.

Mr. HOFFMAN. No; what I meant was the matter to which you just referred.

Mr. DELANEY. Yes.

Mr. HOFFMAN. That process of regulating them-has that anything to do with the present condition of the railways in your opinion?

Mr. DELANEY. None whatever.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Their financial condition?

Mr. DELANEY. None whatever.

Mr. CULKIN. As a matter of fact, the railroads and brotherhoods work together and work intelligently together?

Mr. DELANEY. Without any doubt. It is constructive cooperation. Mr. CULKIN. And you suggest some such form as that?

Mr. DELANEY. Without any doubt.

Mr. CULKIN. For the purpose of building up the morale of the merchant marine?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes. God knows, anybody that knows the maritime industry-and I have been in it since I have been 13 years oldcannot help but say that it is demoralized and it needs cooperation to build it up, and it can be built up. I believe it is an industry that we are all and should be all, proud of, and could be proud of, with proper cooperation from all hands concerned.

Mr. CULKIN. And from the public, such as suggested by the witness this morning here with reference to the German navy league, some national stimulation of going on the sea and the development of the merchant marine, like the Germans did?

Mr. DELANEY. Well, that might be helpful, too.

Mr. CULKIN. It would rouse public sentiment, would it not? Mr. DELANEY. Yes. Our organization condemns absolutely a pernicious racket which has grown up in the matter of hiring seafarers. In every port this evil exists. In San Francisco hiring halls mulcted men of job commissions. In New York the agents of shipowners have been known to recruit men from inferior boarding houses, so-called "welfare " groups and business parasites, who prey on the seafarer, victimizing him either in overpriced inferior merchandise or fees for securing a job.

The CHAIRMAN. We had the Sea Service Bureau, did we not?
Mr. DELANEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And that took a good many men in and helped them?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes. I would not say abolish the Sea Service Bureau, Mr. Chairman, but I would say that I believe the Sea Service Bureau should be in the Department of Labor.

The CHAIRMAN. Frequent efforts are made in Congress to take away the appropriation from the Sea Service Bureau, which, according to the view of some of us, is doing an excellent service.

Mr. DELANEY. Yes; but I do believe it should be in the Department of Labor, and I believe it would be more efficient there, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CULKIN. Well, the history of the sailor from the beginningdid you ever happen to read Masefield's book?

Mr. DELANEY. No; I did not.

Mr. CULKIN. Laid in Queen Elizabeth's time, giving a picture of conditions under which the common sailor lived in those days? Mr. DELANEY. No.

Mr. CULKIN. Is it a fact that the sailor from the time he first began to go to the sea was exploited by the landsman; if he had any money before he went on he was exploited, and after he came off, why, he showed short shrift, did he not?

Mr. DELANEY. That is very true.

Mr. CULKIN. That was his history, and I suppose there is a survival of that ancient and disreputable practice even in your time? Mr. DELANEY. Conditions have changed on the sea.

Mr. CULKIN. Of course, they have improved somewhat, but the point you make is that conditions are susceptible to tremendously greater improvement?

Mr. DELANEY. Yes.

Mr. CULKIN (interposing). And I agree with you.

Mr. DELANEY (continuing). Victimizing him either in overpriced inferior merchandise or fees for securing a job, which frequently lasts a single voyage and puts profits into the pockets of the unscrupulous one who acted as work broker and pauperizes the seafarer. It is generally believed that many port captains and engineers are in cahoots with this practice and share the graft such transactions vield.

Now I believe, Mr. Chairman, as I stated, that an act should be prescribed similar to the railroad labor act:

First. It shall be the duty of all water carriers, their officers, agents, and employees to exert every reasonable effort to make and maintain agreements concerning rates of pay, rules, and working conditions, and to settle all disputes, whether arising out of the application of such agreements or otherwise, in order to avoid any interruption to commerce or to the operation of any water carrier growing out of any dispute between the water carrier and the employees thereof.

Second. All disputes between a water carrier or carriers and its or their employees shall be considered, and, if possible, decided, with all expedition in conference between representatives designated and authorized so to confer, respectively, by the water carrier or carriers and by the employees thereof interested in the dispute.

Third. Representatives shall be designated by the respective parties without interference, influence, or coercion by either party over the designation of representatives by the other; and neither party shall in any way interfere with, influence, or coerce the other in its choice of representatives. Representatives of employees need not be persons in the employ of the water carrier, and no water carrier shall, by interference, influence, or coercion seek in any manner to prevent the designation by its employees as their representatives of those who or which are not employees of the water carrier. The majority of