be

Mr. SIROVICH. If you were a Member of Congress, would you in favor of or against the abolition of the roll calls and the quorum calls, where we have to walk three or four blocks just to answer "yes" or "no", while we are trying to conduct the public business? Mr. HADDOCK. If those roll calls and quorum calls retard prog

ress

Mr. SIROVICH. You see yourself what they do.

Mr. HADDOCK. I am not as familiar with them as you are yourself. If you are opposed to it, you should take the lead and have it abolished.

Mr. SIROVICH. But we cannot abolish that, because we cannot be in two places at the same time and serve all these witnesses who have come from all over, at the same time.

The CHAIRMAN. Let us not call on this witness to pass on the question of the abolition of roll calls.

Mr. HADDOCK. Generally speaking, any rule which serves as a detriment to those who are under it should be eliminated.

It has been pointed out previously that the human element as represented in the ship owners used the service record or blacklist book to the detriment of the seamen, and that it did adversely affect their conduct. We cannot, therefore, look for anything but the sharpening of these discriminations through the use of a legalized blacklisting if Congress imposes this oppressive rule upon the seamen.

The CHAIRMAN. At the same time, Mr. Haddock, right now whenever a discharge is granted the master must show the conduct of the seaman on the discharge.

Mr. HADDOCK. That is true.

The CHAIRMAN. The only difference is that this is a continuous book while the other is a discharge that a man may readily lose or tear up.

Mr. HADDOCK. That is very true.

I want it clearly understood that theoretically I favor the service record book, and if it could be governed impartially and could be governed in such a manner that the ship owners would not use it as a blacklist it would be a wonderful thing. But experience has taught us that that is exactly what they will use it for.

The CHAIRMAN. Your objection principally is to that certification on this record book as to the conduct and character of the seaman? Mr. HADDOCK. Not only that, but merely the master's signature serves as a blacklist. We have it in our license. I have some letters here from the Federal Communications Commission dealing with the very thing.

The CHAIRMAN. Why should the master's signature, which is only as to his service, conduct, and character, operate as a blacklist notice? Mr. HADDOCK. I will just point out this one particular instance: Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of April 19, indicating that you have two cases during the past month where the captain of a vessel refused to sign operators' licenses. In cases of this kind complete statements of fact should be submitted to the Commission for any action deemed necessary.

The CHAIRMAN. This law requires the master to sign, does it not? Mr. HADDOCK. No; it does not require him to sign. He may sign it, but if he does not sign the license the man cannot work.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean the master must sign his book. He can show his bad record, that his service is bad, but he must sign it.

Mr. HADDOCK. If he says his service is bad, then the man has to go through quite a bit to get his service changed if it is not correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Is not the master required to sign every discharge certificate that is issued when a sailor is discharged?

Mr. HADDOCK. Theoretically, I have signed several thousand of them myself.

The CHAIRMAN. But the master is required to sign them?

Mr. HADDOCK. He is required to sign them. This particular case that I referred to here of licenses-I do not intend to try to argue as to the merits of whether the men acted in a manner becoming an officer on board these vessels where these two cases were involved, but the fact remains they could not get their licenses signed. In the meantime, they must remain unemployed until I come down to Washington and present facts to the Federal Communications Commission whereby they may be reinstated or their licenses revoked. Mr. SIROVICH. This bill says so far as seamen are concerned he must sign them.

Mr. HADDOCK. That would be the same question.

Mr. SIROVICH. I think we should amend that, Mr. Chairman, to compel them to sign the papers of the radio officer the same way, and if there is anything bad they can take it up later.

Mr. HADDOCK. If this book is going to be passed upon radio operators, it will not be necessary to have a license any more, in my opinion. If such a book is adopted, I think that all licenses should be abolished and a page specifically placed in the book stating whether or not a man is a master or chief engineer or radio officer or what not.

Mr. SIROVICH. Who is to give him the license that will qualify him as a radio operator?

Mr. HADDOCK. The departments that do that at the present time. Mr. SIROVICH. It is your theory that once he gets that license he shall have his continuous discharge book which works automatically just.the same as has the seaman?

Mr. HADDOCK. Certainly. I am not familiar with the type of licenses by all other governments, but I am familiar with that in Mexico, as an example. The Mexican Government in licensing radio officers gives them a book somewhat similar to the radio-marine red book, which contains the man's service record and his license right in the book. He can carry that book with him wherever he goes, and he will always have his service record and his license in one. The CHAIRMAN. This, however, would be very valuable to the sailor whose record was uniformly shown to be good, would it not?

Mr. HADDOCK. I am not so sure of that; no. We have radio officers in our organization who have been given medals for commemorable acts, yet those same radio officers are on the blacklist today.

The CHAIRMAN. I said uniformly through a period of years his service is shown to be good.

Mr. HADDOCK. No; I do not agree with that.

The CHAIRMAN. Does not this continuous discharge book put him in a very advantageous position in the matter of employment? Mr. HADDOCK. I do not think so, not insofar as the shipping companies are concerned, because experience has shown me that they pretty generally have employed their seamen without regard to their service. They were not interested in the service. In a great number

of cases it seems as though they were interested in perpetuating what are known as the "finkhalls".

Mr. SIROVICH. What does that mean?

Mr. HADDOCK. Where seamen have to ship, at the different halls, or different rooming houses.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean sort of a crimp proposition?

Mr. HADDOCK. That is what it is, a crimp hall.

Mr. LEHLBACH. If the shipping operators are not interested in a man's service record, why is the service record a blacklist?

Mr. HADDOCK. I did not understand that, sir.

Mr. LEHLBACH. If the ship owners in picking crews are not interested in a man's service record as shown by his discharges, then how do those discharges or how does a book containing all of the discharges become a blacklist?

Mr. HADDOCK. Because it gives them information concerning a man that they will use to his detriment, regardless of his service. I just stated that we have members in our organization who are blacklisted, yet who have the very best of records, and who have commemorable records with years of experience.

Mr. LEHLBACH. Then the blacklist is not based on the service record?

Mr. HADDOCK. No; it is not based upon whether or not a man is a good man or not. It is based upon the information which you have. We radio operators have been operating ever since the old MarconiMorgan Co. started over here, under what is known as the "service record book." We still have one. I am sorry I do not have mine here to show you.

Mr. LEHLBACH. You say a good record in the service record book noes not cut any ice with respect to improving a man's chance for employment?

Mr. HADDOCK. It does not mean that that man will be given preference over a man who has a very poor record.

Mr. LEHLBACH. But that he may be ostracized, he may be blacklisted for reasons that do not appear in the service book at all? Mr. HADDOCK. Absolutely.

Mr. LEHLBACH. Therefore, the service book is not a blacklist. Mr. HADDOCK. It acts very much as a blacklist, because if a man had to present his book before the employer-to give an example of that, when I was assigning radio operators in one of the cities down in Texas, a man came in for assignment and gave me his book. I had his name, and so forth, on the blacklist that was submitted by the company. He gave me his book. I had to take that book and compare. it with the record.

If I were employing those men as to their service and only as to their service, I would take their license, see that they have had so many years of experience, that their license says that they are qualified to do such and such work, and that is as far as I would go. That is as far as I am interested. If you are qualified to do the job, you should get it without regard to any blacklists that are built up.

Mr. LEHLBACH. Yes; but what I am trying to get at is, you have voiced your opposition to the service books on the ground that they constituted a blacklist. Then you testified that the man's service as

evidenced by his book or by his discharges has nothing to do with whether he is to be hired or not, that that is dependent upon extraneous records. Then why the objection to the service book if it is not used for that purpose?

Mr. HADDOCK. I do not believe I said it had nothing to do with it. I said it did not always hold that those who have commendable records will be given preference. I did not say that those who have a mark against them would not be further discriminated against.

Mr. SIROVICH. Take a great organization like the International Mercantile Marine, who have radio operators upon their ships. What is the usual length of service of the average radio operator? Does he work for 6 months, a year, 2 years, or 3 years, or do they change them every month?

Mr. HADDOCK. He works by the trip, but they change them only when they find some cause to do so.

Mr. SIROVICH. Let us take that big organization, since you stated pretty nearly every one of the steamship companies have a blacklist. What percentage of the men did they discharge within a period of a year or two?

Mr. HADDOCK. I would say the International Mercantile Marine probably discharge two or three persons a year-that is, radio officers.

Mr. SIROVICH. Out of how many working there?

Mr. HADDOCK. They probably have something like 50, I guess.

Mr. SIROVICH. Is not that a very small proportion, less than in any other business or industry?

Mr. HADDOCK. Aside from what they discharge, the Radio Marine Corporation will probably remove 10 or 12, and there will probably be a turn-over of some 25 or 30 more because of the poor conditions in that particular company.

Mr. RABAUT. According to that only 20 would keep their jobs for the period, or less than 20.

Mr. HADDOCK. Approximately that.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you finished, Mr. Haddock?

Mr. HADDOCK. Add a subsection to section 1006 under "Conferences to read as follows:

The Authority shall endeavor to promote treaties with foreign governments wherein the subsidies shall be equalized, minimized, and eliminated, and shall, when a deduction is made in subsidies by a foreign government, reduce the subsidy to any American company in competition with such foreign lines in a proportionate amount.

It is obvious that subsidies which are granted by our Government will tend to increase subsidies granted by foreign governments, just as have their subsidies caused us to grant subsidies. If each nation is to enter into a subsidy war, there is to be nothing gained except perhaps the granting of lower rates to the exporters, which would permit them to sell their goods at a rate which is lower in foreign countries. thus making the American taxpayer suffer for the benefit of the foreign public.

We have already seen the disastrous results to the taxpayer of the armament war and should utilize this lesson and do everything pos sible not only to prevent a subsidy war but to entirely eliminate the subsidy through international negotiations.

Just in connection with that I would like to cite a peculiar circumstance which I noticed in 1927 or 1928 concerning "Sun-Maid " raisins, with which all of you no doubt are familiar from the old phrase, “Have you had your raisins?" At that time those raisins were selling in the United States for 15 cents per box. In Germany the same raisins were selling for 7 cents a box, which was due entirely to the fact that they could be shipped to Germany in American bottoms under a subsidy at this lower rate, having the American taxpayer pay the difference to the company.

That is all I have.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions?

Thank you very much, Mr. Haddock.

STATEMENT OF C. A. ABELE, CAPTAIN, UNITED STATES NAVY, RETIRED, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE MASSACHUSETTS NAUTICAL SCHOOL

Captain ABELE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, what I wanted to say was pretty well covered by Congressman Walter, but he recommended the removal of the last sentence of section 802, page 36, beginning on line 19. I would suggest that that be changed somewhat as follows:

Add the words: "Provided nothing in this section shall interfere with the present activities of the existing State nautical schools." I have a fairly short statement which I would like to present to the committee:

The U. S. S. Nantucket, ex-Ranger, is the school ship of the Massachusetts Nautical School. She is an auxiliary bark of 1,261 tons' displacement, a coal-burning steamer.

The complement of cadets is 118. Classes are entered in April and October. The course is 2 years. Both deck and engineering courses are provided. Cadets choose the courses they desire to follow.

The school was started in 1893. Since that time there have been graduated 1,674 cadets, 893 deck and 781 engineer. From 1919 to date 824 cadets have been graduated. During the World War some 500 graduates were in the Government service, more than 300 serving as officers in the United States Naval Reserve, and some 150 in Shipping Board ships.

Besides the $25,000 granted the school annually by the Federal Government, the ship has been maintained at the following cost during the years noted for which data is available: