Rambling Reporter
By Ernie Pyle
PORTLAND, Oregon – All up and down the coast I’ve been hearing reports of what a fine job Portland had done with its blackouts and civil defense. So I’ve nosed into the matter, and the reports seem to be true.
Portland’s good showing is due to two things – they started a long time ago, and one man, the Mayor, took the responsibility and carried the ball.
Way last spring the Mayor detached one of his battalion chiefs from the Fire Department, sent him to Washington to study up. and then made him fulltime co-ordinator of civil defense, responsible only to the Mayor. He is Edward Boatright, and he still holds the job.
The Mayor’s name is Earl Riley. The nice things I’m saying about him are not the result of any mesmerizing by the Mayor himself, for I haven’t met him. It’s just that everybody I’ve talked with gives him the credit.
Portland is a city that some visitors find, shall we say, unromantic. It has none of the Seven Seas personality of San Francisco; none of the hot-headedness of Seattle. It is a good staid town, with a deep New England background. And probably because of that it has something that many cities don’t have – which is unity Portlanders can pull together.
So when Mayor Riley and Co-Ordinator Boatright started going to town on civil defense last summer, the people worked with them, and followed. Long before the summer was over all the utilities companies had their plans worked out for air-raid emergency.
They’re ready for real thing
The Red Cross was busy as usual. Also women organized into what were called “Light Precaution Wardens,” the forerunner of “Air Raid Wardens.” And World War veterans started an organization which trained and grew until it was ready to be taken over en masse – it has now been – as a body of auxiliary policemen.
Then in October they had an all-out dress rehearsal – a Hallowe’en-night blackout. The Army was in on it, and they had elaborate plans. The Army was to send bombers over from various directions, interceptor planes were to try to head them off, guns brought in on trailers were to fire blanks at the sky.
Bad weather at the last minute prohibited all the flying and shooting. But the city did go ahead with its blackout. They say it was about 99.6 percent total.
So, when the real thing came, Portlanders knew how to go about it. On the day war was declared, word came from the Army at 5 p.m. that the city must be blacked out by 6.
The Mayor went on the air and told the people what to do. All through that first week the Mayor led strongly, and the people looked to him for leadership.
He took his instructions directly from Gen. Wash in Seattle (head of the Second Interceptor Command). Every time the Mayor had any fresh news he went right on the radio. He had a microphone at his desk, all six stations were hooked together, and they butted in on any program, regardless.
The secret: Only one general
There now hasn’t been a blackout here for several weeks. But as in other cities, the civil defense program is going on ahead, getting itself enlarged and polished up.
Many people are being trained. Even before the war, 3500 auxiliary policemen and 2500 auxiliary firemen had had training. Now more are being trained, and so are air-raid wardens. As far as I can see, the eventual setup will be like London’s.
When it is all finished, there will be two air-raid wardens for every block. Half of them will be women. The women will serve in daytime, the men at night.
As for the physical evidences of war and defense, there aren’t as many in Portland as in San Francisco. No sand has been distributed yet: no buildings sandbagged; no signs put up directing the public to daytime basement shelters.
The Fire Department already is in good shape. The Mayor is an amateur fire fiend, like LaGuardia. Going to fires is one of his hobbies. That may be the reason the Fire Department is so well prepared.
The only item in which Portland seems to have fallen down is the one that has stumped other cities too. Nobody can hear the sirens!
Sixteen new sirens are scattered over the city on rooftops. One certain siren can be heard eight miles away, but not in an apartment two blocks away. So now they are going to install 3¢ more, and put them close to the ground.
Nearly all of Portland’s business executives have worked hard on civil defense. But few of them have even had their names in the paper. It became a general policy for all responsibility to center right in the Mayor. There weren’t “too many generals,” as in San Francisco. That seems to be the secret. Maybe it would work in Washington too.
Fair Enough
By Westbrook Pegler
NEW YORK – The Naval Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives presents some figures on the riches of unions engaged in the war industries and recommends legislation requiring unions to register with the Government and file pertinent information about their officers, membership and financial condition.
The figures themselves are meaningless and, moreover, probably can be discarded as false, because most unions refuse to tell even their members truly how much money they have, how much they collect and how much they spend and what for.
You ought to get a copy of the 30 years report of the great national shakedown racket known as the Hod-Carriers’ Union when, at last, the boys were compelled to go through the form of a convention a few months ago. It compresses the financial record of 30 years, millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of working men into a few pamphlet-size pages.
Sets unions’ income at one billion
This is the outfit which, nevertheless, has had the gall to straddle the roads leading to practically all war construction jobs and stick up the poor American sap for anywhere from $19 to $50 as the price of its gracious permission to work.
Several months ago I estimated that the annual income of the unions was about one billion – billion, not million – dollars a year and an old-time professional labor skate, as the unioneers are called in their own set, told me afterward that in a discussion with several other professionals the conclusion was reached that I was at least a half-billion – half-billion, not half-million – short.
They should have a better idea because they are old hands in the business, but even they could only estimate and guess because most of the unions guard their secrets as the Navy guards its codes. They figured in the graft taken from all those thousands of poor suckers who clattered up and down the land from Port Arthur to Cape Cod and back to Ohio and around about carrying good union cards of their home town locals, but, nevertheless, were forced to buy work permits from the locals having jurisdiction where the projects happened to fall.
One dinky little carpenter’s local in Massachusetts cleaned up some vast amount this way and another in Virginia had similar luck. When the jobs are done and the “foreigners,” or out-of-town men, have vanished down the road these little, exclusive clubs can cut a wonderful melon among their regular resident members. The regulars might retire for life on the shake taken from their fellow craftsmen. Why not? It is their local and their treasury and there isn’t a law anywhere which forbids them to declare a dividend.
The committee’s figures seem very demure to me. I won’t go into them except to present a sample and make a face. The sample says the net assets of 117 national and international unions with 6,085,832 members on a certain date were $71,915,665 which seems just plumb ridiculous. Why, six million head would pay an average of $100 a year, which would give us 600 million dollars a year right there, exclusive of accumulated wealth. And these unions don’t put out much for legitimate purposes, you know. A few nickels for rent, stamps and office help and some fake unemployment and burial benefits and there you are.
What do they do with the dough?
But maybe the committee doesn’t realize that the greatest graft goes to the locals which keep most of the initiation money and dues and pay a per capita to their parent unions which, in turn, dribble a few pennies a month per head into the AFL and the CIO. But six million head paying a per capita of 35 cents into these nationals and internationals, this being the standard rate, although it does vary, would donate $2,100,000 a month, or $25,200,000 a year.
I am not very good at arithmetic, but get out your own pencil and do it up for yourself. These nationals and internationals would have an income of $25,200,000 a year, exclusive of special gyps and their parental share of the initiation money, and yet one of our most important Congressional committees is willing to report without comment that their assets are only, roughly, 72 million dollars. What have they been doing with the dough? Those total assets after all the years of existence of these unions are less than three years’ income.
Well, anyway, it is a comfort that the committee recommends legislation to establish at least some authority of Government over these unions. It isn’t a minute too soon to do this, because if the AFL and CIO ever get together and combine their legal footing power, they will collect two billion a year and, no exaggeration, it will be just goodbye Republican form of Government in the USA.
Clapper: The Nelson way
By Raymond Clapper
WASHINGTON – I don’t want to do Donald Nelson the disservice of adding to a buildup which, if it gets out of hand, can only react against him. As he himself says, he is no superman and neither are the others associated with him.
But he looks like a dependable human being. The new war production organization which he has mapped out looks far better than anything we have had here before in the year and a half of bungling and confusion.
First, there have been many suggestions that Mr. Nelson is not tough enough. Those of us who heard him discuss his plans this week had a chance to make a fresh size-up. I felt, and I think many others present also felt, that he can be tough enough. We don’t want a bull in a china shop. We just want somebody who is firm and will drive through.
One remark which he dropped gives a good tip-off. Mr. Nelson said there would be no revolutionary reorganization. To set up a complete new organization would lose time. That raised a pertinent question. To a large extent, Mr. Nelson intends to use the same Key men who have been here before. They fell down on the job. Why are we to expect any more from them in the future? Mr. Nelson said the difference is that for the first time these men have authority to act.
Has authority, intends to use it
That is true in his own case. Hitherto he has been held under wraps. He knew what should be done. But when he tried to do it, he didn’t have the authority, and often was told so. Now he has it. He says he intends to use it. If he can get results without throwing furniture around, so much the better. That is what he is going to try to do. The test will come if that fails. If it becomes necessary to begin throwing chairs, will Mr. Nelson be able to do it? He looks as if he might. These fellows who are slow to anger are sometime the most deadly when aroused. The ones who bark easy often lack the bite. Everybody here hopes Mr. Nelson will be able to bite. If so, we shall be able to get along quite well without the bark.
Second, Mr. Nelson seems to be setting up a forthright organization. For instance, one big job now is converting the auto industry to war work. Mr. Nelson is planting his deputy in charge of auto conversion in Detroit. That is where the job is. The wisest little thing that anybody has done around here in a long time was just that. Get some of this business out of Washington and out into the field, where the job is. Mr. Nelson put that job in charge of Ernest Kanzler, a brother-in-law of Edsel Ford, an experienced Ford production man, and more recently in the defense organization here. He and his staff will work on the spot. Executives will not have to be running to Washington and getting lost in the corridors.
Doesn’t care where idea comes from
Everywhere in the new setup, Mr. Nelson has taken experienced men, most of whom are veterans in the defense organization here, and has given them authority. They will have committees – but only to offer advice. The power will be in the hands of single men to be held accountable for results. Boards for advice – single men for action. That is the first rule of the new Nelson organization.
There has been a good deal of trouble about New Dealers versus business men. Nelson says he doesn’t care where an idea comes from so long as it works. If labor has ideas that will work, fine. If business men have them, fine. If New Dealers have them, fine. That seems to be his spirit. He starts off with the assumption that everyone wants results just as earnestly as he does. The differences will be over how to achieve them.
So much is at stake that those of us in the back seats have a responsibility not to undermine public confidence in an official unless we have firm ground to stand on. A man can’t bat a thousand in this kind of job, and he needs chanty. If after a reasonable period he isn’t getting results, then will be time enough to begin needling. For the first few innings of the game, we should overlook some errors which normally we would want to criticize. If a failure becomes clear, then is the time for ruthless pounding.
Maj. Williams: The blame lies–
By Maj. Al Williams
“Japan must be bombed to defeat.”
The Senate Military Committee says, “Since our country is at war it is not appropriate to bring up this controversial question” (proposals to create a separate air force – which, in turn, means revamping our national defense system). Upon this ground the Senate Military Affairs Committee has decided to postpone all hearings on the separate air force – indefinitely,
So the hearings won’t be held because we are at war. The British were in a far worse fix than we are today, and they transformed the flying units of their army and navy into a unified air force (Royal Flying Corps being the forerunner of the present RAF) during the darkest days of World War I. And even though that air force was never permitted to function freely and without persistent hampering by the British Army and Navy chiefs during the intervening period between World War I and this war, it was the Royal Air Force that turned back what might have been the invasion of England in 1940. Churchill said so.
Our Army and Navy Departments were caught flat-footed by the use of airpower by our enemy in the Pacific, but we mustn’t forget that while we customarily blame the individual Army and Navy Departments for whatever happens amiss. Congress shares responsibility to a great extent. Congress represents the people of this country. The members of this body represent our interests, and
it is to them we look for supervising what kind of defense equipment and organization is provided with the expenditure of appropriations.
Congress to blame
The orators can yell all they please for sacrifice and courage on the field of battle, but instinctively people will eventually question the courage and type of service rendered by Congress. If Congress were awake and alert, they would have immediately questioned and chastised their own members and the Secretaries of the Army and Navy for the Pearl Harbor and the Philippine disasters.
Congress seemed confident that Japan was a pushover and helped sell that idea to the people. Meanwhile, we have presumably been building thousands of airplanes and tanks and guns and ships. Nevertheless, there were no reinforcements for the boys at Wake and none – or not enough to date – to turn MacArthur’s gallant last stand into a victory. We built those munitions and our boys are short of them in the Pacific. Who is to blame for this? And what is being done about correcting the error which is daily costing the lives of American fighting men – the loss of American territorial possessions and military prestige in the Pacific?
Have we lost the privilege of firing incompetent military and naval leaders, or is that controversial also? The British fired all kinds of incompetent leaders in World War I.
We need a merit system
The removal of a couple of faulty or delinquent generals and admirals isn’t the answer to Pearl Harbor and Wake and the entire Pacific fumbling. Those men were, and their successors are, the product of a Service system that hasn’t worked and may not work to the eventual winning of the war.
It’s the system – our outmoded Army and Navy organizations – that cost us our Pacific mess. And it’s the system that must be changed. And the first constructive move in changing those systems is the quick housecleaning of incompetents, the revamping of the system, the abolition of a pitiful selection system and seniority promotion procedures current in both Services. We’ve got to get back to the merit system to build winning fighting forces. And we are farther from that merit system than the Sioux Indians ever were.
Men possessed of brains and courage must be pushed to the top. Surely this isn’t controversial. The question before us today is, can we win this war under the Army, Navy, and politically-appointed secretaries and leaders now in power – and with the status-quoers who were not ready for Pearl Harbor, Wake, and the Philippines?
House will act on compromise price curb bill
Farm bloc’s 120% of parity plan cut out, minimums retained
WASHINGTON (UP) – The House acts today on a compromise price control bill in which President Roosevelt’s Congressional lieutenants were forced to make concessions to the powerful farm bloc.
Final agreement by House and Senate conferees last night left in the measure four minimum standards below the highest of which Price Administrator Leon Henderson may not impose price ceilings, but eliminated the Senate’s war parity formula, embodied in the O’Mahoney Amendment, which would have permitted farm prices to rise to 120 percent of present parity.
Food price rise due
President Roosevelt personally entered the fight to condemn the O’Mahoney and other farm proposals and administration leaders fought it on the ground that it would permit a 25 percent increase in food costs.
Sen. Prentiss M. Brown, D-Michigan, estimated that the compromise version would limit this margin for farm products to 10-15 percent. After farm prices rise by this amount, Mr. Henderson could, with the consent of Secretary of Agriculture Claude R. Wickard, began using the same ceiling controls to keep farm prices down as he could invoke for other commodities.
Conferees retained the Senate’s provision for giving Mr. Wickard veto power over Mr. Henderson’s farm prices – another amendment which Mr. Roosevelt sought to eliminate.
Licensing plan wins
The administration, however, won out in its fight for:
-
A system of licensing commodity dealers to enforce price regulations.
-
A single administrator in charge, with the House plan for a five-man appeals board eliminated.
-
Power for the administrator to buy and sell commodities when necessary to encourage production. This represented a compromise between the House, which provided only for buying of marginal products which would otherwise not be produced under price ceilings, and the Senate, which gave the administrator broad power to buy and sell to influence prices.
Four minimums set
The four minimum standards below the highest of which the price administrator may not fix the price on any farm commodity are these:
- The price of October 1, 1941.
- The price of December 15, 1941.
- 110 percent of parity.
- The average price from 1919 to 1929.
In addition, the administrator may not interfere with the Agriculture Department’s voluntary marketing agreements now in effect in 25 cities or feature such agreements made under the department’s existing power.
The agreement was not unanimous. Two of the House conferees – Rep. Jesse Wolcott, R-Michigan, and Charles L. Gifford, R-Massachusetts – refused to sign. But leaders of the Senate and House groups predicted it was in such form that both Houses would accept it.
Newspapers criticized
The agreement was reached after Sens. Josh Lee, D-Oklahoma, and Alexander Wiley, R-Wisconsin, in Senate speeches denounced newspapers for having “warped and grossly misrepresented” the farm bloc’s support of the O’Mahoney Amendment.
Senator Lee said it should be included in the bill on grounds that “fair prices” for agriculture should be counted as among the “essentials of winning the war.” Parity, which assures farmers an income equal to the average for the 1910-14 years, he said, “does not constitute a fair price – parity prices are too low.”
Sen. Wiley charged the amendment had been given a “warped” presentation in the press and subjected to “a doubt and smear campaign.”
He said it was presented “unfairly by smug, complacent editorialists who don’t know their ABCs about this country.”