Skip to main content

Full text of "Investigation of improper activities in the labor or management field. Hearings before the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field"

■"^^"'•'^ Willi I iiimin I 



r^ 



t 



^j^AM\.WS\? 



■^1 




Given By 
U, S. SUPT. OF DOCUMENTS 



^ 




INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SELECT COMMITTEE 

ON IMPEOPEE ACTIVITIES IN THE 

LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 

EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 
PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTIONS 74 AND 221, 85TH CONGRESS 



MARCH 12, 13, 14, AND 18, 1958 



PART 23 



Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the 
Labor or Management Field 




INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SELECT COMMITTEE 

ON IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 

LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 

EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 
PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTIONS 74 AND 221, 85TH CONGRESS 



MARCH 12, 13, 14, AND 18, 1058 



PART 23 



Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the 
Labor or Management Field 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
2JlMa WASHINGTON : 1958 



Boston Public Library 
Superintondpnt of Documents 

JUN 5-1958 



8ELECT COMMITTEE ON IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR ()l{ 
MANAGEMENT FIELD 

JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas, Chairman 
IRVING M. IVES, New York, Vice Chairman 
JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota 

SAM J. ERVIN, Jr., North CaroHna BARRY OOLDWATER. Arizona 

PAT McNAMARA, Michigan CARL T. CURTIS, Nehraska 

Robert F. Kennedy, Chief Counsel 
Ruth Young Watt, Chief Clerk 



CONTENTS 



United Automobile Workers, AFLr-CIO, and the Kohler Co. op Sheboy- 
gan, Wis. 

Pag* 

Appendix 9477 

Testimony of— 

Biever, Edmund J 9452 

Butevn, Cornelius 9179 

Buteyn, Peter 9179 

Conger, Lyman C 9195 

Franks, Oakley 9312, 9354 

Heimke, Steen W 9311, 9354 

Hoffman, Hon. Clare 9365 

Ploetz, Rudolph J 9423, 9431 

Rand, Donald 9208, 9233, 9274 

Raugh, Joseph L., Jr 9303 

Treuer, Robert 9155 

Wagner, Walter H 9401 

Zimmerman, Clarence R 9357 

m 



itroduced 
on page 


Appears 
on page 


9202 


(*) 


9203 
9204 


(*) 


9204 


(*) 


9205 


(*) 


9205 

9214 


(*) 


9221 


(*) 


9221 


(*) 



EXHIBITS 

53. Notice of trial, People v. Kohle.r Company re persons 

meeting death in the course of a riot 

54. Dismissal of the action at the motion of the plaintiffs' 

attorney 

55. Transcript of the coroner's jury, 1934 

56. Order for judgment in a suit which Kohler Co. brought 

against the county of Sheboygan 

57. Photographs showing riot damage done to Kohler 

plant 

68. A monthly publication, Kohler of Kohler News, 1934r- 

1935 

59. Photographs taken at the scene of the strike, 1954 

60. Photograph showing Jess Ferrazza, John Gunaca, and 

Frank Sahorske during the mass picketing. May 10, 
1954 

61. Photograph of a nonstriker being led away by a police- 

man 

62. Decree from the United States Circuit Court of Ap- 

peals, Seventh Circuit, National Labor Relations 
Board, Petitioner, v. Local 833 and Others, Respond- 
ents 9230 (*) 

63. Article in the Wall Street Journal, August 9, 1956: 

Kohler Boycott" — UAW Lines Up Unions, Cities in 
Drive to Cut Sales of Struck Firm" 

64. A stipulation complaint, August 23, 1955, before the 

National Labor Relations Board 

64A. Settlement stipulation November 23, 1955, before the 
National Labor Relations Board 

64B. Decision and order of the National Labor Relations 
Board, August 30, 1955 

64C. Petition for enforcement of an order of the National 
Labor Relations Labor Board 

64D, Petitions for an injunction, stipulation, and order 
E, F. granting temporary injunction against certain re- 
spondents, August 23, 1955 

65. Picture of Roman F. Grunewald, showing facial beating. 

66. Item by Mr. Lodge, Jan. 3, 1924 

67. Pictures of John Brophy, Powers Hapgood, and Adolph 

Gernier, quoted to be purveyors of falsehood in 1930_ 

r>8. Articles from the Detroit News, New York Time.s, and 

the Detroit Free Press 

69. Letter dated October 20, 1939, to the chairman, Com- 

mittee on Naval Affairs, from Charles Edison, Act- 
ing Secretarv of the Navv 

70. Lists of strikes, death by violence, 1937-48 

71. A group of photographs of the Ford Motor Co., strike in 

Detroit in 1941 

72. Picture of Walter Reuther and Richard Frankensteen 

from the Town Journal, July 1955 

73. A group of i)hotographs taken during Ford Motor strike 

in Detroit in 1941 9-387 C*i 

74. A photograph taken during the Ford Motor Co. strike 

in 1941, and a page from a publication put out bv 

Kohler Co 9389 (,*) 

75. -\ group of photographs taken during the Ford Motor 

strike in Detroit in 1941 9390 (*) 

76. List of strikes in defense industries as of May 26, 1941, - 9390 (*^ 

IV 



9259 
9304 


(*) 


9305 


(*) 


9305 


(*) 


9305 


(*) 


9308 
9328 
9374 


(*) 
(*) 
(*) 


9375 


(*) 


9377 


(*) 


9379 
9380 


(*) 
(*) 


9382 


(*) 


9385 


(*) 



CONTENTS V 

Introduced Appears 
on page on page 

77. Document entitled "Addes v. Reuther, BuflFalo, August 

1941" 9393 (*) 

78. List of hearings held by Clare E. Hoffman in 1947, 

which show violence 9395 (*) 

79. Hearings before a subcommittee of the Committee on 

Expenditures in the Executive Departments May 
1948: Investigation as to the administration of the 
laws aflfecting labor disputes 9398 (*) 

80. Hearing pursuant to House Resolution 111, labor man- 

agement disputes in Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio, 

in 1947 9399 (*) 

81. Affidavit of Theodore J. Mosch 9425 (*) 

82 A, Letter dated June 28, 1955, to Rudolph J. Ploetz, 

mayor, city of Sheboygan, from Kohler Co 9426 9477 

82B. Letter dated July 1, 1955, to Rudolph J. Ploetz, mayor, 

city of Sheboygan, from Kohler Co 9426 9478 

82 C. Letter dated July 2, 1955, to Rudolph J. Ploetz, mayor, 

city of Sheboygan, from Kohler Co 9426 9479 

83. Newspaper article from the Sheboygan Press, dated 

April 23, 1955, Mayor Invokes Police Powers to Crack 

Down on Vandalism 9449 (*) 

83 A. Newspaper article from the Sheboygan Press, dated April 

23, 1955, 200 Volunteers to Fight Vandals here 9451 (*) 

83B. Newspaper article from the Sheboygan Press, dated 
April 30, 1955, Free Four Kohler Strikers Seized Near 
Dynamite 9451 (*) 

84. Two threatening letters dated December 5, 1955, and 

February 15, 1956, received by Mayor Rudolph J. 

Ploetz 9451 (*) 

85. Letter dated April 27, 1955, to Herbert V. Kohler, 

president, Kohler Co., from Rudolph J. Ploetz 9451 (*) 

85A. Letter dated April 28, 1955, to Mayor Rudolph J. Ploetz, 

from Allan Grasskamp, president of local 833 9451 (*) 

85B. Letter dated May 3, 1955, to Mayor Rudolph Ploetz, 

from Kohler Co 9451 (*) 

86. A pamphlet, Standards for Plant Protection, dated 

June 1, 1952, issued by Department of Defense, 

Munitions Board 9455 (*) 

87. Map of the village of KoMer 9458 (*) 

Proceedings of — 

March 12, 1958 9155 

March 13, 1958 9233 

March 14, 1958 9311 

March 18, 1958 9401 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12, 1958 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN THE Labor or Management Field, 

Washington^ D. G. 

The select committee met at 10 : 30 a. m., pursuant to Senate 
Resolution 221, agreed to January 29, 1958, in the caucus room, Senate 
Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select 
committee) presiding. 

Present : Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Senator 
Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York; Senator Sam J. Ervin, Jr., 
Democrat, North Carolina; Senator Barry Goldwater, Republican, 
Arizona; Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; and 
Senator Carl T. Curtis, Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Jerome S. Adler- 
man, assistant chief counsel; Jolin J. McGovern, assistant counsel; 
Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session 
were Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. All right, call your next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Robert Treuer. 

The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Treuer. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT TREUER, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, 

JOSEPH L. RAUH, JR. 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Treuer. M7 name is Robert Treuer, and I reside at 716 North 
Ninth Street in Sheboygan, Wis., and I am an international repre- 
sentative of the United Auto Workers Union, working in the public- 
relations department, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. Mr. Rauh represents you 
does he ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; he does. 

The Chairman. Let the record show Mr. Rauh appears for the 
witness. 

Mr. Kennedy, proceed. 

9155 



9156 IMPROPER ACTIVmElS IN THE LABOR FTELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Treuer, you were in Sheboygan, Wis., during 
the strike ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, I was in Sheboygan, Wis., full time starting in 
January of 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you been there prior to that time ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir; I had been, but not as an employee of the 
UAW. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you been with the UAW ? 

Mr. Treuer. I have been with the UAW since January of 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were you doing prior to that time ? 

Mr. Treuer. Prior to that time, sir, I was the editor of the Wis- 
consin CIO News, and I had held that position for a period of some 6 
years. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who retained you in the UAW to go to Sheboygan, 
Wis.? 

Mr. Treuer. I was hired by Mr. Harvey Kitzman, the region 10 
director, and I understand after his consultation with officials in 
the international union. 

Mr. Kennedy. T\^at were your duties up there ? 

Mr. Treuer. My duties, sir, were to help in the preparation of 
public-relations and publicity materials and to advise the local union 
in that regard to the best of my ability. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were there, were you not, during the time that 
the so-called clay -boat incident took place in July of 1955 ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was when the clay boat came in to deliver 
the clay for the Kohler Co. at Sheboygan, Wis. ? 

Mr, Treuer. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, did you make some broadcasts prior to the 
time that the clay boat came into Sheboygan ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And do you have with you your broadcasts? 

Mr. Treuer. I have with me, sir, the excerpts from the broadcasts 
that deal with the clay boat. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many times did you mention the clay boat prior 
to its arrival on July 5 ? 

Mr. Treuer. Prior to its arrival, sir, I mentioned the clay boat on 
one broadcast, and I mentioned it twice on that broadcast, once in the 
beginning and once at the end. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you invite people in that broadcast to come 
down to the clay boat when it arrived ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; I did. 

(At this point. Senator Ervin came into the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. "V^liat was the purpose of that, if it was not to incite 
some kind of a riot or a mob scene ? 

Mr, Treuer. That was not the purpose. The purpose, sir, was this : 
My remarks were played on July 1, which was a Friday night. We 
said at the time in our broadcast that the arrival of the clay boat 
•was expected within the next day or two. 

This had been a very quiet time in the strike, so quiet, in fact, sir, 
that we were receiving inquiries as to whether the strike was still 
going on. 



ESIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9157 

We thought at this time if we could get any publicity to the effect 
that the strike was still going on, it would be to our benefit. For 
this purpose, we organized what you might call a publicity gimmick 
or stunt. 

We were going to have six small rowboats, with outboard motors, 
to go out and meet the clay boat and, if you will, escort it in. These 
little boats would have people in them carrying signs saying, "This 
clay is for the strikebound Kohler Co." and things to the effect that 
"This strike is still going on." 

It didn't quite work out that way, because of the 6 boats, sir, 3 
foundered before they ever got too far away, and 1 of the fellows got 
tired of waiting and he went fishing, and only 2 boats did go out to 
meet the clay boat when it came in. 

I must also admit, sir, that we didn't get much publicity as a result. 

Senator Ervhst. Did you get any fish ? 

Mr. Treuer. I hear, sir, that he did. 

Senator Erven. I just wanted to say that the fish haven't been 
cooperating with me on the last times I have been fishing, and I hope 
they do better in the future than they have for me in the past. 

Mr. Treuer. Wisconsin fish are very cooperative, sir. 

The Chairman. We would like to get in the record what he actually 
said on his broadcast. 

Mr. Kennedy. On Friday, July 1 on the 6: 30 p. m., CIO broad- 
cast, from station WHBL, there was an introduction paragraph, and 
then the second paragraph reads : 

Also in the news, a clay boat loaded with clay for the Kohler Co. is expected 
to dock in Sheboygan Harbor sometime Saturday or Sunday. It is expected, of 
course, that a number of people will be on hand to meet and greet the clay boat 
when it arrives. Information is that the sailors aboard the ship have been 
contacted by CIO brothers before the ship even approached Sheboygan, and have 
been told the full story of the Kohler strike. 

Then you go on to give some other news and have an interview, 
and then the last paragraph states : 

Here again are the headlines in the Kohler strike today, for those of you who 
tuned into this program a little late. A clay boat loaded with clay for the 
Kohler Co. is expected to pull into Sheboygan Harbor sometime on Saturday or 
Sunday — that is, some time tomorrow or the day after — and certainly there will 
be many people on hand to watch the sight of the boat maneuvering into dock and 
pulling in and perhaps unloading before even the holidays are out. 

Then on July 3, 1955: 

This is Bob Treuer with today's Kohler strike report : Last Saturday, the steam- 
ship Possum, a ship of Norwegian registry, pulled into Sheboygan Harbor with a 
load of clay for the Kohler Co. 

As the boat approached Sheboygan Harbor, a little armada, you might call it, 
or a Kohler strikers' navy consisting of three little speedboats with outboard 
motors went out to greet them. 

The Kohler strikers in those three small boats carried signs in Norwegian, Ger- 
man, and English announcing the fact that the clay on board the steamship Possum 
was consigned to the strikebound Kohler plant. No effort was made, of course, 
to detain the boat or to interfere with it in any way. Rather the effort was made 
only to advertise the fact that a labor dispute exists at the Kohler Co. 

It must be understood that the sailors, who are mainly Norwegians and Scan- 
dinavians, aboard the ship are prevented by law from refusing to handle this 
cargo or to bring it in, so, of course, no effort was made to even ask them to do 
such a thing. Instead, leaflets were given to the seamen, to the sailors by the 
local 833 navy, urging them not to judge the entire country by the example being 
set by the Kohler Co. 



9158 IMPROPER AcrrvmE'S in the labor field 

Here is a sample of the leaflet which was handed out to the sailors, and this, 
too, was printed in Norwegian, German, and English Here is the English 
version. It I'cads as follows : 

"The clay on your ship is bound for the strikebound Kohler Co. We have 
been on strike since April 5, 1954. The company has tried to break our union 
by force, coercion, and hiring strikebreakers from far away. We ask you not 
to judge our country by wh;it the Kohler Co. is doing, because that is the ex- 
ception, but we ask you also to help us, the Kohler strikers, in any way that 
you probably can. 

'•We thank you for your support and we hope that by the next time your ship 
returns to Sheboygan, Wis., the Kohler Co. will have come to its senses and 
settled the strike." 

Now, incidentally, all of you folks, you members of 833, if you happen to 
meet any of the sailors from aboard the Possum, talk to them and encourage 
them to understand this country of ours, and not to judge it by the example 
being set by the Kohler Co. If possible invite them to your homes, and be- 
friend them and try to get them to understand what our country is really like. 

Mr. Treuer. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the first broadcast, you don't feel that you 
were inciting a riot or mob violence at the dock by announcing the fact 
that there was going to be a large number of people down there? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir ; not at all. 

^Ve have many times broadcast — for example, we have asked people 
to come and help out with office work, and we were not swamped by 
several thousand people by a long shot. This was as I explained, 
sir, strictly for the purpose of trying to get a few people around so 
we would have some spectators for the "Auto Workers' Navy." 

Mr. I^nnedy. Were you down at the dock yourself on that day ? 

Mr. Treuer. On the 2d of July ; yes, sir, I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. The day, was it July 5 when they were unloading 
the clay ? 

Mr. Treuer. These are two different days. The "Auto Workers' 
Navy" happened 3 or 4 days before the so-called clay boat riot or 
incident. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Was there anything else you wanted to explain 
about the "Auto Workers' Navy" ? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir ; that was all. The boat came in, and the navy, 
what there was of it, went out, and that was the end of it, and the boat 
docked, and the fellows went fishing, and after that the July 4 holi- 
days took place. 

In the interim, sir, the city of Sheboygan provides an annual July 
4 fireworks and celebration, which was adjacent to the dock site, and 
during that period of time, according to the local newspaper and 
radio, some 45,000 people had driven by and parked and spent a good 
share of their weekend in that immediate area. 

That is adjacent to where the clay boat was docked, and the people 
knew without a question of a doubt what the boat was, and what its 
purpose was, because the coming of the boat had been a matter of pub- 
lic controversy as long as 2 months before. 

If my memory serves me correctly I believe it was on May 2, 1955, 
an issue arose in the City of Sheboygan Common Council, Avhere the 
arrival or pending arrival of this clay boat was discussed and I under- 
stand some angry remarks were made by different people because I 
believe it was Mr. Desmond had come to see the mayor and asked 
for police protection. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9159 

Aiid the question had arisen that they had clay boats the year be- 
fore during 1954 when the strike was at even a higher pitch, and 
nothing adverse had happened, and the boats were unloaded without 
any delay, and without any problem, and why is this issue being 
raised. That, sir, was in May of 1955. So when the boat came in, 
and all of these people drove down and participated in the July 
Fourth celebration, it was pretty well known what the boat was and 
what its cargo was destined for. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just going back to your Navy, what did they do 
when they went out there? Did they just circle around the clay 
boat? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir; they did circle or attempt to circle, and I 
believe some of the fellows made an effort to throw some of these 
leaflets aboard ship, and I understand a few of the leaflets did get on 
board ship. 

Mr, Kennedy. There was not any attempt at that time to stop the 
boat from docking ? 

Mr. Treuer. No ; of course not, and we so stated. 

(At this point. Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.) 

Senator Curtis. I am interested in what you saj^ about this broad- 
cast on July 1. You say it was your intention to invite Koliler 
strikers and others down to the dock when this clay boat came in. 

Mr. Treuer. As I said, sir, our purpose was to provide a few spec- 
tators to see the navy and our experience has been that not too many 
people responded to these calls, and I would have been satisfied with 
about 20 or 30 people down there, which is wliat happened. 

Senator Curtis. Well now, it was your intention by announcing 
this on your program to have your people come down there; was it 
not? 

Mr. Treuer. For the purpose I stated ; yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Well now, they did other things after they got 
down there ; did they not ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, if I may explain, this was about 4 days or 3 days 
before the so-called clay-boat incident. This "Auto Workers' Navy," 
sir, went out on a Saturday, I believe, and the clay-boat incident that 
Mr. Desmond referred to yesterday took place on the following Tues- 
day. 

Senator Curtis. Because of the holiday weekend ? 

Mr. Treuer. That is correct, sir. 

Senator Curtis. But nevertheless, you say that the purpose of your 
broadcast was to alert people that it was coming and to get a crowd 
down there ; was it not ? 

Mr. Treuer. If I may point out, there were intervening broadcasts, 
too, and the one that we had reference to was to our intent, to my in- 
tent, to provide a few spectators for when the "Auto Workers' Navy" 
went out, and that, sir, was on Friday, July 1. 

Senator Curtis. You did not say anything like that in your broad- 
cast. You did not announce this was coming, and say that you 
wanted a few spectators down there for that particular reason ? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir ; I did not. 

Senator Curtis. You made a general appeal to get strikers down 
there and in due time the incident happened. How can you separate 
what happened from the fact that you drummed up the crowd to come 
down there? 



9160 IMPROPER AcrrvmEis in the labor feeld 

Mr. Treuer. I can, sir ; by tliis : That the remarks you refer to, sir, 
were made on July 1, and we had a progiam on July 3 in which we 
say, "No effort was made, of course, to detain or to even interfere with 
this boat in any way." Rather the effort was made to advertise the 
fact that a labor dispute exists at the Kohler Co. and, therefore, sir, 
our purpose was as I stated to advertise this and not to create an 
incident. 

Senator Curtis. What did the words "of coui-se" in there mean ? 

Mr. Treuer. Because we took it for gi-anted that we would do noth- 
ing but advertise, because, sir, it is easy for us or anyone else now to 
look back and reconstruct what happened. But I wish to point out, 
sir, if I may, that at that time none of us w^ere aware that all Sheboygan 
factories would be shut down the following week for the annual vaca- 
tion shutdowm, as is customary practice. 

It was something that was there, and if we had made inquiries we 
probably would have known, but it was something that I, for one, was 
totally unaware of. 

Senator Curtis. Well now, the sworn testimony here that we took 
yesterday is that a crowd assembled dowai there, and there was anger 
and there was cursing, and there was taking hold of cars that at- 
tempted to go through, and there was a breakage of glass; that the 
police had to open up the lines. Now, those people that were down 
there doing that were down there by reason of your appeal over the 
radio, is that not true ? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir ; not at all. 

(At this point, the following members were present : Senatoi^s Mc- 
Clellan, Ervin, Curtis, and Mundt.) 

Senator Curtis. You asked them to come down there ; didn't you ? 

Mr. Treuer. I asked on a different day. In the intervening days, 
we had at least two additional broadcasts in which nothing was said 
about coming down, and on the contrary. 

Senator Curtis. In that broadcast of July 1, you say, among other 
things — 

And there will be many people on hand to watch the sight of the boat maneuver- 
ing to the dock and pulling in and perhaps unloading before the holidays are 
out. 

It turned out they didn't unload before the holidays were out, all of 
which you w^ere alerting them to. 

As a matter of fact, your broadcast was in the nature of instructions 
to the strikers as to what they were to do dow^n there ; isn't that true ? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir ; it was not. And whereas we did not say any- 
thmg about the presence of the clay boat or its possibility of unload- 
ing, the local radio station, sir, did. This is separate and apart from 
our 15-minute program. Their newscast did, and particularly, sir, on 
the morning of July 5 there were repeated program interruptions. 
There were bulletins which interrupted the program which did sub- 
stantially a lot to draw^ people down there. 

Senator Curtis. The fact is that these radio broadcasts were used 
for the purpose of getting instructions out to the strikers as to what 
they should do as the strike went along ; isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir; it was in the form of information, and in no 
way an instruction. 

Senator Curits. In no way an instruction ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9161 

Mr, Treuer. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Not at any time ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, when we had something that we specifically 
wanted the people to know that was in any form an official instruction 
from the miion, we usually had an officer of the local union on the 
program, and it was stated specifically as an instruction. 

If I may, I would like to cite an example of that. Some confusion 
arose at one time about the specific details of the State labor board 
rules on picketing, where to picket and the exact distance between 
pickets, and so forth, I believe in January or February of 1955. Allen 
Grasskamp, the president of local 833, and I believe Mr. Kohlhagen, 
the recording secretary, went on the air, and said : 

The following are specific, detailed instructions which we want you to have, 
and which we must insist be enforced. You will do everything you can to 
cooperate — 

and then they read these instructions. That, sir, was an instruction. 

Senator Curtis. I will admit that you no doubt used that method 
for direct instruction at times. But isn't it true that by way of an- 
nouncement and news what appeared outwardly to be that was actu- 
ally instructions to the strikers, given out over this radio program? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir ; it was not. 

By way of illustration, again, we have said on many of our radio 
broadcasts, in making references — we call attention, for example, to 
a rehearsal of the chorus of local 833 which takes place weekly, and 
I recall many times saying, "Please be there on time," and I don't 
think the chorus has ever started rehearsing on time yet. 

Senator Curtis. Of course, that is not strike instruction anyway. 
But here you started out with this broadcast : 

Also in the news a clay boat loaded with clay for the Kohler Co. is expected 
to dock in Sheboygan Harbor sometime Saturday or Sunday. It is expected, 
of course, that a number of people will be on hand to meet and greet this clay 
boat when it arrives. 

In truth and in fact that was instructions for them to be there, 
wasn't it ? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir; it was not. I explained when Mr. Kennedy 
asked me about this originally, that we had planned a publicity gim- 
mick to call attention to the fact that the strike was still on, and our 
hope, sir, when this connnent was made, was that there would be 
enough of a handful of people on this July 2 when the boat came 
in so that the reporters, if any were present, wonld be interested. 

Sir, again, there was an interval of several days and several broad- 
casts before the incident of the clay boat took place. 

Senator Curtis. What other duties did you have for the union 
besides these radio broadcasts ? 

Mr. Treuer. My duties, sir — ■ — 

Senator Curtis. Did you get out any other form of publicity ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes. Local 833 has a printed weekly publication, 
formerly known as the Kohlarian, now known as the Local 833 Re- 
porter and Kohlarian. It was my responsibility to assist in the pub- 
lication of this. 

Senator Curtis. What other publications did the union have ? 

Mr. Treuer. Local 833 also has a mimeographed strike bulletin, 
which, for a time, appeared daily, and subsequently, 3 days a week. 



9162 IMPROPER AcnvrTrEis ix the labor field 

This is edited and publislied, sir, by the local union, and I would 
occasionally make efl'orts to help. This publication we considered 
almost exclusively a local union publication, and altliough I made 
advice from time to time, sometimes it was followed and sometimes 
it was not. 

Senator Cuktis. Then were you an employee of the local union? 

Mr. TiJKUKR. Xo, sir; 1 was an employee of the international union. 

Senator Cuktis, When did you come into that area ? 

Mr. Treuer. I came into that area as an employee of the interna- 
tional union in January of 1955, sir. 

Senator Curtis. From where ? 

Mr. Treuer. From Milwaukee, sir. I sold my home in Milwaukee 
and moved to Sheboygan. 

Senator Curtis. Isn't it a fact that the strikers were advised to 
listen to your radio broadcast for their strike instructions? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You are pretty sure about that ? 

Mr. Treuer. They were urged to listen. There may have been 
times on specific events, such as the one I described before, sir, when 
Allen Grasskamp read picketing instructions, that they were asked to 
listen for such instructions, but those would be the only events when 
instructions in the full sense of the word were involved. 

Senator Curtis. I have b-efore me what purports to be the Daily 
Strike Bulletin, Kohler Local 833, UAW-CIO, volume 1, No. 6, for 
Saturday, April 10, 1954. This is a strike bulletin. 

Mr. Treiter. The date, sir, was April 10, 1954 ? 

Senator Curtis. April 10, 1954. The sixth paragraph says: 

Don't forget to tune in on the nightly radio broadcasts over W^HBL at 6 : 30. 
This is your best way of getting important, last-minute information and in- 
structions. 

The strike bulletin is the instructions that you give out to the strik- 
ers ; isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, the date of that strike bulletin was Saturday, 
April 10, 1954, about 8 months before I came to Sheboygan as an 
employee of the UAW. At the time you referred to, I was not an 
employee. I had no connection with either the bulletin or the radio 
program, and I do not know whether this was reference to specific 
instructions or to what. 

Senator Curtis. Understand, I am not holding you up as an indi- 
vidual responsible for this in your individual capacity, but here we 
have a situation where all of these things happened. You had that 
mob down there that is involved in the clay boat incident; a radio 
broadcast is made asking them to come down there; and you admit 
that you asked them to come down there, and you say, "6h, no, we 
had nothing to do with that." 

All of these acts of violence and vandalism happened. Nobody 
knows anything about them. Individuals that do not work at Kohler 
and do not live in the area come in there to take part in the strike. 
Some of them are arrested. We asked them : 

Who directed things ? Where did you get your instructions ? 

I didn't have any instructions. 

Who told you to <;o down there? 

No, I just wanted to go down there and do it. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9163 

I don't know ^Yllo is kidding, but I don't believe anyone can accept 
the fact that this thing ran along without directions. The fact re- 
mains that right in the printed bulletin these strikers were advised to 
tune in and get their instructions. 

Just before this incident, the instructions are given out over there. 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, I wish I could be of more help to you on this 
specific reference, but, unfortunately, I cannot, because i was not 
there and do not know whether the April 10 bulletin had reference 
to some specific instructions forthcoming. But as to your question, 
sir, about direction, I think, sir, that I knew what I was doing or try- 
ing to do, and in regard to the incident you referred to at the end of 
your question, sir, in regard to the clay- boat incident, I will be more 
than happy to try to tell you, sir, what I saw. 

Senator Curtis. We will come to that later, I am interested in es- 
tablishing this chain of command, the direction for this strike. I 
do not think there is anyone in this room naive enough to believe that 
it went on without design, without instructions, and without com- 
mands. 

It was the contention, and it has been the contention of all witnesses 
I have heard on behalf of the union, that this strike had the moral 
support of the vast majority of Kohler workere, and many people in 
the community. 

When you twice appeal for them to come down to the dock, how, 
then, did you say you only expected a handful there to show up ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, that is all that did show up, because the broadcast 
was made on July the 1st. On July the 2d we had about 30 people 
down there. Subsequently to that, sir, several days passed by, sev- 
eral broadcasts passed by, without the urging of anyone's coming 
down, and the events on July 5, mifolded w^ithout any assist or incite- 
ment from myself or the UAW. 

Senator Curtis. Well, some days elapsed, but it was a continuous 
transaction. People didn't anticipate that boat to be unloaded on Sun- 
day or on the 4th of July. Now I want to ask you : When did you first 
learn about the departure from its point of origin of this ship that 
carried the clay '? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, I never learned about the time of departure. 

Senator Curtis. When did you first learn any information, or get 
any information, about the sailing? 

Mr. Treuer. I believe, sir, the first knowledge came through the 
dispute in the city council, which was reported in the local newspaper. 
I cannot recall if the name of the ship was involved. 

Senator Curtis. Is that the first information the union had ? 

Mr. Treuer. That is the first information that anyone had, to my 
knowledge, except, of course, the Kohler Co. must have known. They 
sent Mr. Desmond down to see the mayor. 

Senator Curtis. I want to make another observation in connection 
with this lack of assuming responsibility on the part of the union for 
directing the strike, for giving instructions to participants and the 
like. This does not concern you, not you as an individual — or, not you 
at all. 

But I am not satisfied with the investigation that has taken place 
here. We have it testified that there were over 800 acts of vandalism 
or violence, or annoyance, of some kind. 



9164 IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

I tliink the staff of this committee ought to find out Avho did it. If 
the company is rasponsible for those acts and have committed a fraud 
against tlie public out there and against this committee, that ought 
to be established, and the truth of the thing shown up without mercy. 
On the otlier hand, if the union, if that part of the union conducting 
the strike, is responsible for these things, likewise it ought to be 
known. - 

I do not think that they are accidental . I do not tliink when the 
same pattern shows up in many homes, having w'indows broken, and 
paint bombs thrown in, that it is a coincidence, of the same pattern, 
the same type of weapon. 

I believe that witnesses should be gathered in and subpenaed and 
questioned one by one until we find out who has done that. I do not 
believe that either party — and I don't care which one of them is 
guilty — should pretend that these things just happened. That is all, 
Mr. Chairman. 
Mr. Treuer. Sir? 

The Chairman. The Chair will make this observation : There is 
certainly no disposition on the part of this committee or any memter 
of its staff not to get the facts and not to get the truth wherever we 
can find it. I have no doubt that there are plenty of people out there 
that know who did some of these acts. If we can find anyone who 
does know, who will talk, who will not perjure himself, who will come 
hero and tell the facts, he will be brought here, so far as the Chair is 
concerned. But we must bear in mind that this was a highly emo- 
tional situation out there at the time. I believe the company em- 
ployed detectives to try to ascertain who w^as committing the violence. 
This is some 4 years later, and it is not as easy to go and uncover who 
may have committed this vandalism 4 years afterward as it would 
have been at the time. 

Local officers apparently didn't uncover it, and neither did the com- 
pany find anyone, with the aid of its employed detective force, that 
it could make a charge against. 

I tliink the whole thing is reprehensible. Such violence should not 
be tolerated, should not be permitted, and should be stopped if it is 
possible to do so. But I am not going to take the blame for this com- 
mittee's not being able to di^ it up 4 years afterward w-lien the com- 
pany has been working on it all this time and has not been able to 
come up with a single name of one they could charge. 
Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Treuer, you were at the dock on the day that tiie 
clay was supposed to have been unloaded, on July 5 ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir. I arrived about the same time Mr. Desmond 
did. 

Mr, Ivennedy. Would you relate what you found wiien you got 
there, and your account of the facts, as Mr. Desmond did yesterday ? 

Mr. Treuer. I arrived, to the best of my recollection, around 8 in 
the morning. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, before we get away from the point 
just inider discussion, I wish to associate myself with the remarks of 
tlie chairman, and to say that they express my views about this mat- 
ter. I would also like to say that as a member of tliis committee if 
there is any human being on the face of the earth who can present 
any reasonable assurance that he can unearth anything that has not 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9165 

been unearthed in respect to the perpetrators of the alleged acts of 
violence in connection with this matter, I, for one, will move that this 
committee employ him to conduct an investigation of the same. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy, proceed. 

Mr. Treuer. May I proceed ? 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Go ahead, Mr. Treuer. 

Mr. Treuer. Wlien I arrived at the foot of Pennsylvania Avenue 
there were some 30 to 40 people milling around the open entrance of 
the Hildebrand docks, possibly 100 or 200 people more were standing 
across the street and sitting on the open expansion of lawn in front 
of the Sheboygan Armory. 

Parked in the street was a line of trucks and other heavy equip- 
ment, I presume unloading equipment. I believe that the station wag- 
on described by Mr. Desmond was just about pulling in when I had 
parked my car and walked up to the gate myself to see what was going 
on. People were walking around in front of that gate. I heard the 
description of what may or may not have been a picket line. I can 
only tell you, sir, what I saw. 

That was that people were striking back and forth between the 
gate to get a look inside. 

Adjacent to the gate was a wooden fence, and if you are as short 
as I am, you can't look over that fence. You have to be quite a bit 
taller before you can. Most people were walking around in the open 
space there, trying to get a good look in. The station wagon pulled 
into the open area of the dock and parked. 

The first ones to step out of that station wagon were, I believe , Mr. 
Joe Born and Paul Jacobi. 

There was a bit of hooting going on from the people in the open 
gate, saying "Here come the speed kings. Here come the speed kings." 

I don't think there is a time-study man in any factory in the United 
States who is too well loved by the employees, and this is especially 
true at Kohler where a lot can be said about the incentive system. 

The Chairman. "VVliat did speed king have reference to ? 

Mr. Treuer. Speed king had reference to the fact that Paul Jacobi 
and Joe Born were time-study men, and, I am told, would liide behind 
pillars to observe men to see how fast they were working and if they 
were making too much money per hour, I suppose they would cut 
them down. 

The Chairman. Those are just suppositions, but they were referred 
to as speed kings because of their attitude toward the employees; is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Treuer. That is my understanding sir. 

The Chairman. That is your understanding. 

All right. 

Mr. Treuer. In addition, sir, Mr. Jacobi and Mr. Born had been 
on the witness stand for a considerable length of time in the NLRB 
hearing, and each of them had submitted several hundred affidavits 
citing striker so-and-so for being on the picket line, and striker so-and- 
so and on the basis of these affidavits, and other things the company 
made what has been referred to as Gestapo books activities of strikers. 
They weren't too popular, you might say. 

21243— 58— pt. 23 2 



9166 IMPROPER ACTIVrriES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. AVliat was intended as the total purpose of making 
the reiuuik, was to say sometliing uncomplimentary about them, that 
is the truth; isn't it ? 

Mr. Trelek. That is the truth. 

The Chairman. And the purpose of being down there was to try 
to keep that boat from being unloaded. Why don't we say so? It 
is perfectly obvious. 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir. I don't think any 30 people would 

Tlie Chairman. I am not talking about 30 people. I am talking 
about when a big crowd gathers down there. 

Mr. Treuer. I will try to explain how that developed. 

The Chairman. I don't care how they got there. They were there. 
I don't care whether they walked or came in a car. 

Mr. Treuer. There were that many people there later in the day, 
but as the wliole chain of events unfolded, I will do my best to tell you 
what I saw. 

The Chairman. All right, proceed. 

Mr. Treuer. Jacobi and Born got out of the car, and I believe at 
least Mr. Jacobi walked up to the gate, or pretty close to it, and 
started taking pictures, then Mr. Desmond stepped out. I remember 
seeing him walk up and start to write down what obviously were 
names of people whom he recognized. 

Then the person who was probably the most hated individual in 
the whole Kohler strike stepped out of that car, and the people that 
were there started yelling "Butcher, Butcher Boy." 

Tlie Chairman. "Butcher Boy" ; is that right ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes. 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who are you referring to ? 

Mr. Treuer. I am referring to Mr. Edmund Biever, the plant man- 
ager of the Kohler Co., and I understand that the reason that the 
people shouted so much when Mr. Biever made his appearance, and 
the reason they called him "Butcher Boy" was because Mr. Biever 
was the man w^ho fired the first shot in the 1934 massacre, and Mr. 
Biever is the man who was in the headlines 

Senator Mundt. Are you testifying from your personal knowledge 
that he fired the first shot, or are you just getting us involved in a 
long series of charges and countercharges ? Were you at the strike ? 
Do you know that^ Or are you simply trying to pin something on 
someone without any proof at all ? We ought to have some firsthand 
information. We do not have anything involving the shooting. 

Mr. Treuer. I was told by Mr. Ed Ferguson 

Senator Mundt. Who was he ? 

Mr. Treuer. Mr. Ed Ferguson was a Kohler Co. deputy in 1934 — 
that he stood next to Mr. Biever Avhen Mr. Biever fired the first shot, 
and, sir, in addition, there was testimony in the 1934 coroner's inquest 
into the death of these two men, that Mr. Biever had, in fact, shot the 
first shot. 

Senator Mundt. Now you pin it down with names. That is what I 
wanted to know. 

Senator Curtis. I want to ask you something in that regard. 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. When was this shot fired ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9167 

Mr. Tretjer. This shot was fired on the night of July 27, 1934, and 
what happened as a result two men were killed and many men and 
women were wounded, most in the back. 

Senator Curtis. From this first shot ? 

Mr. Treuer. That shot was apparently the signal for the firing to 
begin, and 

Senator Curtis. Where was the man Biever located when he fired 
it? 

Mr. Treuer. Mr. Biever, according to the testimony was in front 
of the American Club. He was the assistant chief of 

Senator Cutitis. Who did he shoot at? 

Mr. Treuer. He shot at the strikers on the picket line. 

Senator Curtis. Did he hit any of them ? 

Mr. Treuer. He shot a tear gas canister which fell into the crowd, 
and was subsequently followed by a barrage of tear gas, described, sir, 
by Mr. Kichard Davis, of the Milwaukee Journal and others, as being 
so extensive that a whole cloud of tear gas hung over High Street of 
Kohler Village and that men, women, and children alike were gassed, 
trampled, in utter confusion, and this was followed, sir, by a barrage 
of gunfire, in the course of which the injuries and fatalities took place, 
all, sir, on the side of the strikers and the spectators, none, sir, on the 
side of the Kohler Co. deputies. 

Senator Curtis. Was this investigated by a coroner's jury ? 

Mr. Treuer. This, sir, was investigated, to the best of my knowl- 
edge, by the coroner, at that time Mr. Sonnenberg and a coroner's 
jury sat on this question. Some months, I believe, or several weeks, 
after the fact. 

Senator Curtis. What was their decision ? 

Mr. Treuer. Their decision, sir, was that Lee Wakefield, a Koh- 
ler striker, and Henry Engleman — pardon me; Henry Engleman, 
a Kohler striker, and Lee Wakefield, a spectator, had met their deaths 
at the hands of a person or persons — ruthless persons — unknown. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I simply want to observe — and I 
have no objection to this, I want to get all of the facts I can, on this 
situation and on the UAW and on the Kohler Co. — I simply want to 
observe the glib manner in which the union representative has talked 
about 1934, even though he described what took place by looking 
through a knothole fence in some neighborhood yard in Milwaukee, 
which is a long way from Sheboygan. I don't want to complain about 
that. I simply want to point out to Mr. Mazey, if he is listening, how 
utterly silly he must look in view of this testimony, when he accuses 
me of trying to smear Mr. Sif ton, because I went back to 1933. I am 
just 1 year behind him, at least. 

Mr. Rauh. May I observe, sir, that the difference between the two 
cases is that you brought in Mr, Sif ton, who is irrelevant to this hear- 
ing, and Mr. Treuer brought in Mr. Biever, whose presence there in- 
stigated and triggered the difficulty. 

That is the difference. Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. I can think of another difference Mr. Chairman. 
The other difference is that in the first place certainly the legislative 
reprevSentative of the CIO is not what you would call no party to the 
UAW. But another veiy important difference is that I was quoting 



9168 IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Si f ton about ]Mr. Si f ton, rather than quoting what took place in 
19154, from the eyes of a witness who lived in Milwaukee at the time. 

The Chairman, All right. Let's move along. Are there any fur- 
ther questions? 

Mr. TuKUER. Sir, may I 

Mr. Kexxkdy. Go ahead. 

Mr. Treuer. The result, sir, was this, that Mr. Biever, and we will 
bring this to 1955 

The Chairman. Let's get up there in 1955, where they were calling 
him Butcher Boy. Let's move from there and see what happened. 

Mr. Treuer. All right, sir. Mr. Biever, when he stepped out of 
the car down there at the clay boat, was making his first public ap- 
pearance. It was the first time anyone knew that he was around, 
after he had evaded, I am told, seven attempts to subpcna him to 
the National Labor Relations Board hearing. The hearings had just 
then gone into recess, I believe for the holidays, after these, at leavSt 
seven, unsuccessful attempts to subpena him as a w^itness before the 
National Labor ]3oard. 

Tliis, of course, was in the headlines. It had received quite a bit 
of public attention. Here Mr. Biever steps out of the car. It was 
the first anyone had seen him. They had never yet successfully 
served him, to my knowledge, and I think if you had dropped a bomb 
in that crowd, you couldn't have done a better job, because the people 
streamed to the doorway to get a look at Mr. Biever, and everyone 
was pushing everyone else for a position of a fcAv inches of space in 
there to get a good look. 

Senator Curtis. Was that when Mr. Biever was in the police car? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir; that happened later, the second time they sent 
IMr. Biever into the area. By that time, the situation was quite dif- 
ferent. 

Senator Curtis. Wliich was the second time ? Wlien was he in the 
police cor? 

Mr. Treuer. That, sir, happened, I would say, around 11:30 or 
noon. The first time ]Mr. Biever came down was around 8 in the 
morning, and in the interval quite a few things happened. 

Senator Curtis. You w^ere there both times? 

Mr. Treuer. I was there both times, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Was Donald Rand there ? 

Mr. Treuer. I believe he was there, I couldn't say whether he 
Avas tliofe both times. 

Senator Curtis. Is this police officer Detective Stubbier? 

Mr. Treuer. I beg your pardon. 

Senator Curtis. Was the police officer, in whose car Biever was, 
Detective Stubbier? 

Mr. Treuer. You are referring to the second time Mr. Biever came 
dow^n ? 

Senator Curtis. The time he was in the police car. 

Mr. TREin<:R. I believe he was. I would have no way of knowing. 

Senator Curtis. And you believe Donald Rand was there? 

Mr. Treuer. I couldn't say positively. I think he was. I have 
no clear recollection of him being there both times. 

Senator Curtis. He is the international representative; isn't he? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; he is. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9169 

Senator Curtis. Was Rober Bliss there ? 

Mr. Treuer. I have no recollection of seeing Mr. Bliss. 

Senator Curtis. Did you hear Donald Rand say anything to Biever 
as he was in that car ? 

Mr. Treuer. I heard Mr. Rand say nothing to Mr. Biever. I did 
hear Mr. Rand complain to a police officer about bringing Mr. Biever 
into this highly charged situation a second time, and I clearly remem- 
ber Mr. Rand stating "Wliat are you trying to do? Are you trying 
to start a riot?" 

Senator Curtis. TVlien Mr. Rand spoke to Detective Stubbier, did 
he swear at him ? 

Mr. Treuer. Well, I don't know that it was Stubbier he spoke to. 
I will take your word for it, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Well, whoever the police officer was. 

Mr. Treuer. I never heard Mr. Rand swear at a police officer, that 
or any other time. 

Senator Curtis. Did you see a striker reach through the car win- 
dow at Biever and swear at him and tell him that he would take care 
of him? 

Mr. Treuer. I didn't see anything quite like that. I saw the car 
window being rolled down and somebody inside the car, I presume 
Mr. Biever, yell out, but then my view was cut off. 

Senator Curtis. Did you see Rober Bliss, or hear him, yell at 
Biever, swear at him, and call him a rat, and tell him to come out 
of there? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Your knowledge of what happened in 1934 seems 
to be much clearer than what happened at this recent strike. 

Mr. Treuer. Well, sir, if you will permit me, I will try to tell you 
what I saw. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is fine. Go ahead. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Treuer. When the station wagon was still at the dock site, and 
Mr. Buteyn, I believe it was the younger Mr. Buteyn, walked through 
the crowd and onto the dock side 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Buteyn was down there with some equipment? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. To try to unload the boat ? 

Mr. Treuer. I presume so ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had he gotten the equipment into the dock area? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir ; and I saw him make no attempt. He was con- 
tinually talking to people, and then he walked through the people into 
the dock side. I saw him standing there talking, I believe, to Mr. Des- 
mond and Mr. Biever. Then Mr. Buteyn walked back out. 

Mr. Kennedy. What time is this that you are talking about? 

Mr. Treuer. I would say around 9 in the morning, roughly. Then 
Mr. Buteyn walked out. I believe he drove something in. I couldn't 
tell you what pieces of equipment they were. He told his drivers to 
take the rest of it away, and they drove off, thus clearing the street. 
I returned to my office. I returned again — no ; I beg your pardon, sir, 
I did not then return to my office. Shortly after, Mr. Jacobi, Mr. 
Born, Mr. Desmond, Mr. Biever got back into their car, and they 
drove up to the gate, and the people were packed in there like sardines. 
The police officers came along and opened a path. I remember Mr. 



9170 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Desmond stepping ont of his car. I don't recall what he said, if 
anytliing. At any rate, the police came to clear the path. It took a 
minute or two. Tliere was a lot of press there. By "press" I don't 
mean rei)orters. I mean peoi)le were pressing for a look. There were 
at least — tliere were several police officers who cleared the path. The 
car started to pull through, 1 think hefore the path was completely 
cleared. 

They were trying to push their way through. The pavement curves 
down for the rain gutter. Sir, I don't know whether what happened 
then was an accident or whether it was the driver getting nervous, 
whether it wasn't his fault at all, I don't know. 

I can only tell you what I saw happen, and that was this: There 
were still possibly 2 or ?> people in the path of this car. One of tliem 
was a police officer. When so many people are pushing around, it is 
difficult to get a clear picture. But I have a vivid recollection of 
myself and another fellow taking the police officer by the arm and 
pulling him toward us so he would not be hit by the car. He was just 
grazed. Then the car dipped down into the rain gutter, without 
completely stopping, and a woman — the next thing I saw was this 
woman was up on the hood of the car. I can't tell you how she got 
there, whether she was struck, which I doubt, or whether she had 
slipped up on the hood, or just how it happened. I do not know. 

But I do know how it must have looked to the majority of the 
spectators who were across the street. They didn't have side views. 
They had a frontal view of the car, of the hood of the car, and the 
woman, and to them it must have looked terrible, because a shout 
went up. 

You could hear the roaring. It was like waves, and the people 
surged across the street, and there was a shout, "There's Biever, Biever 
has done it again." These people surged across and they pressed 
around the car. They had a pretty difficult time getting out, but they 
did get out. 

I saw the window 

The Chairman. The car had a difficult time getting out ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir. I saw — I know that the window was shat- 
tered at that time. Hoav it happened, I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you went back to your office. 

Mr. Treuer. Yes. At that point I went back to my office. 

Senator Mundt. Before we leave the incident you have been de- 
scribing — you saw all of this happen yourself, did you ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Senator Mundt. AVould you say that the car leaving the gate and 
going through the picket line was going in excess of 50 miles an hour? 

Mr. Treuer. Do you mean coming out ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Treuer, No, sir. It was going very slow. 

Senator Mundt. How fast would you say it was going ? 

Mr. Treuer. It was going very slowly. 

Senator Mundt. About a walking speed ? 

Mr. Treuer. Slightly faster. About 5 or 10 miles an hour. 

Senator Mundt. I have never seen such an accident happen, but 
would you explain to me how a car moving at walking speed could hit 
a woman and toss her up on a car ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9171 

I am not convinced that ballistically that is possible. 

Mr. Treuer. I didn't see the incident of how she got up on the hood 
or what. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, if she got up there, she had to climb 
up there, because a car moving at walking speed cannot possibly over- 
come the law of gravity sufficiently to toss a woman up on the hood of 
a car. You know that, and I know that, and everybody listening to 
this program knows that. She may have climbed up, she may have 
been tossed up, but to think that she was hit by a car at walking speed 
and tossed up — nobody is going to accept that. 

Mr. Tretter. Sir, the phrase "tossing up" is not mine, with all due 
respect. How she got up there, I do not know. It could have been 
that she was trying to get out of the way, the same as the police officer 
was when they pulled toward us. 

Senator Mundt. Just a big, tall gal, walking out and stepping on 
top of the car. I understand it now. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, if I may suggest, and I do not desire 
to enter a controversy, but I respectfully submit that it might be 
argued that w^hen external force is applied to people, sometimes those 
external forces are like a mule. They don't kick as hard as no rule. 

Senator Mundt. If you are trying to interpret that in terms of how 
an automobile moving at walking speed can throw a full-grown widow 
on top of a car, I would like to have you explain it in some language 
other than mule language, because I can't understand it that way. 

The Chairman. This witness said he didn't know how the woman 
got on top of the car. He doesn't know. The woman did get on top 
of the car somehow. You saw that after she was on there. 

Mr. Treuer. I saw that, sir, and I saw the result. 

The Chairman. You saw the commotion that it caused. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you went back to your office ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir. I went back to my office. It would have 
been a pretty hectic day even without all of this business. We were 
moving that day into our present offices. They no sooner hooked up 
the telephone and the reporters started to call and wanted to know 
what was on. They wanted to know were our pickets down there, 
and we said, "Of course not. This is not a proper function — it is not 
a function of our union and we had no pickets down there, and we 
disavowed any involvement or any participation." 

We told the reporters we didn't tell anyone to be down there. 

Mr. Kennedy. So then you went back down there later on ? 

Mr. Treuer. I went back several times. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you go back for ? 

Mr. Treuer. I had a broadcast to make that night. I at least wanted 
to see what was going on, and I was as curious as about several 
thousand other people were. It is a human failing. A lot of us went 
down there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did a lot of people start coming down there to the 
dock then ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; a lot of people did. At that point, the pro- 
gram interruptions on the local radio station were frequent. As a 
matter of fact, when I went down the next time, I met the reporter 
for the local radio station. At that time there was only one station. 
He and I would walk up and down together. I have a vivid recollec- 



9172 E\n>R)OPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

tion, sir, of the curiosity, the interest being so great, that I saw one man 
come running down the middle of Pennsylvania Avenue ; he had his 
bedroom slippers on, slacks and an undershirt, and he was ruiming, 
I think as fast as he could, to get down to the foot of the street, and 
behind him came his wife dressed in a housecoat and also slippers, and 
she was holding out his shirt behind him trying to catch up with him. 
Please, sir, I am not trying to be funny, but this is a vivid recollection, 
and on a day like that, a few things like that do stand out in your 
mind. 

The Chairman. It was the occasion of excitement, is that correct? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Great excitement had been stirred up ? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Were there many women and children down at the 
dock? 

Mr. Treuer. I would say the crowd was at least half women and 
children, and I saw a large number of people whom I would judge 
to be of high-school age. I would say that the proportion of young- 
sters grew as the day went along. 

Mr. Kennedy. So then you went back at 11 o'clock. 

Mr. Treuer. I went back and I was standing with Mr. Fisher. 
We heard a honking of horns and we saw a crane being pulled up 
on a big truck. As the truck pulled down Pennsylvania Avenue 

Mr, Kj:nnedy. How many people were down there at that time? 

Mr. Treuer. I would estimate by that time there were a good 1,000 
to 2,000 people. I will have to guess. 

Mr. ICennedy. That is about 11 o'clock in the morning? 

Mr. Treuer. That is about 11 : 30 or so. 

Mr, Kennedy, So the company had made arrangements to unload 
the clay from the boat during this period of time ; is that right ? 

Mr, Treuer, No, sir; that is not my impression. Because in order 
to unload that boat, and even Mr, Buteyn, who runs a trucking firm 
we heard yesterday, had to get Kohler Co, equipment to help him, 
if the company planned to unload it they didn't have the equipment 
there at that time. All they had was a crane. They also needed a 
substantial number, as I understand it, of trucks, caterpillars, and 
what have you, I am not that familiar with the procedure. 

The Chairman, They never did get set up to unload it. The crowd 
kept them from getting in there with their equipment so they could 
unload it ; isn't that a fact ? 

Mr. Treuer, Sir, if they had the equipment, they didn't bring it 
down, with the exception of one piece. 

The Chairman. Well, they didn't get in there and get to use it, 
did they ? 

Mr. Treuer. I can onlj^ tell you what I saw, and that was one piece. 

The Chairman, You say that, that they didn't get to use it, 

Mr. Treuer. Tliat is the point. In this incident, I saw one piece 
of equipment being brought it. They got down to the middle of 
Pemisylvania Avenue and started to turn in, and the crowd swarmed 
around it. This piece of equipment, unlike that morning when there 
were Mr, Buteyn's drivers, this time there were Kohler Co, super- 
vision and, to use a euphemism, sir, nonstrikers in that truck. The 
crowd swarmed around it and stopped it, Mr, Fisher and I stood 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9173 

across tlie street. We saw the crowd literally swarm around this 
piece of equipment and stop it. By the time we had made out way 
over to it, there was a flat tire and there was gasoline in the street. 
How gasoline gets into a truck, I don't know. But then the fire 
department came to wash it down, and more people came. 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't somebody puncture the tank? Didn't you 
undei-stand tliat ? 

Mr. Treuer. Most likely. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well it would have to be. The gasoline from the 
crane got into the street, so somebody would have to puncture the 
tank to make it possible. 

Mr. Treuer. It could have been, sir, I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't you understand that is what happened ? If 
you didn't know it then, you knew it later, did you not? 

Mr. Treuer. I think the papers said that much. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then somebody punctured the tires on the crane? 

Mr. Treuer. They were pimctured by that time. The crane was 
stopped and couldn't move, and the crowd was all around it. And 
the police. From that time on, I didn't have much time left to spend 
at the scene, and this is substantially the extent of what I saw. I 
had to return to my office. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you returned. Was there an international 
organizer for the UAW present at the time ? 

Mr. Treuer. At the time this crane was stopped ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. Mr. Rand was down at the dock during this 
period of time, was he not ? 

Mr. Treuer. I remember seeing Mr. Rand early in the morning, 
and he could have been there around 11: 30 or so, and if he was, I 
could not say. I could not swear he was or was not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did any representative for the UAW speak to 
the crowd and tell them to go home, or to let the Kohler Co. unload 
the boat if they wanted to ? 

Mr. Treuer. I know I have tried to say a few things in that regard 
early in the morning, and I was pretty roundly cussed and told it was 
none of my business, and it was none of the UAW's business, and 
it was the people around there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody talk to the crowd at all from the UAW, 
that you know of, and tell them that they should go home and allow 
the company to unload the boat ? 

Mr. Treuer. Not that I know of, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were a number of international organizers, 
at least Mr. Rand was there, and there were a number of strikers pres- 
ent, were there not, or those people who were on strike, whether they 
were picketing or not ? 

Mr. TpuEuer. Yes, I think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Don't you feel something could have been accom- 
plished by having somebody from the union get up and tell these peo- 
ple to go home, that the company had a legal right to unload the 
boat, and that they should go home and not cause this difficulty and 
trouble ? 

Mr. Treuer. No, sir; I do not, because we did not tell the people 
to be down there. It was not our intent to stop the unloading and 
furthermore, when, in the morning, I did speak up to try and urge 



9174 IMPROPER ACTIVITTE6 IX THE LABOR FIELD 

people to let this Kohler Co. station wagon through, well frankly, 
I wasn't going to go over that kind of abuse once again. 

Mr. Kennedy. Possibly you didn't have the responsibility for hav- 
ing people down tliere, but certainly you had an obligation and re- 
sponsibility to try to get them out of there, or make a contribution 
to ending this crowd and this mass, and this mob that was forming 
tliere. 

Mr. Tkeuer. If I felt any responsibility, it was personal, and I 
tried to exercise it, and I was pretty roundly abused. 

I would like to point out, sir, if I may, that the makeup of this 
crowed was not predominantly strikers. I recognized very few people 
that Avere down there, and, if pressed, I think I would be hard put 
to name them, because in the melee which kept growing, and more 
people coming there all the time, the process of identification becomes 
harder all of the time. I was not professionally engaged in identify- 
ing persons, as was Mr. Desmond, of the Kohler Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. You know of no other international organizer or 
representative of the local union that attempted to disperse this 
crowd ? 

Mr. Tretjer. No, sir. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, if I may ask a question there. There 
is no doubt in your mind that this time those on strike were desirous 
of preventing the clay from being unloaded, is there ^ 

Mr. Treuer. No, but there is a doubt in my mind about that, sir. 

Senator Ervin. Would you tell me who would have an interest in 
preventing the clay from being unloaded other than those on strike ? 

JVlr. Treuer. Sir, there have been several clay boats before this one, 
which were not interfered with in any way, and I have tried to tell 
you about the unusual circumstances which combined to create this 
incident, which no one, I think, could have predicted at the time except 
now in retrospect. If anyone would have benefited from the commo- 
tion, and the uproar, and especially the publicity that resulted, it was 
the company, and not the union. 

Senator Ervin. You haven't answered my question yet. 

Wliat persons were there who could possibly have any interest in 
preventing the clay boat from being unloaded except those on strike 
and those who sympathized with those on strikes ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, I think the Kohler Co. had to gain, not from the 
unloading or stopping of the unloading, but it was a foregone conclu- 
sion they would get their clay. That is the lawful process, and they 
would get the clay. I don't think anyone ever could have predicted 
they would not. But, from the creation of this commotion, and of the 
uproar, the company was able once again to say, "Look at these terrible 
union people," w^hich is just what they did. 

Senator Ervin. Are you telling me that you believe, honestly, that 
people were inspired by the Kohler Co. to prevent the unloading of 
the clay boat ? 

Mr. Trei^er. Sir, in my opinion, the presence of Mr. Biever trig- 
gered this thing, and, rather than give you my opinion today, if I may, 
sir, I would like to tell you what we said at the time. 

Senator Ervin. I would rather have you answer my question, fii-st, 
and then you can explain and give any explanation. I am asking you 
the question, if you are endeavoring to intimate to this committee that, 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9175 

in your judgment, the Kohler Co. had inspired an effort to prevent 
theiinloading of the clay boat. 

Mr. Treuer. I think they did, and I think that, like Topsy, it just 
grew. On the night of July 5, after all of this excitement, I would 
like to say, sir, what we said on the radio program, and I was asked 
earlier what we said on the radio program, and perhaps in part it will 
answer your question. I will try to. We said, sir, and this is the 
third paragraph in the script : 

The Kohler Co., in its usual blundering fashion, almost set off a serious riot 
at least twice when they deliberately or accidentally — we don't know as yet — 
sent one of the most hated individuals in the long strike situation to the scene 
in person. This was none other than Edmund Biever, the long-missing plant 
manager who failed to answer seven subpenas last week to appear at the NLRB 
hearing, but did show up this morning at the clay-boat dock. Nothing could 
have been more coldly calculated than his appearance to provoke an incident. 

The fact that Biever made two appearances within the morning hours only 
aggravates this — 

Excuse me — 

only aggravates this, this show of Kohler Co.'s lack of understanding, or appre- 
ciation for feelings and emotions, especially from the day when the Kohler strike 
began to the 16th month. 

Senator Ervin. How many people were down there when he came ? 

Mr. Treuer. I beg pardon ? 

Senator Ervin. Hoav many people were down there at the dock when 
he came ? 

Mr. Treuer. When I came down in the morning ? 

Senator Ervin. I am talking about when this man you said, ^h\ 
Biever, came. 

Mr. Treuer. The first time Mr. Biever came, there were probably 
200 people there. Subsequent to that, of course, it was flashed out 
over the radio, and the second time, and not by us, sir, but by the 
reporters for the radio station, but, subsequent to that, when Mr. Biever 
returned, there must have been a good 1,000 or 2,000 people there, and 
the crowd continued to grow until in the evening hours, after the broad- 
cast I referred to, which was ours and not the radio station's, that the 
police issued an appeal for strikebreakers or nonstrikers, as you wish, 
to please not come down there, because they were aggravating the 
situation. 

Senator Ervin. But there Avere 200 persons there before Mr. Biever 
came? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir ; there were. 

Senator Ervin. Who were they ? Were they strikers or nonstrikers ? 

Mr. Treuer. I am sure there were some strikers among them, but 
I would not say that they were all strikers. 

Senator Ervin. And are you telling me, or am I to understand you 
tell me under oath that you drew the inference that the strikers there 
were not interested in preventing the unloading of the clay boat ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, you bet they were interested. But who could 
have 

Senator Ervin. That is what I am interested in. 

Mr. Treuer. Sure, they were interested, sir ; but what striker would 
want to help the Kohler Co. in any way ? But, sir, I respectfully sub- 
mit that, at that time, and as late as 8 or 9 o'clock that morning, no one 
could have visualized or imagined it. Who could have predicted that 



9176 IMPROPER ACTIVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

45^000 people would have driven there over the weekend? Wlio was 
aware, although it was an obvious fact, that all Sheboygan factories 
were closed down on vacation. 

Senator Ervin. Anyway, did ^ou not draw the inference, when they 
started in on the crane, that their purpose was to unload the boat? 

Mr. Treuer. Sure it was, and I expected them to complete the un- 
loading. 

Senator Ervin. And did you not infer, when the crowd stopped the 
crane, the progress of the crane, that they were intending to prevent it 
from being used to unload the boat ? 

Mr. Treuer, I certainly drew that inference. 

Senator Ervin. That is the inference that I draw, and I am glad you 
agree with me, and I wondered wliy you did not do so a little earlier. 
Now, certainly, you saw somebody puncture the gas tank of the truck 
or whatever was taking the crane. 

Mr. Treuer. You say did somebody puncture the tires ? 

Senator Ervin. Yes. 

Mr. Treuer. They must have ; yes, sir. 

Senator Ervin. You don't that was an accident, do you ? 

Mr. Treuer, Certainly it was not. 

Senator Ervin. And you don't infer that the Kohler Co. employees 
did that, do you ? 

Mr. Treuer. Sir, I think that was a result of a highly charged emo- 
tional setting and at most fear. 

Senator Ervin. And also the tires were punctured, which was not u 
natural result of an accident, was it ? 

Mr, Treuer. No, sir ; and I told you when I first stated this thing, 
that the tires were punctured and the truck was surrounded and these 
things happened. 

Senator Ervin. That is all. 

Senator Cuktts. But it is true that you did make an appeal over the 
radio for people to get down there when this boat came in, did you not ? 
You have so testified, have you not ? 

Mr. Treuer. I testified that on July 1, at 6: 30 in the evening, we 
made the announcement which was read into the record, sir. 

Senator Curtis. During the course of this strike, other clay boats 
had arrived and been unloaded without serious incident, is that not 
true? 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, sir; and tlieir arrival was covered not only in 
union broadcasts, but in other means, much more extensively and much 
more was said than I ever said on the niglit of July 1 about this one. 

Senator Curtis. Will you produce those broadcasts for our record ? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes ; we will produce them. 

Senator Curtis. Now, liere is what I want to point out, and this 
is not a question but this is a point that I want to make, Mr. Chairman : 

The position is taken here that the people were invited to come 
down for the purpose of tliis "Navy" stunt, but not for the purpose of 
the things they actually did. As a matter of law, people are presumed 
to intend the natural results of acts they commit. Furthermore, in 
the labor case wherein the United Mine Workers were fined $1,400,000 
for contempt of court, in that case the defense was made that the imion 
did not directly and formally call a strike. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9177 

The United States District Court here in the District of Columbia 
laid down the broad rule that a union functioning as a union is re- 
sponsible for the mass action of its members. That is US v. United 
Mine Workers ((1948), 21 LRKM, 2721). Judge T. Allen Golds- 
borough declared that "Responsibility is not avoided by the use of a 
nod or a wink or a code instead of the word 'strike.' " 

The decision was upheld upon appeal. 

I do not think that there is any escape from the conclusion that the 
union was responsible for the mass action of their members in this 
particular incident. 

Mr. Rauh. May we present at this time the findings of the trial 
examiner to the contrary ? I think it ought to be in the record. 

The Chairman. Has that not been made an exhibit for reference, 
the findings ? 

Mr. Rauh. I think that is right, sir, and I just wanted to call to 
your attention at this point, that this point has been litigated before 
a competent tribunal and decided contrary to the statement of the 
Senator. 

The Chairman. Well, this committee is searching for information 
upon which to legislate. It is not necessarily bound by even the de- 
cision of the United States Supreme Court, if we Avant to change the 
law after hearing the facts. 

Mr. Rauh. I am sure of that, sir. 

The Chairman. Let us proceed. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Treuer, before we conclude with you I think 
maybe you ought to straighten out the record a little bit about this 
woman on the hood of the car. You described your position as almost 
in front of the car because you said that you had a vivid recollection 
of what took place. You stated that you and a friend of yours had 
grabbed a policeman and jerked him out from in front of the car so 
he did not get hit. 

You must have had a pretty good vantage point, and it seems to 
me you should be able to give us a better description, in your best 
opinion of how this woman got on the car, because j^ou left it in a rather 
anomalous situation. 

Mr. Treuer. I did my best, sir, to describe to you what I saw at the 
time that this business of how she got on the hood took place. I 
was at the side of the car, and the car had brushed by us, and we were 
all packed like sardines trying to stay away from the side of it. 

Senator Mundt. Would you agree with me, Mr. Treuer, that the 
best and most plausible and reasonable assumption based on your 
testimony this morning, is that this lady whoever she was, either 
climbed on to the car or was lifted up on the car by some of her 
friends, or some of the other people (and they might not have been 
friends) but some of the other people in the crowd ? 

Can you think of any other way in which she could have gotten 
there ? 

Mr. Treuer. I told you what I saw, and I can't add to it. I am 
sorry. 

Senator Mundt. You were there, you were right close by, and you 
were in front of the car and beside the car. You saw her there, and 
you were not over 10 feet away from her I presume when it occurred ? 

Mr. Treuer. That is right. 



9178 IMPROPER ACTRITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mindt, So if there is anybody who is an eye witness, you 
are an eye witness, and I would like your best opinion as to how you 
think slie got on tliat car. 

Mr. Treueh. Well, if you want my opinion, and remember, sir, I 
did not see tliis, I only saw the result 

Senator Mundt. All right, it is your opinion. 

Mr. Treier. The idea of her being lifted up I think is not pos- 
sible. There weii' not, I don't think there were any people around 
her wlio could have lifted her up. It is possible. 

Senator Mundt. To get this clear now, she was out all by herself 
and no people aro\md her. 

Mr. Treuer. That is right, and again in my opinion, ti-ying to get 
to a side, so that she would be out of the way. Whether she was 
caught in the press, unable to get 

Senator Mundt. Press of what ? 

Mr. Treuer. Of people. 

Senator Mundt. You said there were no people around who could 
have lifted her up. 

Mr. Treuer. It was clear, and she was behind the policeman. 

Senator Mundt. She could not have gotten caught in the press of 
people who were not tliere. 

Mr. Treuer. She could have been unable to get into the place, out 
of the way. 

Senator Mundt. I would like to have you explain how — how a 
woman gets caught in the press of people who were not there. Maybe 
it can happen in Sheboygan, but it is hard for me to understand. 
Perhaps you can explain it. 

Mr. Treuer. A lot of things happen in Sheboygan, but the crowd 
had been cleared. 

Senator Mundt. I don't want to put words in your mouth, and this 
is your answer. You are telling me that to the best of your opinion, 
the woman was caught in the press of people who were not there, and 
she got up on the hood of the car. 

Mr. Treuer. That isn't quite right. 

Senator Mundt. If that is wrong, you straighten it out. 

Mr. Treuer. The police cleared the way. They did their level 
best to do so and the people whom they cleared were pressed together 
to make a path for the car. This woman was still out behind the 
policemen who were standing next to each other and formed a line 
for the car to go tlirough. 

You asked me to speculate, and I told you wliat I saw, and now 
you ask me to speculate, and I speculate that any number of things 
could have happened that got her on top. You suggested she may 
have put herself there, and the possibility exists that as the car was 
slowly rolling down into the gutter, the driver unable to instantly 
stop, she was squeezed between them unable to get out. 

Senator Mundt. You are coming right back to the liypothesis tliat 
you want to deny. 

Mr. Trei'er. I can't tell you something that I did not see. 

Senator Mundt. You have no idea how she got there ? 

Mr. Trei'kr. That is my statement. 

Senator Mi'Ndt. Do you know who she was? 

Mr. Treuer. T believe, sir, that she was Mrs. Ethel Frazey, but I 
don't know. I bt'lievt> that is right. That is mv belief. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES TNT THE LABOR FIELD 9179 

Senator Muxdt. It is just incredible to me, the line of argument 
that you develop. The crowd, seeing a woman on top of a car, mov- 
ing through a tightly pressed group with police escort, going at walk- 
ing pace, and the crowd saj^s, "Biever has done it again, he has hit 
this woman and knocked her up on top of the car,'' I just cannot 
follow this. 

It is awfully hard for me to justify the reactions that you say the 
crowd had, on which you base the whole riot. This is important 
testimony and I want to give 3'ou every chance to fix this up any way 
you think it sounds best. 

Mr. Treuer. I am trying to be as helpful as I can, sir. 

Senator Mundt. I know you are. 

Mr. Treuer. And I recall when I first described the incident, that 
I said regardless of how it liappened, and I did not see the moment of 
impact, if such there was, that to the people, most of w^hom were 
standing across the street, and they were sitting on the lawn, and stand- 
ing on the sidewalk, they were a lot farther away, to them it must 
obviously 

Senator Me^ndt. How far away were they ? 

Mr. Treuer. I don't know, sir, what the exact distance was. 

Senator Mundt. How wide a street was it ? 

Mr. Treuer. It must have been about 70, 80, to 100 feet away. To 
their vantage point, it must obviously have looked a lot more serious 
than it was — a lot more, because of the reaction. 

I think in that instant the entire atmosphere that morning changed. 
Human reactions are strange to explain sometimes, and perhaps to 
you and to me. Senator 



Senator Mundt. To this particular human getting on that car is 
awfully hard for you to explain, and awfully hard for me to under- 
stand. I must say that. 

Mr. Treuer. It is hard for me to explain and midei*stand as well, 
but I do know what the result was. 

(A.t this point, the following members Avere present: Senators 
McClellan, Ei-vin, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

Senator Mundt. One thing you do know is that you saw here on 
tlie car. 

Mr. Treuer. Yes, I did. 

Senator Mundt. All right. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

Counsel, do you have any more questions of this witness ? 

Mr. EJENNEDY. No. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you veiy much. Call the next 
witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Buteyn. Peter and Cornelius Buteyn. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give 
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF PETER AND CORNELIUS BUTEYN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. My name is Peter Buteyn. 



9180 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The CiiAiKMAN. Buteyn? 

Mr. Peter BuravN. Buteyn. By residence is Sheboygan, Wis., 
2532 North Seventh. 

The C/iiAiKMAN. What is your business ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Grading, excavating, and black topping. 

The Chairman. Do you have a company or do you just operate as 
an individual? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. A company. 

The Chairman. You liave a company ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. 

The Chairman. Is it incorporated ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. No, sir. 

The Chairman. A partnership ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. A partnership. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is Cornelius hei-e? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can we have liim, too? 

The Chairman. Come forward. In the meantime, do you waive 
counsel ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give 
before this Senate select committee will be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you, God ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. I do. 

The Chairman. What is your name ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Cornelius Buteyn. 

The Chairman. Where do you live? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Clearwater, Fla., 2143 Gulf to Bay. 

The Chairman. Clearwater, Fla. ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes. 

The Chairman. Are you brothers? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Brothers. 

The Chairman. Are you associated with your brother in the exca- 
vating business ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Up until July 1, 1955, 1 was associated with 
my brother in that business. Since that time I luive been an em- 
ployee of that business. 

The Chairman, Since that time you have been an employee? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Where were you operating at that time ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. I was operating end loaders and dump 
tiTicks. 

The Chairman. Wliere ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. WTiere were we operating? 

In Sheboygan, the Sheboygan area. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel, do you ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Buteyn, the Kohler Co. had made arrangements 
with you to use your equipment and your services to unload the clay 
boat when it an-ived in July of 1955 ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there a question at the beginning of July as to 
what day it would arrive? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN" THE LABOR FIELD 9181 

Mr. Peter Butetn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And ultimately when it arrived on July 2, you made 
some arrangements to go down there very early in the morning or told 
them you would go down very early on the morning of July 5, around 
6 a. m. 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you load your equipment and start for the dock 
around 4 or 5 o'clock in the morning? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. From Elkhart Lake. 

Mr. Kennedy. From Elkhart Lake where you were doing some 
other work ? 

Mr, Peter Buteyn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you loaded your crane, a couple of tractors and 
4 or 5 dump trucks ; is that right ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you started down to the dock ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. You arrived at the dock site about 7:15 in the 
morning ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Approximately. 

Mr. Kennedy. And your brother, "Happy" Buteyn — that is your 
nickname ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Happy Buteyn was in the lead truck ; is that right ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. He was the first one there. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you arrived, Mr. Buteyn, Happy Buteyn, 
did Mr. Donald Rand of the UAW have a conversation with you? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes, he did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. As you approached the dock ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes, he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what he said to 
you? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Mr. Rand, Ray Majerus, and Ed Ka- 
lupa 

The Chairman. Speak a little louder. 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Don Rand, Ed Kalupa, and Ray Majerus 
were the three people I talked to. 

Mr. Kennedy. K-a-1-u-p-a, Kalupa ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And M-a-j-e-r-u-s, Majerus ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is right. And Don Rand. I ar- 
rived at the dock approximately 6 :45 

Mr. Kennedy. Just a moment, please. 

Senator Mundt. I know Mr. Rand is the International UAW rep. 
What is Majerus ? 

Mr. Kennedy. He works out of the Milwaukee office. 

Senator Mundt. Who is the third man ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe he had formerly been a Kohler worker 
but he worked out of the Milwaukee office, and Kalupa was a s-triker. 

Senator Mundt. One was a striker and two of them international 
reps. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Rand came up to you with these other two 
gentlemen and you had a conversation ? 

21243— 58— pt. 23 3 



9182 EVIPROPER ACTIVmEiS IN THE LABOR FEELD 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. And they asked me why we would not 
cooperate. I told them at that time that I was — probably unbeknown 
to them and the general public at that time, that just 5 days prior 
to that we had dissolved the partnership and it would be up to my 
brother, senior partner, to make that decision at that time. He then 
told me "Well, if you don't cooperate, we will pull out all the stops 
to prevent the loading and unloading of the clay." 

Mr. Kennedy. Who said that to you? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Don Rand and Ed Kalupa. 

The Cpi airman. They would pull out all the stops to prevent you 
from unloading the boat? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is correct. 

The Chairman. What did he mean by that? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. I don't know, sir, what he meant by it. 

The Chairman. What impression did you get from it? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Well, the impression I got was probably by 
having mass picketing and enough people to make it very difficult to 
move heavy equipment or trucks through the lines. 

The Chairman. In other words, he didn't want you to unload that 
boat? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. No, sir. 

The Chairman. And he told you so ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And said he would pull out all the stops if you 
undertook to do it? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. He said he would pull out all the stops if 
we attempted to unload the clay boat. 

Senator Mundt. Did you hear anybody shout out "If you don't go 
home, we will look for you in an alley?" 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. I can't recall it, sir. 

Senator Mundt. I will ask your brother. Did you hear anybody 
say, "If you don't go home, we will look for you in an alley?" 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Somebody shouted that at you ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. That really looked, Mr. Chairman, as if they were 
going to pull out every stop that they had. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Butejm, Peter Buteyn, you had some teamsters 
driving some of these trucks? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes, sir, we did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What had been the agreement or arrangement as far 
as their going through and picking up the clay? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Our drivers, sir, all went on a voluntary basis; 
those who objected to going, we found other work for them for those 
few days. 

Mr. Kennedy. So these were volunteers? 

Mr. Pk ter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some conversations with Mr. Rand 
about these drivers bringing the equipment into the dock? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. No, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any conversations with him fol- 
lowing the conversation that Mr. Rand had with your brother? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9183 

Mr. Peter Butetn. Yes, well, I Avas the second one, Mr. Ken- 
nedy, to arrive at the dock that morning, and I noticed that there 
were two people talking to my brother. It appeared to me as though 
they were arguing. I immediately walked over there and asked what 
the trouble was. Well, we walked away from the truck that my 
brother was driving, and he, again, asked me what the reason was for 
not cooperating with the union, and they certainly would appreciate 
it if we would cooperate, that certainly this strike couldn't be settled 
with people like us around. 

So in the process of this discussion there was a lot of profanity used. 
At that time I did not know Mr. Rand or any of the union rep- 
resentatives. So first of all I asked them to stop for a moment, and 
I asked them to refrain from using profanity, which I objected to. 
Secondly, I wished that he would identify himself, because I was un- 
aware of who he was and who he represented. At that time, he told 
me his name and who he represented. He asked me again if we 
wouldn't 

The Chairman. Who was it ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Rand, and he said he represented the IT AW? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Go ahead. 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. During the discussion, then, again, he asked me 
why we wouldn't cooperate, and in a few weeks this strike would be 
settled and everybody could go back to work, and it certainly would be 
beneficial to me. 

Well, I said that was a matter of opinion. I felt I had obligations 
to meet and also had obligations to other people, which had treated me 
fairly over a period of iiO years. 

He said, "If you have obligations to meet, that should not be no 
problem, because if you will cooperate we certainly could arrange 
for any payments at the bank that have to be made, if that is neces- 
sary." 

Well, I said, "That would not be necessary at all." I hadn't ref- 
erence to that alone. In the word "obligations" I had reference to the 
Kohler Co. also. So about that time the first dump truck arrived and 
the driver stepped out of the cab, walked through the gate, at which 
this line had assembled, and Don Rand left me immediately and fol- 
lowed this driver into the dock area. I became alarmed and started 
to w^alk in that direction also, but in a minute they came out together. 

I asked my driver what had been done, and he said, "Well, all that 
Rand told me to do" or the man, he didn't know who he was, he said, 
"All that man asked me to do was not to attempt to go through there 
again." 

I told all of my drivers as they arrived, including the one that had 
gone through the line, to please stay in there in their cab and do 
nothing until this thing was in more orderly fashion that morning. 

The circumstances that prevailed down there, we were not going to 
attempt to go through that line under those circumstances. 

Unless this mob was cleared away and the line was removed, we 
wouldn't attempt to go through. But I didn't want anyone to be 
injured. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Buteyn, do you live in Sheboygan ? 



9184 IMPROPER ACnVITTES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Peter Butetn. Yes, I do, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Have you lived there for some little time? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. All my life. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know a lot of people in Sheboygan ? 

Mr. Peter Ik 'it.yn. I do. 

Senator Mundt. Did you know any of the people standing and 
moving and walking in this picket line? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Not by name. 

Senator Mindt. Did you recognize them as being strikers or non- 
strikers? Did you know whether they were employees of Kohler? 
Did yon know that ? 

Mv. I^ETiai liuTEYN. Tliose that were walking on the line in front of 
the entiance primarily were strikers. 

Senator Mi^ndt. In other words, the picket line was primarily 
comprised of strikers ? 

Mr. Pr.iT.R Buteyn. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. Of course, there were other people gathered around 
as spectators, and so forth ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. A lot of them. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask you, do you know Mr. Allen Grass- 
kamp ? 

Mr. Peter Buieyn. I do. 

Senator Mundt. Was he there ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I saw him only in the afternoon. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. The incidents you are describing up until now have 
taken place in the morning? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Senator Mundt. We will get to him later. I do not want you to get 
to the afternoon until you are ready to come to that part of your 
testimony. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. With whom was this conversation about you had 
obligations ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. With Donald Rand. 

Senator Curtis. And this is the man who has identified himself as 
Donald Pvand ^ 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Senator Curtis. Did he say what his job was or who he represented ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. He told use that he represented local 833, or 
theUAW. 

Senator Curtis. And this conversation, when you said that you had 
certain obligations, you meant the obligation to do the job you had 
planned to do ; is that what you were talking about ? 

Mr. PE'rER Buteyn. Both, Senator. I had financial obligations also. 
But I primarily was interested and concerned about the obligation 
that I owed to the Kohler Co. who, for over a period of 20 years, had 
treated me as fair as any organization could. 

Senator Curtis, Tell me again, what did he say would be done about 
any obligations that might exist at the bank or financial obligations? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. He told me that if it was financial obligations 
which would be necessary, certainly a loan from the union could be 
made ]iossible in order to take care of that period if I refused to unload 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9185 

the boat, and, therefore, become obligated and was unable to pay, due 
to my not unloading the boat. 

Senator Curtis. And in offering you financial assistance, he offered 
it in behalf of the union ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Senator Curtis. And not in his own personal capacity alone ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Well, I assumed that, sir. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

After this initial incident, you left the dock; did you, personally? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. During this time — I arrived there at 
about 5 after 7; after milling around there up Until approximately 
T : 30, there was still no policeman there, and I became rather alarmed 
with all the name calling that was going on. My bookkeeper just at 
that time arrived, and I asked him whether he would take me up to 
the police station a minute, and I would ask for some policemen. So 
as we left the area, we were going west on Pennsylvania, approximately 
a block from the area where this scene was taking place I saw a squad 
car parked bejnnd what is a little rootbeer stand, and from there the 
two officers in the car were watching as to what was going on down 
there, but made no attempt, in my opinion, to come down, where they 
belonged. 

So I went up to the police station, and asked — I believe I talked 
to Mr. Zimmerman. I asked him whether or not they felt that they 
were obligated in any way in connection with what was taking place 
at the dock. In approximately 5 minutes from that time, I don't re- 
call how many policemen arrived, but I do feel that it was not over 4. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go back to the dock then ? 

Mr. Peter Buit.yn. I went back to the dock. 

Mr. Ivennedy. What did you decide to do ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. After approximately another half hour or an 
hour, I forget, time passed rather rapidly that morning, and I am 
not certain about all of the time quotations, I walked into — during 
the time that I was gone, the Kohler Co. officials must have arrived 
into the dock area, and aoout 8 o'clock or a quarter after 8 or 8 : 30, 
somewhere in there, I walked into the dock area and told the Kohler 
Co., Mr. Beaver, Mr. Born, and Mr. Desmond, that it was impossible 
for me to unload the boat under these conditions. 

So I then told them that I was going to tell all of my equipment 
to pull off of Pennsylvania Avenue. At that time, they asked me 
whether or not my truck and trailer would be available to tliem in the 
event that they wanted to move their own equipment down there to 
unload, and I said it would be. 

Mr. Kennedy. You felt that it was impossible for you to unload be- 
cause of this crowd ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then a representative of the company spoke to 
you about leasing tiie equipment and their trying to miload the clay 
themselves ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Just the truck and trailer to move their crane 
down. Our cranes were already pulling out. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you agree to do that ? 



9186 IMPROPER ACTIVITIEiS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes, sir, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. With whom were those conversations ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. With Mr. Beaver. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you did make arrangements for them to lease this 
equipment, is that right ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Eight. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. And they did lease it. What happened as far as 
the crane was concerned ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Before I go into that, Mr. Kennedy, there is 
one point yet. Before I left the dock, all my drivers and equipment 
left, and a Mr. Harold Minten, an employee of mine, and myself, 
stayed, because we had 2 tractors, small ones, very small ones, ours 
were all larger but these were very small which were used in the 
hatch in the boat. They were on my trailer, but they belonged to the 
Kohler Co. 

I asked them what they wanted to do with the two small tractors, 
and they said I should unload them. So I unloaded those and parked 
them on the street. After my truck had pulled away, I, myself, at- 
tempted to put them into the dock area, where they would be safer than 
out on the street. 

I stood in front of the line, then, on the first tractor that I attempted 
to run through, I stood right in front of the line that was in front of 
the entrance, and stood there approximately 15 minutes, with a lot of 
name calling going on in the meantime. A picket captain, and I am 
sorry I do not know his name, I have tried to find out but have been 
unable to do so, walked up to me and said, "Pete, I feel badly about all 
the name calling, the things that have gone on here this morning. I 
don't agree with them." 

He said, ""N^Hiat do you want to do ? " 

I said, "I want to run these two small tractors into that yard and 
then I want to leave." He said, "I will see what I can do for you." 

He walked into the line and talked to someone, again I don't know 
who it was, and he came back and said, "O. K., run it in." 

The line opened up, I ran the two small tractors in, parked them, 
shut them oft', and I walked out. That is when I left, until approxi- 
mately 11 : 30, when I came back, but stayed approximately a block 
from the area. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason did you come back at 11 : 30? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I was curious to know what was going to 
happen. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you see at that time ? 

Mr. Pe'it.r Buteyn. I saw my truck and trailer come with Kohler 
Co. employees, with their crane on, attempting to go into the area. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people were there at that time? 

Mr. Pei-er Bui'EYN. A rough guess, Mr. Kennedy ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Approximately. 

Mr. Peti'^r Buteyn. I would say anywhere from 300 to 400. 

(At this point, Senator Ervin left the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. And you got down into the area. Did you learn 
what happened then? 

Mr. Peteu Bi'TEYN. No. I was too far away. I saw the mob surg- 
ing into the area where the truck attempted to turn in, I heard some 
shouting going on, and so on and so forth. I saw the fire department 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 9187 

come. But, actually, as to what, all that happened, I was too far away. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is what you foresaw, that this type of thing or 
this might go on if you tried to move the crane in, is that right, that 
there would be a major problem as far as getting the crane into the 
dock area ? 

Mr. Peter Butetn^. That is what I thought. 

Mr. ICennedy. Had you expressed yourself to Mr. Beaver and to 
the representatives of the company ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I told them that it was impossible for me to, 
I thought, for me to unload under these conditions. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did they think they would be able to do it 
if you were unable to do it ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I couldn't answer that, Mr. Kennedy ; I don't 
know. 

Mr. Kennedy. But what you prophesied was correct, because when 
they got the crane down there, they could not get it through the crowd ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went home and then around 1 : 30, did you re- 
ceive a telephone call ? 

Senator Mundt. Before we leave the crane, we had some testimony 
by the young man from the radio station that somebody punctured 
the gas tank of the truck carrying the crane. Did j^ou have any 
information about that? Did you see that or learn about that? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. As I mentioned, Senator Mimdt, I was approxi- 
mately a block away from that actual scene. I was aware of it, of 
course, in the afternoon, when I got back there, and had to check all 
the damage that was done. But we will get to that. 

Senator Mundt. O. K. 

Mr. Kennedy. About 1 : 30 you received a telephone call from the 
mayor of the city. Mayor Ploetz ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he was very demanding and insistent on what 
he wanted you to do ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. He wanted you to get the crane out of there ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you recite briefly in your own words what 
he said to you, what you said to him, and what agreement you finally 
reached ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. First of all, I was ready to leave for Elkhart 
Lake when the phone rang, and Steen Heinke, who is now chief of 
police, was on the phone and requested me to move the equipment 
off of Penn Avenue. I told him at that time that, as far as I was re- 
sponsible, I was unaware of any equipment on Penn Avenue that I 
was responsible for. He said, "Well, your name is on the truck." 
I said, "That is possible. I wouldn't know." But, I said, "We have 
trucks that are leased to other parties who might have a truck on 
Penn Avenue." 

But I felt that I was not responsible for the truck on Penn Avenue. 

After talking for a few minutes, he said, "I will let you talk to the 
mayor." 



9188 iivrpRjOPER AcnviTiES in the labor field 

The iiiiiyor came on tlie phone and said, "Mr. Buteyn?" And I 
said, "Yes," and he said, "I demand that you come over here imme- 
diately and move this equipment oli' the street. It is a hazard." 

I said, "I have taken all the demands for 1 day that I will take, 
whether you be mayor or anyone else." 

He said, "1 will have a few policemen come over there and pick 
you up and put you in jail." 

I said, "It might be safer there than on the streets of Sheboygan." 

After some more persuasion, he was unsuccessful, and he said, "How 
can I get you to move this equipment? I have called everybody in 
Sheboygan and they said they are unable to move it because of its 
weight and you are the only one capable of removing it." 

I said, "I'll have to get orders from the Kohler party who brought 
that equipment into the dock. It is not my responsibility." 

He said, "Will you take orders from me." And I said, "I just got 
through telling you I am not taking orders from you today." He 
said, "Would you do me a favor and call the Kohler Co. ^" 

And I said, "Now you are talking my language. I will do that." 

So I called the Kohler Co. and asked them what I should do; 
whether they wanted me to move it or didn't want to move it. 

They said, "Pete, if you want to move that equipment, it is your 
responsibility. We are not going to tell you to move it. We are not 
going to tell you not to move it. It is up to you. If you want to 
volunteer your services to the city of Sheboygan or the mayor, it is 
up to you entirely." I said, "O. k. ; fine." I called the mayor back 
and told him my answer. 

Senator Mundt. What was your answer ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I told them I would voluntarily move it on 
the basis that I would be given protection, more so than I received 
that morning, and he promised me that. 

Senator Mundt. Do you mean police protection ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Police protection. 

Senator JNIundt. And the mayor promised you protection at that 
time ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you went down to tr3^ to remove it ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. I arranged to call a tire shop to pick up 
10 or 12 of our spare tires, which was necessary to replace because 
with flats on, with 27 tons, I was unable to move it. 
^ Mr. Kennedy. In the meantime, you had been informed that the 
tires of the crane had been punctured and flattened ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that the gas tank had been punctured also? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that the gasoline tank had been cut? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any other equipment damage that you 
knew of at that time ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. An inch rod pushed through the radiator, dis- 
tributor wires pulled oft", lights pulled off, windows shattered. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you got your equipment and went down to the 
dock. What did the mayor say to you when you arrived back at the 
dock ? 



IMPROPER ACnVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9189 

Senator Mundt. Now, we are back on the truck and I will ask my 
question. Was there more than one flat on the truck ? 

Mr. Peter Butetn. There were approximately 10 flat tires. 

Senator Mundt. Ten ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Ten. 

Senator Mundt. How many wheels are there on the truck ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Eighteen. 

Senator Mundt. Ten flat tires at one time, that is worse luck than 
I have ever had. I have had a couple. But 10, that is a lot of flats. 

Also, I heard some testimony or read it in the paper, but I w^ant 
to get it right. Did they cut the air hose on the truck which controls 
the braking mechanism ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. All the air hoses were cut. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, the braking mechanism was de- 
stroyed ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. The only thing that held the truck there was 
the fact of the terrific load on that and the flat tires. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, if it started rolling, it would have 
created quite a bit of havoc in a crowd like that? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Correct. 

Senator Mundt. It would have killed a lot of people ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Nothing was holding it except the inertia estab- 
lished by 10 flat tires. 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is ri^ht. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went back. Did the mayor ask you to make 
an announcement at that time ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. When he arrived, Mr. Kennedy, the mayor 
had a loud-speaking system kept up, and our pickup came in. 

Zeller's Tire & Equipment Co. came in with all the spare tires on. 
We pulled in alongside the policemen, w^ho cleared a way; we pulled 
into our equipment. We started to pull the tires off the pickup and, 
before we got 1 tire off the pickup, 1 tire on the pickup was flat. 

We kept on unloading them. A few moments later, the mayor 
asked whether or not I would be walling to make an announcement 
over the loudspeaker system to this extent ; that we were going to pull 
this equipment not only away from there, but also — I should change 
that testimony, Mr. Kennedy. 

The crowd kept on shouting, "Ask Mr. Buteyn to make the an- 
nouncement over the loudspeaker system that he not only is willing 
to pull this equipment back to the Kohler Co., but will promise never 
again to unload a clay boat." 

The mayor put the mike in front of me and asked me whether I 
wanted to make that statement, and I said, "Absolutely not." That 
was the extent of that conversation. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he making announcements? Did the mayor 
make an announcement? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. He made a few announcements, referring to 
the fact that we were only interested in removing this equipment off 
the street, and that it was going back to the Kohler Co., and that no 
clay boat was going to be unloaded at this time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that you should be allowed to change the tires 
and get the equipment out of there ? 



9190 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FTELD 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is right, 

Mr. Kennedy. But, as you were trying to change the tires to put the 
new tires on, they were flattened, too; is that right? 

Mr. PEiTiR BuiT'n'N. It happaned 3 or 4 times over, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Finally, did you find that it was impossible to get 
the equipment out of their way, also ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is right. Because, as fast as we put them 
on, they were again damaged. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to Captain Heinke of the police depart- 
ment then ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. No. I believe I went back to the mayor. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you request more protection ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I requested more protection, and not only that, 
but I told them if this continued on we were going to leave. I told him 
that 3 or 4 times. He pleaded with me to stay and try it again. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you get more protection ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I would say not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Heinke, of the police department, give you 
some protection ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Yes. He put two policemen right with me at 
all times, because we were receiving threats at all times. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you able to change the tires then ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. We were able to change them a little faster than 
what they were being made flat again. 

Senator Mundt. You were gaining on them ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. A little bit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you get another tractor down there then ? Was 
another tractor called down ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I finally called the county highway depart- 
ment, which I felt was a neutral party, and asked them whether or not 
they would be willing to give us a truck to pull this thing out, regard- 
less of the damage on it, and not attempt to make all the repairs there. 
After he called the union hall and got permission from them, they 
agreed to bring a truck down and hook on, which we did at that time. 
In order to get the truck down the hill, I, myself, took it and put it 
in the lowest gear that I possibly could, hoping that the transmission 
would not break in the process of doing that, for fear it would then 
roll and we would have then no way of stopping it, and also, approxi- 
mately — I would say, that was at a quarter to 6 or somewhere in that 
neighborhood, when we hooked on to it. 

I also had sent word back to our shop to ask Brother Happy to bring 
the trailer to remove these two small tractors off the dock area which 
I had earlier run in, in the morning. 

The mayor had agreed to that. I also asked Don Eand abont that 
in the afternoon, whether or not we would be given permission to load 
those two tractors out. In the morning, he had time to talk to me. 
In the afternoon, when I made the request, he said he had nothing to 
do with this. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did get the crane out through the help of the 
county ; you were able to get the crane back to the Kohler Co. ? 
(At this point Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. I did. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 9191 

Mr. Kennedy. Your brother, Happy Buteyn, knows more about 
getting the tractors out ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You came into there to drive the tractors out ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Before we get to that, I have a question for the 
first gentleman. You are the most intimate witness we have had 
as to what took place there. You were personally involved, and you 
went back, and you finally got the truck out. In your opinion, was 
this just a spontaneous uprising of the strikers, or was there somebody 
in charge of the operations down in this place ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. Do you ask me for my opinion, Senator ? 

Senator Mundt. That is correct. 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. My opinion is that there definitely was some- 
one in charge. That is my opinion. 

Senator Mundt. And, in your opinion, who was this individual 
who was in charge ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. More than likely, there was more than one. I 
would say the union would cover that statement. 

Senator Mundt. Have you any idea, judging solely on your obser- 
vation, because you are not a union member — but I am asking you for 
your best opinion — and after you observed what took place at this 
particular spot, in your opinion, could you name one or more union 
members who seemed to you to be in charge ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. No. The only one that I was introduced to 
that morning was Donald Rand, and I didn't know any of these people, 
Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. Did it seem to you that Donald Rand seemed to 
have some authority in connection with what was taking place there ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. He certainly appeared to have, with me, in the 
morning. 

Senator Mundt. I have shared a feeling with Senator Curtis — the 
feeling that a strike, any strike, has to be masterminded and directed 
by someone, and that we have been listening to a lot of guff by some 
of these outside union representatives who would have us believe that 
they simply wound up in Sheboygan on a happy Sunday evening with 
no idea of where the union headquarters were, what they were sup- 
posed to be doing, and they meandered their way around for 3 or 4 
months at the rate of $90 a week. 

I have listened to it, but I haven't believed a single word of it. I 
am convinced somebody has to mastermind it. I see nothing particu- 
larly wrong with it. How are you going to run a strike without some- 
body being in charge ? But I kind of hate to be kidded so long by so 
many in that connection, because it is too great a strain on the credu- 
lity of this particular Senator from South Dakota. 

I wanted to ask you whether it looked to you like this was just a 
spontaneous, miregulated shifting of humanity or whether somebody 
seemed to be a spokesman. As I interpret your testimony, to the 
best of your opinion, the spokesman appeared to be Mr. Rand. 
Mr. Peter Buteyn. That's right. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 
Mr. Kennedy. I have a few more questions. 

I want to develop the fact that you tried to get the tractors out of 
the dock ; is that right ? 



9192 nvrpROPER activitteis in the labor field 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you put blocks under the tractor so that you 
could drive them up on the trailer ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Mr. Kennedy, let me explain, if you will, 
I drove the trailer and tractor up to the dock area, after having per- 
mission from the police department to go through the barricade to 
try to get the two tractors, the D-2 tractor and the Cletrac owned by 
the Kohler Co. parked in the area. 

I parked by the gate to the dock. I stepped out of the cab of the 
truck to lay the blocks down so that I could put the tractors on to 
the lowboy. I went in to the dock area. I started up one tractor and 
came out to the gate with it, but I could not get through the line, 
because there were a lot of people there. I didn't want to put the thing 
in gear and push the tractor through. I appealed to the police officers 
and they did what they could at that particular time. 

But there was one individual that refused to move. I finally put 
the thing in gear and moved it as slowly as I possibly could, and fi- 
nally got by him that way. Wlien I got up to the lowboy, these blocks 
were kicked out of the way. That meant I had to get on and off of 
that tractor 3 or 4 different times to place those blocks. Finally I 
got a shot at the Icwboy with the tractor, because the blocks stayed 
there good enough so that I could attempt to load it. 

Mayor Ploetz got up on the low bed of that trailer and said "Take 
that thing back in the dock area where you got it from, you are in- 
citing a riot." 

After giving permission to my brother in the late afternoon to go 
down and get them out of there 

(At this point, Senator Ervin entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. The police officer told me, "Happy, you 
better comply." I was not going to comply, because I didn't know who 
Mr. Ploetz was. But I did comply because a police officer told me 
"Happy, you better comply." He is the boss. "We can't help you no 
more." 

I then returned and took the tractor back in the area. That meant 
I had to walk back through the mob again on the street. Then I hap- 
pened to get close to Mr. Donald Rand again and I appealed to him, 
I said, "Hey, what is the deal here? This morning you asked us to 
cooperate, and now this for just trying to get the equipment out of 
here." 

I refuse to repeat in the presence of this committee and ladies and 
gentlemen in this building here what he told me at that particular time. 

He said "I don't even want to talk to you." 

Senator IMundt. Wlio do you mean by "he" ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Donald Rand. 

The Chairman. The Chair is going to direct you to write it down 
and submit it as an exhibit for the committee's information. 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Now, sir ? 

The Chairman. No ; but you may do it. It will be under oath. I 
would like to see what was going on down there. 

Senator Mundt. I think we should have it as an exhibit. 

The Chairman. I have ordered it, but I do not want it on the air. I 
would like to see what it looks like. 

Proceed. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9193 

Mr. Kennedy. You took the tractor back to the dock area, is that 
right, after these instructions ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you tried to walk back to your own truck and 
trailer? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, were you kicked as you walked back? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes ; I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you kicked very badly ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. I was kicked severely on my legs, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you still have some scars from that ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes ; I have. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have to go to the hospital on that ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you still have scars. 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Yes ; I have. 

Senator Mundt. Did anybody call you, as you walked through the 
picket line, did anybody holler at you and say "You are nothing but a 
dirty, filthy, scum — a dirty, filthy, scummy scab ?" 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. "Slimy scab." That was Don Rand, sir. 

Senator Mundt, He said to you "You are nothing but a dirty, filthy, 
scummy scab?" 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. He was the same international rep from the outside 
whom your brother believes to be in charge of the incidents that took 
place. Let me ask you : You were there also. Do you believe that this 
was a spontaneous occurrence here, or did somebody seem to be plan- 
ning this effort to keep you from moving your equipment and deliver- 
ing your equipment ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is the way it seemed, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Who would you think seemed to be in charge? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Well, I testified to the fact that I talked 
to Don Rand, Ed Kalupa, and Ray Majerus in the morning, and I left 
that area that morning, sir, at 8 o'clock, and I didn't come back to the 
dock area again until that evening at 6 o'clock. 

Senator Mundt. When you came back, who did you see there again ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Sir? 

Senator JNIundt. l^Hien you came back, who did you see there then 
that you recognized? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Well, at 6 o'clock in the evening, there 
probably were a couple of thousand people there. Senator. I couldn't 
tell you. Many of them, I suppose, were strikers, and many of them 
were spectators. I did talk to Don Rand that night at 6 o'clock, like 
I just have testified. 

Senator IMundt. In other words, you saw him in the morning when 
you got there, and you saw him in the evening w^hen you left ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. When was it that he called you a dirty, filthy, 
scummy scab ? 

Mr. Cornelius Buteyn. Six o'clock in the evening. 

Senator Mundt. I suppose that is not the occasion when you devel- 
oped the nickname of Happy Buteyn, but some other occasion gave 
you that nickname. 



9194 EVrPROPER ACnVITTES IN THE LABOR FTELD 

Mr. CoRXELius Bu'n':YX. That is ri<)flit. 

The Chairman. Is there anythinfj further ? 

Senator Mundt. I think we sliould have for the record — or maybe 
they have it or can prepare it — the extent of tlie financial damage to 
this equipment which you have been describing. 

You described the rods through the radiator and so forth. 

You probably have the figure available. How much was the finan- 
cial damage involved^ 

Mr. Peter Butetn. We had 5 engines, a total of 5 engines, in which 
we determined some foreign material was put in. These were diesel 
engines. The exchange prices on all of them varied from $825 to 
$1,000, without the labor of taking the old one out and putting in the 
new one. In 3 of those, the foreign material that was found in there 
was enough to warrant the insurance company positive proof and on 
that basis they paid, for 3 of them. 

Two of them are still pending and what will happen we are unaware 
of at this time. 

The truck damage which was done down at the dock was approxi- 
mately $1,000 to $1,100, somewhere in that neighborhood. I don't 
recall that exactly. And which also our insurance company paid for. 

Senator Mundt. I am not concerned whether the insurance company 
paid it or whether you paid it. That is your personal problem. I am 
trying to find out the total amount of the damage to equipment and 
property that occurred in this instance, the flat tires, the cutting of 
the nose, the rod through the radiator. Now you are talking about 
the foreign material in motors and so forth. 

I am not going to hold you to an exact figure, but roughly, round- 
ing it, what would you say altogether was the total damage to all of 
the e<|uipment that was damaged ? 

Mr. Peter Btjtetn. I would say between $6,000 and $7,000. 

Senator Mundt. Between six and seven thousand dollars I 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Part of which the insurance companies paid, and 
I suppose part of which you got stuck for yourself ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Let the Chair ask you one final question : Is there 
any doubt in your mind that this operation down at that time was 
being directed by Donald Rand, the representative of the international 
union ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. If there is any doubt in my mind, Mr. Chair- 
man? 

The Chairman. Is there any doubt in your mind about it ? 

Mr. Peter Buteyn. There is no doubt in my mind but that he 
played a part in it, Mr. Chairman. "Wliether he played it alone or not, 
I wouldn't dare to say. There might be others witli him. 

The Chairman. But he was playing a part ? 

INIr. Peter Buteyn. Delinitely. 

The Chaihisian. Thank you very much. You may stand aside. 

Tlie committee will stand in recess until 2 : lo. 

(Wheieupon, at 12:44 p. m. a recess was taken until 2: 15 p. m. of 
the same day, with the following members present: Senators Mc- 
(Uellan, Mundt, and Ervin.) 



IMPROPER ACrrVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9195 

AITERNOON SESSION 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session were Senatoi-s McClellan, Ives, Mundt, Goldwater, and Cur- 
tis.) 

The Chairmax. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Donald Rand. 

Mr. Rauh. I am sure he is on the way over, Mr, Chairman, from the 
hotel. He will be here in a second. 

The Chairman. We will be at ease a moment. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Before we start to hear any other witnesses, I have 
a request. I have not discussed it with any witness, but we have 
heard repeated charges here about murders being connnitted in 1934. 
Several union witnesses have repeatedly brought up this charge, es- 
pecially this morning. 

A man was identified as the one who fired the first shot. It is not 
alleged that that shot murdered anyone. I believe that in the light 
of that, we sliould at this time let the company present a witness, very 
briefly, confined to that point only, and made any statement that they 
wish in reference to it. That is my request. 

The Chairman. Do you have the name of the witness you would 
like to hear ? 

Senator Curtis. I do not know. Mr. Conger would be all right, if 
he can do it. 

The Chairman. All right. Come forward, Mr. Conger. 

TESTIMONY OF LYMAN C. CONGER^Resumed 

The Chairman. You have been sworn, Mr. Conger. 

Mr. Conger. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. You will remain under the same oath. 

Senator Curtis, proceed. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Conger, you were in the committee room this 
morning ? 

Mr. Conger. I was. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. And did you hear the witness make reference to the 
1934 strike, and state that there were murders committed in it? 

Mr. Conger. I did. 

Senator Curtis. Do you have any statement you wish to make in 
reference thereto ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes, Senator ; I have. 

Senator Curtis. All right. Confine it to that and boil it down as 
much as you can. 

Mr. Conger. I want to state first that contrary to all the witnesses 
that have appeared previously here, I am testifying as an eyewitness 
to that occurrence. I was through the entire strike, saw the entire 
proceeding, saw the riot of the night of July 27, and saw what occurred. 

That strike started, unlike this one, over a question of recognition, 
which was finally settled, adversely to the striking union, by a National 
Labor Relations Board election. For 12 days, our plant was kept com- 



9196 EviPROPER AcnvmEis in the labor field 

pletely closed by a mass picket line which blockaded all the entrances 
and even kept the office employees out. 

The only one who was allowed to enter and leave at will was Walter 
Kohler, Sr., then president of the plant. After the 12th day of the 
strike, the pickets turned back a coal car which they had agreed to allow 
to come in to provide necessary power for the powerhouse. 

They had made that agreement through Father Maguire, a Federal 
conciliator. The village deputies went out, after they had turned 
the coal car back, went out and got it in. They went along the picket 
line and told them that they could picket in the future legally, that they 
would not be restricted with their picketing, but they had to permit free 
egress and ingress to the plant. 

They also disarmed the picket line of several barrels full of clubs, 
slingshots, stones, rocks, and so forth, some of which we now have in 
this very city and which can be produced as exhibits if it is necessary. 

This occurred in the morning. Throughout that day, the tension 
was very high. There were yells from the picket line, "Wait until 
tonight. We are coming in and get you yellow rats tonight. Wait 
until it gets dark. We will get you." 

I am now testifying, Senators, as to things that I personally heard. 
That evening, as soon as it was dark, about 8 o'clock at night, a riot 
had started simultaneously on each end of the plant. I will say that 
the village deputies in the afternoon had carefully policed the 
grounds 

Senator Curtis. Who do you mean by village deputies ? 

Mr. Conger. At that time, Senator, we had one village policeman, 
and the village had sworn in some special village policemen when the 
strike started. Those are the ones that I refer to as village deputies. 

Incidentally, I served as one myself. Senator. I was duly sworn 
in as a law-enforcement official. At that time I had no direct con- 
nection with labor relations. I may say that I had an indirect con- 
nection as an attorney. 

But the village deputies had cleaned up all loose stones, all rocks 
and so forth. At about 8 o'clock that night simultaneously on two 
different ends of the plant, the north end and the south end, at as near 
as we cHTi determine the exact moment, a riot began with the smashing 
of windows. 

Everything that was valuable was smashed ; everything that could 
be smashed was smashed with rocks and stones. They proceeded to 
move, the two groups, together toward the center of the plant, and 
finally arrived at the office, sm.ashing ever3'thing on the way. 

Senator Mundt. Was this riot out of the picket line, outside of the 
gate, or was this something that took place inside the grounds? 
Where did this riot take place ? 

Mr. CoNOER. This is outside of the grounds, Senator, outside of the 
plant fence, or, in some cases, where the buildings abutted onto the 
street itself. 

Senator Mundt. What windows are you talking about that were 
being smashed? 

Mr. Conger. Those were windows in the plant, in the pottery 
building, in the south foundry building. Thev smashed the windows 
in the employment office and in the medical building. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9197 

Senator Mundt. How did they smash them if they were way outside 
the fence? 

Mr. Conger. The ones that were outside of the fence — when I say 
the fence, the fence is about 10 feet from the buildings. There were 
portions of the plant grounds where the windows were not smashed, 
where it was too far away from the fence. 

They also had a little gimmick, Senator, of what they called an 
"inner tube sling shot." Two men would hold an inner tube, a com- 
plete inner tube, and the third man would pull it back with a half a 
brick on it and those things would go quite a ways. One of them 
happened to miss my head by about 4 inches and the brick that was 
thrown went up against a brick wall and was smashed all to pieces. 

Another one of those bricks \vent through a plate-glass window on 
the second floor of the medical department, went across the entire 
medical department, which is somewhat wider than the spot where I 
am sitting now from the committee, and imbedded itself in a plaster 
wall. That is the force that those things carried. 

Eventually, this mob met, the two groups met, in front of the office. 

Senator Mundt. Still outside the picket fence ? 

Mr. Conger. Still outside the fence of the office, Senator, abutting 
on the street. They came rushing in there. 

Senator Mundt. None of us, so far as I know, have ever been in 
Kohler Village, nor have we seen the plant. I started envisioning this 
as a plant surrounded by a fence, the plant bemg perhaps two or three 
hundred feet inside the fence. 

If you would describe what you are talking about, it would make the 
picture a lot clearer to us. 

Mr. Conger. I believe possibly I may have some pictures here that 
I would like to submit to make it clearer, but I will also try to describe 
it. Senator. 

On the front of the plant, in most places, the fence is not more than 
10 feet from the factory buildings, and in some cases the factory 
buildings abut right on the street. The office abuts right on the street. 
It is recessed back. 

Senator Mundt. You are telling us now that in some places the 
factory building is really part of the fence? 

Mr. Conger. That is correct; and in other places it is not more 
than 10 feet from the fence. 

The office, of course, abuts directly on the street, or it is recessed 
from the street but there is no fence to prevent one from getting to 
it. The medical building and the employment office abutted directly 
on the street. 

Senator Mundt. So when they met in the middle, as you say, how 
far were they from the building ? 

Mr. Conger. Wlien they met in the middle, they were right up 
against the building, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Fifty feet, forty feet ? 

Mr. Conger. No; 5 or 10 feet. They would rush right up on the 
steps of the office and hurl rocks through the windows and through 
the doors. Everything was smashed there. Nothing happened up 
until that time. 

Now, I will depart from the eyewitness part of it. I do know that 
before this happened or while it was happening, a squad car of the 

21243— 58— tp. 23 4 



9198 lAfPROPER ACTIVITIFJS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

villafje police was stoned and practically demolished, as far as any- 
thing deniolishable was concerned. A county probation officer who 
happened to be drivin<; through the area at the moment had her car 
stoned, the windows smashed, and she had to take refuge in one of 
the buildings. 

After they had smashed everything that was smashable in the office, 
they were yelling, "We will go in; we will tear the place down. We 
will get those rats out." Shouts arose from the crowd, and I am now 
going back to the eyewitness or the ear witness part of it, if you please. 

There arose shouts from the crowd, "Let's get the village. Let's 
tear the village down. Let's burn the village down." At that time, 
the village police, and I may say that Mr. Edniond Beaver, who has 
been mentioned here, was on leave of absence from the company at 
that time, acting as assistant chief of the village police. 

As I said, when the strike started, the village had 1 policeman or 
I believe, 2. I believe they had 1 on days and 1 on nights. At 
that time, the village police opened up with gas, with tear gas, and 
sought to split 

Senator Mundt. Where were the village police? Were they inside 
the plant, outside the plant, in the picket line, off the picket line? 
Where were they shooting from ? What were they shooting at ? Let 
us get the picture so we can understand it. 

Mr. Conger. The village police that I am talking about were on the 
outside of the plant that evening. We had some people, including 
myself, who had been deputized as village police, but who stayed en- 
tirely within the plant and did not go outside of the plant until later 
in the evening, until this particular episode was all over. 

But I did. As this riot started, I went down to the south end, to 
the south foundry, as it is called, and I followed the rioting and the 
window smashing all the way up to the office and when they got there, 
I went into the office and soon on the inside of the office, because we 
feared that they would probably rush the office and come in. 

I heard these shouts and yells from the outside, and then the village 
police fired the gas into the crowd. They sought to, and they did, 
divide the croAvd into two parts and drove part of it to the south and 
out of the village and part of it out of the north and out of the 
village. 

At that time, I left the office and followed along tlie inside of the 
fence up to the north end to see what was happening there. 

Senator Mundt. You used the phrase, "out of the village." To me 
that means they drove them out of town. Is that what you are talk- 
ing about? 

Mr. Conger. They drove them out of town ; yes. I think properly 
speaking of the village now, as of tlie residential portion and not the 
village limits, which went some distance. They drove them across 
on the north side, they drove them across the State Highway 23 and 
there was at that one time one building on the other side of that. 

But otherwise, it was what you might call farmland. 

Senator Mundt. How many people were shot ? 

Mr. Conger. At that stage no one was shot. 

Senator Mundt. At this stage they were using only tear gas? 

Mr. Conger. At that stage they were using only tear gas. 

Senator Mundt. Did Mr. Biever fire tlie first tear-gas gun ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN" THE LABOR FIELD 9199 

Mr. CoNGEK. I understand that he did, Senator. I did not per- 
sonally observe that, but I understand that he fired the first one. 

Senator Mundt. Did he fire tliis from within the plant or from 
outside the plant? 

Mr. Conger. No, sir. He fired it from the American Club lawn, 
which is directly opposite the office. 

Senator Mundt. Wliat is the American Club ? 

Mr. Conger. The American Club is a building that we have to 
house the single people of the organization. It is, I might say, be- 
tween a hotel and a boardinghouse. 

Senator Mundt. Inside the fence or outside the fence ? 

Mr. Conger. Outside the fence and across the street from the plant. 

Senator Mundt. Some place between the plant and the Grant Hotel, 
I guess ? 

Mr. Conger. That is right, only it is a little different direction than 
you would go to go to the Grant Hotel. 

Senator Mundt. Around the world 

Mr. Conger. Well, I would say about three to four hundred feet 
from the office, and outside. Then when they got up to that point, 
very unfortunately, the wind changed and a strong northern wind 
came up and they were unable to use gas anymore. 

The gas was driven back into the village. In fact, I got a little 
sample of it myself that night. At that point, the mob re-formed and 
started yelling, "Let's go back into the village." They came back into 
the village and completely destroyed the company's showrooms, fix- 
tures. 

There was a shoe store on the comer where a man was living and 
running a little shoestore, a shoe-repair shop. They smashed the win- 
dows on that ; bullets were fired on that. At that time 

Senator Mundt. Wliat were they shooting at the shoestore man for ? 
Was he a Kohler official ? 

Mr. Conger. Not an official, but he was a Kohler Co. employee. 
Excuse me. I am sorry. He was not at that time a Kohler Co. em- 
ployee, either. 

Senator Mundt. They must have had some reason why they would 
shoot at a shoestore. He must have been connected somehow with the 
company, was he not ? 

Mr. Conger. Well, there was a lot of indiscriminate shooting from 
the other side tliere. Senator. That is what I was just gettmg to. 
There were flashes of firing coming from the mob. 

Senator Mundt. It is now dark, I take it? This was at night? 

Mr. Conger. This was at night. This riot started about 8 o'clock 
at night, and this that I am talking about now, would occur about 
9 : 15 at night. It was completely dark and very dark because they 
had smashed all of the lamps and the street lights were out. 

We could see these flashes of fire coming from the mob. Tlie 
deputies who were up at that end, and they included both sheriff's 
deputies and village deputies, returned some of that fire and approxi- 
mately, exactly, 35 people were shot. 

No one knows to tliis day, and the coroner's jury was unable to find 
out, whether they were shot by shots from the mob or from the depu- 
ties. I think, myself, there was some of each. After tliis riot was 
over we finally discovered that there had been shooting long before 
they got to that point, shooting from the mob, I mean. 



9200 IMPROPER ACrrVITTElS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Wo discoverd bullet lioles in the windows of the powerhouse. We 
discovered several bullet marks in the tower of the office and we also 
found one bullet hole in a residence in the village, which apparently 
was (ired. Some of these deputies were fired directly upon. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many of the deputies were shot? 

Mr. Conger. None of the deputies were shot, but about 18 of them 
were injured that night with clubs, rocks, bricks, injured severely 
enough to require medical attention. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many were actually shot? 

Mr. Conger. There were 35 people actually shot. 

Mr. Kennedy. Plow many of those were deputies? 

Mr. Conger, None of the deputies were shot. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people inside the plant were shot? 

Mr. Conger. No one inside the plant was shot, but several people 
inside the plant were shot at. 

Mr. Kennedy. Plow many people were killed ? 

Mr. Conger. Two people lost their lives. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were any of those people deputies? 

Mr. Conger. No, and may I say, of the 35 people shot, including 
1 who was killed, the majority of them had never been a Kohler Co. 
employee. 

Senator Mundt. That does not mean anything unless you describe 
who they were. Were they outside union men brought in as they 
were in this last strike? Were tliey spectators who lived around 
there? Were they passersby? Who were these peopie who were 
killed, who were not either Kohler Co. employees, management or 
strikers who were there ? 

Mr. Conger. They were strike sympathizers from Sheboygan, who 
came out to participate in the riot. There was plenty of time, Sen- 
ator, between 8 o'clock in the evening and the time that this shooting 
finally took place, for anyone who did not want to participate in that 
riot, to get out of town. 

There was an hour and a quarter. I might also say that we, of 
course, clearly saw this thing coming. We heard the threats in the 
afternoon. The village president issued a proclamation, asking peo- 
ple who had no official connection, or no business there, to please stay 
out of the town and not interfere with the efforts of the law-enforce- 
ment officers to keep law and order. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Conger, you mentioned Father Maguire. I have 
a quote from Father INIaguire, who was evidently present then or 
shortly thereafter. Pie stated : 

I have been in many strikes, but I never saw such needless and ruthless kill- 
ing by supporters of the law. 

Pie says in reference to the trouble in Kohler before the troops ar- 
rived : 

But it is understood that most of the people were shot in the back last Fri- 
day. The rutlilessness is evident. You do not have to shoot people in the 
back v^hon they are running away. I examined a score of wounded and all 
except two were shot in the back. 

As a member of the Chicago Regional Labor Board, I am not going behind 
fences to say what I have to say. There are human rights and property rights, 
but human lives are more sacred tban property rights. A deep wrong has 
been done in this county and you should go to the bottom and discover who 
was responsible, and those should be punished as they deserve. 



IMPROPER ACTTVTTIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9201 

The Chairman. Are you familiar with that statement ? 

Mr. Conger. I am very familiar with it, Senator, yes, sir. I will 
say that I disagree with it completely. I also — not also, but I did, 
and I am afraid Father Maguire acted and made that statement a 
good deal on hearsay, because I was going to get to this. The company 
was sued by some 28 of these people that got injured in the riot, mak- 
ing the same charges and the same claims that are now made. 

It was a part of my duty as a lawyer to investigate this thing. 
I investigated it. I investigated the medical records of just how these 
people were shot and where they were shot. I can tell you that there 
were not 20 shot in the back. There were a few shot in the back, 
but I think this committee heard the testimony of Gilbert Moede 
here, who saw one shot in the back running from the mob toward 
the plant and shot from the picket line. 

That is as I interpret his testimony here. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. You disagree that, "There are human rights and 
property rights, but human lives are more sacred than property 
rights" ? Do you disagree with Father Maguire ? 

Mr. Conger. No, sir, I do not disagree with that, but I thought 
the brick tho.t was directed to my head was directed to a human being. 
I want to tell you that there were human beings endangered that 
night. This is not just a question of property rights. We are hu- 
man beings too. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people in the plant were shot ? 

Mr. Conger. None were shot, but as I told you before, about 18 
of them were injured, injured severely enough to require medical 
treatment. There were many more that I know sustained injury, 

Mr. Kennedy. I think that the point Father Maguire makes is that 
perhaps the property of the plant was hurt by bricks coming through 
the widow. Perhaps that was a problem for the company, but there 
was no excuse, no reason, to fire on a lot of defenseless people and 
shoot 35 of them, and kill 2 of them. 

There cannot be any excuse for it. I am astounded that you come 
up here and try to excuse it. 

Mr. Conger. I am just as astounded that you would not read the 
Wisconsin State statutes which require law enforcement officers to 
quell a riot. I can tell you this, Mr. Kennedy, having had experience 
with a few of them, that the longer you allow a riot to go, the harder it 
becomes to quell and eventually it is going to take something out. 

There were people endangered, lives endangered, with that riot, 
that night including mine and including many of these deputies who 
were trying by as peaceful methods as they could to keep order. This 
shooting from the other side was not a joke. It was not directed at 
property. It was directed at human beings. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think you can tell pretty much from the results, 
and the results are that the people who were shot and the people who 
were killed were those on strike. I do not think you can get away 
from that, Mr. Conger. 

Mr. Conger. I do not think you can get away from the fact that that 
was the mob that was attacking, either. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you about those in the plant that were 
injured. How were they injured? 



9202 IMPROPER ACnVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Conger. Senator, I do not believe anyone in the plant was 
injured. The ones I am talking about 

The Chairman. I thought you said there were 18 in the plant. 

Mr. Conger. No. I said 18 deputies were injured. If I said in the 
plant I misspoke, Senator. I am sorry. 

The Chairman. I may have misunderstood you, but I thought you 
said 18 in the plant were injured. 

Mr. Conger. If I did, I did not mean to say that. There were 18 
of the village deputies who were injured severely enough. 

The Chairman. How were they injured? By gunshot? 

Mr. Conger. They were injured by bricks, by clubs, stones. I do 
not think any of them were shot. 

The Chairman. None of those were shot, but they were injured by 
external violence? 

Mr. Conger. They were. And many of them were injured long 
before any shooting started. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Mr. Conger. If you please, I have not completed my statement 
May I continue? 

The Chairman. You have a prepared statement that you are going 
to present sometime. I thought they just wanted to interrogate you 
about the shooting at this time. 

Mr. Conger. That is all I wanted. But I wanted to finish up with 
that. 

The Chairman. You may. 

Mr. Conger. The coroner investigated this thing, as Father Maguire 
suggested be done, and the coroner's jury returned a verdict that the 
shooting was by persons unknown. The coroner issued a statement 
that these persons came to their deaths in the course of a riot and that 
the deputies, both village and sheriff's deputies, were acting in the 
line of their official duties. 

After that, tlie union put some of these people up to suing the 
company. They made the same charges as are now being made, that 
these were company guards that did the shooting, that it was a con- 
spiracy to do the shooting. 

They sued, among others in the Kohler Co., Mr. Walter Kohler, 
president of the Kohler Co., Mr. Herbert Kohler, Kobert Kohler, 
Walter Kohler, Jr., John Case, who was a village policeman, Ernest 
Shilke, and Edward Biever. The Edward was wrong; it should have 
been Edmund, but it was the same gentleman of whom we have heard 
here. 

That was a rather unusual suit, gentlemen, in that the plaintiffs 
never tried to bring it to trial. I was representing some of the de/- 
fendants. I was representing the Kohler Co., and we noticed for 
the trial. 

I would like to submit as an exhibit that notice of trial, showing 
that we forced it to trial. I would also like to submit as an exhibit 
the fact that when we forced it to trial, and they were compelled to 
come into court and try to prove their charges under oath, they 
dropped that suit and their lawyer promised never to start it again. 

The Chairman. The first item, the notice, may be made exhibit 53. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 53" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 



IMPRO'PER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9203 

The Chairman. What is the other item ? 

Mr. Conger. The first one is the notice of trial. 

The Chairman. The notice of trial has been made exhibit 53. 

Mr. Conger. I would like to make another exhibit the dismissal of 
the action, showing that it is dismissed at the motion of the plaintiffs' 
attorney. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 54. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 54" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. They use the term, "dismissed with prejudice." 
What is dismissed with or without prejudice ? 

Mr. Conger. It was not dismissed with either. Possibly technically 
without prejudice, but the attorney for the — we argued that point in 
court at the time, Senator, and the attorney for the plaintiffs said 
he would orally promise he would never bring it again. The judge 
did not require it to be dismissed with prejudice. 

The Chairman. At any rate, the suit was brought; it was never 
tried. It was dismissed and it has never been brought again ? 

Mr. Conger. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Period. 

Mr. Conger. There is one other suit I would like to mention. 

Senator Mundt. Let me inquire. To me, that is a curious develop- 
ment, not being a lawyer and not being sued very often and not want- 
ing to get sued. There must be some reason. They must have given 
some reason. It does not seem to make very good sense to me. 

You sue somebody to collect some damages and then you drop the 
suit. What reason did they give? Does it show in this exhibit? If 
not, can you tell us? Was it in the newspapers? I would like to 
know why they did not go through with the suit. 

Mr. Conger. It is a reason that I think would be quite familiar to 
this committee at this time, that they could not get a fair trial in 
Sheboygan County where this thing happened. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, they said that the judge would not 
give them a fair trial — or the jury ? 

Mr. Conger. Well, judge or jury or both, that they could not get 
a fair trial in SheboygJ^n County or in any adjoining county. 

Senator Mundt. Can you not get a change of venue in Wisconsin 
when you have a suit, so you can get a fair trial ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes; you can get a change of venue to an adjoining 
county. 

Senator Mundt. It has to be in an adjoining county? 

Mr. Conger. That is true in a criminal action. I am not sure, but 
what in a civil action, they can get it in another county. 

Senator Mundt. Anyhow, they dropped the allegation or the suit 
on the ground that they could not get a fair trial in Sheboygan 
County ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes ; in the county in which these things occurred. I 
want to mention that there is a transcript and this is something I for- 
got to do before. There is a transcript of testimony before this 
coroner's jury. At least 8 to 12 witnesses who have no connection with 
the Kohler Co., never had, or with Kohler Village, testified on that 
suit, to seeing shooting from the mob toward the deputies. I believe 
that a transcript of that has been ordered by the staff' of this com- 
mittee. 



9204 IMPROPER ACTIVrnES m THE LABOR FIELD 

At any rate, I have one here. The reason I say 8 to 12 is there were 
about 4 witnesses who were called and who did not testify because 
they said, "Well, my testimony will be the same as the fellow ahead 
of me. I was with him." The fellow ahead of him had testified 
to seeing shooting from the mob. 

Senator Mundt. Is that something that you can put in as an ex- 
hibit? I think that will keep popping up in the course of these hear- 
ings. We would like to examine it and perhaps ask questions from it. 
If it is something that is not too voluminous, I think it should be an 
exhibit. 

Mr. Conger. We will be glad to, Senator. It is very voluminous, 
but we will furnish it. 

Senator Mundt. Would that be accepted as an exhibitj Mr. Chair- 
man ? 

The Chairman. "Wliat is that? 

Senator Mundt. Could that be accepted as an exhibit — a transcript 
of the coroner's jury ? 

Mr. Conger. That is a copy of the transcript before the coroner's 
jury. 

The Chairman. Is that all of the testimony ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 55 for reference. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 55" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Conger. I will have to provide it later. I do not have it with 
me here. 

The Chairman. That is all right. Turn it over when you get it. 
We will make a note of it to the clerk and it will take its proper place. 

Mr. Conger. I would like to present as an exhibit, also, the record 
of an order for judgment in a suit which Kohler Co. brought against 
the county of Sheboygan, and we have a statute in Wisconsin which 
makes the municipality liable for riot damage, if it does not control 
the riot and doesn't do it. It makes it absolutely liable if there is a 
riot, except in the case, and I want to call attention to this, that if this 
riot damage is in any way caused or assisted by the person who is 
damaged, they cannot recover. 

We did recover in that suit, and I would like to submit that as an 
exhibit. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit 56 for reference. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 56" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

Senator MuNnT. You recovered how much ? 

Mr. Conger. It is three-thousand-four-hundred-and-some-odd dol- 
lars, I think, Senator. It is on the exhibit itself. 

Senator Mundt. I didn't see the exhibit, and I just wondered how 
much you recovered. 

Apparently what you recovered was the damage to your windows 
and your property that took place. 

Mr. Conger. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Pardon me. Do I understand that the taxpayers 
had to pay for that damage up there ? 

Mr. Conger. I assume that they did. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9205 

Mr. Kennedy. That was about $80 for every person shot ? 

Mr. Conger. I haven't added that up. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is about $80 per person. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further \ 

Mr. Conger. I have one thing further. I would like to submit a 
series of photographs showing the riot damage done to our plant. 

The Chairman. They may be received as exhibit No. 57. 

(Photographs referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 57" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Conger. I have one more exhibit I would like to introduce at 
this time. That is an issue of the Kohler of Kohler News, a magazine 
we put out in 1934, which contains copies of the coroner's statement, 
pictures of the various riot damage, and some more pictures and other 
aspects of the thing, and some of the current things that happened 
at that time. 

The Chairman. Well, it may be received, and — I don't know, it is 
a kind of self-serving document, I think. 

That will be exhibit No. 58. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 58" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee. ) 

Mr. Kennedy. Could I ask you a couple of questions? Was an 
NLRB election conducted ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes ; not the NLEB that we have today. It was the 
National Labor Relations Board established under section 7 (a) of 
the National Recovery Act. 

Mr. Kennedy. They conducted the election up there % 

Mr. Conger. Yes, sir ; they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that the information of the KWA, then ? 

Mr. CoNGFJR. Yes; the KWA was formed before the election, but 
participated in the election and was successful in wimiing the election 
by approximately a 2-to-l vote. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who conducted the election for the NLRB? Did 
they have some people up there ? 

Mr. Conger. Mr. Carl Stevenson, and a Mr. Nathan Shefferman, 
who at that time was with the NLRB. 

Mr. Kennedy. He came up for the NLRB and conducted the elec- 
tion which ultimately had the KWA winning the election ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes. Mr. Stevenson, I think, took the main active 
part in it, and Mr. Shefferman came up, as I recall it, only to sit in 
the balloting place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that the KWA that they also found later on 
was company dominated ? 

Mr. Conger. No, sir ; they did not find out later on it was company- 
dominated. After that election, the Board ordered us to recognize 
the KWA. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the Board ever make any statement about the 
fact that the company influenced that ? 

Mr. Conger. Before the election, the Board rnade some statements 
that they thought the company might have influenced it. After the 
election, they made the statement that despite anything that the com- 
pany might have done — and, mind you, this was before the Wagner 
Act, and it was not under the terms of the Wagner Act — they said 
that despite anything that the company might have done or any assist- 



■9206 IMPROPEiR ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

ance the company might have given it, the vast majority of our em- 
ployees liad chosen the KWA in a freely conducted election, and we 
were therefore required to recognize it. 

Mr. Kennedy. A freely conducted election by representatives of 
the National Labor Relations Board which included Mr. Nathan 
Sheff erman ? 

Mr. Conger. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. I was wondering. You talked about the police force. 
That had how many people in it — the deputy police force in Kohler 
Village? 

Mr. Conger. I believe that by the time of the riot they had some- 
where around 100 citizens of the village deputized. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that all that there were there at that time? 

Mr. Conger. I cannot give you the exact number of village deputies 
that they had. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many police deputies did they have the night 
of the riot, or on that day ? 

Mr. Conger. I don't know exactly. It was not enough. 

Mr. Kennedy. Approximately how many ? 

Mr. Conger. This mob was a mob of approximately 4,000 to 
10,000 people, I would say, and my estimate would be that among 
the people who were deputized inside of the plant tliat did not go out, 
who stayed there merely for the plant protection, and the people on the 
outside, I would say around 100. But I have no definite figures now 
on that part. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they have any kind of uniforms that they used? 

Mr. Conger. Yes. I believe they had arm bands, if I am not mis- 
taken. They were not uniformed. They had stars. 

Mr. Kennedy. They had no particular kind of shirts or anything? 

Mr. Conger. Yes, I believe that they did have blue shirts, if I am 
not mistaken. 

Mr. Kennedy. Blueish black shirts, were they ? 

Mr. Conger, I think that they were blue. 

Mr. Kennedy. Blue shirts ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. They all had blue shirts ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes, sir ; with a deputy marshal's star on them. 

Mr. Kennedy. And where did the guns and ammunition come from 
that were distributed to these people ? 

Mr. Conger. Well, they came from the village. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the company have any guns or ammunition ? 

Mr. Conger. The company had some, but none were fired, and I 
may say that as soon as that mob got chased out of the village, I went 
home and brought over my two shotguns that night, because it wasn't 
a very healthy place to be, and I wanted a little protection. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any gun prior to that ? 

Mr, Conger. Did I have any gun ? 

Mr, Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Conger. No, I did not fire any gun that night. 

Mr. Kennedy, Did you have a gun ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes, I "had a gun, and I had two of them. 

Mr. Kennedy. But vou didn't fire at all ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9207 

Mr. Conger. No, I didn't fire it. I did not have a gun when the 
riot started, but as I say, about 9 : 45 or so, after this thing sort of 
quietd down, I went out and got two shotguns that I owned, and 
brought them over. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you with some of the people that fired ? 

Mr. Conger. No, I was not. I was within the plant all of the time, 
and I followed the rioting down all of the way from the south end, 
as I said before, clear up to the north end. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was Mr. Biever's position in all of this ? 

Mr. Conger. Mr. Biever at that time was an engineer with the 
company, who had been given a leave of absence. He was a veteran 
of considerable service, and had been given a leave of absence and 
was appointed by the village board assistant chief of police of Kohler 
Village. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that the position that he held this night at the 
riot? 

Mr. Conger. That is the position he held that night. 

Mr. Kennedy. All right. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

Senator Goldwater. Did I hear you say that Mr. Shefferman was 
a member of the NLRB ? 

Mr. Conger. Oh, no, sir, he was not a member of it. He was an 
employee of it. 

Senator Goldwater. An employee of the Board that came up at that 
time? 

Mr. Conger. Yes, sir ; and I cannot tell you exactly what his posi- 
tion was, and in fact I don't know that I ever knew what his position 
was. 

Senator Goldwater. He was employed by the Board ? 

Mr. Conger. He was employed by the Board, by the Federal Gov- 
ernment ; yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. How was that Board appointed in those days ? 

Mr. Conger. Well, I believe the Board was appointed by the Presi- 
dent, if I am not mistaken. There were three members on the Board. 

Senator Goldwater. Presidential appointments ? 

Mr. Conger. I believe so, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. And then the Board members would be re- 
sponsible for the employees ? 

Mr. Conger. Yes; the Board members I am sure appointed what- 
ever employees they might have. I might say that Mr. Shefferman took 
no part in these subsequent protests of the union on the election or the 
decision of the Board regarding it. 

Senator Goldwater. What year was that ? 

Mr. Conger. This was in 1934. 

Senator Goldwater. President Roosevelt was President then ? 

Mr. Conger. That is correct. That was under the NRA, and the 
famous Blue Eagle. 

Senator Mundt. "Wliile we are on the subject of Shefferman — you 
may have been asked this while I was called out — did the Kohler Co, 
ever engage the so-called services of Nathan Shefferman ? 

Mr. Conger. No, sir ; at no time. Our only contact we ever had with 
him was as a Government employee, and I have not seen Mr. Shefferman 
since the year 1935. 



9208 rMPROPEOR aci^ivities in the labor field 

Senator Mundt. Then your only contact with him was when he was 
a member of the NLllB ? 

Mr. Conger. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. And I presume you had nothing to do with his 
appointment as such ? 

Mr. Conger. No, sir. The first time I ever saw the man was when he 
arrived there as an employee of the NLRB. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Will you come around, Mr. Rand. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence, given 
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Rand. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF DONALD RAND, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, 
JOSEPH L. RAUH, JR. 

The Chairman. State your name, and your place of residence, and 
your business, or occupation. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Let me get the witness sworn in. 

Mr. Rauh. It was about the prior matter, but I will wait. 

The Chairman. Just 1 second. 

Mr. Rand. My name is Donald Rand, and I live at 8430 East Jeffer- 
son Street, Detroit, Mich. I am administrative assistant to the aecre- 
tary-treasurer of the United Automobile Workers, AFL-CIO. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Rauh appears as a counsel for you ; does he 2 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; he does. 

The Chairman. Now, Mr. Rauh. 

Mr. Rauh. I would just like to say that I presume we would be 
accorded the right to produce eyewitness testimony, and I don't know 
whether we would want to do this about the 1934 strike, but one fact 
I would like to have in the record is that the United Automobile 
Workers was founded in 1036, 2 years after the Kohler Co, was en- 
gaged in the riotous strike. It would be a little hard to blame that 
one on us. 

The Chairman. Does anvone challenge the statement that the 
UAW was formed in 1936 ? " ^ 

Senator INIundt. Mr. Chairman, I think Mr. Rauh's request is per- 
fectly reasonable, and if he wants to have some eyewitnesses on this 
same situation, he should be permitted to do so, whether it was UAW, 
or some forerunner union, or some union entirely disassociated from it. 

The Chairman. He was making a statement of fact and I am going 
to take judicial notice that it is correct without having testimony 
about it, if we can. 

We will ask witnesses who the committee may desire to hear, eye- 
witnesses or otherwise, we will finally get around to it. 

Senator Mundt. If ^^e are going to have an eyewitness, can you get 
someone closer than from Milwaukee ? That is a long distance away. 

Mr. Rauh. The other matter, INIr. Chairman, was that Senator 
Mundt has at times requested information about the boycott. I 
thought this would be the appropriate time to present it, since the 



lAIPBOPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9209 

witness here will undoubtedly be interrogated about the boycott, and 
I wondered if I could offer as next exhibit, whatever it is, a memo- 
randum on UAW consumer boycott of Kohler Co. products and the 
exhibits, all of which deal with these cases that Senator Mundt and I 
have been discussing over the past week. 

The Chairman. I believe. Senator Mundt, you requested certain 
information ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes, I did, Mr. Chairman, and I am glad that Mr. 
Rauh has it. Now all I want to determine is who will submit it as 
sworn testimony, because I have had a hard time finding the attorney 
who would assume rasponsibility. If Mr. Rauh will do it as his own 
sworn testimony, fine, or if you have a witness who will swear to its 
accuracy, we certainly want it as an exhibit. 

The Chairman. What is the nature of it, Mr. Rauh? 

Mr. Rauh. This is a statement of the principles of the Kohler 
boycott, and the legal terms under it. I have submitted it as a brief 
signed by myself and Mr. Redman H. Roach, Jr., of Detroit. I swear 
to the contents of it to the best of my belief. 

It is a legal document. Attached to it are all of the documents to 
which you referred, and they were handed to me. The documents on 
their face appear to be what they purport to be ; namely, the stipula- 
tions, and these various cases. 

Senator Mundt. The controversy grows, Mr. Chairman, out of a 
colloquy question which I had over a period of time, I think, with 
Mr. Mazey primarily, and then I thought that Mr. Rabinovitz might 
be the attorney in the case and could handle it. We brought him 
up, and he said he was not. At the time he said that you also were 
not. It seems to me that if this is going to be testimony supporting 
the statements which were made by Mr. Mazey, which I believe are 
entirely inaccurate — not that I think that they were perjuries ; I think 
that they were based on the best of his information, but I think his 
facts were wrong — that it would be a question of fact and not a ques- 
tion of legal interpretation. 

Either those findings were made or they were not made. It seems 
to me that we should have sworn testimony from somebody on a state- 
ment of fact. 

The Chairman. Let the Chair state that counsel presenting a brief 
citing precedents of law and decisions and so forth to sustain a point, 
that is not testimony. That is simply argument. That, of course, 
would not be required to be sworn to. 

That would just be information of a point of view. If you have 
documents or something that you wish to have made evidence, or 
exhibits as evidence, then, of course, they should be sworn to. I do 
not know what they are. 

Mr. Rauh. Sir, we have here the documents before the Labor Re- 
lations Board of the three cases to which Senator Mundt referred. 
One is in Milwaukee, and one was in Los Angeles, and a third 

Senator Mundt. The only one in controversy is the one in 
Milwaukee. 

Mr. Rauh. Obviously different lawyers handled them in different 
parts of the country and I don't think that there is any question of 
the authenticity of the documents. 

The Chairman. May I suggest this and let us not loaf along. 



9210 EMPROPEiR AcnvrriBS in the labor field 

Will you submit them to Senator Mundt, and let him make such 
examination of them, and then we will determine whether he wants 
them sworn to or not. 

Senator Mundt. Very good. 

The Chairman. We might proceed then with the testimony of this 
witness. 

At any time wlien you are satisfied about it, let me know. 

Senator Mundt. That will be perfectly all right. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Rand, you are an international repre- 
sentative of the UAW? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir ; I am. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been in the UAW for how long? 

Mr. Rand. I believe that I joined the UAW in 1947. I would like 
to say in that regard, Mr. Kennedy, that I was a member of an inde- 
pendent union, I believe I joined the United Broach Makers on May 
10, 1936. I was a steward and an officer of that independent organi- 
zation, and I believe it was in 1947 that we affiliated with the 
UAW-CIO. 

Senator Mundt. May I interrupt to inquire of Mr. Rauh, is this 
something that you want me to safeguard and return ? 

Mr. Rauh. 1 am offering that for the record as an exhibit, and 
we have duplicate copies of the Labor Board documents that are con- 
tained there. I only want you to preserve it for the record. 

Senator Mundt. All right. 

The Chairman. I was waiting for you to examine them before I 
determine whether to make them an exhibit or not. 

Senator Mundt. I will have to have a little more time than this 
afternoon. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators 
McClellan, Ervin, Mundt, Curtis, and Goldwater.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You were an officer of this independent union in 
what city? 

Mr. Rand. That was in Detroit, Mich., sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you were affiliated with the UAW ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; we did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you become an international organizer at that 
time ? 

Mr. Rand. No; I didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. "When did you become an international representa- 
tive? 

Mr. Rand. In 1947 when we affiliated with the UAW, I became 
president of the local union which was an amalgamated local in the 
city of Detroit. I believe it w^as in 1951 that I went on the staff, 
the skilled-trades staff of the international union. I might say that 
I am a toolmaker by trade and I have over 20 some years — well, since 
1936, 22 years' seniority in my plant. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were made an international representative^ 
then, in 1951? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; I believe so. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are appointed to that position, are you ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9211 

Mr. Kennedy. But prior to that you had been elected as president 
of your local ? 

Mr. Kand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. "VVliat were your duties as an international repre- 
sentative, just briefly, in 1951-54 ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I was assigned to a skilled trades staff. Specifi- 
cally my assignment covered the areas of regions 3, 4, and 10 of the 
international union. Basically, region 3 is Indiana and Kentucky, 
region 4 is Illinois and the surrounding States, and region 10, as you 
probably know, is the Wisconsin — generally the Wisconsin area. I 
was assigned specifically to those 3 regions. 

Mr. Kennedy. As an international representative, what are your 
responsibilities ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, in the skilled trades department specifically, we 
had tlie assignment of assisting local unions in the problems relative 
to skilled trades workers. We participated in negotiations on the wage 
structure of skilled trades workers, and attempted in many cases to 
establish apprenticeship programs. I spent a great deal of my time 
in that particular field. 

Mr. Kennedy. Within that jurisdiction would be local 833 of the 
UAW? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlien did you first begin to do some work with that 
local and in that area ? 

(At this point. Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Mr. Rand. I believe, Mr. Kennedy, that I participated in the organi- 
zational drive some time prior to the affiliation with the UAW. I 
attended, I think, 1 or 2 meetings of skilled trades workers in the city 
of Sheboygan prior to the actual successful election that took place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would the employees of the Kohler Co. be consid- 
ered in the category of skilled labor ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, in my opinion, they do, sir. I would like to just 
relate an interesting event that took place in my very first meeting. 
Mr. Conger no doubt disagrees with that fact. When I was introduced 
to him as a skilled trades representative, he advised me that there were 
no skilled workers in the Kohler plant. I asked him whether or not 
that included him. I thought we ought to start with him. He agreed 
that he was a skilled trades worker. That was the way we got started, 
unfortunately, but I think it gives some reflection on the attitude of 
Mr. Conger, when we attempted to work at the problems of the skilled 
workers as well as many other workers within the Kohler plant. 

(At this point. Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Anyway, the UAW felt that this was in the category 
of skilled workers, and you were sent up there as a representative of 
skilled workers ? 

Mr. Rand. There is no question of it, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am not going to get into it. 

Mr. Rand. I think we ought to say this. There are many skilled 
workers in the Kohler plant. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am trying to establish why you went to Kohler, 
Wis. That is why you went there. 
Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. Wlien are you talking about ? 



9212 IMPROPER AcnvmES est the labor field 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just getting him there ,which was 1952 or 1953. 
Is that right? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. As I pointed out, I was involved in the organiza- 
tional drive. I think I attended two meetings prior to the strike. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is prior to the strike f 

Mr.KAND. Yes;1952. 

Mr. Kennedy. You attended a couple of meetings prior to the time 
that they were trying to organize ; is that right ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You continued up there, or continued to have an 
interest in local 833 during 1953 ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. Following the election, I participated in nego- 
tiations of the first contract. 

Mr. Kennedy. You actively participated yourself ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. In negotiations with the representatives of the Koh- 
lerCo.? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I was a member of the skilled trades staff, and in 
that particular function, I went in to Sheboygan and participated in 
the negotiations with the local 833 committee. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much time did you spend up there in 1953, 
roughly ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I can't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you up there a great deal of the time in 1953 ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes; I spent a great deal of time in there just prior to 
the signing of the contract; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in 1954, were you up there during those nego- 
tiations when the contract was being reopened ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; as a matter of fact, I participated in the reopening 
of the negotiations that took place ; I believe, in May of 1953, we finally 
settled it, I think, in August of 1953, and it was retroactive to May. 

But I was in those negotiations as well as the ones which led up to the 
strike. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was beginning in the early part of 1954 ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. You also participated actively in negotiations with 
the company during that time? 

Mr. Rand. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did your function change up there from merely as 
a representative of the skilled trades to some different responsibility ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I don't know exactly what you mean by that. I 
might answer it this way : Yes, it has changed since that time. But I 
was still actively involved in the problems of the skilled trades work- 
ers as the strike went on, as it took place. 

Mr. ICennedy. Then did you have other responsibilities in addi- 
tion? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I assisted the local union where I could in the 
problems relative to the strike, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the strike started April 5, 1954, is that right? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you been up there for most of the time prior to 
1954 during the negotiations? 

Mr. Rand. Prior to April 5 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to April 5, 1954. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9213 

Mr. Rand, Yes, I had spent a great deal of time there. 
Mr. Kennedy. What was your responsibility during the strike, 
after the strike started on April 5, 1954 ? 
What were your responsibilities, briefly ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, the local union officers, the strike committee, were 
in charge of the strike, and I assisted them wherever I possibly could. 
I might say that we had many problems. I was there specifically to 
handle the problems relative to the skilled workers in the event the 
negotiations would take place. We worked continually at it. One 
of th problems that we had was that the company had not given the 
local union sufficient data to compile a wage structure, and, as a re- 
sult, we had to go into a long survey and try to develop certain infor- 
mation, and so forth, relative to this particular problem. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you work on the picket line or work in the soup 
kitchen after the strike started ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I wouldn't say I worked on the picket line. I 
was on the picket line, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. You wcre aware of the fact, were you not, that — 
and I don't want to go through all of this again — that the nonstrikers 
were unable to get into the plant because of the mass picketing that 
was going on ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe that has been testified to, yes. 

Mr. I\JENNEDY. And you were aware of it yourself, were you not? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I am aware of the fact that there was a mass of 
people there, and also 

Mr. Kennedy. And that the nonstrikers were unable to get in? 

Mr. Rand. They didn't go to work ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Because of the mass of people ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe so ; yes. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Rand, you were on the picket line most every 
day, weren't you ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe I was ; yes sir. 

Senator Curtis. I would like to hand you a photograph. This one 
is not numbered, but it is dated April 5, 1954, with the location at the 
northeast entrance. I will ask you to look at that and tell us what 
it is, and let us know whether you are in that picture. 

(Photograph handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What were you doing there ? 

Mr. Rand. It looks like I am walking. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. Are they letting any of the nonstrikers go 
through ? 

Mr. Rand, Frankly, I don't remember this picture. I didn't even 
know the Kohler Co. had this one. 

The Chairman, Senator, may I inquire for the record : Have these 
already been made an exhibit ? 

Senator Curtis, These particular copies are not; no. I think not. 

The Chairman. I will make them an exhibit, as we go along, if you 
wish. 

Senator Curtis. I have several here. Do you want them all at once ? 

The Chairman. I think that would be better. 

21243— 58— pt. 23 5 



9214 IMPROPER ACnVTTIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. All ri^ht. 

The Chairman. The Chair presents to you a series of pictures and 
asks you to examine them and see if you identify them as pictures 
at the scene of the strike. 

( Photographs handed to the witness. ) 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I recognize this picture 

The Chairman. All of them ? 

Mr. Rand. All of them. 

The Cilmrman. Take a look at all of them and see if you recognize 
them as pictures of the strike. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. I believe, Senator, that I appear in all but one of these 
pictures. 

The Chairman. All right. Lay the one aside in which you do not 
appear, and we will see about it later. All of the others may be made 
Exhibit No. 59-A, B, C, and so forth. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 59A-G" for 
reference and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Rand, you testified concerning this one pic- 
ture. Here is a picture that I will hand you and ask you to tell us 
what it is. It is 59-B. 

(Photograph handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Rand. Those pictures, Senator, that you showed me; were 
they all the same date ? 

Senator Curtis. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rand. I wonder if I could see them again. I just want to 
refresh my memory whether that is actually myself on those pictures. 

(Photographs handed to the witness.) 

Senator Curtis. I would like to take them up one at a time, if I 
could. 

Mr. Rand. I just wanted to check the dates, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Read the dates out loud, would you, please, so 
we can all get them ? I haven't seen the pictures, either. Mr. Rand, 
will you read the dates out loud so we can get them in the record so 
the rest of the committee can also know ? 

Mr. Rand. 59-A has a date on it of April 5, 1954. B has a date, 
April 12, 1954. C has a date of April 12, 1954. D has a date of May 
24, 1954. 59-E has a date of May 24, 1954. 59-F has a date of May 
24, 1954. 59-G— I think I read it before— is August 13, 1954. 

Senator Mundt. It covers different days, I think. 

Mr. Rand. I thought, Senator, some of them had been taken at 
one and the same time. 

Senator Mundt. There were two pictures on the same date, and 
the rest were on different dates. 

Senator Curtis. I started to ask you about the picture 59-B. I 
asked you what it was, what it was a picture of. I don't believe 
I got your answer. 

]\Ir. Rand. I better look at that a little closer. Senator. 

(Photograph handed the witness.) 

Mr. Rand. I believe that is a picture tliat M^as taken in front of 
the plant. 

Senator Curtis. Are you in that picture ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I am, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9215 

Senator Curtis. Are you numbered with a number written there 
in pen? 

Mr. Eand. Yes. There is a line drawn from my face to a number, 
which is No. 2. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 1 in that picture ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe it is Harvey Kitzman, according to the nota- 
tion on the back. 

Senator Curtis. Wlio is Harvey Kitzman ? 

Mr. Rand. Harvey Kitzman, if that is him, is the regional direc- 
tor of region 10, UAW. I believe it is him, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. That is a pictm^e of the picket line ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. Now I want you to examine this next picture, 59-C. 
Tell me whether or not that is a picture of the picket line. 

(Photograph handed to the witness. ) 

Mr. Rand. That is a picture taken in front of the plant; yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Are you in that picture ? 

Mr. Rand. At least I don't see a picture of myself. I may be. I 
don't know. No. 6, it says on the back. Yes. It is the back of my coat 
and my head. 

Senator Curtis. "VAHio is No. 1 marked there ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 1 — at least the notation on the back of the picture — 
it is a little difficult to see the front, and you can't identify the person — 
the back of the picture has the name "Frank Sahorske." 

Senator Curtis. Do you know him ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. Frank Sahorske was the assistant regional direc- 
tor at the time of the strike. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 2 on there ? 

Mr. Rand. Bob Burkhart. 

Senator Curtis. Bob Burkhart ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Wlioishe? 

Mr. Rand. Bob Burkhart is an international representative of the 
UAW. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 4 on there ? 

Mr. Rand. Four is Jess Ferrazza. 

Senator Curtis. Wlio is Jess Ferrazza ? 

Mr. Rand. Jess Ferrazza is the administrative assistant to the sec- 
retary-treasurer of the UAW, Mr. Emil Mazey. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 5 ? 

Mr. Rand. Five is Joseph Burns. 

Senator Curtis. Who is Joseph Burns ? 

Mr. Rand. Joseph Burns is an international representative who was 
assigned to the commmiity services department of the international 
union, UAW. 

Senator Curtis. None of those six people that you mentioned were 
Kohler workers, were they ? 

Mr. Rand. No ; they were international representatives, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. But they were there to form a picket line, help 
form a picket line, to keep anyone out of the plant that wanted to go 
to work ; is that right ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't understand your question. 

Senator Curtis. The purpose of the line was to keep anybody who 
wanted to go to work from going in, wasn't it ? 



9216 IMPROPEIR ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Hand. No, I don't believe so. 

Senator Curtis. What was its purpose ? 

Mr. Rand. You are referring to this picture, Senator? 

Senator CuRiis. No, I am referrin^^ to the picketing generally. 

Mr. Rand. I thought you were referring to the picture. This is 
talking to the chief of police in the village of Kohler, in this picture. 

Senator Curtis. I am referring to the purpose of the picket line 
generally. What was its purpose? 

Mr. Rand. The picket line was a group of the Kohler workers who 
saw lit to picket the Koliler plant to protect their interest in their 
working conditions and their jobs. 

Senator Curtis. Was part of its purpose to keep people from going 
to work in the plant? 

Mr. Rand. There is no question about it, that the people who were 
on the picket line were there to advise the people that they were there 
as strikers, and in an attempt to protect their investment in their jobs 
in the Kohler plant. 

Senator Curtis. Now I hand you a picture, 59D, which appears to 
be taken on Monday, May 24, by the Milwaukee Sentinel, 1954 ; I ask 
you to state what that picture is, and whether or not you are in it. 

(Photograph handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I am in that picture, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Do you recognize anybody else in the picture ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe that the chief of police of the village of Kohler, 
Mr. — I think his name is Waklemer Capelle. 

Senator Curtis. What is he attempting to do? 

Mr. Rand. I might say there is another person whom I recognize 
as the sheriff, Sheriff Mosch, is there. 

Senator Curtis. "\^niat are the officers attempting to do ? 

Mr. Rand. It is a little difficult to tell from this picture what they 
are doing. 

Senator Curtis. Now I will have you look at this one marked "59E." 
This picture is one where there are a great many people in it. They 
are crowded close together. There are some angry looking faces and 
some elbows up to people's throats, it looks like. I will ask you if 
you can tell me what that picture is. 

(Photogi'aph handed to the witness.) 

Senator Curtis. That is a Milwaukee Sentinel picture. 

(Witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. I was going to say I believe, Senator, this is a picture 
which appeared in tlie ISIilwaukee Sentinel, and which has been used 
by the Kohler Co. I don't know how many millions of copies they 
have of tliis picture, but they have made extensive use of it. 

Senator Curtis. Are you in that picture ? 

Mr. Rand. I am, sir. 

Senator Curtis. The Milwaukee Sentinel is a newspaper published 
in Milwaukee, isn't it? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, it is, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You are in that picture. 

"\^^lat number are 3^ou? 

Mr. Rand. The line from the top of the picture designates that I 
am No. 2. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 1? 

Mr. Rand. No. 1 ? According to the back it is William Vinson. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9217 

Senator Curtis. Do you know William Vinson ? 

Mr. Rand. I beg your pardon ? 

Senator Curtis. Do you know William Vinson ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. He is the man that was here and testified? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. And he was the individual convicted for an at- 
tack upon Mr. Van Ouwerkerk ; is that right ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 3 in the picture ? 

Mr. Rand. Frank Stallons. 

Senator Curtis. Wlio is he? 

Mr. Rand. I believe, sir, that he is a member of a local union in the 
city of Kenosha — Kenosha, Wis. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 4? 

Mr. Rand. No. 4? I think. Senator, that that is Frank Sahorske, 
he has a big smile on his face. 

Senator Curtis. Who is he? 

Mr. Rand. Frank Sahorske, as I have already mentioned, is the 
assistant director, or was the assistant regional director, region 10, 
UAW. 

Senator Curtis. He is No. 4? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 5? 

Mr. Rand. Five I believe to be Raymond Majerus. 

Senator Curtis. Who was Raymond Majerus? 

Mr. Rand. Raymond Majerus is an international representative 
assigned to region 10. Also, Senator, I think it has been mentioned 
that he was one of the fellows who was fired in the 1952 affiliation elec- 
tion by the Kohler Co. during the organizational drive. 

Senator Curtis. Is there a No. 6 on there marked ? 

Mr. Rand. There is a 6 marked. According to the back here, I don't 
recognize the picture, I think it is James Fiore, yes, I believe it is 
James Fiore. 

Senator Curtis. Wlio is James Fiore ? 

Mr. Rand. Incidentally, the name is misspelled here. I think it is 
F-i-o-r-e, is it not? 

Senator CuiiTis. You look at the picture and tell me who it is. 

Mr. Rand. I have already testified to that, sir. It is James Fiore. 

Senator Curtis. James Fiore ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Are there any other numbers on there ? 

Mr. Rand. I beg your pardon ? 

Senator Curtis. Is that all of the numbers on the picture ? 

Mr. Rand. 1,2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and 7. 

Senator Curtis. Who is 7? 

Mr. Rand. Seven is Ed Kalupa. I might say. Senator, there are 
many other people in these pictures. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. Who is this last mentioned individual ? 

Mr. Rand. Eddie Kalupa was a chief steward of UAW, Local 833. 

Senator Curtis. What number are you on there, again ? 

Mr. Rand. The mark here is No. 2. 

Senator Curtis. That is you ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 



9218 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. And what is the date of that picture. 

Mr. Rand. I believe — at least, it is noted here, May 24, 1954. 

Senator Ccrtis. Getting along almost to the first of June. How 
come you are wearing gloves ? 

Mr. Rand. I suppose for the reason that it is cold. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. You weren't ready to hit somebody there ? 

Mr. Rand. Incidentally, Senator, there are a number of other peo- 
ple wearing gloves there, too. 

Senator Curtis. I noticed that. 

Mr. Rand. And they have coats on. 

Senator Curtis. But it is almost the first of June. 

Mr. Rand. It gets pretty cold up in Sheboygan early in the morning 
in June. 

Senator Mundt. I don't believe you told us what that picture is 
all about, but just there were a lot of people there. 

You were there. Was it a mass meeting of some kind, was it a 
picket line, or a group of people standing there. Do you recall ? 

]Mr. Rand. This is a picture which would indicate there is a lot of 
pushing and shoving. Right directly behind me is an individual with 
sort of a half-laugh on his face, and some fellow's elbow stuck in the 
back of his neck. I have a picture here of my own. Senator, that 
might be of some interest to you. Would you like to see it ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. But let me ask you one more thing about 
this other one. Are people attempting to go to work in the picture 
there you were talking about, 59 D ? 

Mr. Rand, It is a little difficult to determine just what they are 
doing. There is a lot of pushing and shoving going on. Wliether 
there is anybody attempting to go to work or not, I do not know, 
Senator, from this picture. 

Senator Curtis. But he wouldn't have been able to get through 
and go to work, had he tried, I don't suppose. 

Mr. Rand. I don't suppose so, no. 

Senator Mundt. Take a good look at the picture, Mr. Rand, and 
tell me if you recognize any nonstrikers in the picture? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I believe the man standing directly in front of 
me is a nonstriker. I think his name is Mahlocli, and the reason I 
say that is because the following picture shows that he was arrested 
by a village Kohler deputy, a fellow, incidentally, by the name of 
Carl Berlin. 

Carl Berlin is a special deputy. I think he is a scab at the present 
time. I am not sure of that. But Carl Berlin was a special deputy 
of the Kohler village. I am told, at least, that this man who is 
standing in front of me was subsequently arrested for striking an 
officer. 

Senator Mundt. For striking an officer? 

Mr. Rand. Ye.s, sir. 

Senator Curtis. A\'as there any other striking taking place that 
day? 

Mr. Rand. I beg your pardon ? 

Senator Curtis. Did anybody else do any striking that day? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe so. 

Senator Curtis. Did you ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Any time ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9219 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Now, you 

Mr. Rand. I would like to say at this time. Senator, if I may, that 
I have never been arrested in my life, I have never participated in a 
strike, and furthermore 

Senator Curtis. You never participated in this one ? 

Mr. Rand. I used the word before. Senator — and, furthermore, I 
haven't struck anybody in this picture or this strike ? 

Senator Curtis. All right. Now I want to hand you a picture 
marked 59F. It is dated Monday, May 24, 1954. I ask you if you 
are in that picture. 

(Photograph handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Rand. I believe I have already pointed that out, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You are No. 1 in that picture, are you not ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. There is a line drawn — I don't know why I am 
No. 1, because there are about — what is there, about 150 people in that 
picture ? 

I am designated as No. 1. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 2? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know who that is. John Konec, according to the 
marking on the back, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Who is that man ? 

Mr. Rand. I see Carl Fiedler there. He doesn't have a mark. That 
is the Sheboygan press reporter, I think. He is sitting right over 
here. 

Senator Curtis. Who did you say was marked No. 2 ? 

Mr. Rand. John Konec. 

Senator Curtis. Who is he ? 

Mr. Rand. John Konec was the Local 833 UAW chief, picket 
captain. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 3 ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 3, 1 believe, is Raymond Majerus. 

Senator Curtis. You mentioned before who he was. Would you tell 
us again ? 

Mr. Rand. He is a UAW international representative assigned to 
Harvey Kitzman's staff in region 10. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 4 ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 4 is a man who is standing there and it looks some- 
thing like James Fioer. He has a smile on his face. I would like to 
call your attention, Senator — I don't know who put these markings 
on here, but it says "Goon from Detroit. Here many months." 

I suppose this is the Kohler Co.'s photograph. At least, it sounds 
like their language. 

Senator Curtis. Well, I presume that maybe they did. I suppose 
enough people have been called scabs here, and they have been pretty 
nice folks. Maybe somebody can be called a goon and maybe they 
are just a little goon or none at all. 

There is one picture here that was set aside because you weren't 
in it, but it is dated May 10, 1954. It was taken by Harold Bogen- 
hagen of the Sheboygan Press. I would like to have you state whether 
or not you know what it is. Identify some of the individuals in it. 
There is one individual there whose face doesn't look like he is carry- 
ing on peaceful picketing. It looks like there is considerable feeling 
in there. He is marked "No. 1." Wlio is that ? 



9220 IMPROPER ACnVITIBS EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Rand. No. 1, accordino- to the listing on the back, sir, is Jess 
Ferrazza, administrative assistant to Emil Mazey, the secretary- 
treasurer of the UAW. 

Senator Curtis. Emil Mazey's administrative assistant? 

Mr. Rand. That is what is marked on tlie reverse side of the picture. 

Senator Curtis. Do you recognize him as such ? 

Mr. Rand. I have seen the Kohler Co.'s book in which they have 
used this same picture 

Senator Curtis. Do you recognize that picture as this man? 

Mr. Rand. As I am trying to point out to you, Senator, I have seen 
the Kohler Co.'s booklet in which they have stated that this picture is 
Jess Ferrazza. 

I think it is quite a distorted picture. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know him ; do you ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I think he is sitting right here in the courtroom. 
The hearing room, I should sa3^ 

Senator CuRns. Is it him ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I believe it may be him. 

Senator Curtis. All right, who is No. 2 ? 

Mr. Rand. According to the markmg here, it is John Gunaca. 

Senator Curtis. John Gunaca ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. It looks like John Gunaca. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know John Gunaca ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. That was the John Gunaca who was a witness here 
a day or two ago ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Who is No. 3 ? 

Mr. Rand. Three is Frank Sahorske. 

Senator Curtis. Who is he ? 

Mr. Rand. As I have pointed out, Frank Sahorske is or was the 
assistant regional director under Harvey Kitzman, region 10. 

Senator Mundt. Every time you come to this name you change "is" 
to "was." Would you tell us where he is now 2 

Mr. Rand. He has another assignment. Senator. He is now as- 
signed in, I believe, Racine or Kenosha. There is another man 

Senator Mundt. He is still alive and still in good health, I suppose ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. You see he is not the assistant director now. 

Senator Curtis. All of these pictures represent scenes of mass pick- 
eting conducted, among other reasons, to keep workers from going to 
work ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. You have heard about these home demonstrations 
or home picketing, too, haven't you ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I have, sir. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, before we leave the pictures, can the 
one that Mr. Rand has identified be admitted, sir ? 

It is one that he has identified as the one man being arrested who 
was opposite him here. We would like that in, if it is not objection- 
able. I have it in my hand here. 

The Chairman. There has been a picture presented which has not 
been made an exhibit. 

Senator Curtis. I would like to see it made an exhibit. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9221 

The Chairman. It is the picture you were talking about that was 
eliminated from the first group. I will now make it exhibit No. 60, 
the single picture. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 60'' for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee. ) 

The Chairman. May I see what the counsel has ? 

Mr. Rauh. Here are 2 pictures, 1 a duplicate of the one that 
Mr. Curtis presented and the other is the one Mr. Rand testified to, 
the picture of the nonstriker being led away by the policeman. I 
Thought those two ought to be a separate exhibit, referring to the 
one that Senator Curtis testified to. 

Senator Curtis. May the record show who took the pictures ? 

Mr. Rauh. It is on the back, I believe. The Milwaukee Sentinel. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. All right. 

The Chairman. The pictures may be made exhibits 61 and 61-A. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. 61 and 
61-A" for reference and may be found in the files of the select com- 
mittee. ) 

Senator Curtis. Were you present at any home demonstrations? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I was. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. How many ? 

Mr. Rand. I know that I was at one of them. I may have been at 
two. 

Senator Curtis. Were you at one on August 13, 1954 ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, the date escapes me for the moment, Senator, but 
I was at 1 or 2. 

Senator Curtis. On North 21st Street? 

Mr. Rand. There, again, I am not too familiar with streets or the 
numbers or just what particular area that was, but I was at 1 or 2 
of the homepicketing. 

Senator Curtis. How did it happen that you knew that this home 
demonstration was going to go on ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, Senator, as I remember it, I received a phone call, 
or phone calls, I should say, pertaining to these particular situations, 
and had heard that the representatives of the Kohler Co. were out 
there early in the afternoon. 

I had also heard that they had secreted a photographer inside the 
home of one of these people. Whether it was this particular day or 
another one, all of these facts are relevant. 

I went out there to see whether it was actually possible that this 
company might provoke an incident that would do damage to our 
union. 

Senator Curtis. Do you think the company was stirring up these 
home demonstrations ? 

Mr. Rand. Senator, it is inconceivable to me to think that the com- 
pany would be out there before the crowd got there. 

Senator Curtis. You are referring to this photographer? 

Mr. Rand. Photographers, yes, plural. I might say that one of the 
interesting parts about my experience in Sheboygan, and it happened 
in this particular instance, or one of these, at least, every time I was 
any place, one of the Kohler Co. photographers would snap my pic- 
ture. How they got there with their camera at the time I did, I don't 
know. They were there. 



9222 IMPROPER ACnVTTIBS Df THE L.\BOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. Wliat other home demonstrations did you go to be- 
sides this one ? 

Mr. Rand. As I say, Senator, I am not sure which one that is. I 
haven't the least idea. I may have been at two. I am not sure at the 
moment. 

Senator Curtis. Did you have anything to do with planning them? 

Mr. Rand. No, I did not, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. So you don't know anything about that ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. But you are not naive enough to believe that they 
are just spontaneous ? 

Mr. Rand. Senator, if you would go into Sheboygan and spend as 
much time as I have there, you wouldn't use the word of whether or 
not I am naive. I can assure you that at least to the best of my 
knowledge, these were completely spontaneous. They weren't ar- 
ranged by our union, they weren't planned by our union. It was 
just something that happened. 

Senator Curtis. This picture which you are in, in the 1900 block of 
North 21st Street, which would be, I am told, about 26 or 27 blocks 
from your hotel, you went over there in response to a telephone call ; 
didn't you ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. More than one telephone call. I had heard about 
these. I don't know whether this is the first, second or third or which 
one it was. Senator. You might refresh my memory. 

Senator Curtis. Well, you can look at the picture and it will tell 
you when it was. 

( Photograph handed to the witness. ) 
_ Mr. Rand. I believe that I remember this. "\Yliether it is a par- 
ticular day, I don't. But I recognize the UAW or at least a member 
of the staff of the CIO who was taking moving pictures there. I be- 
lieve it would be Frank Wallich. Yes, it is listed on the back. I drove 
out there with Frank Wallich, and he is taking moving pictures of 
this. At least, it is being held up to his eye. Whetlier it is movies 
or a still, I don't know. 

Senator Curtis. If it was spontaneous, he found out about it, too? 

Mr. Rand, I believe he must have, sir. He was our publicity man 
at the time, I think. 

Senator Curtis. Isn't it true that this home picketing of the same 
type, the same pattern, would occur on all different sides of She- 
boygan ? 

Mr. Rand. Not to my knowledge, no, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You don't know that that happened? 

Mr. Rand. No ; I don't think it did. 

Senator Curtis. Did the strike bulletin ever have anything in it 
about these home receptions ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe some reference has been made to the fact that 
there were such home demonstrations. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. For instance, the Daily Strike Bulletin of August 
10, 1954, there is language such as this : 

Each night a royal reception awaits them when they arrive home from the 
strike breaking. The crowd of Kohler strikers and their sympathizers is in- 
creasing nightly. 

Why would that be carried in the bulletin if the union didn't have 
any connection with it? 



EVIPRiO'PER ACTIVITIES ENT THE LABOR FIELD 9223 

Mr. Rand. Well, anything that was of interest to the community. 
There were many items that appeared in the bulletin. Why that 
particular item was in there, I don't know. I might add, sir, that the 
newspaper in the city of Sheboygan, the Sheboygan Press, also carried 
stories relative to this particular type of incident. 

Senator Curtis. You have admitted, or you have stated, rather, that 
one of the purposes of the mass picketing was to keep workers from 
getting into the plant to go to work. 

Let's just be reasonable and let me have your opinion of this. Isn't 
it true that the home picketing was carried on to induce workers not 
to go to work ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What was it carried on for ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know, frankly. I don't know. 

Senator Curtis. But you are positive it wasn't carried on to induce 
people not to go to work. 

Mr. Rand. No. It amazes me just as much as it does you. Senator. 
I just don't know how they started. I just don't believe that they 
could have started. But they did. 

To the best of my knowledge, it was a spontaneous action of people 
in the neighborhood. That is to the best of my knowledge how they 
got started. 

(At this point, the following members of the committee were pres- 
ent: Senators McClellan, Ervin, Mundt, Curtis, and Gold water.) 

Senator Curtis. But now here you come back to the official bulletin, 
official strike bulletin of your organization, and on August 17, 1954, 
we find language like this : 

Reception committee : In a few days the activities of the Twelfth Street Re- 
ception Committee for the homecoming scabs has grown to such proportion that 
it now equals anything the northsiders can put on. 

Then a little later in the same bulletin : 

Five more homes were visited before the demonstrations came to an end. 

Now, isn't it true that these home demonstrations were promoted 
and encouraged by means of the strike bulletin ? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't believe so. Senator. The union had notliing 
to do with those home demonstrations. 

Senator Curtis. Nothing to do with them ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Now, what do you mean by the union ? 

Mr, Rand. I am saying that the union had nothing to do with those. 
By the union I mean the tJAW, local 833. 

Senator Curtis. How about the international ? 

Mr. Rand. And the international union. 

Senator Curtis. How about individual representatives ? 

Mr. Rand. Not to my knowledge. Of the local union or the inter- 
national. 

Senator Curtis. Both? 

Mr. Rand. Not to my knowledge. They had nothing to do with 
the organization of those. 

Senator Curtis. How about some of these visitors who happened to 
be in town who were paid by some other local ? 



9224 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR P^IELD 

Mr. Rand. I have no knowledge of whether they organized them or 
not, or wliether tliere were such people otlier than the ones that have 
been testified here to. 

Senator Curtis. Xow tlie strike bulletin on Auj^ust 19, 1954, has lan- 
guage like this: "Company shutterbugs and legal bengles are always 
present at the various demonstrations at scab neighborhoods. Could 
it be that they have noticed some of their scabs are not showing up 
for work after they have had a homecoming reception ?" 

Now does that not indicate that the strike bulletin was promoting 
these things, and the purpose of them was to keep people from going 
to work ? 

Mr. Rand. Do you want me to answer that i 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. I don't think so, Senator, and I have already said I don't 
believe so. 

Senator Mundt. "Would it be fair to say, at least on the basis of 
the strike bulletins w^e have heard so far, that the strike bulletin 
representing as it does the official voice of the strikers, did nothing 
to condemn or to discourage home demonstrations. That would be 
fair ; would it not ? 

Mr. Raxd. Yes; I believe that since we have gone into this matter 
we have checked, and I have been unable to determine whether or 
not anything officially Avas said in the bulletins relative to this thing 
other than the points that the Senators liave brought out. 

Senator Muxdt. I bring out to you, if you can supply us with strike 
bulletins which at any time condemned these home demonstrations, 
that this committee would be very glad to receive them as evidence. 

Mr. Rand. I have tried to find it and I havent seen anything of 
that nature. 

Senator Mundt. So I think it would be fair to say that on the 
basis of the record, there is nothing xw the .strike bulletin as the offi- 
cial document of the striking union, that would indicate that they 
had condemned or discouraged the home demonstrations. 

Mr. Rand. I think that is right. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know of any home demonstrations carried 
on at the homes of strikers? 

]Mr. Rand. No, I don't. Senator. Not offhand ; I don't. 

Senator Curtis. In this picture, at this home demonstration that 
you looked at, was there a Kohler Co. photographer there ? 

Mr. Rand. I just glanced at it, and Mr. Jacobi is the fellow who 
took my picture. 

Senator Curtis. Did you see him there ? 

Mr. Rand. I must have. 

Senator Curtis. Did you attempt to interfere with his taking 
pictures ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

Senator Curtis. Or get in his line of vision or anything? 

Mr. Rand. No ; he took a pretty good picture there. 

Senator Curtis. That is all at this point. I have something more 
I want to ask about the clay-boat incident and 1 or 2 other things 
but the counsel has not reached that yet. 

Mr. IVENNEDY. I Avant to take you into the matter that was dis- 
cussed this morning regarding the clay-boat incident on July 4 or 5, 
1955. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9225 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were down at the dock at the time the clay 
boat came in and was going to be unloaded ? 

Mr. Eand. Yes, I was, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. What time did you arrive down at the docks ? 

Mr. Rand. It was about 7 o'clock in the morning. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you come down at that time ? 

Mr. Rand. I went down to the clay-boat area to discuss with the 
drivers the possibility of them refusing to cross our picket lines into 
the Kohler plant. 

Mr. Kennedy. Cross your picket line where ? 

Mr. Rand. At the Kohler plant, in Sheboygan, or in Kohler Vil- 
lage, I mean. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a picket line down at the dock? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, there were a group of people down there 
already. 

Mr. Rand. I believe that there were 12 or 15 people, Mr. Kennedy, 
who were in the general area when I walked down. Incidentally, I 
walked down from the Grand Hotel, and I think I was at the union 
office first and I went from there and walked there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you known that the trucks were coming in that 
day, to unload the ship ? 

Mr. Rand. No ; I think it was common knowledge that the trucks 
would be there, and I am not sure. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, did you or did you not know ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I may have known, and I went down there for the 
specific purpose of discussing the matter with the truckdrivers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Obviously, you did know that ? 

Mr. Rand. I must have ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And who did you go down with ? 

Mr. Rand. I went down there alone. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to the drivers ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; the first person that I talked to was one of Buteyns, 
the fellow who sat on the right hand, I believe he is the fellow that 
they called "Happy," and I talked to him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell him that he should not go through 
the picket line, and should not come in to try to pick up the clay ? 

Mr. Rand. I discussed the matter with him, and I don't remember 
the exact conversation, but I did have a discussion with him relative 
to the truckdrivers going through our picket lines in the Kohler Vil- 
lage, and he said that any problem relative to this we ought to talk 
to the truckdrivers and I asked him for permision to talk to the 
truckdrivers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to the truckdrivers then ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was their reaction ? 

Mr. Rand. As I remember it, each of the fellows, and I think that 
I talked to 2, or maybe 3 of them, I talked to these fellows, and I ex- 
plained to them, and I didn't know them, incidentally, I just talked 
to them as one man to another, and I explained to them that by the 
unloading of the clay, if they intended to take it into the Kohler 
plant, there was the possibility, of course, that they would cross our 
picket lines. 



9226 IMPROPER AcrmTiES ix the labor field 

I explained to them — I spent about 10 or 15 minutes with each of 
them, and I told them what the strike was, and I said I hoped they 
understood what the struggles were here as it related to the Kohler 
workers, and I begged them not to cross the picket line. 

Mr. Kenxedy. Did you talk to Mr. Peter Buteyn then ? 

Mr. Rand. Peter Buteyn ? 

Mr. Kexnedy. The man who owns the company. 

Mr, Rand. Yes. As a matter of fact, following my discussion with 
2 or 3 of these drivers, I would have talked to more of them, but I did 
not have the opportunity, and I saw Mr. Buteyn there, and somebody 
said, "Well, there is Peter Buteyn. ^Yhy don't you talk to him?" 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time did you tell him that he should leave, 
and not come in to try to unload ? 

Mr. Rand. No ; I did not. I don't remember my exact conversation 
with him, Mr. Kennedy, but I believe it went something like this: I 
discussed the matter with him, and I explained to him that we had 
an extreme problem here in Sheboygan, that this was a serious strike, 
and it was a strike in which we needed the help and the determination 
of all of the citizens not only of Sheboygan but of the surrounding 
area, and it was something that we all believed in as a justified fight 
and all of the people would benefit as a result of our being successful 
in this kind of an endeavor. 

Mr. Kennedy. You told him all of this ? 

Mr. Rand. Oh, yes ; we had a long discussion. This was following 
this. We walked away after the group got around us, and he sug- 
gested we go over to the side. 

He agreed with me, that we did have an extreme problem, and he 
said that he did not feel that he could actually avoid unloading the 
clay and taking the clay out there, because he had some personal 
problems that made it difficult for him to do that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did you tell him if he had any financial prob- 
lems with the bank, that the union would assume those obligations? 

Mr. Rand. I explained to him 

Mr. Kennedy. Just answer the question. Did you tell him that ? 

Mr. Rand. I think that you ought to allow me just to make this 
point. 

Mr. Kennedy. I will let you make any point, but I think that you 
should answer the question, and then you can make the point. Did 
you tell him that if he had any financial obligations or responsibilities 
at the bank, the union, or you speaking for the union, would assume 
those obligations and responsibilities for him ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I said that I would attempt to help him with those 
if I possibly could, as an individual. 

Mr. Kennedy. As an individual? Do you have that kind of money ? 

Mr. Rand. As an individual. If you will allow me, I would like to 
make the point that Mr. Buteyn explained to me that he was heavily 
in debt, and he had a problem if he did not do this work for the Kohler 
Co., that there was some possibility that he could not meet his personal 
obligations, and so forth. 

I said that I ho]:)ed he would not see fit to cross the picket line, but I 
realized that he did have these problems. I said that 1 would be 
juore than happy to assist him if I could, and I would do everything 
in mv power to give him a hand if it wa,s witliin the authority that 
I had. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9227 

Mr. Kennedy. Therefore, you personally, or the union, would as- 
sume the financial obligations which he had responsibility for, if he 
would not come in and unload the clay boat ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir, Mr. Kennedy. I think that he may have as- 
sumed that, but that was not my intention. 
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did you intend, then ? 

Mr. Rand. My intent at that time was and I feel this way about 
anybody's problem, that I would like to help them if at all possible. 
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Rand, you are not going aromid and setting up 
an organization where you are going to help anybody out that has a 
financial problem ? 
Mr. Rand. No, of coui-se not, Mr. Kennedy. 
Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat did you mean, then ? 

Mr. Rand. If there was any way that I could assist him, I don't know 
exactly what way that I could, but I was sincere when I said that I 
hoped that he would give consideration to our problem and certainly 
I would give consideration to his, as an individual, and do whatever 
I could to help him if at all possible. 

Mr. I{j}nnedy. Wliat did you feel that you could do for him, and 
what did you have in mind when you said you would help him out with 
his problem ? Were you going to loan him money ? Were you prepar- 
ing to loan him money ? 
Mr. Rand, Myself, you mean ? 
Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 
Mr. Rand. No ; I haven't money. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Did you assume the union would put up money for 
him? 
Mr. Rand. I have no right to assume that. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you have in mind when you said you were 
going to help him out with his financial obligations ? 

Mr. Rand, Frankly, I had no specific point of view at that time. 
But, as I say, I was sincere that I would if at all possible. He said the 
bank was pressing him for his notes or some such thing as that, and I 
didn't know exactly in what way I may help him or could have helped. 
But I was sincere that I would try. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are sincere, and I am sure of that, Mr. Rand, and 
now I am trying to find what you are sincere about. What were you 
going to help him with ? Was the union going to help him or were you 
going to get your family together and help him out, or what were you 
going to do ? 
What were you going to do and what did you have in mind ? 
Mr. Rand. I really don't know. I don't know. I didn't know his 
problem and I didn't understand his problem. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Why did you tell him sincerely you were going to 
help him out ? 

Mr. Rand. Because I meant it. 
Mr. Kennedy. What were you going to do ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know and I don't know what I could have possi- 
bly have done to help him. 

Mr. Ivennedy. That wasn't very sincere of you. If you couldn't 
help him, and the union couldn't help him, you were less than sincere 
if you told him you were going to help him out and you didn't have 
anything to help him out with ; is that right ? 



9228 IMPROPER ACTTTVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mv. Rand. I don't know in what manner I could have helped him, 
Mr. Kennedy, but I believe tliat we may have been able to work some- 
thing out. I don't know. I didn't know what his problem was, other 
than that he was being pressed for his obligations, and I explained to 
him that I would be more than happy to help him if I could. 

Now, just which way I could do it, I haven't the least idea. 

Senator Ervix. Mr. Chairman, I would like to approach this from 
the opposite direction. 

What impression did you intend to convey to him, to make on his 
mind, when you said that you would help him out on his difficulty 
which you say he told you was linancial ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, Senator, I was in hopes that he wouldn't unload 
that boat and go through the picket line. 

Senator Ernin. I was sure of that. In other words, you were using 
language which you thought would induce him to refrain from cross- 
ing the picket line ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, the language that was used at that time was a re- 
sult of our discussion that had taken place, and in which he explained 
to me that he didn't want to cross the picket lines, but that he said he 
had no alternative. 

He raised this other problem of certain obligations that he had. 

Senator Ervin. He said he had obligations at the bank ? 

Mr. Rand. That is right. 

Senator Er\t[n. And you said or told him that if he would not un- 
load the clay, that you would try to help him with his problems not- 
withstanding the fact that you knew that you had no money of your 
own to help him with, and notwithstanding the fact that you kneAv you 
had no authority from the union to make any such promise on its be- 
half? 

Mr. Rand. I was sincere. Senator. 

Senator Ervin. How" can you call that sincere ? 

Mr. Rand. I didn't say that I would pay his notes. Senator. 

Senator Ervin. Well he told you his problem of bank notes, didn't 
he, at the bank ? 

Mr. Rand. It was in a general sort of way, and he didn't tell me 
his personal business whatsoever, and he explained to me that he 
had some problems as a result 

Senator Ervin. Haven't you stated 4 or 5 times that he told you 
that he had some problems, and he had to carry out this contract with 
the Kohler Co. because he had some obligations at the bank? Haven't 
you made that statement. 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir, I have, sir. 

Senator Er\'in. So he made a very specific statement as to what his 
problems were, didn't he ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir, in a general way, and he didn't tell me 

Senator Ervin. And you told him if he didn't undertake to un- 
load the clay, that you would try to help him Avith his problem? 

Mr. Rand. No, I said this, Senator: I said that was a decision that 
he had to make, and that if he decided that he had to follow through 
and carry out his obligations there w^as nothing that I. could do 
about it. 

Senator Ervin. Haven't you stated 4 or 5 times that you told him 
that you would try to help him in solving his problems ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9229 

Mr. Eand. Oh, yes. 

Senator Ervin. Then you tell us now that you didn't tell him that, 
but you told Mm he would have to work it out for himself. 

Mr. Eand. No, I think you mismiderstand me, Senator. Maybe I 
am misunderstanding you. I don't know, but it seems to me that what 
I am testifying here to is the fact that we did have this discussion 
relative to his problems. Following this discussion I said, "Well, 
Mr. Buteyn, that is a decision you will have to make. I can't do 
anything about it. If you decide to unload this clay, fine. If you do 
otherwise, there is nothing I can do about it." 

Senator Ervin. But you had told him previous to that you would 
try to assist him in his problems ? 

Mr. Rand. In our general discussions. 

Senator Ervin. And the only assistance that it appeared to you, 
the only assistance he needed, was financial assistance, and that you 
knew that you were unable to assist him financially, and were auth- 
orized by the union to pledge its financial assistance. You call this 
sincerity ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I went further than that in our discussions, and 
at least it was my oj^inion at that time that maybe through the help 
of the union, that we could assist him in getting other business to 
offset the loss. 

Obviously he would be involved in a loss if he had refused to un- 
load this boat, and it was a problem, and we recognized that problem, 
Senator, because we had problems. 

Senator Ervin. Did you tell him that if he wouldn't perform this 
undertaking that you Avould try to or the union would try to get him 
other business ? 

Mr. Rand. Not in those words ; no. 

Senator Ervin. Well, you intended him to imagine that. In other 
words, I am trying to find out what impression you intended to 
make on his mind when you asked him not to cross the picket line or 
rather not to come and unload the clay, and you said that you would 
assist him with the problems that he had, which he had assured you 
were financial problems. 

Mr. Rand. Senator, I implied at that time that I would be as help- 
ful as I could in trying to assist him in his problems. I had nothing 
specific in mind. 

Senator Ervin. You were making a general statement like the poli- 
tician who said, "I believe in the greatest liberty to the greatest number 
and I will do what I can to achieve it," something like that ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, Senator, 

Senator Curtis. Now, the Buteyn Co. were not part of the Kohler 
Co., were they? 

Mr. Rand. No ; not to my knowledge. 

Senator Curtis. They had no labor difficulty with their employees 
that you know of, did they ? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't think so, other than the fact that it is testi- 
fied here this morning that they switched drivers or some such thing. 
I believe that was the testimony, and I don't know if that implied 
difficulty. 

Senator Curtis. But they weren't parties to the union's contest with 
Kohler Co., were they ? 

21243— 58— pt. 23 6 



9230 EMPROPEIR ACTTVITIEiS EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand. Not to my knowledge. 

Senator Curtis. No, and now, as a matter of fact, this thing went to 
court, didn't it? 

Mr. Kand. This particular case went to court. AVhat are you re- 
ferring to ? 

Senator Curits. This action against the Buteyn Co. 

(Witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. I have no knowledge of that offhand. 

Senator Curits. Wiiat I mean, there was an action brought against 
the union. I have here a decree from the Seventh Circuit of the 
United States Court of Appeals, where the National Labor Relations 
Board is petitioner, and local 833 and others are the respondents : 

It is hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the respondents, Local 833, 
International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft, and Agricultural Implement 
Workers of America, UAW-CIO, and International Union, United Automobile, 
Aircraft, and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW-CIO, shall : 

1. Cease and desist from, a, picketing Buteyn Construction Co., city of Mil- 
waTikee, Cheyenne Northwestern Railway Co., or any other employer or person 
using, selling, handling, transporting, or otherwise dealing in the products of or 
for Kohler Co., or doing business with Kohler Co. (except for primary picketing 
at Kohler Co. premises) where an object thereof is to force or require Paper 
Makers Importing Co., Inc., Himmill & Gillespie, Inc., Buteyn Construction Co., 
city of Milwaukee, Wis., Cheyenne Northwestern Railway Co., or any other 
employee or person, to cease using, selling, handling, transporting, or otherwise 
dealing in the products of or for Kohler Co., or to cease doing business with 
Kohler Co., or with any other employer. 

It mentions the using of threats and the like. 

Mr. Chairman, I ask that this decree be received and made an 
exhibit. 

The Chairman. It will be made exhibit No. 62. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 62" for reference, 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Rauh. That decree is also a part of the exhibit that we have 
filed. 

Senator Curtis. It is already in there ? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes ; but it doesn't matter to us, if it can go in twice. 

The Chairman. Since it is not going to be printed, it will be one 
more paper to take care of, and it won't encumber the record. 

Mr. Rauh. May I just point out to complete this, sir, that this doc- 
ument there is based on a stipulation between the union and the 
NLRB, and the other parties which contains this sentence : 

This stipulation contains the entire agreement between the parties, there 
being no agreement of any kind, verbal or otherwise, which varies, alters, or adds 
to this stipulation, and nothing herein shall be construed as an admission that 
respondents or any of them violated the provisions of the National Labor Rela- 
tions Act, as amended, nor shall the stipulation be admissible in any other 
proceedings. 

Although, I guess, it has been put in evidence in this proceedings. 

Senator Curtis. The decree doesn't say anythuig about the stipu- 
lation. 

The Chairman. It is now exhibit 62. 

The committee will stand in recess until the members can go to the 
Chamber and vote, and then return. We will try to resume in 15 
minutes. 

(Brief recess.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9231 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Member present at the convening of the session was: Senator 
McClellan.) 

The Chairman. At this time the connnittee will recess until 10 
o'clock in the morning. 

( Wliereupon, at 4 : 35 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 
10 a. m., Thursday, March 13, 1958.) 

(Member present at the taking of the recess was: Senator 
McClellan.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



THURSDAY, MARCH 13, 1958 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN THE Labor or Management Field, 

Washington^ D. G. 

The select committee met at 10 :23 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 221, agreed to January 29, 1958, in the Caucus Room, Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present : Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Senator 
Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York; Senator Sam J. Ervin, Jr., 
Democrat, North Carolina; Senator Barry Goldwater, Republican, 
Arizona ; Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota ; Senator 
Carl T. Curtis, Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Jerome S. Adler- 
man, assistant chief counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; 
Ruth Yomig Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session 
were : Senators McClellan and Mundt and Gold water.) 

The Chairman. Mr. Rand, come forward, please. 

TESTIMONY OF DONALD RAND— ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
JOSEPH L. RAUH, JR.— RESUMED 

The Chairman. All right, Mr, Kennedy, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Rand, we were talking about the unloading of 
the clay boat, July 5, 1955. We had established that you were down 
there at about 7:30 or 7 o'clock in the morning, that the Buteyns 
brought their crane and other equipment down, that you spoke to the 
drivers, requesting that they not go through, and that you then had 
some conversation with the Buteyns themselves. I think that is about 
as far as we had gone yesterday, is that correct ? 

Mr. Rand. I think so. I believe we ended up when one of the Sena- 
tors brought up the question of whether or not the clay boat incident 
had been part of some legal matter. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you remain down at the clay boat the rest of the 
day? 

Mr. Rand. No, I didn't, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. After you had the conversation with the Buteyns, 
what did you do ? 

9233 



9234 IMPROPER ACTTVmES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand. Well, I don't remember the exact chronology of events 
that took place, but to the best of my memory, I left that area at that 
time and went back to my oflSce. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat time would that be ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, shortly after the conversation that I had with Mr. 
Buteyn. 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be about 8 : 30 or so ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I believe it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Nine o'clock or 8 : 30 ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I believe it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people were down at the dock at that 
time, approximately ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe that there may have been 100 people or so in 
the general vicinity. That is along by the armory there, along 
Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you request anybody to come down to the dock ? 

Mr. Rand. Do you mean in the morning, Mr. Kennedy ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, the day before. Had you requested anybody 
to go down to the dock ? 

Mr. Rand. No. The only person that I even discussed this matter 
with was an international representative, Raymond Majerus. I had 
discussed with him the possibility that I might go down to the area 
and discuss the problem with the truckdrivers. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Had you requested anybody to come down to the 
dock? 

Mr. Rand. I believe I might have requested that Ray come down 
there, or words to that effect. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell anybody else, any of the members of 
local 833 ? 

Mr. Rand. No, It didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not tell them to come down to the dock and 
act as pickets ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

(At this point. Senator Curtis entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Are you sure of that? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I am positive of that. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about the morning of July 5, after you went 
back to your office, did you try to get people to come down to the 
dock then ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't take any steps to get people down to the 
dock? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you planned to come back to the dock yourself? 

Mr. Rand. Yes; I did, 

Mr. Kennedy. After a'ou went to your office ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlint did you do then? You came back to the dock 
later on ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. "V^Tiat time was that? 

Mr. Rand. T am not sure of the time; sometime in the morning; 
maybe 11 o'clock. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why had you come back ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9235 

Mr. Rand. Well, I had heard from various people who had come 
into the office that there was an increasing number of people in the 
general vicinity and I went down there out of curiosity to find out what 
was going on. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. How many people were there when you finally got 
back? 

Mr. E.AND. It is a little difficult to estimate the number of people, 
because this is quite a long while ago. I would estimate that there 
must have been four or five hundred men, women, and children in the 
general area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there pickets, representatives of the local No. 
833 picketing the area at that time ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir ; not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, were there people walking in a circle acting 
as pickets ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were not ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you arranged for people to go down there and 
walk in a circle ? 

Mr. Rand. No ; I had not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you arranged for anyone to go down and block 
the entrances ? 

Mr. Rand. No; I hadn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had anybody to your knowledge, any official of 
local No. 833 or the UAW, arranged for people to go down there and 
act as pickets ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, do you know ? 

Mr. Rand. To my knowledge, I am almost positive that nobody 
from the local union had made such an arrangement. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any idea that such arrangements were 
made? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir ; I do not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then all of these people appeared down there with- 
out any instructions or orders from any official of local No. 833 ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, Mr. Kennedy, there were many people in the area. 
They were not strikers or Kohler workers as such. Just who they 
were, I don't know. There were men and women and children of 
all descriptions there. 

(At this point, Senator Ervin entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. I am trying to find out regarding 833 and the UAW. 
None of the representatives of that union at the dock, on this date, 
had been instructed to go down there by any representative of local 
833? 

Mr. Rand. I am sure they had not been instructed to go there by 
local 833. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went back again at 11 o'clock? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Or 11: 30? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did you remain down there at that time ? 

Mr. Rand. I may have stayed down there in the neighborhood of, 
I would say, less than an hour. 



9236 IMPROPEIR ACTR^ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people were there at that time? 

Mr. Hand. As I stated, I believe there were more than four or five 
hundred men, women, and children. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVhat did you do when you were there ? 

Mr. Rand. As I recall it, this is the time at which the automobile 
which Mr. Biever was riding in arrived on the scene. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you do? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I saw the people run over to the car and I heard 
somebody say, "There is Biever again." 

I had known, of course, that Mr. Biever had quite a reputation, 
and wasn't too well liked by the people. As a matter of fact, he had 
been convicted of running over one of the })ickets. I don't tliink that 
has been mentioned here yet. 

I realized that with the people running up to tliis car, tli;>r sonu*- 
thing might happen. I inmiediately walked over to the car and I 
talked to a detective. I didn't know he was a detective. I believe 
he was in plain clothes. I didn't know who he was. I said some- 
thing to the efl'ect that, "Why do you bring Biever down here ? Are 
you people trying to start a riot?" 

With that, he eventually was able to move the car and back the car 
up and get out of there. 

(At this point. Senator Mundt Avithdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all you said ? 

Mr. Rand. That is all. I believe so ; yes, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they trying to get into the dock area at that 
time ? 

Mr. Rand. No. This w^as up at the top of Pennsylvania Avenue, 
which is — I would estimate that this must be 200 yards from the area. 
I don't believe that they had any intentions of going with that car into 
the dock area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you swear at the police officer and tell him to 
get Biever out of there ? 

Mr. Rand. I might have, in the throes of the emotions that existed 
in that crowd, swore at him, merely as a means of expression. I had 
nothing against this man. I didn't know him. But I realized that 
Mr. Biever being there, that our people disliked him, and I think they 
have a right to dislike him with his reputation. I realize that Mr. 
Biever could spell trouble. I thought that it was ridiculous, I 
thought it was very stupid of anybody to bring Mr. Biever of all 
people into that crowd. They drove right down into the middle of 
the crowd, and the people swarmed over the crowd. I pushed my 
way through and spoke to the detective. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Biever left ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. The car containing Mr. Biever left. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you take any positive action at that time, when 
there were four or five hundred people who were aroused, to try to 
get those people to go home ? 

Mr. Rand. As an individual ? 

Mr. KiiNNEDY. As an individual or as a representative of the 
UAW? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I talked to a lot of people. I did not know too 
many there. I was not too well known. I went further than that. 
I did run into a representative of the Sheboygan labor organizations 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9237 

there in the city, and I discussed the matter with him. I suggested to 
him that he ought to use whatever authority he had, and if he knew 
any of the people, that he ought to advise them that they ought to go 
home and they ought to leave that area. I did my best, with the 
people I knew. I spoke to them and urged them that they ought to 
leave that area, this was something that didn't represent an advantage 
to the union, and if anything it would be a reflection upon our union, 
and the people there would be considered as being part of the union, 
and we ought not to have anybody there if at all possible. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Did you take the action to get the people to go home ? 

Mr. Rand. I did personally. I talked to some people. 

Mr. I\JENNEDr. Did you make a speech and tell the people to go 
home ? 

Mr. Rand. No; I didn't make a speech. I believe Mr. Schuette 
made a speech. 

Mr. Kennedy. As an international representative of the UAW, did 
you tell the people from the UAW to go home ? 

Mr. Rand. As an individual, I did. I went to as many people as I 
knew, Mr. Kennedy. I didn't get up and make a speech. I don't 
think those people hardly knew me, the general people who were 
there, because I don't think they were union people in the sense that 
they were Kohler workers. But Emil Schuette, who was a repre- 
sentative of the labor organizations, did speak to the people. 

I urged that he talk to them. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wlio were some of the people that you told to go 
home? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I discussed the matter with Allen Grasskamp, the 
president of the local union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell Allen Grasskamp to go home ? 

Mr. Rand. No; I suggested that Allen being the president of the 
local union, that he ought to talk to as many people as lie knew. He 
said "Don, there are darn few people down here. I will talk to the 
people." 

I said, "If there are any people, you ought to immediately urge our 
people if at all possible to leave that area." 

Mr. Kennedy. Who else did you talk to ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't remember any particular person. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tell us one person that you talked to and told to 
go home. 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't remember any names, Mr. Kennedy. 

This is quite some time ago. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just asking for one person's name that you told 
to go home. 

Mr. Rand. One person? 

I don't know. I wouldn't — I knew very few names, Mr. Kennedy, 
other than the stewards and the bargaining committee, the strike com- 
mittee members. I didn't know people by their names. I knew them 
by their faces, as strikers, but I didn't know their actual names. There 
were hundreds of people there. I did know Emil Schuette, and that 
is the person whom I spoke to. 

The Chairman. You told Buteyn to go home, didn't you ? 

You remember that. 

Mr. Rand. I requested, Senator, that 



9238 IMPROPEK ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You told Buteyn then to get out of there, didn't 
you ^ 

Mr. Rand, No, I didn't. I suggested that he cooperate. 

The Chairman. Do you deny that you told them to get away from 
there ? 

Mr. Rand. I suggested, Senator, that Mr. Buteyn ought to cooperate 
with us, and not unload the crane or go through our picket lines. 

The Chairman. Do you know about the vandalism that went on 
there on those trucks ? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't, sir. I know about it now. 

The Chairman. You know about it now ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

The Cpiairman. Did you see any of it happening ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

The Chairman. Did you order it done ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

The Chairman. Did you order them not to do it ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

The Chairman. All right. Senator Goldwater? 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Rand, you are telling us that the union 
had nothing to do with this clay-boat strike, that you as an inter- 
national representative and others had nothing to do with the plans 
for it. Are you trying to tell us that ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. Well, I would like to refer to the 

Senator Goldwater. No; I would like you to answer me. I don't 
want you to refer to anything. Just tell me "Yes" or "No." 

Mr. Rand. What is your question, Senator ? 

Senator Goldwater. Are you trying to tell us that the union had 
nothing to do with the plans involving the clay boat ? 

Mr. Rand. Involving the clay boat ? 

Senator Goldwater, That is right. 

Mr. Rand, It has already been testified that we had these boats 
out there, I have already testified that I talked to the truckdrivers. 
Wlien you say involving the clay boat, I don't exactly understand 
what you mean. 

Senator Goldwater. All right. I will put it another way. Are 
you trying to tell us that you had nothing to do with the incident at 
the clay boat ? 

Mr. Rand. I beg your pardon ? That I had 

Senator Goldwater. Am I speaking loud enough ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, but I don't understand your question. Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, let me see if I can put it some other way. 
Are you trying to say that you were in no way involved in the plans 
that set up the incident at the clay boat? 

Mr. Rand. That I was in no way involved in setting up the plans? 

Senator Goldwater. That is right. You can say Yes" or "No" 
to that, 

Mr. Rand. I didn't set up tlie incident at the clay boat. Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Did you have anything to do with it ? 

]Mr. Rand. With the incident at the clay boat ? 

Senator Goldwater. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 



1 



IMPROPER ACTrVTTIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9239 

Senator Goldwater. Did the union ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. That is a very strange thing, Mr. Rand. I 
am getting a little tired of you international representatives who are 
supposed to know something about what is going on in your union, 
sitting here under oath and telling us that you are innocent, that you 
don't know anything about this strike, that you had nothmg to do 
with it. Let me read you something from the CIO Broadcast Sta- 
tion WHBL, July 11. 

This was after the clay-boat incident. I am quoting : 

This is Bob Treiier with today's Kohler strike report and some very good 
news. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I think I should caution Mr. Rauh 
again. He has been pretty good for a couple of days, but three times 
this morning he has been whispering to the witness. Under our 
rules, the counsel is there only to respond to inquiries from his client. 

Mr. Rauh, you know that. 

I understand that inclination to whisper something to him is there, 
but under the rule of the committee, you are to advise him only when 
he solicits it and not volunteer anything. 

The Chairman. The Chair will make a ruling on that. The 
counsel can advise his client any time with respect to his legal ri^^hts. 

Generally the client inquires. But a counsel is entitled to advise 
his client as to his legal rights. If I find counsel is simply coaching 
a witness and telling him how to testify, I would hold that strictly 
in violation of the rules of this committee and take appropriate 
action. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, Senator Goldwater asked the witness 
a question. He asked if he could read something. Senator Gold- 
water did not permit him to, I was advising him that his legal right 
was to appeal to you for the privilege of reading the document which 
Senator Goldwater had refused him the privilege. I have been try- 
ing to get it clear with him how you do this. I think the words I 
have been trying to tell him were appeal to the chairman for the right 
to read this document. That was the sole conversation. 

The Chairman, That would be appropriate legal advice. Proceed. 

Mr. Rand. May I read this ? 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, I am in the middle of reading 
something here. I think Mr. Rand can wait. I am not objecting to 
his reading that, but I want him to read it at the proper time. 

Mr. Rand. Why don't you go ahead, Senator, and I will wait. 

The Chairman. Just one moment. You were interrupted by Sen- 
ator Mundt to make an objection to counsel's behavior, and the Chair 
tried to rule on it. You have the floor. You may proceed. 

Senator Mundt. Behavior might be a strong term, Mr. Chairman. 
I was trying to give him a friendly suggestion. 

The Chairman. I will soften it down to suggest to his client. Now 
we have it softened up. 

Senator Goldwater. Now I will start over again. 

This is Bob Treuer with today's Kohler strike report and some very good 
news. The Fossum, carrying clay for the Kohler Co., has been chased out of 
Wisconsin waters by the pressure of public opinion and the solidarity of labor. 



9240 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES UN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand, do you still want to tell us that the union had nothing 
to do with the plans for preventing the unloading of that clay boat? 

Mr. Rand. I would like to read, if I may. Senator, from the 

The Chairman. Answer the question. 

Senator Goldwater. Let me finish with what I have, and I will be 
happy to sit and listen to what you have. 

Mr. Rand. As I understand your question, Senator, you asked me 
whether or not the union had any plans involving this matter. 

Senator Goldwater. No. I asked you : In view of the fact that your 
own radio announcer announced a few days after this incident the 
success of the pressure of public opinion and the solidarity of labor, 
your own man said that, do you still want to sit there and tell us 
that the union had nothing to do with the plans for that incident? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't believe the miion did have any plans for the 
incident. 

Senator Goldwater. Let me read you something else, then. This is 
from the same broadcast, and I will quote : 

Kitzman announced that Kohlei* local 833 will put up a picket line at any and 
every dock, pier, and port where boats loaded with hot clay for the Kohler 
pigeons make an attempt to unload their unwanted cargo. 

Do you still want to say that the union had no part in the plans for 
preventing the unloading of the clay boat ? 

Mr. Rand. Whether the union had anv plans for unloading the clay 
boat ? 

Senator Goldwater. Any part in the plans for unloading the clay 
boat. 

Mr. Rand. You had said before the incident, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, let's call it the incident, then, if you 
want to stick to that word. 

Mr. Rand. No, the miion had no plans for the incident. 

Senator Goldwater. Did the union have any part in the plans to 
prevent the unloading of the clay boat ? 

Mr. Rand. No, other than the fact that we hoped that the teamsters 
wouldn't cross our picket line at the Kohler Village. 

Senator Goldwaiter. Was there a meeting held at any time during 
which the coming unloading or attempted unloading of the clay boat 
was discussed ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe. Senator, that we had discussed the clay boats 
on many occasions. 

Senator Goldwater. And no union members were told to be at the 
clay boat to prevent the unloading ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe so. 

Senator Goldwater. Can you say, categorically, that they weren't 
or were? 

Mr. Rand. To the best of my knowledge, they weren't, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. This is a very strange pattern. You are an 
international representative, supposed to know something about what 
is going on in your union. I think you know a lot more tlian you are 
telling. Is Charles Schultz still the State director of the CIO in 
Wisconsin ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; I think he is. Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, he was at the time. If I am not mis- 
taken, and the copies of the press are coming to me in the mail now, 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IINT THE LABOR FIELD 9241 

the press in Milwaukee carried a threat of Charles Schultz that he 
would call a city wide strike if the clay boat attempted to unload in Mil- 
waukee. Do you recall that ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't think you have it exactly correct. I think the 
statement was to the effect that he included the whole State of Wis- 
consin. 

Senator Goldwater. That he would call a general strike of the whole 
State? 

Mr. Rand. Of the whole State. That is what he said. 

Senator Goldwater. Did you know anything about that statement 
before it was made ? 

Mr. Rand. I did not ; no, Senator. I would have been opposed to 
it if I had had the opportunity to have an opinion. 

Senator Goldwater. Let me ask you one more question. Did the 
union have a man on the Fossmn from Detroit on into Milwaukee, the 
UAW? 

Mr. Rand. Not to my knowledge ; no, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Have you ever heard that story ? 

Mr. Rand. No ; I haven't. 

Senator Goldwater. I have no evidence at the moment to go on, 
so I will not press it. But the information that has reached me, and 
it is supposed to be substantiated by press statements, is to the effect 
that the union had a man on that boat all the Avay from Detroit to 
where it was to be unloaded. 

Mr. Chairman, because I do not have the newspaper evidence at 
the moment, I am going to refrain from questioning on Mr. Scliultz 
further. But it may develop that it will be necessary to request that 
Mr. Schultz be subpenaed to appear here as a witness, because I am 
convinced that these incidents, these riots, were planned by the union 
and executed by the union, in spite of what the witness says. If we 
have to drag every man in Wisconsin down here to prove it, I think 
we ought to do it. 

Mr. Rand. Mr. Chairman, may I read this ? 

Senator Goldwater. Now you can read that. 

The Chairman. The Chair would make this observation. I have 
repeatedly stated that a subpena will be isued for any witness that 
any member of the committee desires to have here. I don't think we 
will need all of the people of Wisconsin. If so, we are going to have 
to get an increase in appropriations. But I am ready to issue a sub- 
pena for any witness that any member of this committee wants. I 
share the view expressed. I am not convinced that this big union and 
all of its international representatives are so innocent in this thing, 
but I am trying simply to get the facts and to get the proof. The wit- 
ness has some kind of a statement there. 

What did you have in mind ? 

Had you finished. Senator ? 

Senator Goldwater. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. I would like to refer to the examiner's findings; Mr. 
George Downing. 

The Chairman. We have the examiner's findings on file. 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I wish to refer to page 52, Senator. 

The Chairman. You may read briefly from it. 



9242 EMPROPBR AcrrvTriES in the labor field 

Mr. Rand. He stated as follows : 

By an amended answer, respondent also charged the local and international 
union and their oflScers, agents, and members with engaging in a conspiracy re- 
garding the clay-boat incident on July 5, 19J55, with violent and unlawful conduct 
in carrying out said conspiracy and with abusing the processes of the board in 
that connection. Respondent made no reference to that defense, either in brief 
or in oral argument, and has, presumably, abandoned it. In any case, the 
record fails to establish it. 

I thought that we ought to put that into the record, because it ob- 
viously represents the opinion of Mr. Downing as it relates to this 
problem. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. The opinion and the findings of the examiner have 
their weight. This committee might find otherwise than the exam- 
iner. 

Senator Mimdt. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Rand, did you have any conversations with 
Mayor Ploetz on the day of what you call the clay-boat incident ? By 
the way, calling what took place there as an incident is a good deal like 
calling the Korean war the Korean incident, in my opinion. It 
sounds like a riot when you smash up the machinery. But I will not 
quarrel about the language, so we will use 3'our term. 

Mr. Rand. Senator, I don't think you can compare the clay-boat 
incident with the Korean war. I thinlv that is sort of ridiculous. 

Senator Mundt. I grant that. But I think the use of terminology, 
the description is comparable. I don't think you can describe the 
Korean war is an incident. I think it was a war. And I think this 
was a riot. You can call it an incident, or you can stay by your origi- 
nal description, or, if not yours, it is Mr. Treuer's, the UAW naval 
regatta, where thev sent some boats out to meet the ship. I am not 
going to quarrel about whether it was an incident, a naA'j'^, or a riot. 
We know the day we are talking about, don't we ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; the day. 

Senator Mundt. On this day, did you have a conversation with 
Mayor Ploetz ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe I did. 

Senator Mundt. You ought to know that. 

Mr. Rand. I don't think so, Senator. I talked to a lot of people 
down there. I may have spoken to him, maybe in a casual fashion. 

Senator Mundt. There would be nothing wrong with talking to the" 
mayor. What I am trying to find out from you under oath is whether 
you put in his mind this idea that before the trucks were to be removed 
from Pennsylvania Avenue he was to make a statement or a promise 
that they would never again unload a clay boat. 

Mr. Rand. No, sir ; I did not. 

Senator Mundt. You had nothing to do with that whatsoever? 

Mr. Rand. Nothing whatsoever. 

Senator Mundt. You were in the hearing room yesterday, were you 
not? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; I was. 

Senator Mundt. You heard Mr. Cornelius Buteyn testify, better 
known as Happy, I believe ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 



IMPBOPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9243 

Senator Mundt. He testified that you said to him — well, first let me 
ask you : You were there in the evening, were you not ? You had been 
away from the scene of the incident and back to the scene at the dock 
during the day, but you were there at the conclusion, were you not ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I was. 

Senator Mundt. He testified that you said to him. No. 1 : 

We are going to pull out all the stops to prevent you from moving this clay. 

Did he say that ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe he testified to that effect. He didn't tes- 
tify to that effect, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. I think he did. If it were not him, then it was 
Peter. It was one of them. But let's forget whether he testified to it. 
Let me ask you the question, so we will not have to go through the 
record. We will waive that point, Mr. Rand. Let me ask you this 
question. Counsel tells me he did testify. 

Mr. Rand. No, not exactly the way you put it. Senator, 

Senator Mundt. Well, maybe you would like to read it to me. 

Mr. Rand. It is on page 2064. 

Senator Mundt. Read what he said. 

Mr. Rand (reading) : 

Mr. Kennedy. Who said that to you? 
Answer. Don Rand and Ed Kalupa. 

Senator Mundt. Did Don Rand and Ed Kalupa say that ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Neither one of you said it ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know whether either one of us said it. I know 
I didn't say it. 

Senator Mundt. Did Ed Kalupa say it in your presence ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know. Senator. He may have. 

(At this point, the following members were present : Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Ervin, Mundt, Curtis, and Goldwater.) 

Senator Mundt. You were there ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, Senator, there were 

Senator Mundt. He testified that the two of you said it and I am 
asking whether Ed Kapula said it in your presence or in your hear- 
ing, or did you hear him say it ? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't remember hearing him say it and he may 
have said it, and I don't know. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, on this point you say that your 
memory is not positive, and he may have said it and he may not have 
said it ? 

Mr. Rand. He may have said it. 

Senator Mundt. You didn't say it ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe so. 

Senator Mundt. He also testified that you called him — I don't ex- 
actly have the language— later on in the day you called him a scab 
with a considerable number of adjectives in front of it, and one was 
"scummy." 

This is the sworn testimony of Happjr Buteyn. Mr. Buteyn quoted 
you as saying, "You're nothing but a dirty, filthy, scummy scab." 

I ask you under oath, did you say it ? 

Mr. Rand. No, I didn't say that. Senator. 



9244 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THDE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. You are positive? 

Mr. Rand. I am quite positive. That isn't my language. 

Senator Mundt. 1 want you to be positive because this is going to 
be tlie first time in these hearings when I am going to have to request 
the chairman to send a transcript of these hearings to the Attorney 
General to see who is perjuring himself, because obviously if Mr. 
Buteyn said you say it, and you say you didn't say it, and you can 
advise with counsel on this, but I think he will agree with you, some- 
one is perjuring himself. 

Mr. Rand. I don't have to ask my counsel about this. I don't be- 
lieve that I said that. Senator. I mean that honestly. 

Senator Mundt. That isn't the question. I want you to be able to 
tell me. Are you able to say categorically "I did not say it," because he 
categorically said you did? 

Mr. Rand. Anything that happened at that time, it would be most 
difficult for any individual to remember exactly. I don't believe that 
I said that. 

Senator Mundt. That isn't the question. Are you able to testify 
categorically to the effect that you did not say it ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe, Senator, that I said that at that time. 

Senator Mundt. I am not asking you that, and you said that, and 
I will grant you, and you said that three times. 

Mr. Rand. I may have said a lot of things, but I don't remember 
them. 

Senator Mundt. My question to you, sir, is this : Are you able to 
testify categorically that you did not say it? 

Mr. Rand. Senator, I would answer your question this way : I don't 
believe that I said that. 

Senator Mundt. You answered that four times. 

Mr. Rand. Many things happened, and I can't remember that. 

Senator Mundt. I think the witness should be directed to answer 
the question. 

Mr. Rand. I certainly want to answer your questions. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. And I will repeat it for the final time and call for 
a hearing from the Chair. 

Mr. Rand. I have told you that I don't believe that I said that, and 
I mean that honestly. 

Senator Mundt. That has nothing to do with it. 

Mr. Rand. That has nothing to do with it ? 

Senator Mundt. That was my question. 

Mr. Rand. Maybe I misunderstand you. 

Senator Mundt. Mj^ question is : Are you able to say under oath, 
categoricallj", that j^ou did not say that? 

The Chairman. That you can answer, "yes" or "no." 

Mr. Rand. I cannot say "yes" or "no" to that. I may have, I don't 
know, I may have said that. 

The Chairman. That isn't the question now. The way this question 
is posed is this : Are you able to say, categorically, "No" that you did 
not say that? 

Now you can say that you did or you did not. 

Mr. Rand. No, sir; Senator. 

The Chairman. You say you don't remember saying it ? 

Mr. Rand. I can't say it. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrriBS EST THE LABOR FIELD 9245 

The Chairman. Yon doT-t't bolieve you said it and so you are not 
able to say categorically, "No, I didn't say it." Am I right? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Senator Mundt. Now this is what I have been trying to get from 
you all of the way through, and I want to ask you directly and have 
the direct answer. 

Mr. Rand. I didn't know what you were trying to get at. 

Senator Mundt. Now you know. Are you able, categorically, to 
say that you did not say to Mr. Buteyn, "You are nothing but a dirty, 
filthy, scummy scab" ? 

Say "Yes" or "No" to that question and then you can make any 
explanation. 

The Chairman. That is the same question. 

Mr. Rand. I think it is, and haven't I already answered that ? 

Senator Mundt. I am not sure. Do you understand the question? 
And I am asking you to make sure I get an answer. 

The Chairman. The witness will answer. 

Mr. Rand. No, I cannot answer whether, as you put it — in the man- 
ner in which you have put it. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. That is what I want to find out, because Mr. 
Buteyn was very specific and categorical about his statement. 

What is your present position with the UAW, Mr. Rand ? 

Mr. Rand. I am tlie administrative assistant to the secretary- 
treasurer, Mr. Emil Mazey, of the UAW. 

Senator Mundt. At the time the strike started, however, you were 
international representative ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, at the time the strike started I was with the skilled 
trades department, and then 

Senator Mundt. "Wlien were you elevated to your present position ? 

Mr. Rand. AVell, shortly after our convention I was assigned to the 
region 1 staff, in the city of Detroit; then I was assigned to the Kohler 
boycott program ; and then I believe I was appointed to the adminis- 
trative assistant post sometime in October of 1956. 

Senator Mundt. In all events, there was nothing in any of your 
conduct at Sheboygan which prevent Mr. Mazey from appointing you 
as his administrative assistant. 

This was after you had been there, and after the so-called clay boat 
incident, and after you had been on the scene at Sheboygan. You 
were subsequently appointed to your present position? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. For a while, and maybe now, but for a while you 
were in charge of boycott activities; is that right? 

Mr. Rand. I still am. 

Senator Mundt. You still are? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. And I presume that some of your representatives 
niake some kind of inducements or representations to buildeis and 
distributiors and others in an attempt to get them to stop using Kohler 
fixtures; is that right? 

Mr. Rand. Well, you covered a lot of territory. Senator, and I think 
the answer is "Yes." 

21243— 58— pt. 23 7 



9246 IMPROPEIR ACTR-ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. And what kind of inducements or representations 
do yon make? 

Mr. I\AN». I (]o)i't know whether the word "inducement" is the cor- 
rect word to use in tliat re«^ard. I would say 

Senator Mundt. I was trying to avoid the use of the word "thj-eat,'' 
but I am 

Mr. Raxd. I don't insist that you use that. 

Senator Mundt. I will volunteer it. 

Mr. Kand. Well, let us say that the program of the boycott is one 
of telling the story of the Kohler strike, and to urge people not to buy 
Kohler products. 

Senator Mundt. And what tactics or devices or methods or induce- 
ments or threats or representations do you make to try to achieve that 
result ? 

Mr. Rand. That would take me a long while to answer that question, 
Senator. To my knowledge, we don't use any threats, and we don't 
use inducements, but we do tell the story of the Kohler strike, and 
urge peo})le not to purchase products which are made by the Kohler 
Co^, of Kohler, Wis. 

Senator Mundt. By the printed word, or do you tell that verbally ? 

Mr. Rand. Oh, yes; we do. 

Senator Mundt. Or any other way? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. How else? 

Mr. Rand. Well, let me try to answer your question, and you ask a 
series, and it is a little bit difficult for me. Senator. As you well 
know, we have various printed materials dealing with the issue in- 
volved in the strike, the hardships of the people. 

Senator Mundt. You don't have to describe all of them to me, and 
I am sure that you have it. 

Mr. Rand. I think that you ought to have the benefit of what the 
Kohler strike is all about. You asked INIr. Conger to tell about his 
activities in 1934, and I would like to tell about mine in 1954. 

Senator Mundt. It has been told a great many times and I think we 
know Avhat the strike is about, but if you want to submit some of youi" 
literature as exhibits, I think that would be pei'fectly proper. 

Mr. Rand. It is an unusual strike and an miusual company, Sena- 
tor, and actual!}' this is a sordid story that shouldn't have to be told 
because as the examiner said in the record, that this company was 
bargaining not to reach, but to aA'^oid, an agreement. 

That is the cause of our boycott and all of the subsequent events, 
that this company, as he said, bargained to avoid, and not to reach, an 
agreement with this union. 

Senator Mundt. I presume that is part of the story that you tell 
in the printed word. 

Mr. Rand. We certainly have told it. 

Senator Mundt. And I presume you tell that story verbally? 

Mr. Rand. And I am trying to tell it to all of the people within 
listening voice, that this company is an unfair company and should be 
dealt with accordingly. 

Senator Mundt. What other means do j^ou use besides telling that 
story verbally and putting it in print? Is that the extent of the bo}^- 
cott activities? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9247 

Mr. Raxd. Basically, that is it. We talk to as many people as we 
can. 

Senator Muxdt. That is verbally. 

Mr. Rand. And we have materials. 

Senator Mundt. You distribute literature ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes; we do distribute it to as many peojDle as possible. 

Senator Mundt. Now you do it by printed word and you do it by 
verbal representations, and are there any other methods that you 
employ ? 

Mr, Rand. Well, we have developed a program which you might 
say is one of advertising; that is, advertising the fact that the Kohler 
Co. is an unfair company. 

Senator Mundt. That would be a printed proposition, I presume ? 

Mr, Rand. I beg pardon ? 

Senator Mundt. That would be either printed or verbal ? 

Mr. Rand. Oh, yes. 

Senator Mundt. We have covered that, and I am asking you 
whether, beyond the printed word, and that can be a booklet and it 
could be an advertisement, and it could be anything that is in print, 
black or white or colors, and verbally, which can be talking to a man 
individually, or giving a speech, or giving a radio broadcast. 

Now, beyond that, beyond verbal and printed representations, do 
you try to do anything else to stop people from buying Kohler 
material ? 

Mr. Rand. As much as we possibly can. 

Senator Mundt. What else do you do ? 

Mr. Rand. As we have pointed out here, we use various types of 
advertising. 

Senator Mundt. That is printed. 

Mr. Rand. And direct approach to individuals and gi'oups. 

Senator Mundt. That is talking to them, and what else ? 

Mr, Rand. We use the various means of advertising. 

Senator Mundt. That is still printed. You print material and you 
say things and we know that, and now do you do anything else? 

Mr, Rand. Well, it is a little difficult for me to say. 

Senator INIuNiyr, You are the head of the whole movement, and you 
have an office and you have a lot of people working for you, and I am 
simply asking you the question : Do you do anvtliing else besides say 
things verbally, and in print, trying to induce people or convince them, 
if 3^ou don't like the word "induce'' to convince people not to buy Kohler 
products ? 

Mr, Rand. No ; I think that you covered quite well that we advertise, 
and that we do that in two methods, by printing and by discussions 
with those people. 

Senator Mundt, Your testimony under oath is that those are the 
only two things that are done under your direction as part of the 
boycott ? 

Mr, Rand. I don't know. You make it sound kind of strong now, 
Senator, Let me answer the question, I don't know exactly what 
you are driving at. 

Senator Mundt. May I ask the question again ? Is it your testimony 
under oath that under your direction the boycott activities do nothing 
else except utilize the printed word and the spoken word to induce 
people not to buy Kohler products? 



9248 IMPROPER ACTTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand. OfThand, I think that that is basically our program. 
That is the printed word and the spoken word. 

Now is there something else that you have in mind, Senator, and I 
would be glad to answer you ? 

Senator Mundt. I would like to ask this question once again, and 
it seems to me this witness is simply refusing to answer. 

The Chairman. That is a basic way. 

Senator Mundt. I have asked him a specific question, Is it his 
testimony under oath that the boycott activities under his direction do 
notliing else except use the printed word and the spoken word in an 
effort to convince people not to buy Kohler products ? That is a direct 
question, and he should answer it "Yes" or "No," and then make 
his explanation. Otherwise, these hearings are going to last until all 
of the people of Wisconsin get so old they can't come here to testify, 
if we dont' get any answers at all to start with. 

The Chairman. The witness has answered the question basically 
that those were the things that they did. 

Now what you should do — I will try to get this untangled — is, if 
there is anything else you can think of that you do other than the 
spoken word and the printed word, why say so. 

(The witness consulted with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kand. It escapes me for the moment, Mr. Chairman, and pos- 
sibly there are other things, and I don't know what the Senator is 
driving at. 

The Chairman. You don't have anything else in mind at the mo- 
ment that you do ? 

Mr. Eand. At the moment, certainly not, and I would be more than 
happy, and I would like to go through the whole boycott program and 
tell it to the Senator exactly what we do and all phases of the 
program. 

I think this is a fine opportunity for this committee to hear it, but 
it would take a great deal of time to go through it. 

Senator Mundt. It would not take very long if the chairman will 
insist on a "yes" or "no" answer to my question. 

The Chairman. Well, the witness has said basically those are the 
two things. Now you cannot think of anything else at the moment 
that you do ? 

Mr. Rand. Not offhand, I can't. Senator. 

The Chairman. Well, now, let us see. I think that I have 1 or 
2 things in mind that you possibly do, besides that. 

Senator Mundt. I know several, and he knows of several but he is 
trying to dodge that he does do them. 

Mr. Rand. I am trying to find out what the question means. 

The Chairman. It simply means, what else do you do to try to 
induce people not to buy Kohler products, other than by talking to 
them, using verbal conversations with them, and publishing and 
printing material and sending it out. What else do you do? 

(Witness consulted with counsel.) 

The Chairman. I think that you can think of something else. 

(Witness consulted with counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. I have checked with the legal adviser that I have here, 
and Ave feel, of course, that generally speaking that all of the activities 
of the boycott fall within the scope of the items mentioned by the 
Senator. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9249 

Now, if he is inferring that the picketing of various establishments 
does not come within that category, and that is an additional one, 
certainly. 

The Chairman. The Chair would hold that it does not come with- 
in that category. That is another activity in addition. 

Mr. Rand. We are not doing that any more, and I might say that 
in answer to the Senator's question, I assumed that that came into 
the area of 1 of the 2 things, an expression of the freedom of speech. 

The Chairman. Well, I think, of course, there is speech and printed 
matter and all of it, as you said, those are the two basic things. 

Mr. Rand. I am not trying to avoid the question and I sincerely 
believe that that comes witliin the category that the Senator men- 
tioned. 

The Chairman. The Chair holds it does not, and that is an addi- 
tional thing. Those two basic problems are involved, but then, in 
my judgment picketing would go beyond just a verbal conversation 
and also beyond the printed information or newscasts. 

Mr. Rand. AVe did that at the beginning of the boj^cott, but to my 
knowledge we don't do that now. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. And we got out one of them, and 
let us talk about that for a while since we got it out. 

That is verbally, and the printed word, and by use of picket lines. 
Have you ever personally either led a group of strikers in a picket 
line, or participated in a picket line protesting the use of Kohler 
products ? 

Mr, Rand. Protesting the use of Kohler products ? 

Senator Mundt. Or advocating that they do not use them, if you 
don't like the word "protesting." 

Mr. Rand. I don't remember any offhand, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Have you ever been in a picket line, as a leader 
or a participant in which some people were carrying signs saying 
"Don't buy Kohler products," or something to the effect, or "Kohler 
products are made by scabs," or "Do not buy products made by Kohler," 
or anything similar to that? 

Have you ever walked or appeared in a picket line of that type ? 

Mr. Rand. I may have. Senator, yes. 

Senator Mundt. Now you know whether you have. 

Mr. Rand. I think that I have, now. 

Senator Mundt. Just try to answer the question "yes" or "no," 
when you know the answer. 

Mr. Rand. The reason I answered that way is that that language 
which you use is common language in this boycott and it is quite ob- 
vious that I have been where those signs have been carried. 

Senator Mundt. And you have been in those kinds of picket lines ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know whether they were picket lines as such. 

Senator Mundt. Now we are going to have to go all through this 
again. If you want to describe some other word for a bunch of peo- 
ple standing in front of a plant waving signs or walking in front of 
the signs, and if that isn't a picket line you will have to explain to me 
what it was. It looks like a picket line to me. 

Do you want to use the words "line up," rather than "picketing," 
would that be better ? 

Mr. Rand. I am trying to get it. I don't know what you are re- 
ferring to exactly. 



9250 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THIE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. For some reason, you don't want to say "yes'" or 
"no" to things that I know you can say "yes" or "no" to. 

Mr. Rand. You see, Senator, you have the advantage of having that 
material before you, and if you want to talk to me about it, and show 
me, I will admit if it is a picket line if it is a picket line, but generally 
I don't know wluit you are talking al)out. 

If you have a specific example of where I appeared in a picture, on 
a picket line, as such, I would be glad to acknowledge it. But I don't 
remember. Senator, whether or not a specific picture of myself at an}' 
time regardless of pictures, whether it was a picket line as such. 

Senator Curtis. Would the Senator yield very briefly ? 

Senator Mundt. Very briefly. 

Senator Curtis. This morning I have been carried back to the testi- 
mony of Jimmy Hoffa, repeatedly and repeatedly. 

Senator Mundt. For some strange reason, this witness out-Jimmies 
Jimmy this morning. Yesterday I thought he was pretty forthright 
and direct, but I can't understand his attitude this morning. 

Senator Curtis. This is, "I can't remember" and indefinite quib- 
bling about words, and I wish we could get the evidence. 

Mr. Rand. Mr. Chairman 



The Chairman. Just a moment, is there any objection to the way 
the Chair is proceeding here ? I am doing my best to be helpful. 

Senator Curtis. That was not any criticism of the Chair at all. 

Senator Mundt. I think we should get "yes" and "no" answers when 
"yes" and "no" answers can be made. 

The Chairman. You may speak. 

Mr. Rand. I resent the remarks of the Senator, because my union, 
the United Automobile Workers, is in a life and death struggle with 
Jimmy Hoffa's union. I don't think it is fair for him to mention that. 
I think by the very remark of the Senator that he is lending support 
to Hoffa's campaign. 

The Chairman. I know what the Senator was referring to, and we 
had a great deal of problem here getting little Jimmy Hoffa to re- 
member some things. He says this brings back memories of the time 
when Jimmy was on the stand and we were trying to get Jimmy to 
remember. 

Now, then, they are asking you questions about whether you have 
been in a picket line, picketing on account of a boycott, the boycott 
of Kohler products. It seems to me that you could remember. If you 
have, say so, and if you haven't say you haven't. 

Mr. Rand. Well, Senator 

The Chairman. Let us move along. 

Mr. Rand. I have been involved in this boycott and I have put a 
great deal of time and effort into it and little specific incidents I 
frankly don't remember. 

The Chairman. I am sure you can't remember every detail, but 
can you remember or can you not remember whether you have walked 
a picket line protesting the use of Kohler products. Now, that is 
just as simple as it can be. 

Mr. Rand. I don't want to use no, because I may have. Senator. 
I don't remember a specific incident. I would have to think long 
and hard. I am not sure whether there was such an incident. I don't 
know. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9251 

The Chairman. Whether you walked it or not, at one time you 
did have such picket lines around peoples places of business ; did you 
not? The union had them ? 

Mr. Rand. Oh, yes ; I have already said tliat. 

The Chairman. All right, we have that much. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, we filed a memorandum last night ex- 
plaining this exact thing, and it referred to the consumer picketing 
that we had done, to our consent agreements, and I don't know what 
all of the shooting is about. "We have filed a full memorandum ex- 
plaining this whole thing. 

The Chairman. The Chair has not seen the memorandum, that is 
the one delivered to Senator Mundt. 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, and it seems to me it is all stated in there, and I 
can't see, this is much ado about nothing. 

The Chairman. That is not proof before the committee as yet. 

Senator Mundt. It has not been accepted as sworn testimony, and 
I have made some examination of it, and I have a little more to do but 
before the end of the day I expect to read in the presence of Mr. Rauh 
my evealuation of the momorandum he submitted. 

It certainly has no connection whatsoever with the question I am 
asking Mr. Rand, which is, Did you ever participate in any picket 
line, or any picket procedure of this type? I will say to you, sir, that 
I don't know anything about your fight with Mr. Hoifa, which you 
are talking about, or the UAW and the Teamsters, but the reason I 
said that 3'ou were out- Jimmying Jimmy is exactly the reason that 
the Chairman mentioned, and Mr. Curtis. 

We had a lot of difficulty with Jimmy Hoffa after the first couple 
of days in his testimony, getting him to remember anything. That 
seems to be your difficulty this morning. 

I thought yesterday you were a very forthright witness, very direct, 
and now I ask you a question as simple as this one, as director of the 
boycott procedure which you told me you were then, and you still are, 
whether you had ever participated in a line of people standing in 
front of a place urging them not to buy Kohler products, and you 
would like to have me believe you can't remember that. I just can't 
accejjt tliat. 

Mr. Rand. Let me assure you that we have had a great deal more 
trouble with Mr. Holfa than you may have had. For example, there 
are many trucks still going through the picket line, which I am sure 
are the responsibility of Mr. Hoffa, through tlie Kohler strikers picket 
line. 

(At this point, the following members were present : Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Ervin, Kennedy, Mundt, Curtis, and Goldwater.) 

The Chairman. May the Chair suggest we try to keep this inquiry 
as to problems relating to Kohler and the UAW. I don't want to get 
Jimmie Hoffa back up here yet. 

Mr. Rand. I would like to have him up here just to answer the 
question of those picket lines. 

The Chairman. Let's get some answers from you about picket lines 
first. 

Go ahead. 

Senator Mundt. I am waiting for the answer. 

Mr. Rand. "\Yliat is your question, Senator ? 



9252 IMPROPEK ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. I suggest that the reporter read any one of the 7 
or 8 times that I have asked the question. An answer to any one of 
them would make me happy. 

Tlie Chairman. The question is, Have 3^ou walked a picket line 
where they were protesting the use of Kohler products? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I believe I may have. 

Senator Mundt. Why didn't you say that 30 minutes ago. You 
wouldn't have had Jimmie HofFa in the act at all if you had said that. 

JNIr. Rand. I didn't know that you meant that. I may have. I 
don't know. 

The Chairman. INIay I make this observation : If you folks would 
come over here and just talk and tell what you know and get it over 
with, I think you will make a better impression before the country. 
This dragging back and haggling along here and consuming a lot of 
time until we fiinally get it is not the right cooperative spirit. All I 
want is to get the facts. We can evaluate them afterward. When 
we go to evaluate them, there may be some differences of opinion 
around this table. But let's move. Tell what you know, and let's go. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. So far we have not moved an inch, 
because this particular Senator, when I ask a question have you done 
something, and he says "I may have," he might just as well keep on 
"Hoffa-izing." There is no answer. 

The Chairman. Ask the question again. 

Senator Mundt. I w^ill ask the question again : Have you ever par- 
ticipated in a picket line or a picketing procedure with other members 
of your union, carrying signs indicating that the people should not 
buy or use Kohler products? 

Yes or no ? 

Mr. Rand. Senator, I believe the answer is "yes." But wdiether 
they were actually picket lines, that is where I am disturbed as to 
whether or not there was a picket line. I don't know. 

Senator Mundt. That is why I added the words "picketing proce- 
dure," to try to make it easier for you. I don't know what you call 
a picket line any more. I say "picketing procedure." 

Mr. Rand. I didn't want you to infer that it was a picket line. I 
am not sure it was. If it was a picketing procedure, the answer is 
"yes." 

Senator Mundt. Very w^ell. I will leave the words "picket line" 
as I have used them, with the conjunction procedure. Have you ever 
walked in a picket line or participated in a picketing procedure, that 
is both of them now, in which the people who are participating in 
that activity carried signs urging people not to buy Kohler products ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. Yes? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. Very well. Now, if we could get yes or no 
answers 

Mr. Rand. It is difficult, sometimes. 

Senator Mundt. If my questions are ambiguous, I suggest that you 
get me to make them clearer to you before you try ducking and dodg- 
ing. We will not get any place if you are ducking and dodging and 
will not answer. Are you able to deny under oath, Mr. Rand, that 
strikers who have been picketing Kohler distributors and others have 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN" THE LABOR FIELD 9253 

ever shouted threats and directed vile language at Kohler Co. employ- 
ees delivering those Kohler fixtures, or trying to deliver them? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe that I have never heard of that. 

Senator Mundt. Would you be able to deny it? Would you deny 
that you ever heard it? 

Mr. Rand. Deny that I ever heard that people swore or used 
language 

Senator Mundt. I didn't say swear. I said shouted threats and vile 
language. 

Mr. Rand. They may have; and I may have heard about it. I 
don't know. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, it may have happened, but your 
memory is not clear on it ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Very well. I think I will accept that as an answer. 
You have headed, I suppose, boycott representatives who have gone 
to plumbers' conventions and to non-UAW-CIO unions in an effort 
to get other unions and other groups to joint with you in this boycott 
program ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I don't know whether the word "headed" is 
proper, but I was there. 

Senator Mundt. Very well. Were you ever interviewed by a Mr. 
Ray Vicker, of the Wall Street Journal ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; I was. Senator. 

(At this point. Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Senator Mundt. In the August 9 issue, 1956, of the Wall Street 
Journal, you were quoted as saying, "It seems to me that it is almost 
sinful to have any labor dispute degenerate to the point where this 
one has, where we actually have to wreck the company. That is what 
we are doing, wrecking the company." 

Is that an accurate quote ? 

Mr. Rand. Are you reading from the Wall Street Journal article? 

Senator Mundt. Yes ; I am. 

Mr. Rand. That is a quote from that article. 

Senator Mundt. That is a quote that you made in that interview. 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt, In the Wall Street Journal also 

Mr. Rand. I would like to make reference to that story, if I may. 

Senator Mundt. We are going to discuss it for some little time. 
You have a copy and I have a copy. 

Mr. Rand. I don't have that particular copy, but I do have a letter 
from Ray Vicker, in which reference is made to that specific remark. 

Senator Mundt. We will come to Mr. Vicker at the proper time. 

Mr. Rand. May I put this in the record ? I would like to have this 
submitted for the record. 

Senator Mundt. Is that an original copy of the letter? 

Mr. Rand. No; I believe it is a photostat of the letter. I believe 
we have the original. 

Senator Mundt. I would rather you put the original in and keep 
the photostat. 

Mr. Rand. We can see that you get it, but to the best of my knowl- 
edge, it is an accurate copy. 



9254 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Ervin. Senator McClellan asked me to preside for a 
moment. 

If he identifies it as a photostat, we have taken photostats in evi- 
dence, and this time I would make a ruling to the effect that he would 
be entitled to put it in. 

Senator Mundt. He could, if he would swear that it is an accurate 
copy. If he says he believes it is, that is not good enough for me. 

Mr. Rand. To my knowledge, it is an accurate copy. 

Senator Mundt. Before he reads it, may I ask a question? This 
has nothing to do with my questioning. 

I am not going to have him interrupt my interrogation. 

Mr. Rand. You have not read the letter. 

Senator Mundt. I want to ask further questions. 

Senator Ervin. You want to ask further questions about the quote 
before he puts this in. 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Senator Ervin. I will rule that you have a right to do so, and before 
you go away from that questioning, to other things, he would have 
the right to put that in. 

Senator Mundt. I will quote the article of the Wall Street Journal, 
which you either have before you or have available to you. It says 
"The UAW claims to have an accurate count," and we are talking now 
about the boycott. 

You have so much difficulty hearing my questions when you are 
listening, I know you can't hear them when your back is turned. 

Mr. Rand. You inferred that I had a cojjy of the Wall Street Jour- 
nal article. I don't. I would like to have somebody get me one. I 
have one here in the committee room. 

Senator Mundt. You have one in the room ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. While you ai-e waiting, go ahead and read your 
letter. 

Mr. Rant). Thank you. This is a letter dated June 7, 1957, and it 
is addressed to a Mr. Leo J. Breirather, local 833 boycott coordinator, 
UAW, Local 833, Sheboygan, Wis. I might say, Senator, that this 
is in answer to a letter that Avas written by Mr. Breirather to Mr. 
Vicker, regarding that specific quote that you made reference to. 

Senator Mundt. Could we have the other gentleman's letter in, too, 
so we could have the full exchange of correspondence? I think it 
would be unfair to Mr. Vicker to read his reply without the letter. 

Mr. Rand. If we have that, we will be happy to submit it. I think 
the letter would speak for itself. 

Senator Mundt. You surely would have it in your files if he has 
it in liis files. Would you agree to get it and put it in the record? 

Mr. Rauii. We agree to get it and put it in the record if we have it. 

]Mi'. Rand (reading) : 

Deak Mk. Breirather: Sorry to hear that Don Rand's quote is being misused 
by various folk when discussing the Kohler strilie. It seems to me that there 
hardly could be any misunderstanding about that one unless a guy were trying 
to misunderstand it. 

When Rand says "It seems to me that it is almost sinful to have any labor 
dispute," etc., it is quite obvious that he is talking about the company's sins. 

We, of course, have no power over somebody trying to twist a phrase the 
way they want to. If that phrase is being misunderstood I'm sure it is because 
those using it that way purposely want to change it to mean whatever they wish. 
If they didn't have one phrase they would grab another. 



IJVIPBOPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9255 

At the moment we aren't working on any Kohler story. However, we may 
be sometime in the future. When that haiipeus we will try to be as objective 
as possible and write the story as we see it. That's about all we can do. 

You know it is interesting receiving your letter, for, after doing that boycott 
piece last year I received a bitter letter from Mr. Conger saying I had been 
unfair, misconstrued facts, etc. The implication was that we should write 
another piece "correcting the inference that the company was out to break the 
union." We haven't written the piece as suggested by the company because we 
figured we were objective in our original report. 

I guess this shows you can't win. 

Again, I'll say I'm sorry if somebody is twisting any of our earlier stories 
around to make erroneous statements. Unfortunately, there is an inflexibility 
about the printed word which can't be changed no how. Once something is 
printed, it is on the record. No amount of latter stories can change the fact 
that anybody who wants to do so can go back to the original story, take out 
any phrase he wants, and use it. 

Knowing the way some of your antagonists work I know about what they 
would say were Mr. Rand to be quoted : "We are not out to wreck the company." 

In that event, you can be sure that some people would be saying : "The UAW 
is admitting they're licked. They're backing down." 

When we originally reported Mr. Rand's statement, we were merely trying to 
be factual and we did report it as he said it. It wasn't intended as any ammuni- 
tion for anybody who wanted to make hay against you fellows. That statement 
doesn't read so bad when in its original context where it belongs, in a story of 
how you were driven to launch the boycott. 

When taken out and twisted by whatever copy a fellow wants to put above or 
below it, I can see how your opponents might make the phrase look very damag- 
ing to you. In a way this is just like planting photographers around the plant 
and having them wait until a guy has a scowl on his face before snapping a 
picture. They can make an ordinary Joe look like a Capoue gangster. 

The heluv-it is there is no legal way I know of to stop anybody from doing 
that type of misquoting. 
Sincerely, 

Ray Vicker. 

That is the man, incidentally, who wrote the original article, 
Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Very good. You have your letter in, and you will 
have the copy of the letter that was written to him in, and I think 
that neither him nor you question the validity of the report. He 
points out that anybody can twist the part of a statement, which is 
obviously true, and you can twist the part of a letter. We have it 
in evidence. You made the statement, and that is all we are trying 
to do Avith that particular phrase. Xow we come to another part. 
Did you get your photostatic copy i 

I can't wait any longer for you to lind your copy. If you have any 
doubt about any of this, your attorney can come and look over my 
shoulder and see that I am quoting it correctly. I have the article 
here. 

Mr. Rand. That will not be necessary. 

Senator Mundt. This is a more significant portion of it, in my 
opinion. 

The UAW claims to have an accurate count — 

talking about the boycott. 

It also claims to have many spies in the plant. 

Were you in the committee room when we were discussing this with 
Mr. Mazey or not ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I have been here every day. 

Senator Mundt. You remember our colloquy with Mr. Mazey and 
the strike bulletins and what they said about spies ? 



9256 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THDE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand. The U-2's and B-2's. 

SenatxDF Mundt. That is right. Now they are quoting Mr. Rand 
in the Wall Street Journal, in an article which everybody seems to 
admit was a faithful reproduction of what you said. 

It says : 

The UAW claims to have many spies in the plant, fellows that are playing 
both sides of the fence. They are working buy playing ball with the union to be 
on the safe side if the uoiion should ever win its way back into the plant. 

So it is a fact, is is not, then, that the union does have spies in the 
Kohler plant? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. Isn't that the opinion of Ray Vickers? He is not quot- 
ing me, is he ? 

I can't find the specific paragraph. Can you tell me where it is? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. I am quoting — practically the whole article 
is the opinion of Mr. Vickers, the reporter, based on his interview 
with you. Do you have the photostat ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. By the way, if you have any doubt about the article 
being good, the Kohlarian which you published thought enough of it 
to reprint the whole article in its issue of Friday, November 24, 1956. 
So it Avas in your own paper, printed, and proudly presented to the 
members of the union under 

I will correct the record, Mr. Chairman, It is in the issue of Friday, 
August 17. 

Out goes scab work — 

and here are some of the strikes we are talking about. 

Scabs make Kohler wares to be used here. 

And they are hauling out some Kohler products from a place in the 
St. Marguerite School building in Kenosha, Wis., at the direction of 
your boycott activities. 

On page 3 of the Kohlarian, Friday, August 17, 1956, you boys in 
the union thought enough of Mr. Vicker's article then to reproduce it 
in full, and I believe you reproduced it accurately. 

It says : 

The boycott becomes a gi'eat big business. 

The Wall Street Journal report on the legal primary boycott of the 
Kohler strike? 

Down near the end of that article, at this particular point, 

The UAW claims to have an accurate account of rail boxcars and trucks which 
have left the plant since the strike started. It also claims to have many spies in 
the plant, fellows who are playing both sides of the fence. They are working, 
but playing ball with the union to be on the safe side if the union should ever 
win its way back into the plant. 

So my question to you is, as it was to Mr. ]\Iazey, since the strike 
bulletins had over and over again made the claim that they had spies in 
the plant, and now, you in your interview with Mr. Vicker^ create the 
same impression to him so he inserts it in his article, you think enough 
of the article to reproduce it in the Kohlarian, so once agaiu it goes to 
your people, then it must be a fact, then, that the UAW did have spies 
in the Kohler plant. 

Is that correct ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9257 

Mr. Rauh. May we know what part of the article you are reading 
from ? Two of us have been unable to find the particular sentence. 

Senator Mundt. I will give it to you from your own bible. There 
it is, in your own periodical, in your own book. 

Mr. RuAH. Thank you very much. 

Senator Mundt. I have the original copy here, if you would like to 
see that. As far as I can see, the union reprinted the article very 
faithfully and didn't change anything. 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 

Senator Mundt. Do you find it, Mr. Eauh, and do you find it, Mr. 
Rand? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes. We have it. 

Senator Mundt. Now will you answer my question, Mr. Rand ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't think the article quotes anybody. It seems to 
be an opinion of a reporter at that stage. He does quote me in the 
other article in which I was discussing the signs of the Kohler Co. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask you first : Did I read the statement from 
the paper correctly ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe you did. Senator, yes. 

Senator Mundt. All right. Since this is a report on an interview 
with you, an important enough one so that you exchanged correspond- 
ence with Mr. Vicker about it, you have introduced Mr. Vicker's letter 
into the record, and he doesn't disavow, and apparently you do not 
disavow, the accuracy of the article, and this is an article which you 
think is correct and honest enough so you put it as a full page ad in 
your own newspaper, proudly proclaiming your strike in the Wall 
Street Journal, is it a fact that you have strikes as reported by the 
Wall Street Journal ? 

Mr. Rand. Is it a fact what ? 

Senator Mundt. Spies in the Kohler plant as reported in the Wall 
Street Journal ? 

Mr. Rand. Not to my knowledge, no. 

Senator Mundt. Now let's get an answer to that. 

Mr. Rand. No ; is that what you want ? 

Senator Mundt. We want "yes" or "no." I am not trying to put 
words in your mouth. But I am trying to find out. 

You created the impression in Mr. Vicker's mind. You certainly 
tried to create the impression in the minds of everyone who reads the 
Kohlarian, because you reprinted it there, and it seems to me that you 
tried to creat the impression to everyone who read the strike bulletin. 

Now we come right back to where we were with Mr. Mazey, which 
is as clear as it possibly could be to anybody, that either you were 
trying to deceive the strikers into developing a false hope for victory 
on the basis that you had spies in the plant, or else you are now trying 
to deceive this committee and the public by saying that you didn't 
have them, all you did was talk about having them. 

Which was it ? Who were you trying to kid ? 

Mr. Rand. Is that a question ? 

Senator Mundt. That is a question. 

Mr. Rand. I thought it was a speech, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Wliat was that ? 

Mr. Rand. It somids like a speech. 

Senator Mundt. It is a question. Who are you trying to fool ? 



9258 IMPROPEK ACTIVITIES i:X THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand. Mr. Conger is also quoted in the Wall Street article. 

Senator Mundt. What has that to do with it 'i 

Mr. Rand. I thought you wei-e ti ying to imply that he just inter- 
viewed myself, as an individual. He talked to a number of people. 
The article starts off by talking to an individual striker. 

Senator Mundt. Are we going to have a speech, Mr. Chairman, or 
are we going to get answers, sometimes, to questions. The question is 
pretty clear. Who is he trying to fool ? 

Mr. Rand. Xobody, Senator, nobody at all. 

Senator Mundt. All right. Now we are getting along. Then were 
you misrepresenting the facts to the strikers when you put in your 
own paper the article from the Wall Street Journal saying that there 
were spies in the phmt, or why did you put it in ^ Why didn't j'ou 
disavow it^ Why didn't you have something at the bottom saying 
"Look, fellows, we don't have spies. This part of the article is wrong. ' 

l-VHiy do you wait until 3 or -i years later and then try to come before 
the committee and say, "Mr. Vicker wrote the article wrong" ? 

Why didn't you do it at the time ^ 

(The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

The Chairman. Why didn't you do it at the time, disavow it ? 

Mr. Rand. Disavow the whole article i 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. Well, there are many good things in it and it is not too 
often that we get good articles in newspapei-s. I suppose the people 
who were responsible for the publication of our newspa])er felt that 
it did have some vahie and they printed it accordingly. 

Senator Munm'. Why didn't you disavow the portion that you 
thought was wrong? tVHiy did you try to mislead the people on the 
strike line? Why didn't you disavow the part that was wrong, if 
something was wrong? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. The article contains a number of paragraphs which we 
feel are advantageous to the union. For example, tlie TTAW has 
offered to arbitrate the dispute but the company 

Senator Mundt. Just a minute. Did you feel it was advantageous 
to the union to lead the people that were on strike to believe that you 
had spies in the plant and consequently victory was in grasp of the 
strikers if they would hang on for a few moi-e months ^ Did you think 
it was advantageous to the union to create what you now tell us was 
an entirely false impression, and that you didn't have any information, 
that all of these strike bulletins, all of this repetition, the article in 
the Wall Street Journal, the reprint in the Kohlarian, all of this was 
based on just a completely false situation, but you thought you would 
pass the information out to the strikers anvhow { 

^^alydidyoudothat? 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Why didn't you disavow at the time? 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chainnan, the witness was being asked a question. 
He was reading an answer. He was reading from the answer. Sen- 
ator Mundt interrupted. We appeal to the Chair to let the witness 
answer the last question, which was based on the advantageous parts 
of this document. We a]ipeal that he be allowed to give his answer 
to the previous question before an interruption which was made to 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9259 

prevent him from reading some things in here that show why we re- 
printed it. May he answer the previous question ? 

The Chairman. What is the previous question? Why did you 
print the article? "V^Tiy didn't you take out and disavow that part 
that was not true ? 

Mr. Rauh. That is correct. He wanted to read the good parts of 
the article to show why it was reprinted. 

Senator Mundt. Any time we can get the answers from the wit- 
nesses, I am for that. 

(At this point, Senator Ervin withdrew from the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. Has the article been made a part of the record ? 

Senator Mundt. I am not sure. Let's make it a part right now. 
Let's put it in as part of the printed record. 

The Chairman. Let the article at issue here be made exhibit No. 63. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 63" for refer- 
ence and is as follows :) 

(Article from the Wall Street Journal, August 9, 1956, follows:) 

[The Kohlerian, the Wall Street Journal, Chicago, Thursday, August 9, 1956] 

KoHLEE Boycott; UAW Lines Up Unions, Cities in Drive To Cut Sales of 
Struck Fiems : Union Offers Anticompany Ties, T-Shirts ; Boycott "Sai-es- 
men" Tour the U. S. : Preview of a Potent Wbiapon 

(ByRay Vicker) 

Sheyboygan, Wis. On a bulletin board in the United Automobile Workers 
Union Local 8.33 headquarters here, a pin-studded map of the United States is 
divided into 15 territories. 

At first glance it might be mistaken for a business sales map. Actually, it is 
a battle map tracing a UAW boycott offensive aimed at throttling Kohler Co. — 
the UAW's adversary in one of the bitterest and the longest labor disputes of 
the postwar period. 

Kohler, which makes plumbing ware, has replaced strikers with nonunion 
workers and continues to operate, so after 28 months the UAW has now shifted 
from production-halting efforts to a sale-stopping campaign. 

Each pin on the map represents "the enemy," a Kohler sales outlet. Tiny 
flags show the location of UAW agents who are "on the road." The 1.5 territories 
represent zones covered by these special representatives in drumming up support 
for the boycott. 

BUSINESSLIKE BOYCOTT 

"This is the most comprehensive boycott ever organized by labor because we 
now have the full weight of the combined AFL-CIO with us," says Don Rand, 
husky 37-year-old UAW international representative who heads the boycott. 
"We've put this program on a highly organized, businesslike basis with this as a 
central office." 

UAW's boycott has implications which go far beyond this tree-studded city 
of bratwurst, bock beer, and sauerkraut. Since it is a boycott which could only 
be effectively waged through a combination of the AFL-CIO, it provides business 
with a preview of a powerful, souped-up weapon which has been placed in labor's 
hands by that merger. 

Mr. Rand shakes his head as he leans against a huge "Don't Buy Kohler !" 
placard in the UAW office and says : "It seems to me that it is almost sinful 
to have any labor dispute degenerate to the point where this one has — where 
we actually have to wreck the company. That's what we're doing, wrecking 
the company." 

UAW hasn't yet succeeded in its goal, though. "We have not been able to see 
that the boycott has had any appreciable effect on our sales or is anything else 
than somewhat of an annoyance," contends L. C. Conger, chairman of Kohler 
Co.'s management committee. 

But UAW leaders insist that their boycott already is hurting the company. 
Moreover, they emphasize that it is just gathering strength, thanks to closer 
working relations being developed at the local level as effects of the AFL-CIO 
merger seep down to the grassroots. 



9260 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

AN OLD WEAPON 

The boycott weapon is old hat on the labor scene, of course. But union 
leaders here say there never has been a boycott which compares in scoi)e with 
this one. The merged AFL-CIO now has some 77,000 locals and more than 
18 million members. 

A boycott organization has been established here in Sheboygan to bring the 
full force of those 77,000 locals against Kohler Co. If this boycott can succeed 
in this case, then it probably can do so again in the future against any other 
company which might resist all demands of a union. 

Striding to a file, IMr. Rand opens drawers and thumbs through cards of 
thousands of labor, educational, religious, governmental, and building contracting 
contacts developed to further the boycott. He lifts a weighty black-bound tome 
which looks like a sales manual and explains the detailed plan which has been 
put in printed form. Such books are given to union representatives as a guide 
on their "sales beats" around the country. 

Each representative is making the rounds in his territory much like a traveling 
salesman with a suitcase full of samples. He appears before local union groups 
seeking cooperation in the boycott of Kohler products. He appears before city 
and State groups urging that purchasing departments shun strikebound articles, 
with emphasis on the Kohler line. He suggests to area plumbers and contractors 
that they steer clear of the Kohler label. 

On a desk is a stack of letters from locals in almost every branch of the 
AFL-CIO promising support. Already a half dozen resolutions of support have 
been passed by city and State bodies — in Waterbury, Conn., P>oston, and else- 
where — with dozens of such proposals due to be presented by union sympathizers 
in other cities around the country. 

THE PLUMBERS MEET 

When the plumbers union holds its annual convention in Kansas City next 
week, UAW's boycott specialists will be on hand. The plumbers union already 
has indicated sympathy toward the UAW cause. If bonds are lightened between 
the two unions, boycott leaders predict their hand will be strengthened consid- 
erably since plumbers are the workers who install the bathtubs, washbowls, 
and other plumbing ware which Kohler makes. 

Few labor disputes have been more bitter than the Kohler-UAW fracas. The 
dispute started April 5, 1954, when 2,600 members of local 83.3 struck the land- 
scaped, lawn-encircled plant in nearby Kohler, Wis., a company-town suburb 
of Sheboygan. Kohler Co. recalled or hired nonunion workers and resumed 
production despite a wave of strike violence. 

Bushy-browed, blunt-jawed Herbert V. Kohler, company president, says: 
"There have been more than 800 incidents of violence and vandalism away from 
the picket lines. These included gunshot blasts into homes, dynamiting of auto- 
mobiles and buildings, paint bombings, window smashing, tire slashing and the 
throwing of acid into automobiles and inside houses." 

Original strike issues have long since lost tlieir importance. As the union saw 
its picketing failing it moderated demands to such an extent that they bear little 
relationship now to original proposals. Basically, the issue now is whether or not 
the company should have an outside union in its plant. 

PICKET LINE DEFEAT 

This spring, after pouring $10 million into strike benefits, the UAW finally 
admitted defeat on the picket line. It announced reductions in benefits and urged 
strikers to get jobs elsewliere. 

But the UAW wasn't tossing in the sponge. It then focused attention on two 
fronts : Fighting the company before tlie National Labor Relations Board for 
alleged unfair labor practices, and the boycott. 

"Since April, we estimate that over 1,200 of our members have gotten jobs 
elsewhere," says Mr. Rand. 

One union member looking for a new job is Allen J. Graskamp, president of 
the local. He is running this fall for the Wisconsin Assembly on the Democratic 
ticket. 

Nobody knows how many of the original 2,600 strikers would go back even if 
the dispute ever were settled in the union's favor. 

"I guess the better the settlement the more people there will be coming back," 
says mu.scular, light-haired John Konec, a 41-year-old brass-molder striker who 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9261 

this week took a job as a welder with Anderson Tank & Manufacturing Ck>., 
Milwaukee. He drives the 110-mile round-trip daily "because I'm not going to 
let Kohler chase me out of Sheboygan," says he. 

Not all workers have been so lucky. 

"Jobs are scarce in this town," says slim, friendly Bob Bernico, a striking 
lottery inspector. He is still supporting a family of 8 with union subsistence 
food, rent, and utilities vouchers after 28 months on the picket line. 

Kohler Co. is the principal industry in the Sheboygan area. Several furniture 
and a few metalworkiug concerns also provide employment. But with so many 
strikers looking for work, many a striker has had to move elsewhere to get a job. 

At the boycott headquarters here 65 strikers are working 7 days a week 
preparing posters, answering letters, mimeographing literature, stuffing en- 
velopes, and helping with the boycott in various ways. They're donating time 
and drawing only subsistence allowances from the union. 

Big, slow-moving Art Fox, 50-year-old enameler, heads local 833's 280-man 
picket team. A dozen pickets still patrol various gates of the struck plant 
in desultory fashion. However, one of their principal tasks now is counting 
plant-workers, outgoing freight cars, and trucks to keep tab on plant operations. 

When destinations of shipments can be ascertained, that information is im- 
mediately relayed to boycott representatives. Calls then are made on local 
contractors who may be getting shipments. The idea is to persuade them to 
steer clear of Kohler products. 

"We now have a list of every Kohler distributor in the country," says Mr. 
Rand. 

He adds : "We've found that Richmond, Va., New York, and Chicago are 
Kohler's three top-sales areas. So naturally we are concentrating our boycott 
harder in those areas. " 

Another volume keeps tab on calls made by boycott representatives. This 
avoids duplications and indicates where new calls should be made. 

A locker in the headquarters contains several neckties. When hanging vertical- 
ly, the ties look like ordinary neckpieces v^^ith a scroll decoration. Turned side- 
wise the scroll reads : "Support Kohler Boycott." Ties are being peddled for 
$1.50 to union locals from Maine to California. 

Chubby Leo Breirather, boycott coordinator, holds up a nylon T-shirt. Em- 
blazoned across the front is the plea : "Boycott Kohler. Win the Strike." A 
design on the back says : "Don't Buy Kohler." 

Says Mr. Breirather: "We're going to flood the country with these." They 
will be sold for $1 apiece. 

A work cap, selling for 25 cents, also carries boycott slogans. Proceeds from 
sales of the clothing items will go to further the union's fight. 

Lists of leaders : To reach sympathizers, the UAW has obtained lists of every 
AFL-CIO union business agent, local president, secretary, and other officials in 
the country. 

Says Mr. Rand : "Before the merger such lists were carefully guarded and it 
would have been impossible to get them." 

With the lists, the UAW has been successful in stirring up support from hun- 
dreds of locals. In addition, the auto union also has obtained information about 
union meetings and conventions scheduled through the next year. At such meet- 
ings, a boycott representative appears to tell his story. 

Each such appearance usually results in a resolution being passed by the 
meeting offering assistance. In many cases, the hat is passed and funds go along 
with the resolution. 

Next month a series of spot UAW boycott pleas are scheduled to be carried 
over a Milwaukee radio station. They'll be financed by contribution from various 
AFL-CIO locals. 

UAW leaders are counting on fellow unionists to follow up their resolutions 
by refusing to handle Kohler products on construction jobs, or by handling them 
in the slowdown fashion which may persuade contractors to use other products. 

Often after a local's support is won, the local launches a move to bar nonunion 
goods from city purchasing lists. 

WATERBrEY'S KESOLTJTION 

A resolution passed in June by the city of Waterbury, Conn., reads : "Whereas 
the Kohler Co., of Sheboygan, Wis., has refused all efforts to mediate or 
arbitrate the 2-year-old strike it is involved in * * * be it resolved that the 
21243— 58— pt. 23 8 



9262 IMPROPER ACTR'ITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Board of Akieriuen of the City of Waterbury recommend that coutractors re- 
tained by the city in any construction projects be requested and urged to refrain 
from purcliasing any Kohler fabricated products." 

The Massachusetts General Assembly passed a resolution urging all purchasing 
oflBcers and departments of the State be instructed that "it is highly improper and 
undesirable to purchase any goods or services from strikebound firms, or firms 
convicted of unfair labor practices who continue noncompliance with Federal 
labor laws and court orders ; such as Kohler Co. * * * until such time as the 
strike in question is settled." 

Last month the city of Boston adopted a similar resolution. 

The city of Ansonia, in Connecticut, is more blunt in a resolution adopted by 
its council. It orders the board of aldermen to "give notice to all contractors 
doing business with the city that they cannot use Kohler products on any job 
contracted for by said city." 

In Milwaukee, the Milwaukee County Board defeated a Kohler boycott resolu- 
tion, 12 to 9. But the proposal is likely to come up again in September, with union 
leaders expected to put heavy pressure on board members for voting labor's way. 

Mr. Conger, of Kohler Co., questions the legality of such resolutions, since 
in most cases public works must be let to the lowest bidder according to State 
laws. Moreover, Kohler Co. has not yet been convicted of unfair labor practices, 
he points out. 

He adds : "There is no question but that the UAW will do everything possible 
to promote such resolutions * * * wherever they believe that they can find poli- 
ticians supine enough to bow to their dictates and to forget their duty to the 
public." 

As for results of the boycott, you get widely differing stories from the union 
and from the company. 

Says Mr. Conger: "Production and employment are not yet quite on the pre- 
strike basis, but we are operating satisfactorily and on a profitable basis." 

The UAW claims to have an accurate count of railroad boxcars and trucks 
which have left the plant since the strike started. It also claims to have many 
spies in the plant, fellows who are playing both sides of the fence. They're 
working, but playing ball with the union to be on the safe side if the union 
should ever win its way back into the plant. 

With information collected, union officials have drawn a graph which they 
claim portrays company shipments. The graph shows a steadily descending 
line from the spring of 1954, when the strike started. 

"Railroad shipments now are 63 percent of the 1954 prestrike level while 
truck shipments are 25 percent of that level," claims Mr. Rand. 

One factor which clouds boycott results is the downturn in housing con.struc- 
tion which set in this year. This could have resulted in loss of some company 
business anyway, it is admitted, though Kohler, a privately owned, closely held 
firm, gives no concrete sales data. 

The Chairman. The witness may refer to any part of the article 
to refresh his memory or to assist him in liis answers. 

Mr. Rand. The paragraph 

The Chairman. Do yon want to point ont what yon regarded as 
the good part? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

The Chairman. And you are reading from the publication. 

Mr, Rand. I will just refer to one. I think there is more than one. 

(At this point, Senator Cnrtis Avithdrew from the liearing room.) 

Mr. Rand. I liave located the paiagraph. 

The Chairman. Refer to it quickly. 

Mr, Rand (reading) : 

The UAW has offered to arbitrate the dispute, but the company rejects such 
overtures, contending arbitration represents a surrender of conii)any prerogatives. 
One arbitration overture was made by another Kohler, Governor Kohler, of 
Wisconsin, who is a nephew of the firm's president. 

We felt there was some value in that particular portion. 

The Chairman. Now, can you tell us right quickly why you didn't 
take out that part that was deceptive, if it was deceptive, with respe<?t 
to the spies ? 



lAJPROPER ACTIVITIES ES' THE LABOR FIELD 9263 

Mr. 1\AND. I don't know wh}^ they didn't take it out. They could 
have printed a portion of it. The whole article was printed. I haven't 
got the answer as to why the whole article was printed. 

The Chairmax. Did you order it printed? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir ; I did not. 

The Chairman. Did you have anvthinof to do with the printing 
of it? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir ; I didn't. 

The Chairman. "\Y1io did ? 

Mr. Rand. Whoever was in charge of the publicity program of the 
local union. 

The Chairman. You were not in charge of that ( 

Mr. Rand. No, sir ; I was not. 

The Chairman. You don't know anything about it, then^ as to why 
they published it or didn't ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. Period. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Rand, you have had this article in j^our hands 
recently, from the Kohlerian; correct? 

Mr. Rand. That one ? Yes, sir. 

Senator Mdndt. Do you see anything there; do you want to reex- 
amine it, or take another look at it, anything that disavows in any 
way, shape or form the statement about which you wrote the letter to 
Mr. Vickers i I don't think you wrote the letter, but it was the letter 
written to Mr. Vickers. In that you point out that it seems to be a 
sin to try to wreck a company, but that is 'Syhat we are trying to do, 
to wreck the company.'' Do you see a disavowal of that in the 
article? - 

Mr. Rand. Senator, the letter wasn't written to Mr. Vickers as a re- 
sult of that article. It was written as a result of some propaganda 
by the Kohler Co. and the people who uphold their point of view. It 
was being misused. It was being taken out of the context of the 
entire article. We couldn't quarrel with Mr. Vickei-s in a sense, be- 
cause when I spoke to him at that time, I was discussing with him the 
sins of the Kohler Co., and I wasn't referring to anything else. 

Senator Mttndt. I suggest that the reporter read the question, so 
that the chairman can determine whether that is an answer. 

The Chairman. Read the question. 

(As requested, the reporter read the pending question.) 

The Chairman. Do you see any disavowal of that statement that 
it is a sin to wreck the company ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

The Chairman. In the article, you do not ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Senator Mundt. Now, do you see any disavowal any place in the 
article or in the issue of the Kohlarian published as a full page ex- 
hibit on August 17, 1956, over the bannerhead "The Boycott Becomes 
a Great Big Business, the Wall Street Journal Report on the Legal 
Primary Boycott of the Kohler Strike?" Do you see anything here 
disavowing from the standpoint of your readers so that your readers 



9264 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

and fellow strikers can get the facts? Do you see anything dis- 
avowing this statement: 

The UAW claims to have an accurate count of railroad boxcars and trucks 
which have left tho plant since the strike started. It also claims to have many 
spies in the plant, fellows who are playing both sides of the fence, working 
but playing ball with the union to be on the safe side if the union should ever 
win its way back into the plant. 

Do you see any disavowal of that ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

Senator Mukdt. So that either you, not Mr. Rand but the UAW, 
the family of people who are putting out this Kohlarian, the strike 
bulletin, the International Reps, of whom you were one, Mr. JNIazey, 
the group in charge, either you were misrepresenting to the strikers 
the situation in the Kohler plant, having them move ahead on the 
false assumption and in the false hope that the spies in the plant 
were going to help them w^n the strike, or else this was an entire mis- 
representation ; is that correct ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator Mundt. Either you have the spies or you were misrepre- 
senting the picture to the workers. 

Mr. Rand. We didn't have any spies. 

Senator Mundt. All right. So it must follow you were misrepre- 
senting it by publishing this to the workers ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator Mundt. You don't disavow; you don't change it. You 
don't modify it. You wait until you come before this committee and 
disavow it under oath. I am not quarrelling with what you tell me. 
But I am tracing the facts that follow from that kind of utilization of 
information. 

Mr. Rand. That is an article that appeared in the Wall Street 
Journal, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. And reprinted in the Kohlarian. 

Mr. Rand. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And the Kohlarian is read by the people on strike, 
and maybe the people not on strike, by the employees of Kohler. 

Mr. Rand. I don't necessarily agree with the entire article. 

Senator Mundt. There is nothing here that you disavow, any por- 
tion of it? 

Mr. Rand. Did you ask a question ? 

Senator Mundt. I said there is nothing that you disavow, any por- 
tion of it ? 

Mr. Rand. No. We left Mr. Conger's remarks in there, too. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. And reprinted with union money, 
the union paid for this ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes; the union pays for the publication of the local 
union reporter. 

Senator Mundt. Do you feel that the strikers, the union members, 
normally have a right to rely on the accuracy of what they read in 
their union paper ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. And I — yes. 

Senator Mundt. This is what they read. It seems to me ihevitably 
you must arrive at the conclusion that the strikers are being misled if, 
in fact — if, in fact — you did not have spies in the plant. You have 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9265 

said to the best of your knowledge there were no spies in the plant. 
You are not able to say, I take it, categorically, that there were no 
spies in the plant ? Or are you? 

Mr. Rand. That is an accurate reproduction of an article that ap- 
peared in the Wall Street Journal, Senator. 

Senator Mttndt. Are you able to say categorically there were no 
spies in the plant ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe there were, not spies as such ; no. 

Senator Mundt. Well, now, we are not going to quarrel about the 
word "spies." You used the word "spies," Kohler used the word 
"spies," I call them spies, anybody on the other side sneaking out 
information, bringing out facts. This isn't a war. Let's say inform- 
ants. "Spies" was a word that Mr. Vicer picked up out of the inter- 
view with you. Whether you mentioned spies to him or whether he 
mentioned it to you, whether that is his coinage, I don't know. "Spies" 
was the word that was used in the striker's bulletin that you people 
put out. 

If you don't like the word "spies," I will take the word "inform- 
ants." Are you able, from your personal knowledge, categorically to 
deny the union had people, the strikers had people, working inside 
the plant, bringing information out to them, what I would call spies 
and what you would call informants? Would you deny that ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; I deny that^ sir. 

Senator Mundt. On the basis of your information ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. So that it stands, then, without dispute that this 
was a misrepresentation of fact, as far as your readers were concerned, 
the word "spies" ? 

Mr. Rand. That is your conclusion. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Nobody can arrive at any other conclusion. You 
tell them you have them, and now you tell us you didn't have them. 
If that isn't misrepresentation, you and I use a different kind of dic- 
tionary. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, I appeal to the Chair that this is unfair. 
That document was not ours. It was the Wall Street Journal. We 
didn't edit out the word "spies," nor did we edit out Mr. Conger's 
testimony, statements in here. We are not in the position of editing 
articles. Wlien we reprint one, we reprint the whole thing. To sug- 
gest that because we reprinted an article in the Wall Street Journal, 
that we have done any ratification of anything, I don't see. I protest 
this line of questioning. 

The Chairman. Let the Chair make this observation. The point is 
you reprinted an article, period, as it appeared, and reprinted it in fuU. 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The Senator is drawing a conclusion from it be- 
cause there was an erroneous statement in that article, that it was 
republished for the purpose of deception. He can draw any conclusion 
he likes. You have taken the positioin that if you are going to re- 
publish the article, it had some good in it, but republish it in full ex- 
actly as it appeared in another publication. That is all there is there 
to it. Let's move. 

Senator Mundt. I draw my conclusion not only on the basis of this 
isolated incident, but a whole series of strike bulletins, a whole series 
of information already in the record. 



92()() IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

I readily concur that any one time a mistake can be made. But this 
is a j)attern, apparently premeditated, a premeditated pattern, a 
very precise ])attern, a pattern Avhich perpetuates itself for a long 
period of time. 

I simply point out that it is a bit unfair to the strikei-s to tell them 
one thing and then tell the committee something else. It certainly is 
deceitful to make the strikers believe, as they had a right to believe, 
that their cause was going to be successful, in part because they had 
been able to penetrate the opposition camp, and Avere getting out in- 
formation, Avhen the SAvorn testimony is they didn't have any such 
situation prevailing at all. 

That is all, Mr. Cliairman. 

(At this point. Senator Kennedy withdrew from the hearing room. 
Senators Curtis and Erviii entered the hearing room.) 

The Chair:man. Are there any other questions ? 

Senator Goldwater. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Eand, how long have you been administra- 
tive assistant to Mr. Mazey ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe. Senator, since sometime in October of 1956. 

Senator Goldwater. Did you testify earlier that the Kohler strike 
is an unusual strike, an unusual strike pattern for the UAW? 

Mr. Rand. An unusual pattern ? 

Senator Goldwater. Yes. Is the Kohler strike an unusual type of 
strike for the UAW to engage in ? 

Mr. Rand. I may have testified to that. Whether I used the exact 
terminology that you are using — it is unusual in the sense that it is a 
4-3'ear strike and that Ave have the boycott program. At least, it is 
unusual to me. 

Senator Goldavater. Is the fact that violence occurred an unusual 
pattern in a UAW strike ? 

Mr. Rand. To my knowledge, yes. 

Senator Goldwater. You haA^e been a member of this union how 
long ? 

Mr. Rand. Since 1947. 

Senator Goldavater. And hoAv many strikes have you engaged in ? 

Mr. Rand. This is the only strike that I have engaged in. 

Senator Goldavater. The only strike that j'ou, yourself, have en- 
gaged in? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Goldavater. But as an international representative, and 
now as the administratiA^e assistant to the second in command of the 
UAW, you know something about the strike of the UAW, don't you? 

Mr. Rand. About the strike ? 

Senator Goldavater. About the striking. IIoav strikes are con- 
ducted ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes; through our ollice, our otHce is directly involved in 
the community service facilities of the international union, and we do 
handle the ]3roblems of assistance for strikers. 

Senator Goldwater. Will you tell me Avhether Aiolence in a UAW 
strike is an unusual thing? 

Mr. Rand. Is violence an unusual thing in UAW strikes ? To my 
knoAvledge, yes, sir. 

Senator (joldavater. Tell me "yes" or "no." You are a member of 
this union. You are one of the top men in this union. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9267 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe so, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. Well, an administrative assistant to the second 
in command is pretty high. Is violence a pattern in UAW striking? 

Mr. Rand. No, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. You say categorically no ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Goldwater. You have been wanting to read things this 
morning, let me read a few things. 

This is from the New York Times, September 21, 1951, dateline Los 
Angeles : 

Strike mob beats 10. A mob at the block -long Meier & Welsh engine rebuild- 
ing plant in nearby Vernon beat up 10 men, upset 5 automobiles, and damaged 
11 others today. 

I will skip a paragrapli. 

The United Auto Workers-CIO struck the plant last July. 

The CiLviRMAN. May I ask the witness if he has any knowledge of 
that? 

JNIr. Rand. No, I haven't. 

The Chairman. You have no knowledge of it? 

Mr. Rand. None whatsoever. I hadn't even known the strike had 
taken place. 

Senator Goldwater. This is the Free Press of September 16, 1952. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, on the basis of your previous ruling that 
articles unsworn were not to be introduced, it seems to me that the 
fair way to do this, sir, would be to ask if he knew of a certain strike, 
and, if he did not, then not to "produce this." 

Tlie Chairman. The Chair has held that you may read an article 
and ask the witness if he knows anything about what it states. The 
article itself is not proof. It is only material for questioning pur- 
poses, unless it is sworn to and put into the record. 

Senator Goldwater. Let me read from the Free Press of September 
16, 1952. 

Union sued in strike violence. Contempt action against local 1.57, UAV^'^-CIO, 
was begun in circuit court Monday as an aftermath to several acts of violence 
apparently connected with the union organizing campaign. This was the Peer- 
less Pi-oduction Co. 

That was 1952. Do you know anything about it ? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't. Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. From the Detroit Times of June 25, 1955 : 

Picket hurt at Willow Run plant. Windows in two cars were broken and a 
picket was injured today in a series of incidents outside the struck General 
Motors Willow Run transmission plant. 

Do you Iviiow anything about that? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. Was that the picket who was hurt. Senator? 

Senator Goldwater. Yes. Do you remember the Square D strike? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I know of it. 

Senator Goldwater. Let me read from the Detroit News of Sep- 
tember 22, 1954. "Two Picket Chiefs Seized in Rioting." That is 
the headline. "Cars jammed, rerouted" and so forth. 

As unprecedented violence and disorder flared today in the 100-day old Square 
D strike, police cracked down by arresting 2 of the chief picket leaders. 

Seized were Paul Silver and Ernest Mazey, officials of the UAW-CIO locals 
not involved in the strike. 



9268 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand. That wasn't a UAW plant, was it, Senator? 

Senator Goldwatek. 1954, 

Mr. Rand. Yes. It wasn't a UAW plant. It is now. 

Senator Goldwatek. I think at tlie time it was being struck by the 
electrical workers and you fellows went up to help them. 

Mr. Rand. The UE. 

The Chairman. Let the Chair make this observation again so there 
will be no misunderstanding about his ruling. If you were trying 
this man, the witness, for an offense, the procedure the Chair is per- 
mitting here would be improper. This is an investigating committee, 
however, to try to get information for legislative purposes. For that 
reason I am departing to that extent from the firm rules of evidence 
in order to get the information the committee may be able to get that 
might serve its purpose. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, so that the record might be 
clear, and so that the Chair might know what I am attempting to do, 
I have said before, and I am saying again, and I will say it in the 
future, violence in striking, when the UxVW is striking, is not unusual. 
It is the rule rather than the exception. I am trying to prove it 
because the witness, who is a high official of the union, evidently has 
been so cloistered that he hasn't heard of these acts of violence that 
have been performed. 

The Chairman. The Chair has held it is quite proper in this pro- 
ceeding for you to read the article and ask the witness if he knows 
anything about it. 

Senator Goldwai^r. You said you knew something about that 
strike, I believe, Mr. Rand. Mr. Vinson and Mr. Gunaca both testified 
that they participated in this strike. What were they doing up there 
as UAW members when it was an electrical union that was striking 
the plant ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know. Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Let me read you from the Detroit News of 
September 9, 1954 : "UAW Locals Aid Strike. Massed Pickets Defy 
Court Ban." 

We not only find a pattern of violence, but we find a pattern of 
defiance of the law. You defied the order at Kohler and you defied the 
order here. 

Let me read just a few sentences. 

Hundreds of hooting and jeering pickets poured into the streets surrounding 
the Square D Co. plant today threatening a showdown with ix)lice and ignoring 
a circuit court order against mass piclieting at the gates. 

There is another headline on this same issue. 

UAW Pickets Join the Square D Strikers. 

Let me read a little more from this article. It is quite interesting. 

The more than 700 pickets defined the mass picketing ban at the main gate, 
6060 Rivard, at Piquette, as well as other entrances, but they did not block them 
completely. For the first time, strikers were supported today by UAW-CIO 
locals, including members of the big Ford and Dodge locals. Other UAW locals 
represented at the throng in the plant were Detroit Steel Workers Products, Local 
351, Budd Local, Plymouth, Hudson, DeSoto, Chevrolet, and Chevrolet Forge. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators 
McClellan, Ervin, Mundt, Curtis, and Goldwater.) 



IMPRiO'PER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9269 

There is a sublieadline, Local 600 Contingent : 

Also there was Carroll Stillott, president of the big Ford Local 600, UAW-CIO, 
at the Ford Motor Co.'s Rouge plant, who arrived with 50 or more men. 

These are quotes : 

"We'll get more help if we need it," Stillont said. 
Mr. Rand, Is that in reference to the UE ? 
Senator Goldwater. To the Square D. 

Mr. Rand. We were able to take over that from the Communist- 
dominated UE. 

Senator Goldwater. I understand that you did take it over. 

Both he and Qninn immediately joined a group of 75 to 100 pickets circling at 
the main entrance in violation of a circuit order issued last Friday by Judge 
Frank D. Ferguson. 

That was in 1954. You testified that you knew something about that 
strike. Why did you defy the court order ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't understand your question. 

Senator Goldwater. You testified tliat you knew something about 
this strike at Square D. 

Mr. Rand. What strike is that ? 

Senator Goldwater. Square D. 

Mr. Rand. I know about as much about it as you have just read 
there in the paper, period. 

Senator Goldwater. I asked you a question prior to this, and I be- 
lieve you said you knew something about it. Did you just know it by 
reading it in the papers ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. You didn't know any of the details about it? 

Mr. Rand. No detail whatsoever. 

Senator Goldwater. Have you ever heard discussed at the top level 
why the court order was defied ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

Senator Goi-dwater. Let me ask you a question here. In your job as 
administrative assistant to Mr. Mazey, whom do you report to ? 

Mr. Rand. Mr. Mazey. 

Senator Goldwater. Wlio does Mr. Mazey report to ? 

Mr. Rand. The executive board of the international miion. 

Senator Goldwater. And who is president ? 

Mr. Rand. And the officers. 

Senator Goldwater. Who is president of the executive board ? 

Mr. Rand. Mr. Walter Reuther is president of the international 
union. 

Senator Goldwater. So anything that you report of importance to 
Mr. Mazey w^e can reasonably expect is accessible to Mr. Reuther? 

Mr. Rand. I believe so, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Now, let me read you from a Columbus Eve- 
ning Dispatch, which says, "Ohio's Greatest Home Newspaper," and I 
will get in a plug for them. That is November 17, 1953. 

Nine Hurt in Violence at NAA, North American Aviation, Picket Line. 

The subheadline is : 

Company Asked Court To Clear Out Strikers. 

Continuing : 

At least nine persons were injured, none seriously, between 6 : 45 a. m., and 
8 : 30 a. m. in the first major disorders since 12,500 UAW-CIO members went out 
on strike. Strikers massed in groups of 20 to 50 before several entrances. Autos 
of incoming first-shift workers were rocked. Fists threw, stones damaged cars, 
newsmen were threatened, and one striker was arrested. 



9270 IMPROPEiR ACn-rVITIEiS IN THiE LABOR FIELD 

Do you know anything about that strike? 

Mr. Rand. No, Senator, I don't. 

Senator GoLi)AVAn::K. Did you ever hear of it ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe, Senator, tliat tho^e are the exceptions, and there 
are hundreds of strikes in wliich our union is involved. 

Senator Ctoldwatkk. Well, it is an unusual exception ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Goldwater. Let nie go on with these exceptions. 

I am not through with my research on tliis, by the way, either, so 
we will have some more next week. 

From the New York Times, Saturday, August 20, 1949 : 

Struck Bell plant demands militia. Company and sheriff join in asking Dewey 
aid after vniion dcmonsti'ation. 

The Bell Aircraft Corp. and the sheriff of Niagara County today asked Governor 
Dewey for armed intervention after a disturbanoe in the United Auto Workers' 
strike here. 

Do you know anything about that strike i 

Mr. Rand. When I answered "No" before, I have heard of those 
strikes, about as much as you are tell me now, Senator. 

Senator Goldw^ater. I wouldn't try to cause you to create ]:)erjury 
by an answer like that. I want to know if you, in your official position, 
had anything to do with them, and I ask that question, if you knew 
about them from the executive level ? 

Mr. Rand. "What was the date of that one ? 

Senator Goldwater. This article was August 20, 1949. You had 
been a member about a year, I think, at that time. 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I was a member of my local union, and I didn't 
have an official position with the international union whatsoever. 

Senator Goldw^\ti':r. Well, in this particidar case, I would doubt 
that you had any reason to know anything about it. 

Mr. Rand. I read it in the paper, probably. 

Senator Goldw^ater. Let me read to you from the Detroit News of 
Thursday, January 27, 1955 : 

Racing to beat an Atomic Energy Commission production deadline, oflScials 
of Simplex Industries, Inc., 24520 12th Westchester Telegraf, started negotia- 
tions today with the UAW-CIO in an attempt to reopen the plant. Scene of 
picket line gunfire and violence yesterday. 

This is the subheadline : 

Pickets arrested. About 20 cars carrying 1 or 2 pickets each were parked 
at the plant this morning. Bard Young, UAW-CIO international representative, 
and Samuel Murphy, vice president of West Side Tool and Die Local 157, said 
the union had not had sufficient time to call off another scheduled rally of 
pickets here today. 

Now you have testified that you are a toolmaker by profession, and 
you did know about this strike in 1955 ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I knew about that strike, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. Did you know about the gunfire and violence? 

Mr, Rand. No. Where was that gimfire from? 

Senator Goldwater. It said the gunfire occurred at the plant "the 
scene of picket line gunfire and violence." 

Mr. Rand. I don't know anything about that strike at nil, other 
than what was in the paper. I know some people involved in it, the 
names that you mentioned. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9271 

Senator Goldwater. It says : 

At least three separate outbursts of firing were reported after the pickets 
tipped over a car owned by Edmund Blakeman, a uonstriking employee, and 
showered him with coffee. 

Let me read you another one. 

The Chairmax. Do you know anything- about that incident ? 
Mr, Rand. Nothing, except what was in the paper, Senator. 
Senator Goldwater. From the Detroit Times of October 15, 1953 : 

Rocks thrown at Kingsford Chemical Co. 

Now I will just read the first paragraph, which is a special 
paragraph : 

Lansing, October 1.5. Attorney General Miller said today he would recom- 
mend that Governor Williams send State police to maintain order at the Kings- 
ford Chemical Co. Officials of the company claimed that several nonstrikers 
who managed to get through massed UAW-CIO pickets at the main gate 
suffered minor cuts when windows in the car in which they were riding were 
smashed. 

Do you know anything about that strike ? 
Mr. Eand. No, sir, Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. I will read you from the Detroit News of No- 
vember 16, 1954, headline : 

CIO leader in plant brawl. Law-enforcement agencies sought to prevent fur- 
ther picket-line violence today as the UAW moved in to help a sister CIO union 
gain a closed shop at the Midwest Rubber Co., 1427.5, 9 miles east, in Warren 
Township. 

Do you know anything about that strike ? 

Senator Goldw ater. Now getting back to the North American Avia- 
tion Co. strike, in Columbus 

Mr. Rand. I don't think that last one was a UAW strike. Wasn't 
that the rubber works ? 

Senator Goldwater. It said the UAW moved in to help a sister 
CIO union. 

Mr. Rand. Yes; but the very name implied that. There are a lot 
of United Rubber Workers unions in the city. 

Senator Goldwater. I am not questioning that at all, but you have 
testified and others have testified that international representatives 
have a habit of wandering around in these other's strikes to help morale 
and I am just putting into the record the type of morale work that you 
engage in. 

From the Detroit New s of 1954 

The Chairman. The Chair will have to say again that the news- 
paper articles as .such are not evidence. They may be read to ask 
the witness what he knows about it, if he knows whether they are true 
or not, but the articles as such are not evidence. 

Senator Goldwater. Does tlie Chair object to the Senator reading 
these articles ? 

The Chairman. The Chair is not objecting at all. The Chair sim- 
ply has a duty to perform here to keep the record straight, and that 
is all I am doing. 

Senator Goldwater. If the witness cares to call anybod}^ to testify 
that these are wi-oug, I am perfectly willing to allow him to do so. 

Mr. Rauii. Mr. Chairman, Senator Goldwater just made a state- 
ment and I Avould like to get this clear. 



9272 IMPROPEK ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Goldwater said, sir, "if the witness cares to call anybody 
to prove that these statements are wrong, he does not object to it." 

Now the witness has no responsibility for calling other people. I 
have a responsibility of asking you to call other people if we decide 
that. Now, do I understand that we are now trying in this hearing, 
or that we are broadening this from Kohler and Perfect Circle to all 
UAW strikes ? We are prepared, ready, and willing, and we have sta- 
tistics showing how few strikes we have, and take statistics showing 
hov>^ little violence and we are ready to do that. 

The Chairman. I think the Chair understands the purpose of this 
line of questioning. What the Senator is undertaking to establish 
is, if he can do so, that in the Kohler strike the violence that occurred 
there was in line with the practices and pattern of other UAW strikes. 

Now, if I understand, that is the purpose. 

Senator Goldwater, That is correct. 

The Chairman. But the Chair has to take some responsibility for 
the proceedings here, and I stated that the articles themselves, although 
the Senators made them, are not evidence. But they form the basis 
of questioning the witness as to whether he knows anything about 
them. That is as clear as I can make it, and I believe I am right 
about it. 

Senator Goldwater. I think in fairness to Mr. Eauh, that I should 
tell him that sometime last spring, I think it was May, and it might 
have been June, and the exact date slips me, the committee met and 
decided on 11 areas that we would investigate. 

One of these areas was violence in striking. There was no decision 
made to pick out this strike or that strike or any other strike. 

Now, the mere fact that Kohler was chosen, I believe the reason it 
was chosen was that it was probably the classic example of striking 
that we could put our hands on. Certainly the door isn't closed, in 
this Senator's opinion, to the investigation of violence wherever it 
occurs, because we are merely proceeding under the decision of the 
committee. 

Now I want to go on with this. 

Mr. Rauh. Just a moment. 

Senator Goldwater. What do you want to say ? 

Mr. Rauh. I have to say it first in order for you to know what I 
want to say, Senator. 

There is a confusion here, and I would like to get the answer to it. 
I am not clear now as to what we are in fact investigating, because 
your opening statement which I took as counsel for the union as the 
position of the committee, was that you were investigating here Kohler 
and Perfect Circle. 

Now, Senator Goldwater, while I recognize your ruling is that this 
isn't evidence, is suggesting that we have some obligation to rebut 
newspaper articles which are not evidence. I had assumed that this 
is the Kohler strike, and if it is broader then we should rebut these 
things. 

The Chairman. It is primarily the Kohler strike, but the Chair's 
position would be, and we have established already that there were 
many acts of vandalism and violence in the Kohler strike period. 

Now, the Senator is contending that this just is further illustrative 
of a pattern of this union's practices. To that extent, if he can make 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9273 

any corroborating testimony that this is the practice of the union, this 
is what it does in strikes, and it occurred here again in the Kohler 
strike. 

Because you do have here some question as to who actually com- 
mitted the vandalism. Now, we have not been able to establish defi- 
nitely who may have committed the vandalism. If he can show that 
the general pattern is every time you have a UAW strike you have 
these things happening, it would have some corroborative effect. 

Mr. Rauh. I undei-stand what you mean, if he can show it by other- 
wise than newspaper articles. 

The Chairman. Show by proof. 

Mr. Rauh. Thank you, sir. 

Senator GoLDWAn:R. Mr. Chairman, inasmuch as the broad field 
that we are investigating at the present time is violence in striking, 
I think that the committee can at any time decide among ourselves 
whether we want to get into any other strikes in which violence 
occurred. 

Now, my purpose in reading these newspaper articles, or these por- 
tions of them, is to try and bear out what I have contended ; that this 
is not an isolated strike at Kohler. 

Now, I did not demand that the union rebut. If they doubt the 
word of the press, and if they don't believe what has been written in 
these newspapers, I think it is perfectly fair to them to allow them 
the chance to call the Detroit New^s wrong, or the Detroit Times wrong, 
or any of these other newspapers. 

Now let me go on with this little chore. 

The Chairman. We will cross that bridge when we get to it. At 
the present I don't know whether we will arrive at it. But if we do, we 
will cross that bridge then. This committee has jurisdiction to in- 
vestigate any strike or any violence in any strike, anywhere in this 
country. 

Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, I have one or two more and 
I will be finished. 

Two thousand block factory gate. 

This is from the Detroit News of August 23, 1948 — Jackson, Mich., 
August 23. 

Violence flared at the gates of the Aeroquip Corp. Today resulting in a beat- 
ing of several company officials and office employees. Two thousand pickets 
blocked the plant entrance, Police Chief Harry Bailie said. 

The company, manufacture of automotive, aircraft, and agricultural ap- 
pliances, employs approximately 300. 

That was just a year after you joined the UAW. Do you know of 
that strike? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't. Senator. 

Senator Goldwater. From the Free Press of March 10, 1950 : 

Chrysler aide beaten by pickets. 

That is the headline. 

The first violence in the 45-day Chrysler strike flared Thursday at the Marys- 
ville plant. Pickets twice assaulted John Scrivo, 45, of Warren Township, a 
supervisor in the accounting department, at the gates of the struck plant. 

Do you know anything about that strike ? 
Mr. Rand. No, sir. 



9274 IMPROPER ACTIVITIKK IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Goldwater. AVell, Mr. Chairman, I won't read the rest of 
them at this present time. There will be some more as our research 
continues. 

The CiiAiKMAX. Is there objection to recessing at this time? 

Senator Mi xnr. Before you recess, could 1 make a unanimous- 
consent refjuest ^ 1 may be in error, but I think that when we admit- 
ted the article by Ray Vikers, into the record, I think it was taken as 
an exliibit instem! of part of the printed record. I tliink it should be 
part of the printed record in view of the fact that there were many 
questions about it. and there is a lot of connnent from Mr. Vikers and 
to Mr. Vikers. 

I ask you why unanimous consent, as part of the printed record at 
the point where we were discussing this matter, that the Wall Street 
Journal article of August 9, 195(), as reprinted in the Kohlerian for 
Friday, August 1 7, 1950, appear in the jirintecl record. 

It is not long, and I think it will make the hearing more intelligible 
to those who read it. 

The Chairman. Well, the ('hair has no objection. Does anyone 
else have objection? If not, it will be so ordered. 

Now, may I inquire if there are any more questions of this witness? 

Senator Ervix^^. I want to ask just one. 

Senator Muxdt. Senator Curtis does not seem to be here, but he 
told me a moment ago 

The Chairman. I am just trying to determine whether we should 
have the witness come back. 

Senator Cctitis. Yes ; I have some questions. 

The (/HAirman. The witness Avill return, then, and we will recess 
until 2 o'clock. 

(Whereupon, at 12: 15 p. m., the committee I'ecessed, to reconvene 
at 2 p. m., Thursday, March 13, 1958.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION' 

The CiiAiRMAX'. Tlie connnittee will be in order. 
(Members of the connnittee present at the convening of the session 
were : Senators McClellan, Ervin, and Mundt.) 

The Chairman. Will you resume the stand, Mr. Rand ? 

TESTIMONY OF DONALD RAND, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, 
JOSEPH L. RAUH, JR.— Resumed 

Senator Ervin. If my recollection serves me right, you stated dur- 
ing your examination that Mr. Biever, I believe you expressed it, 
had run over a striker. 

Did I understand 3^ou correctly ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ervin. When did that occur ? 

Mr. Rand. During the period of the strike, and I don't know the 
specific date, and I can probably find that out for you. 

Senator Ervix". What do you mean by "running over a striker" ? 

Mr. Rand. He was found guilty of striking, as I remember it, one 
of our pickets while he was either going in or out of the plant. He 
was driving a car, and with that car, I think he pleaded guilty or he 
was guilty of that act. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 9275 

Senator EmnN. He was convicted in a court ? 

Mr. Rand. I think he appealed and it was still upheld. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Rand, perhaps we can finish about the clay 
boat. In the afternoon you came back and Mr. Biever came down, 
and at that time the tires were punctured on the car that was pulling 
in the crane, isn't that correct? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I believe so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have anything to do with that ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did you remain in that area at that time? 

Mr. Rand. I would say about 30 minutes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then where did you go ? 

Mr. Rand. I went back to my oftice. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did you remain in your office then ? 

Mr. Rand. I was there. I believe, until the latter part of the after- 
noon. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did you go back to the dock ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. I believe I was there some time in the evening. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you go back to the dock ? 

Mr. Rand. I heard tliat there was a tremendous crowd there, that 
cars were driving through there, and just a tremendous group of 
people were there, and I went down there out of curiosity. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went down to the dock three times, did you 
not? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it very peculiar that you happened to arrive 
at the dock on the three occasions when the crane was about to appear? 

At 7 o'clock in the morning you were there, and 11 o'clock in the 
morning you were there when all of this violence was done to the 
crane, and you were there again at 6 o'clock in the evening when they 
were trying to get the equipment out. That is the situation. 

And isn't it very peculiar that you happened to show up— the in- 
ternational organizer of the UAW — at the very time that these acts 
of violence took place, and where these incidents occurred ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't think that there was any accident insofar as me 
being there. I was not there all of the time. I was there for an 
hour, and I didn't come down there for any other reason than to see 
what was going on. 

Mr. Kennedy. It doesn't make any sense. You w^ere there at 7 
o'clock and you had the conversations with Buteyn. You went back 
to your office and you came back at 11 o'clock, and at that time the 
equipment on the crane was wrecked. You stayed for a half hour, 
and the equipment on the crane was wrecked. You went back to 
your office and you remained in your office and you came back in the 
evening. 

Then you swore at the man who was trying to get the equipment 
out of the dock. Those are the facts. And whenever there was some 
act of violence, or whenever there was a disturbance, Don Rand was 
there. 

Mr. Rand. Well, Mr. Kennedy, actually when I came back there 
the second time, I didn't see the crane, and the only thing that I saw 
at that time was Mr. Biever in the car which I subsequently found 
out was being driven by the detective, when the Kohler Co. officials 



9276 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN TKE LABOR FIELD 

including Mr. Biever were there, and that was the incident which I 
related this morning. 

Mr .Kennedy. Then, certainly, in the evening, when Mr. Happy 
Buteyn was trying to get his caterpillars out of the dock area, you 
prevented him or told him or swore at him, and by intimidation pre- 
vented him from doing what he was entitled to do ? 

Mr. Kand. At that time he came over to me, and he said something 
to me and I don't remember exactly what it was, and I said 1 didn't 
want anything to do with it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you arange to have the lines opened 
up so he could get his equipment out of there ? 

Mr. Rand. I hardly knew anybody who was there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, Mr. Rand, it is very peculiar, I would say, 
that every time something occurred at the dock that day you were 
there. 

Mr. Buteyn's estimation, both of their estimations were that you 
■were in charge, and talking to the police officials who will testify 
later, but you were the one who was instigating all of these riots or 
these incidents that were occuring at the dock. 

Do you deny any responsibility for it ? 

Mr. Rand. I have no responsibility for any of the riot that occurred 
there. 

Mr. Kennedy. You, as an international organizer 

Mr. Rand. Men and women and children were there, and thousands 
of people were there before the day was out. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand. 

Mr. Rand. And I know nothing about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand, too, the fact that maybe at the be> 
ginning this was certainly not intended to occur; that is, the violence; 
and perhaps at the beginning it wasn't intended there were going to 
be that many people. But certainly you did not do anything as an 
international representative of the UAW to alleviate the condition. 

The situation appears that when there was an incident, Donald 
Rand was present. I would like to just point out, as far as your 
history up there is concerned, Mr. Rand, you were there when the 
mass picketing was taking place. When these nonstrikers could not 
get through the picket line, you were present, and you did not take 
any steps at that time, as a representative of the UAW, to open up 
a line so the strikers could get to work. You were present on at 
least one occasion when the home demonstrations were taking place, 
which were completely unfair to the people living in those homes who 
wanted to go to work. That was intimidation. You were present on 
the three occasions down at the dock when incidents occurred. 

You were a representative of the international union. 

Mr. Rand. The period of time in which I was at the clay boat, Mr. 
Kennedy, probably covers 3 or 4 hours altogether. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. You were there at 7 o'clock in the 
morning when they arrived with the equipment ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know precisely whether something happened. 

Mr. Kennedy. I will tell you what happened. You were there at 
7 o'clock in the morning at the arrival of the equipment, at 11 o'clock 
in the morning at the arrival of the crane and where all of the damage 
was done, and 6 o'clock at night when they came to try to pick up 
their equipment. That is what happened. 



IMPROPER ACTrVTTIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9277 

You -were there 3 times, and 3 incidents occurred, and you were there 
in your participation in the rest of the strike ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; I was disturbed about it, and I did speak to Emil 
Schuette who was there, as I have ah^eady mentioned. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would think that was completely unsatisfactory. 
You had an important position, Mr. Rand, and at the time the loud- 
speaker came down you could have gotten up and spoken yourself and 
told the people to go home, or certainly the people who looked to you 
for leadership. 

ThatisalL 

Mr. Rand. I wasn't in charge of this. 

The Chairman. Well, who was? Can we find out for goodness 
sakes, who was in charge ? 

Mr. Rand. Mr. Burkliart was the international representative, and 
Mr, Allan Grasskamp. 

The Chairman. Was he your boss ? 

Mr. Rand, Well, he superseded me as such. 

The Chairman. Was he there at the same time that you were ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe so. 

The Chairman. Well, you were the highest ranking international 
official there ; were you not ? 

Mr. Rand. I may have been. 

The Chairman. All right, they were looking to you for leadership. 

Mr. Rand. Allan Grasskamp was president of the local union. 

The Chairman. But they were looking to you for leadership, so 
far as the international was concerned ? 

Mr. Rand. Not in this particular situation. 

The Chairman. You were in charge, giving the directions and 
refusing to let them get their equipment out, and you were threaten- 
ing them if they did ; were you not ? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

The Chairman. As the testimony shows. 

Mr. Rand. I pleaded with these people not to cross our picket 
lines. 

The Chairman. Did you plead with them to let them get their equip- 
ment out of there ? 

Mr. Rand. No. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Senator Ervin. When I heard the testimony about the incidents at 
the clay-boat dock, and then the disclaimer that it was not planned, but 
accidental, I cannot help but recall the statement that a great judge. 
Chief Justice Lacey, of North Carolina Supreme Court, made on one 
occasion. He said : 

If two or more men coming from different directions and each carrying planks 
should meet at the center of a desert, and should place the planks together and 
form a perfect design, one might reasonably infer from such event that they came 
together by prearrangement. 

That is all. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I have a question. 
Senator Mundt. I wonder if the Senator will yield ? 
Mr. Curtis. I will yield. 

Senator Mundt. My purpose in asking the Senator from Nebraska 
to yield, Mr. Chairman, is to read into the hearing a letter which I 

21243— 58— pt. 23 9 



9278 IMPROPEIR ACTRITIES IN TKE LABOR FIELD 

received duriiif^ the noon hour, and which I think in justice to the 
clergy of Sheboygan County should be read, because their names have 
been bandied around to a considerable degree during the course of 
these hearings. 

The CiiAiuMAX. Let the Chair make it very clear again, this is not 
evidence. 

Senator Muxdt. This is not evidence at all. 

The Chairman. It is just a speech. 

Senator Mundt. Like the one we took in from Mr. Vickers this 
morning. 

The Cii ATiorAN. This was sworn testimony tliis morning. 

Senator Mundt. This was a letter or photostat copy of what Mr. 
Vickers ]iad written. 

The Chairman. I was not in the room at tlie time. 

Mr. Rauii. The letter this morning was sworn testimony in that 
the witness swore that this was a letter from Mr. Vickers explaining 
the document which Senator Mundt was referring to. We are now 
getting a letter that is not the basis of any questions to Mr. Donald 
Eand, but is simply a letter being ])ut in. We would appeal to you 
to enforce the ruling, Avliich I know is difficult in view of the activities 
here. 

The Chairman. Let the Chair state this, that each Senator is a 
Senator in his own name. I am stating for the record that this letter 
is not evidence, and if I am overruled, why then it will become evi- 
dence, but until T am it is not. 

Proceed. 

Senator Mundt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

In view of the fact that a lot of liberties have been taken with the 
members of the clergy of Sheboygan County and their integrity has 
been cliallenged, and their impartiality has been challenged, and their 
judgment has been challenged, I found on my desk this noon, when 
i returned, a letter from Eev. T. Perry Jones, the pastor of the First 
Methodist Church of Sheboygan, Wis. : 

Senator Karl Mundt, 

Care of Senate Investigating Committee, 
Washington, D. C. 
Dear Senator Mxindt : I thought you would like a copy of this letter that has 
been sent to Mr. Eniil Mazey in response to a telegram addressed to rue. The 
members of the clergy of this community feel that publicity should be given to 
letters that are being sent by individual clergymen to the committee. Mr. Mazey 
has made us look very ridiculous, and religious leaders over the country should 
know our side of the story. 
Sincei-ely yours, 

T. Perry Jones, 
Minister, First Methodist Church, Sheboygan, Wis. 

Here is the letter that Mr. Jones enclosed with that note of trans- 
mittal. , 

The CiiATRisrAN. Let the Chair make this observation: Suppose we 
get a letter from Mr. Mazey. Are you going to want it in the record? 
i am trying to keep a record here that has integrity, so far as this sort 
of proceeding is concerned. I have the same letter, I know about it, but 
j ust to give it to the press is one thing. 

But when you go to cluttering up this record with it, then you are 
o-oino- to force the Chair to rule that anybody else who wants to write 
a lett'er and put it in the record can do so. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrriEiS m THE LABOR FIELD 9279 

Senator Curtis. Well, will you give me the floor back on that. I 
think this : I believe either the sender of a letter or the recipient can 
lay a proper foundation for its introduction as evidence. 

Xow, the letter received this morning was not identified either by 
the writer or the person to whom it was addressed as a general written 
letter. It went in here, and I did not object to it, and I do not want 
to object to it. It was perfectly all right. Mr. Rand got it in there. 

I have no objection to having members of the committee sworn to 
present this. But I believe that it does qualify when it is presented 
by either the writer or the receiver of the letter. 

The Chairman. All the Chair has to say is when I rule the other 
way, don't object. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, the letter referred to evidently is 
the letter that I understood was from Mr. Vickers. Senator Mundt in- 
quired of Mr. Rand about an interview which he gave to Mr. Vickers. 
He had read a dispatch from the New York Times or the Wall Street 
Journal, or some newspaper. 

Mr. Rand admitted that he had an interview with ]Mr. Vickers and 
he also admitted, as I recall, the accuracy of the particular quotation, 
but contended or asked, after he w^as asked about that, for the privilege 
of introducing it, after admitting the statement made by Mr. Vickers, 
and the letter that he had was from Mr. Vickers, referring to the 
very statement and the very article which was put in evidence. 

I think that door was opened in that case, and I think it is an en- 
timely different situation from that which now confronts the com- 
mittee. Here we are offered a letter written by some man who is 
not a witness and never has been a witness, and whose name has not 
been mentioned, as I recall, by any of the witnesses or any statements. 
If we are going to put in a letter like this, I have a bushel or two 
of them in my office that would be just as competent. I think we 
would never get an end to the record, or the hearings if that is what 
we are going to do. 

Senator Mundt. You say you were not here this morning ? 
The Chairman. I had stepped out and Avhen I came back in, they 
were talking about this letter. Now, I assume that it had been put 
in evidence. 

Senator Mundt. I can throw a little bit more light on that letter, 
and it was admitted in evidence, and I did not object to it because 
I want to get the facts before the people, and I want to get the facts 
into the record, and I don't want to preclude anybody from introduc- 
ing information that he thinks would be helpful on them. 

Mr. Rand said he would like to read the letter from Mr. Vickers. 
The Chairman. Was the letter from Mr. Vicker to Mr. Rand ? 
Senator Mundt. It was not. It had no relationship whatsoever. 
It was to another party, from Mr. Vicker and answered back. It was 
never identified as being his letter at all. There was no identity to 
it at all. It was on foursquare with this letter. This happens to 
be a preacher and I think he is entitled to as much treatment as any- 
body else. 

The Chairman. You know what the rules are. 

Senator Erxtln. Mr. Chairman, I would like to state again that on 
an article, as I recall, written by Mr. Vicker, the witness was not onlv 
interrogated about it by Senator Mundt, but I believe it was subse- 
quently put into the record, the entire article. 



9280 IMPROPEIR ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The witness was asked about his interview with Mr. Vicker. He 
oflfered a letter which was written to Mr. Vicker, calling attention to 
the same interview that was put into the record, the same article that 
the witness was interrogated about. 

Furthermore, it was not objected to by anyone. That is the situa- 
tion. This is entirely different. 

Senator Muxdt. It is precisely the same. In both cases you have 
letters written by people involved in the testimony. In neither case 
was the letter written to the man who was testifying. Mr. Rand did 
not write Mr. Vicker. Mr. Vicker did not write to Mr. Rand. Mr. 
Rand said some other individual in the union had written to Mr. 
Vicker and Mr. Vicker had replied to him. 

He said he had what he believed to be a true and honest photostatic 
copy of that letter. He pleaded for an opportunity to read it and 
we granted him the opportunity. It is exactly on foursquare. Sena- 
tor Curtis interrogated Mr. I\Iazey at great length 

Senator EimN. With all due respect 

Senator Mundt. Just a moment. I have the floor. 

Mr. Curtis interrogated Mr. Mazey at great length about his atti- 
tude toward the clergy in "Wisconsin, both the Catholic clergy and the 
Protestant clergy, because they had advertisements and ads expressing 
the opinion of Mr. Mazey on them. 

Mr. Mazey made his statement and a little later modified it, re- 
tracted it. It is something that has been a matter of inquiry for a 
long time in here. I think the pastors of Sheboygan have a perfect 
right to have read into the record their opinion, because nobody can 
deny that they have been slandered or maligned or criticized, use what 
language you want, in the course of the testimony. 

The Chairman. Let us get it settled once and for all. The rule 
provides that anyone who feels that he has been maligned or slandered 
may come and testify, or he may submit an afRdavit. The Chair has 
enforced that rule up to now. 

If we are going to do it this way — I am not going to do it. I am 
not going to admit it. I am going to let those who read this record 
know that I had the courage to rule as I believe is right. If you want 
to tear up the record, it is all right, but you will have to take the 
responsibility for it. 

I know if you start this, every letter that I have received, every letter 
any member of this committee has received, is entitled to go into this 
record. 

Senator Mundt. At least it is on foursquare with the incident that 
occurred in this committee room less than 4 hours ago. 

The Chairman. You invited it 4 hours ago. I was not here. 

Senator Mundt. It was not my letter. Mr. Rand invited it. 

Senator Ervin. I do not like to argue with my good friend, the able 
and distinguished Senator from South Dakota, but I am going to say 
this without letting my sweet disposition sour in any respect, that 
the situation which now confronts us bears just as much resemblance 
to the situation which occurred this morning as my homely countenance 
does to the beauteous countenance of Miss America. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. Under date of March 10, 1958, Rev. T. Perry 
Jones wrote to Mr. Emil Mazey, as follows : "Emil Mazey, Secretary- 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN" THE LABOR FIELD 9281 

Treasurer, UAW, CIO." He has addressed him care of the Senate 
Investigating Committee, Washington, D. C. 

Dear Mr. Mazey : Your telegram of apology for your irresponsible reference 
to the clergy of Sheboygan County arrived too late to be of any consequence. 
In fact, it is 2 years too late. The UAW-CIO, through its strike bulletins, and 
your intemperate statements in public speeches in Sheboygan, vilified the clergy 
for one reason only. 

We were expected to support every word and every technique used by the 
union. When the clergy turned away from this snide invitation to be spokesman 
for the union, then we were accused of being spokesmen for the Kohler Co. 

Obviously, your greatest insult is to assume that the clergy of Sheboygan 
County are so lacking in self-respect that they would be stooges for the Kohler 
Co. or any other group in the community. Whatever faults you may recognize 
in the Kohler Co., the clergy of this county can assure you that Knhler Co. 
offinals have never tried to influence the churches. We are, Mr. Mnzey, as 
free a group of clergymen as you will find in any part of the country and, 
in spite of your inference, we intend to remain that way. 

Had you been as just and honest as you demand others to be, you could 
have made reference to the many meetings and hours of labor put in by four 
members of the clergy in an attempt to find an area of usefulness, and to con- 
vince the union in its strike techniques that they should be men of integrity. 

Because we did not follow the leadership of the union, we were castigated 
for months in the daily strike bulletin and, by inference, we were accused of 
cowardice. I do not recall that you came to our defense during this period 
of intimidation. 

It grieves me. Mr. Mazey, that a man of your experience and important office 
in the union should maliciously poison the minds of labor and alienate the 
great number of union members from their spiritual leaders. 
Sincerely, 

T. Perry Jones, 
Minister, First Methodist Church, Shchoyyun, Wis. 

For whatever it is worth, and in justice to the clergy, Mr. Chairman, 
I have never contended that this is evidence, but it is, it seems to me, 
in the spirit of fair play, an opportunity to give people w^ho have been 
severely criticized, to put it mildly, before this committee, an oppor- 
tunity to present their side of the case. If any member of the commit- 
tee doubts the accuracy of this report, I will be happy to have them 
sug^^est to the clergy of Wisconsin, of Sheboygan, individually or col- 
lectively, that they come here to testify. 

The Chairman. All right ; you have agreed with me that it is not 
evidence, but you want to keep it in the record, notwithstanding that 
fact? 

Senator Mundt. That is right. 

The Chairman. Then the Chair will recognize Mr. Rauh. You may 
make a statement. 

If we are going to proceed that way, we will proceed that way. 

Mr. Rauh. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. All I want to say 
is that Mr. Mazey apologized for his statement. It seems to me it is 
time we dropped this subject. Thank you for this opportunity, sir. 

The Chairman. Your statement is not testimony either, as far as I 
am concerned. Proceed. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Rand, referring to the day and evening of 
the clay-boat incident, based upon all of your sources of information, 
including what you saw, as well as information you picked up in 
conversation, through the press and otherwise, what union officials 
were down to the dock the day of the clay -boat incident ? 



9282 IMPROPER ACTR'ITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rand. I believe, Senator, that almost every single person in 
Sheboygan County, including the officers and the stewards and the 
members and their wives and the kids, everybody — I saw lawyers, and 
there were probably doctors down there — I think everybody in Sheboy- 
gan was down at the dock during that period. 

Senator Curtis, Will you enumerate the union officials that were 
there? You were there ? 

Mr. Rand. I know that Alan Grasskamp was there. I know that 
Raymond Majerus was there. I believe that Ed Kalupa was there, 
w^ho was a chief steward of local 833. 

Senator CuRTLS. Was anybody else there? 

Mr. Rand. I am trying to search my memory. It is quite some time 
ago. I do not know, offhand. Bob Trever, of course. 

Senator Curtis. Was Baur there ? 

Mr. Rand. Art Baur, I think he was there ; yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Was Treuer there ? 

Mr. Rand. Treuer ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes ; Treuer. 

Mr. Rand. Yes ; I just mentioned him. 

Senator Curtis. Was Vinson down there ? 

Mr. Rand. I do not know. I do not believe he was there. I do 
not even think he was in town at that time ; was he ? 

Senator Curtis. Can you think of any others that were down there ? 

Mr. Rand. As I say, I think probably everybody was there, the 
whole town. 

Senator Curtis. I am talking about union officials. 

(At this point. Senator Gold water entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Rand. I do not remember any others than that, Senator. Let 
me think for a minute. 

Senator Curtis. You were present in the hearing 

Mr. Rand. I think John Steiber, our financial secretary, may have 
been there, local 833. 

Senator Curtis. Can you think of any local 833 membei^ who were 
not international representatives or officers, but who would come in 
from other locals? Can you think of any of them that were there, 
too? 

Mr, Rand. I do not think there was anybody, Senator, from any 
other UAW local, unless they were from Sheboygan. We have a 
number of locals there in Sheboygan, who are members of our union. 

Senator Curtis. Not all of these international representatives would 
be in Sheboygan everyday all the time, would they ? 

Mr. Rand. When you say "all" 

Senator Curits. I mean some of those people were coming and go- 
ing ; is that correct ? 

Mr, Rand. Well, yes, depending upon whom you mean. Senator. 
If you mean Harvey Kitzman or people of that type; yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis, That is what I mean. There were people who came 
to Sheboygan off and on many times, but who were not there con- 
tinuously ? 

Mr, Rand, Yes, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. So would you say that all the union officials, inter- 
national representatives, and other unionmen, who had come in from 
outside in connection with the strike, who were in town were perhaps 
there, down to the dock that day ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9283 

Mr. Kand. Yes ; I think the people who were in town, I think most 
of the people who were in Sheboygan that day, at one time or another 
were down at the dock, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Now we have it established that the union officials 
were down there and that perhaps everyone of them that was in town 
was down there. I think there has been quite a little testimony here 
to show that they had some active part, one way or the other. There 
has been testimony about conversations. 

You were in the hearing room yesterday when your public-relations 
man testified concerning the radio broadcasts ; were you not ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And at that time I called attention to the strike 
bulletin of Saturday, April 10, 1954, wherein, in the sixth paragraph 
it says this : 

Don't forget to tune in on the nightly radio broadcasts over "WHBL at 6 : 30. 
This is your best way of getting important, last-minute information and in- 
structions. 

Did you consider these radio broadcasts a means of instructing the 
strikers and others what to do ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, Senator. The radio programs was used for that 
purpose, but to the best of my memory, whenever any instructions or 
notices were given, they were usually given by a specific member of 
the local union. As it was mentioned here, for example, if the chorus 
was going to have a rehearsal, it would have been the chairman of 
the chorus. If it was a strike committee meeting, it would have been 
announced by Alan Grasskamp or something of that nature. 

Senator Curtis. I am not interested so much in the chorus. I would 
probably like to hear it. 

Mr. Rand. It does a pretty good job. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. How many different union representatives or of- 
ficials had any talk or contact with either of the Buteyn brothers that 
day ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rand. Did you say how many local and international unions? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. I believe I had a discussion with them. I believe Ray- 
mond Majerus, an international representative, discussed a matter 
with them, and I believe it has been testified that Ed Kalupa, who was, 
as I pointed out, a chief steward. 

People other than that — that is from the local, of course. Whether 
there are people other than that, I don't know. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. The Kohlerian, although it has changed its name 
now, was in 1955 the official organ of local 833; was it not? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. I have before me here the issue of Friday, July 8, 
which says : 

General strike, State CIO chief warns, if unloading of clay is attempted — ■ 

I will read the first three paragraphs. They are datelined Mil- 
waukee : 

State CIO President Charles M. Schultz, Thursday, said that if necessary 
he will call a general strike to prevent unloading of the Kohler Co. clay boat, 
the M. S. Fossum, a ship of Norwegian registry, loaded with 1,700 tons of ball 
clay for the strikebound plumping fixture firm. 



9284 IMPROPEIR ACTIVITIES EN" THE LABOR FIELD 

Union dockworkers in Milwaukee said that they would not handle the cargo 
and State CIO President Charles M. Schultz, said that if necessary, a general 
strike would be called to prevent any unloading operations. 

CIO President Charles Schultz predicted that 52,000 citizens would be out in 
the streets if the cargo is unloaded. 

This morning there was some discussion with you as to whether 
Mr. Schultz was talking about a general strike in Milwaukee or a 
general strike throughout Wisconsin. Based on this reference of 
52,000 citizens, what is your best judgment as to whether this general 
strike that was talked about was within the city or throughout the 
State? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I would assume from the figures that you have 
used there, which appear in this article, Senator, 52,000 — I haven't 
the least idea how many members there are in what he represents in 
that area, but I think that the statement was a mistake, and if I had 
known about it I would have been opposed to it, as I am now. I 
think it was a real mistake to make such a statement. 

Senator Curtis. What I am trying to clear up is whether your 
president was proposing a statewide general strike or whether he was 
talking about ]\Iilwaukee. 

Mr. Rand. I am not sure now. When you say 52,000 — how many 
members are there in the State of Wisconsin ? 

Senator Cuktis. That I do not know. 

Mr. Rand. He is the president of the Wisconsin State CIO. I have 
very little, if anything, to do with that. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Schultz is the statewide president? 

Mr. Rand. He was at that time. He may. still be for all I know. 

Senator Curtis. And his jurisdiction extended to all of the CIO 
unions in Wisconsin ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, the setup of the CIO in any one of our State 
organizations is made up of various CIO local unions who have affili- 
ated with a statewide council. Just what his authority or jurisdiction 
would be, I am not sure at the moment, but the constitution or the 
bylaws of the organization will speak for themselves. 

Senator Curtis. That CIO president, Charles M. Schultz, he is 
president of the greater organization which includes unions other 
than the UAE ; is that right ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. The State CIO is made up of affiliated locals from 
among CIO unions within the State. 

Senator Curtis. And would he have authority to call a general 
strike? 

Mr. Rand. I doubt it very much. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. He would have to have some other people sup- 
porting him? 

Mr. Rand. I am pretty sure he would. 

Senator Curtis. I want to get that organizational setup just right 
for the record. From the international standpoint, Walter Reuther, 
prior to the merger, was both president of the UAW and also president 
of the CIO ; is that right ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes; I believe he was. Yes, the UAW and the CIO. 

Senator Curtis. At the present time, your immediate superior is 
Mr. Emil Mazey? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And his immediate superior is Walter Reuther? 



IMPRiOiPER ACmVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9285 

Mr. Eand. Yes. Walter is the president of our organization and 
Emil is the secretary-treasurer. He would be the superior, I suppose. 

Senator Curtis. In another issue, right close to that time, of the 
same paper, July 14, 1955, the headlines say, "Labor Solidarity Sends 
Clay Boats Away. AFL and CIO Backed by Public Support." 

Now, this statement in your official paper indicates that it was the 
CIO and AFL project and it was backed by public support. The first 
paragraph is as follows : 

The united front of the CIO and AFL, combined with overall public support 
this week resulted in an announcement from the shippers of Kohler-bound clay 
that they would not attempt to unload their cargo either in Milwaukee or 
Sheboygan. 

Further on in this article, the paper says it is the official organ of 
local 833. It says : 

Harvey Kitzman said all unloading operations would be picketed to advertise 
the fact that it is bound for a struck plant. 

Then, in the Milwaukee Journal of Thursday, July 7, 1955, we have 
a reference to the same incident. It says : 

Freighter comes here after Kohler dispute — 
and the next headline is : 

Threat made of citywide CIO walkout. 

I read the first paragraph : 

Cbarles M. Schultz, president of the Wisconsin State CIO said Thursday that 
he had received assurances from Mayor Zeigler that the freighter, Fossum, 
would not be unloaded here until the mayor received a legal opinion. Schultz 
said he would call a citywide strike of all CIO union members if unloading were 
attempted. There are about 50,000 CIO workers in Milwaukee. 

Then, I would like to call your attention to another portion of that 
story : 

The freighter reached the Milwaukee Harbor about 6 a. m., and tied up at 
municipal pier No. 1. A dozen persons, including some of the striking Kohler 
workers from Sheboygan, gathered in the dock area on Jones Island. I'olice 
later barricaded the island entrance to turn back anyone who did not have 
business there. There were no incidents, police said. Some of the union men 
said that they were here as observers. 

My question is this, Mr. Rand : Do you know who any of the men 
were who went over from Sheboygan to Milwaukee to be there as 
observers when the boat docked or attempted to dock at Milwaukee? 

Mr. Rand. I understand. Senator, that there were some people 
from Sheboygan who were there. I do not know what their names 
are. 

Senator Curtis. '\'\^iere did you get that information ? 

Mr. Rand. From the same source, I think, that you have. 

Senator Curtis. Well, now, Mr. Rand, here we have a picture where 
the strike bulletins inform the members to listen to the radio for their 
instructions. The radio carries on a program of when the boat will 
arrive and says, "There certainly will be a welcoming committee down 
there." 

According to your testimony, practically, at least, every union 
official that was anywhere around the area was there the day of the 
incident. The testimony is without dispute that they had conversa- 
tion with the Buteyn brothers, who were the contractors there to 
unload the boat. 



9286 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

There is other testimony about their conversations with police, and 
possibly with some of the Kohler people. Following that, your State 
president, after they failed in one attempt to unload the boat, says: 
"If it is unloaded in Milwaukee, there will be a oeneral strike." 

In the light of those facts, I ask you : Is it still j^our contention that 
the union had no part in the clay boat incident ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. It is my opinion and it is the opinion of the ex- 
aminer who investigated this matter, the Labor Board. 

Senator Curtis. I think you would know more about it than any 
of the rest of us on the outside would know. I am going to be inter- 
ested as this investigation progi-esses in the extent to which you and 
other high-ranking officials in the union contend that it was not your 
doings. 

Now, Mr. Rand 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, before we leave that, there is a con- 
fusion in the record about the relationship of the CIO president to 
the United Automobile Workers. Indeed, the questioning has referred 
to the fact of "your president." 

The CIO is an organization in the State, sir, which has no authority 
in any collective bargaining of this kind. It is a loose federation deal- 
ing with other matters, legislation, other kinds of actions. We had 
no responsibility whatever, sir, for what might have been done by the 
head of this loose federation. 

It is inaccurate to refer to it as "our president.'' I do not say 
whether it was wise or unwise. 

The Chairman. If you want that to be evidence, let the witness so 
swear. The Chair is not going to sit here and rule that everything you 
say is evidence. I am going to keep this record straight. 

All right, proceed. The statement of the counsel is not evidence. 
It might be informative to someone who might want to listen to it 
and get their bearings. 

Mr, Rand. Senator 

Senator Curtis. I am totally astounded at the statement of coun- 
sel. I did not lift that statement out of some irrelevant publica- 
ion. Here is the official organ of the local union, carrying the story of 
what their State CIO president says, that there will be a general 
strike if they attempt to unload that boat. Here we have a state- 
ment of counsel trying to disclaim it. 

It is about as impressive as these other disclaimers. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Witness. 

Mr. Rand. Senator, it happens to be a fact that the State president,, 
to my knowledge, could not have done what he is saying there. 

Senator Curtis. Do you mean he had no lawful authority to do it ? 

Mr. Rand. I do not believe that he had that authority. 

Senator Curtis. I will ask you this 

Mr. Rand. Under the constitution of our international union, there 
is a certain procedure that follows, and one of those procedures does 
not provide that the State president of a State organization will call 
a general strike. 

To my knowledge, it is impossible for him to have carried out that 
particular statement and I think it was a mistake on his part. I am 
sure that he would agree today that it was a mistake to make such a 
statement. 



IMPIDOPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9287 

Senator Curtis. I think there are a lot of threats made, and prob- 
ably they have no lawful authority to perform them. I do not know 
who slashed Mr. Buteyn's tires, 10 of them; I am not making any 
accusations as to who did. But I am sure of this, that no one had 
any lawful authority to do it. 

The witness has testified in response to questions about the boy- 
cott. He has had a part, some part, in the boycott. I want to ask 
you : The products of Kohler are used in home construction as well 
as public buildings, are they not ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And you know, as a matter of fact, of course, that 
most citizens do not build a home more than maybe once during their 
lifetimes. You are also aware of the fact that many of the contractors, 
builders, are small operators and small-business men, as well as there 
may be some larger ones. 

Mr. Rand. That contractors are small-business men ? 

Senator Curtis. That among the people who build homes there are 
many small contractors and operators ? 

Ml'. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. When a union official makes a suggestion either to 
the person that is putting his life savings into building a house, or 
to the small contractor, the small-business man who is building that 
house, when the UAW representative comes along and in just an 
ordinary tone of voice makes a suggestion that they ought not use 
Kohler products, that carries with it something more than just an 
urging, does it not ? 

Mr. Rand. As I understand it. Senator, a legal primary boycott is 
proper. That is the type of a boycott program that was undertaken 
by our union and we advertised the Kohler story and urged people not 
to buy Kohler products during the period in wiiich they were found 
guilty of unfair labor practice in their failure to bargain in good 
faith. 

Senator Curtis. The point I wish to make is this : Not to talk about 
the legality of a particular set of acts, whether or not they are already 
prohibited as a boycott or whether they should be, but I want to point 
out what the practical effect of it is when the union official says to a 
little individual or a person of modest circumstances, or anybody else, 
"I would suggest you not use Kohler products." 

That suggestion is coming from an organization that he has heard 
about and he has read such headlines as rioting, injury, and, "Two 
Hurt. Two Seized in Picket Clash." In other words, over a long 
period of years, he has read about the UAW and what happens to 
people that get in their way. 

He has read about violence at Kohler ; he has read about these other 
things. If he lived in the Toledo area, he may have read in the news- 
papers of how a member of the union got up in the union and wanted 
to see the books of the building corporation and got his jaw broken. 

So it is not just a mere suggestion that Kohler is unfair in their 
labor organizations and you are trying to persuade people not to use 
their products, but the entire reputation, built up over a period of 
years of the UAW is pressing down on the mind and conscience of 
that individual. 



9288 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

So lie is going to be impressed by it and he is not going to use them. 
Do you feel that when you are successful in curtailing the use of 
Kohler products, that you are hurting anybody besides the Kohler 
Co.? 

Mr. Rand. Is that your question, Senator? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. Am I hurting somebody ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. I was so lost in your speech that I do not get the ques- 
tion. Why don't you repeat the question for me ? 

Senator Curtis. All right, I M-ill. 

Mr. Rand. I was going to talk about some of the decent things that 
our union has done for the people in this country, such as pensions, 
wages, better working conditions. You seem to forget those things, 
Senator, when you talk about it. 

Senator Curtis. No, no. I heard Walter Reuther talk about those 
things every time he has been asked a direct question in the last 10 
years. 

Mr. Rand. And he does a very fine job in pointing out the very, 
very fine things that have been done by our organization. 

Senator Curtis. The words just float out and he avoids the respon- 
sibility for the record that has been written by the UAW all through 
the years, just as you people here avoid responsibility for the record 
you wrote at Kohler. 

I have no sympathy for the Kohler Co. management. I never saw 
them before this thing came up, but the public has an interest here, 
and when the public has a choice of merchandise shut off by a boy- 
cott, not only does it restrict their selection, but it causes the prices 
to rise, and certainly, to a lot of people, just like this Buteyn firm 
small-business men who may be in the retailing or distributing busi- 
ness, they are not responsible for what happened at Kohler, yet they 
are the victims of this boycott program you carry on. 

My question was 

Mr. Rand. Senator, I would like to say this, that I am sure that 
the decent people in the United States of America and Canada, who- 
ever buys a bathtub, will not support the Kohler Co. in their sordid 
background and their history of their murdering people and tlieir 
attempts to do the same thing. It is my opinion that they actually 
were going to do the same thing if they got the opportunity in 1954. 

The record will sliow that they had guns and ammunition and clubs 
and all of these things there, especially detectives, we find out here. 
This company's sordid labor history is one that ought to be told to 
all of America. 

Senator Curtis. All right. 

INIr. Rand. I think that those people who understand and hear this 
story will not buy any of the Kohler products. 

Senator Curtis. All right. Now, here is my question : Do you feel 
that when you are successful in inducing someone not to use Kohler 
products, that you are hurting anyone other than the Koliler Co. ? 

Mr. Rand. We were in hopes. Senator, that we would never have 
to have a boycott. We gave a great deal of consideration to this 
because 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9289 

Senator Curtis. We will grant that, that you were hoping that 
that would not have to happen. But it did happen, it is happening 
now. You have a nationwide boycott operating. Wliat I am asking 
you is : Do you feel that in this boycotting, you are hurting anyone 
other than the Kohler Co. ? 

Mr. Rand. That we are hurting people other than the Kohler Co. ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. Yes, unfortunately. Senator, we are, and we are willing 
to call this boycott off today, this minute, if you can get Mr. Congers 
to accept Mr. Mazey's arbitration proposal. 

Senator Curtis. We are not arbitrators. We are taking this testi- 
mony for the one purpose, and that is the only reason we have to 
justify these hearings, to get the information to see if there should be 
any change in our labor laws. 

We are not here to defend the mistakes of management or the mis- 
takes of labor. You said that you are hurting other people. Now 
who are you hurting ? 

Mr. Rand. When you say, "Wlio are we hurting?" do you mean 
as a result of the boycott ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Rand. I think the over 2,000 men, women, and children in the 
Kohler strike are being hurt very much by the boycott because it is 
necessary to carry on this boycott because of the refusal of the 
Kohler Co. to sit down and bargain very simply on the terms that 
we have offered to settle the strike oti. 

Senator Curtis. Now let us get back on the train. I a.-ked you if 
you felt that in carrying on this boycott you were hurting anyone 
other than the Kohler Co., and you replied, unfortunately you were. 
Now who are those other people that you are hurting ? 

Mr. Rand. The two-thousand-odd strikers, their families, their 
wives, and kids and all the people. 

Senator Curtis. Do you mean your boycott is hurting those people ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, Senator, because if we did not have to have this 
boycott, we would have the strike settled. That is what we want to 
do, through the boycott, to settle this strike. 

Senator Curtis. Are you hurting any retailers? 

Mr. Rand. I have no knowledge of it. I would say that there are 
many good union products that can be purchased in lieu of Kohler 
products, which are made by scabs and strikebreakers. 

Senator Curtis. How about the retailer who may have his money 
invested in an inventory of Kohler products that he has bought in 
the due course of business ? Are you hurting him ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I think. Senator, that that is a concern that the 
Kohler Co. ought to give a great deal of consideration to. 

Senator Curtis. All right, I am asking whether or not he is being 
hurt. 

Mr. Rand. I don't know ; is he ? 

Senator Curtis. Well, is he ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know of any of those. 

Senator Curtis. How about a distributor who perhaps has been a 
distributor of a particular line of products for 10, 20, or 30 years or 
40 years, who has built up goodwill and their advertising program 
on pointing to a product that your members have made, and you go 
into a commimity and you boycott the use of it. 



9290 IMPROPER ACTTVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

What is the effect of that upon the distributor? 

Mr. Rand. Senator, we did not start this strike; we did not cause 
the strike 

Senator Curtis. I did not ask wlio started it. 

Mr. Rand. All of these thino;s are fundamental when you come to 
a discussion such as this. Those people are victims of Kohlerism. 
That is what the problem is here. 

Senator Ctirtts. Just a minute. Do you adhere to the doctrine that 
the end justifies the means ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't think so, no. Senator. 

Senator Curits. Are distributors hurt by this action ? 

Mr. Rand. I think some may be and so are the 2,000 Kohler strikers 
and their families. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, you would agree that a boycott 
does hurt people that are not involved in the basic labor dispute, is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, just as the strike does. 

Senator Curtis. And that is what we are interested in. 

Mr. Rand. Yes, and we would like to settle the strike today. 

Senator Curtis. We are interested in the public's stake in this thing. 
Now I want to ask you about something else. Were you ever at the 
bowling alley known as Roofs Bowling Alley ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I was, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. How many times have you been tliere ? 

Mr. Rand. I think I have been there possibly a dozen times. 

Senator Curtis. A dozen tim«^.s ? 

Mr. Rand. Maybe more. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Were you there on the night of February 6, 1956? 

Mr. Rand. I am not sure of the exact date. If you have reference 
to a particular incident 

Senator Curtis. That night there was some trouble there. 

Mr. Rand. I w^as there on one of those nights. 

Senator Curtis. On one of those nights. It is the occasion that 
has been referred to by previous witnesses as the Root's Bowling Al- 
ley incident, wherein the bowlers, made up of individuals who were 
then working in the plant were bowling down there and there was 
some trouble. You were there that night ? 

Mr. Rand. I believe that they were tlieie two nights. They had 
some diHiiiilty. I was there one night when there was some trouble. 

Senator Curtis. Who else of UAW officials or members l)rought 
in from the outside were there at the }x)wling alley the night that you 
vrere there ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr. Rand. I do not believe there were any, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know Roger Bliss ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I do. 

Senator Curtis. Wlio was he? 

Mr. Rand. He is a Kohler striker. 

Senator Curtis. He is a Kohler striker ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Was he there that night ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir ; he was there the night I was there. 

Senator Curtis. Were the two of you together ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN" THE LABOR FIELD 9291 

Mr. Rand. I don't know whether we were together. He was there 
and I was there. I believe I Avas with him. 

Senator Curtis. Wliat ? 

Mr. Eand. I was with 3 or 4 other people, too, I might add. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. Who were they? 

Mr. Rand. I think Fritz Byrum, a Kohler striker. There were 
2 or 3 Kohler strikers. I don't know their names offhand. 

Senator Curtis. Did j'oii bowl that night? 

Mr. Rand. No, we did not. 

Senator Curtis. Did Roger Bliss bowl? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't think he did. I think the Kohler Co. scabs 
and strikebreakers were bowling in a city tournament. 

Senator Curtis. These 3 or 4 other people that you were with, did 
they bowl? 

Mr. Rand. I don't think so. 

Senator Curtis. What time did you get down there ? 

Mr. Rand. It must have been around 9. 

Senator Curtis. How long did you stay? 

Mr. Rand. I would say about 30 minutes, a half liour, more or less. 
More than that, if anything. 

Senator Curtis. A little more than that. Did Roger Bliss have an 
altercation with a police officer down there '. 

. Mr. Rand. He had an altercation outside with a police officer, I 
think. He was in plain clothes. He was unidentified. I think 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator Curtis. Did you have some conversation with the police- 
man? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, I believe so. 

Senator Curtis. You spoke up in defense of Roger Bliss, did you? 

Mr. Rand. I spoke up and, as far as Bliss was concerned, he was 
disturbed over somebody what he claimed jumped on him in the 
bowling alley, a plainclothes man. He was pulling away and these 
fellows identified themselves as officers. 

I urged Bliss not to start anything or get into any difficulty, to do 
what they were telling him to do. They said they wanted to talk 
to him. 

(Members of the select committee present at this point, were Sen- 
ators McClellan, Ervin, Mundt, Goldwater, and Curtis.) 

Senator Curtis. Why did you go down to Root's Bowling Alley 
that night? 

Mr. Rand. I went down there, Senator, because I had heard, and I 
think we got telephone calls, there were a bunch of policemen down 
there, secreted in various sections of the street, and there was a large 
number of people down there. 

I went down there because I wanted to make sure that none of our 
people got into any difficulty because I knew that the Kohler people 
were bowling there. 

Senator Curtis. Now were your people bowling down there? 

Mr. Rand. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You wanted to go down and see the policeman? 

Mr. Rand. No. I had understood that Mr. Desmond was down 
there taking down names or some such thing, and you have to under- 
stand this situation, that these people 



9292 IMPROPER AcrrivrriES est the labor field 

Senator Curtis. Wlio told you that Mr. Desmond was down there 
taking down names? 

Mr. Rand. I received a telephone call to that effect, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Where were you when you got the telephone call ? 

Mr. Rand. I was in my office. 

Senator Curtis. At what time? 

Mr. Rand. 8 or 9 o'clock at night. 

Senator Curtis. Who was it from ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't know the person offhand. 

Senator Curtis. You got an anonymous telephone call ? 

Mr. Rand. No, I don't believe it was anonymous. I don't re- 
member the name offhand, but somebody told me that there was a 
great number of people down there. 

Senator Curtis. It was general knowledge that those Kohl er em- 
ployees that were working were going to bowl down there that night, 
wasn't it ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't believe that I knew that, and it may have been 
general knowledge. 

Senator Curtis. And it had been discussed in your union circles, 
hadn't it? 

Mr. Rand. Not by me, sir, no. 

Senator Curtis. How many strikers did you see down there ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I don't know whether they were strikers or who 
they were. There were a lot of people there. 

Senator Curtis. How many strikers that you recognized as strikers 
did you see doAvn there ? 

Mr. Rand. I would have to estimate, Senator, and I would say 6 
or 8 of them, or maybe 10, and I don't know offhand. It was pretty 
crowded there. It is a neighborhood bar and a tavern connected. 

Senator Curtis. Now you went down to see Mr. — what's his name, 
who was writing down some names ? 

Mr. Rand. I heard Mr. Desmond was there. 

Senator Curtis. You wanted to go down and see him write? 

Mr. Rand. I have seen this fellow writing quite often. He is an 
attorney for the Kohler Co., and he makes a practice, and I think he 
took 485 affidavits or some ridiculous figure. 

Incidentally, Senator, many of them were disproven in the National 
Labor Relations Board hearings. 

Senator Curtis. I don't know what you are talking about disprov- 
ing. I haven't gotten the story out of you yet. 

Mr. Rand. I am talking about the affidavits that he took, and his 
attempts to get information dealing with the activities of the Kohler 
strikers. 

Senator Curtis. Here was an activity going on where your ci-owd 
weren't involved. They weren't bowling, and you say you went down 
there to see him write down names because you heard some policemen 
were down there ? 

Mr. Rand. I don't think that I said that ; did I ? 

Senator Curtis. What did you go down there for ? 

Mr. Rand. I went down there because I was aware of the fact there 
were a great number of policemen in the area, and that there was a big 
crowd down there. 

Senator Curtis. Who told you there was a big crowd down there? 



IMPBOPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9293 

Mr. Kand. I have already testified to that, sir, that I received a tele- 
phone call. 

I might point out, Senator, that I have been to a lot of places in 
Sheboygan, and I spent a great deal of time there, and the fact I was 
in this bowling alley at the time certainly doesn't indicate that it was 
something that just happened. I was there a dozen other times. 

Senator Curtis. Did something happen that night ? 

Mr. Kand. Yes; it did. 

Senator Curtis. Wliat did happen ? 

Mr. Rand. Well, I don't know exactly how or where or anything 
else, or what actually happened, but all of a sudden somebody grabbed 
Bliss — and I think his case was tried in court, and Bliss was even- 
tually — the charges were dropped. And there were some plainclothes 
men we found out subsequently to that who were in the bowling alley 
and other people can certainly testify to what the facts are. 

There was pushing and shoving and that was all that I saw. 

Senator Curtis. Did Bliss come down to push and shove, or did he 
come down to bowl ? 

Mr. Rand. The alleys, sir, were being used by these Kohler scabs 
and strikebreakers. 

Senator Curtis. Well, Bliss wasn't one of them, was he? 

Mr. Rand. Oh, no, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Those fellows were interested in bowling, and the 
scores, and the tournament going on, weren't they ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. It wasn't a case of your crowd having a bowling 
party, and the Kohler workers who were not joining you coming in 
and molesting you at all, was it? 

Mr. Rand. I don't understand your question. 

Senator Curtis. This wasn't a case of where the strikers were hav- 
ing a bowling party, and the nonstrikers came and molested them, 
was it ? 

Mr. Rand. No, to the fii*st part of your question, and what is the 
second part ? 

Senator Curtis. It is all one question. I said this was not a case 
where the strikers were having a bowlmg party, and the nonstrikers 
came and molested them, was it ? 

Mr. Rand. The nonstrikers, no. 

Senator Curtis. Well, that is what I wanted to know. 

Mr. Rand. I think Mr. Desmond was there, too, and I think he 
testified he wasn't bowling. 

Senator Curtis. I want to read just a part of the editorial which 
appeared in the Sheboygan Press on February 8, 1956, which appar- 
ently was the second day after that. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, the issue has arisen again of an editorial 
to be read that has nothing to do with the questioning. It is just 
a reading of an editorial, and I suppose it can be done, but I just 
wanted to call your attention to it. 

The Chairman. Well, the Chair has ruled, and the Chair is still 
going to insist he is right until I get taught better, that you may 
read an editorial or an article from the paper, and ask him if he 
agrees with those facts. 

21243— 58— pt. 23 10 



9294 IMPROPPJR ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The reii(lin«>- of it, or the statement about it, is not evidence. Tlie 
answer that the witness may give is evidence. 
Proceed. 
Senator CuiiTis (reading) : 

The heckling, the profanity, and the obscenity and mauling that developed at 
Root's Recreation, 1.^20 South 12th Street during the past 2 evenings, cer- 
tainly is not characteristic of Sheboygan. The screaming, the inteference with 
the bowlers, the flicking of ashes into the glasses of beer, the kicking in the 
shins, the spitting of tobacco juice, and the spraying of beer at bowlers, the kick- 
ing around the shoes of the bowlers, the barring of access to the men's room, the 
ripping of shirts, and all these acts of indecency are not typical of Sheboygan 
as we have known it. Neither is the threatening of life typical to our com- 
munity, but there was at least one such instance Monday night. Requiring the 
bowlers to run a gantlet as they leave the premises, is not Sheboygan. 

Now,, my question is this: In your opinion is that characteristic of 
Sheboygan ? 

Mr. Rand. May I read a letter, too. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. I want you to answer my question. 

]Mr. Rand. I don't think that I understand your question, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Well, I read this newspaper account of the inter- 
ference taking place with tlie bowlers. I will have to read it again. 

Mr. Rand. I don't think it is necessary, if you will just ask me the 
question. 

Senator Curtis. They described all of tliis spitting and picking and 
putting ashes in beer, and ripping shirts off, and said that that wasn't 
typical of Sheboygan. I asked you if you agreed with that, that 
it is not typical of Sheboygan. 

Mr. Rand. I don't think that action of that type is typical of any 
town in this country. I am quite positive of that. 

Furthermore, if you will look at this in the proper perspective, you 
can undei'stand that the emotions are high, and things like this will 
happen, Senator, with a strike of this type against the Kohler Co. 

This Kohler Co.'s background is one which is probably the most 
sordid in the history of any industry, and you have to accept the fact 
that certain emotions, or emotional things will take place, and they are 
very unfortunate indeed, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Now you can go on with all of those arguments 
you want to, that the end justifies the means, but you will have to an- 
swer in the court of public opinion on that issue. 

Now, here were some of your fellow workers down there bowling. 
Because you didn't like the employer, you say it is all right to go 
ahead with tliose things. 

Now, this lavSt paragraph in this editorial has something to say 
about you. 

The right to set up picket lines at a struck plant is not in question, but we do 
not believe it is the intent of the law that a picket line can be moved to the 
place of business of a ])erson who is not involved in the strike. 

The disturbances at the bowling alley were in effect moving the picket line to 
such a place of business. To su])stantiate this viewpoint, we point out that 
Kohler strikers took part in the disturbances Monday, and that in that group 
that evening was Don Rand who represented the international union here. 

Mr. Rand will be rcnieniltered for his activities on tlit> dny of the riot at the 
harbor front last .July. It is a remarkable colnciden<<' that disturbances be- 
come intensified during the periods that he is in the city. 

My que.stion is this 



Mr. Rand. iVIay I read- 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 9295 

Senator Curtis. Let me ask the question. 

Mr. Rand. May I read an article from the next day's press, too, 
if you will allow me to do that ? 

Senator Curtis. I want you to answer this question: Are you the 
Don Rand that is referred to in the Sheboygan editorial of February 
8,1956? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, whicli I am refeiTing to in the editorial papers of 
the Sheboygan Press. 

Senator Curtis. '\Aniat is it you want to read ? 

Mr. Rand. I would like to read an article that appeared in the 
Sheboygan Press, on February 9, 1956. 

Senator Curtis. How long is it ? 

Mr. Rand. It won't take too long, a little longer than yours, 
Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Is it an editorial ? 

Mr. Rand. No, it is an article that appeared there. 

Senator CuRiTS. A news item? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, sir; and I will give you this cox)y if you will allow 
me to read it. 

Senator Curtis. You go ahead and read it. It is all right. 

Mr. Rand (reading) : 

Union Board Attacks Press and Praises Rand 

The executive !)oar(l of local .So3 accused the press of casting aspersions on the 
union and defendant I >on Rand, international representative, in a statement 
issued today, in reply to an editorial published Wednesday. The statement was 
transmitted by E. H. ("olluiiien. recording .secretary; and it follows: "The She- 
hoyji:an Press editorially tried its hand at tongue in cheek libel by casting- asper- 
sions on the union and the international representative assigned to the Kohler 
.strike by inference. insinuati(m and omissions. 

"Internati(mal Ri^presentative Donald Rand was a.ssigned to the strike in 
O 'tober of li)">, mainly to intensify the nationwide primary boycott campaign 
against Kohler products and also to administer the strike in behalf of the inter- 
national union. He was assigned l>ecause he is a capable administrator, a good 
negotiator and a hard worker. 

"He has done a most comi>etent .iob of administering the day-to-day work of 
conducting- the strike, and put in more than 16 hours each day sparkplugging 
the evidently successfid boycott campaign. We are not surprised that Kohler 
management wishes to rid itself of International Representative Don Rand as 
.a negotiator and as a union leader. 

"He is formidable opponent. We are surprised that the press has subscribed 
to the Kohler Co.'s smear tactics. If the press is really — " 

Senator Mundt. We are entitled to know what all of this levity is 
riibout. They are passing notes around, and if it is evidence 

Mr. Rand. They are missing me, too. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. I saw counsel pass a note to you and if it came 
from somewhere else 

Senator Curtis. Tlie Avitness is mine and I haven't yielded to any- 
' body. 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis has the floor. Proceed. 

Senator Curtis. Go ahead with your reading, I think what you are 
reading is very significant. 

Mr. Rand. I think it is, too. Senator. 

"If the press is really concerned about the welfare and good name of Sheboy- 
gan, it could do far more to offer constructive leadership in trying to find ways 
and means of settling the strike on an honorable and equitable basis. We too 
are concerned about these incidents, and think that the entire situation is 



9296 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

deplorable, including the lack of real courage on the part of leading citizena 
to investigate all of the true facts of the entire situation, and follow with 
definite steps designed to restore a stable industrial peace to the community. 

"We note that the Sheboygan Press has never raised editorial comment about 
the industrial lawbreakers in our midst, who have plunged the entire community 
into conflict. The good name of Sheboygan did not seem to be at stake when 
the Kohler Co. was cited for 12 unfair labor practices, each single one involving 
a charge that a Federal Labor Board law had been broken. Or what about 
Kohler Co.'s conviction on earlier counts which were adjudicated to be outright 
intimidation? And doesn't the same principle apply or are Kohler workers 
expendable as citizens of the community? 

"The international union has demonstrated far greater responsibility to the 
Kohler strikers and to the community than either the Kohler Co. or its satellites. 
They spent over $7.5 million in this community so that economic pressures will 
not determine the outcome of this strike. 

"They spent the money so that Kohler workers can eventually achieve first- 
class citizenship not only in their homes but also at work. We agree that 
hoodlumi^m has not place in Sheboygan, but neither has second-class citizen- 
ship. If the Sheboygan Press desires to crusade for the elimination of both, 
we offer our wholehearted cooperation because our concern for the community 
and its good name extends far beyond recreation for strikebreakers." 

Tliat was an article that appeared in the Sheboygan Press of No- 
vember 9, 1956. 

Senator Curtis. That was a news reprint of the statement issued 
by the local union ? 

Mr. Rand. Yes, the executive board of local 833. 

Senator Curtis. I am very much interested in you presenting that. 
Here a shameful thing takes place. A man owns a bowling alley, and 
he has no labor strike, and no labor trouble there. Some of your fel- 
low human beings, fellow workers, go down there to bowl. People 
come down there to molest them. It is described as obscenity and 
profanity and spitting of tobacco juice and flicking ashes in beer, and 
kicking people on the shins. 

Mr. Rand. I did not see that happen there. 

Senator Curtis. I know you did not say it. 

Mr. Rand. I did not see it there, either. 

Senator Curtis. A newspaper condemns it. And they are treated 
with the identical UAW pattern that Judge Schlichting was treated 
with, and that the clergy was treated with. They were attacked for 
that. And you are writing the record here on that. 

I think that you men owe a responsibility to the tens of thousands 
of workers in this country, many of them organized, to take this cloud 
off unionism and discontinue and disavow responsibility for these 
things. After all of these admissions, for instance, about tlie clay 
boat incident, that you were all there, that you discussed tlie things 
witli Buteyn, that you were in touch with the policemen and tliat had 
been advrtised over the radio and strikers were told in their bulletin 
to listen to the radio for instructions, you then come in here and say 
that it was not any union activity, and you had nothing to do with it. 

That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions? 

Mr. Counsel ? 

Senator Mundt. You asked me the other day to examine some 
exhibits wliich Mr. Rauh olfered to the committee, and to report back 
to the committee as to wliether I thought they should be accepted and 
to compare them with the colloquy and the differences of opinion 
which had given rise to them. 



IMPRiOPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9297 

I have now had an opportunity to examine these documents and I 
have gone over them and had them examined in addition by one of 
our staff associates, Mike Bernstein, and I am ready to make my re- 
port if it is agreeable with the chairman. 

The Chairman. The Chair will hear the report. The Chair wanted 
you to be satisfied about whether you accepted them as evidence, or 
just accepted them as a brief. That is what I was trying to determine. 

Senator Mundt. Yes, because I raised the question at the time 
that it was not sworn testimony. 

The Chairman. That is right. I sustained you in it, too. 

Senator Mundt. That is right. I have examined these documents 
which Mr. Rauh submitted to the committee on March 12, in which 
he described it as a legal memorandum, plus certain legal papers or 
copies thereof, in connection with what Mr. Rauh refers to as the 
stipulations or settlement agreements between the NLRB and the 
union. 

I want to say, Mr. Chairman, that I had no objection to receiving 
as exhibits in these hearings the legal papers referred to and which 
1 shall describe more precisely in a moment. I shall point out shortly 
why I do object to receiving the so-called legal memorandum. 

First I want to point out exactly what is involved in this whole 
matter so that we can have it once and for all in one place in these 
hearings. The union spokesmen have been attempting to create the 
impression the NLRB has never taken any action against the UAW, 
whether it be Kohler I^cal 833 or the international union itself in 
connection with the union's attempts to establish a boycott at Kohler. 

In trying to create this impression, these union spokesmen have 
either answered my questions erroneously, in my opinion, or have tried 
to evade and befuddle the entire issue. Proceeding chronologically 
from March 7, 1958, I was questioning Mr. Mazey, ihe No. 2 man in 
the Automobile Workers Union about boycott activities directed by 
the union against the Kohler Co. 

Mr. Mazey insisted that the union's tactics were perfectly legal and 
lawful, and gave the impression that the NLRB had never taken any 
legal action against the union, for violating the secondary boycott 
provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Mundt, Curtis, and Goldwater.) 

Senator Mundt. As everybody knows by this time, I believe, an 
NLRB proceeding in an unfair labor case, including secondary boy- 
cott cases, is initiated because somebody filed a charge with the Gen- 
eral Counsel of the NLRB, alleging that a certain employer or a cer- 
tain union has violated the Taft-Hartley. 

The General Counsel of the NLRB makes an investigation and if 
he believes there is prima facie evidence of such a violation, he issues a 
complaint against the union or the company, whichever happens to 
appear to be violating the law. In questioning Mr. Mazey, who, as I 
have said, was giving the impression that no NLRB action had been 
taken against the union, I asked him this question, appearing on page 
1476 of the transcript : [Reading :] 

Senator Mundt. Has the NLRB General Counsel issued a complaint against 
your present Kohler boycott? 
Mr. Mazey. They have not. 
Senator Mundt. They have not? 
Mr. Mazey. No. 



9298 IMPROPEIR ACl'IVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

That was on March 7, 1958. On Monday, March 10, 1958, I re- 
turned to tlie matter again by questioning Mr. Mazey as follows, and 
1 now quote from pages 1724, 1725, of the transcript : 

Senator Mundt. Now, you testified on page 1476 in response to my question. 
I asked you this : Has the NLRB counsel issued a complaint against your 
present Kohler boycott? 

Mr. Mazey. They have not. 

Senator Mundt. They have not? 

Mr. Mazey. No. 

Senator Mundt. Do you want to let that stand in the record without cor- 
rection ? 

Mr. Mazey. Yes. I don't believe a complaint was issued. 

The witness then conferred with his counsel. 

Mr. Mazey. I am advised by our attorney that no complaint was processed by 
the General Counsel for the NLRB. 

Then again on the bottom of page 1725 Mr. Mazey said, and I 
quote : 

I am told that no complaint was issued, Senator. 

Then on page 1726, Mr. Mazey said, and I quote him again : 

I am advised by my counsel that no complaint was issued. 

On the same page, Mr. Kauh said, and I quote him, at page 1726, 
Mr. Rauh: 

I think there was no complaint in the sense that Mr. Mazey used it, a General 
Counsel complaint. If we are wrong, we will file that, too. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to point out that Mr. Mazey was quite 
wrong. I do not condemn him for this, because he is not a lawyer. 
But I do wish to point out not only did he receive erroneous counsel 
from his attorney, but that his attorney at the same time was mis- 
leading the members of this committee by what he said in that con- 
nection. 

I have in my hand here a document turned over to me by Mr. Rauh 
himself, which is a copv of the complaint issued by the General 
Counsel of the NLRB on August 23, 1955, in case No. 13 CC 110, al- 
leging that the UAW International Union and the Kohler Local 833, 
as well as several other unions, violated the provisions of the Taft- 
Hartley Act by attempting to establish an unlawful boycott against 
the Kohler Co. by means of certain activities directed against a num- 
ber of other companies doing business with Kohler, including the 
Buteyn Construction Co., from whom we have had testimony con- 
cerning the clay boat incident at the dock in Sheboygan. For Mr. 
Rauh's benefit, I might add that there isn't a single word in this com- 
plaint about settlements, agreements, stipulations and so forth. It 
is just an ordinary, regular, typical NLRB complaint, which Mr. 
Mazey and apparently Mr. Rauh has insisted never liad been issued 
against the union. 

But Mr. Rauli, with his wrong interpretation, misled both his client, 
Mr. Mazey, and this committee. He prevented me, since I am not a 
lawyer, from making this point at that time, because I had to have 
adequate counsel and give careful study to the submittals' made by 
Mr. Rauh. 

He once more promised, as he had done before, Mr. Rauh once more 
promised as he had done before, to submit a legal memorandum, and 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIElrD 9299 

uttered a few additional statements which tended to further confuse 
the issue about whether there were stipulations and settlement agree- 
ments. 

So on Tuesday, March 11, when Mr. Rabinovitz, the lawyer who is 
in this committee room now, who represented the union in a number 
of matters, testified under oath, I asked him about the matter of 
NLRB action against the UAW because of an illegal boycott against 
Kohler. 

I did that under the misapprehension that Mr. Rabinovitz was the 
lawyer who might have appeared in that case. Mr. Rabinovitz ad- 
mitted that charges had been filed with NLRB against the union, but 
stated he was not the attorney who would handle that particular 
matter for the union. 

He said he understood it was handled by attorney Harold Crane- 
field in Milwaukee. I quote from Mr. Rabinovitz' testimony on pages 
1843 and 1846 of the transcript : 

Senator Mtjndt. Is Mr. Cranefield in the committee room? 

Mr. Rabinovitz. No, sir, he is not here. 

Senator Mundt. Is there any attorney here who has any firsthand information 
on it? 

Mr. Rabinovitz. I don't think so. I think Mr. Bernstein is probably referring 
to Mr. Redmond Roache, but I am sure that Redmond Roache was not active 
in that. It was handled completely by Mr. Cranefield. 

Further questioning elicited from Mr, Rabinovitz that Mr. Rauh 
was not a member of the regular legal staff of the UAW. I wish to 
point out that Mr. Rauh heard this testimony of Mr. Rabinovitz and 
made no protest, and I believe that in direct questioning by me saited 
that he was employed by the UAW for these hearings and is not a 
member of the regular staff of the UAW counsel. 

So inasmuch as this concerned him as well as a matter which he had 
promised to clear for the committee, I assume he found Mr. Rabino- 
vitz' testimony accurate. He certainly raised no protest against it at 
the time. At any rate, I again had no opportunity to question any- 
body representing the UAW, either a lawyer or an official, about the 
NLRB action against the union, concerning this boycott of Kohler. 
Consequently, I have spent some time examining the documents that 
Mr. Rauh submitted the day after the examination of Mr. Rabinovitz, 
on Wednesday, March 12. 

As I have said, they consist of a number of legal documents involved 
in several NLRB matters connected with the union boycott activities 
against Kohler, and the document entitled "Memorandum on UAW 
Consumer Boycott of Kohler Co. Products" submitted by the union's 
attorney. 

I object, Mr. Chairman, to the acceptance of this document called the 
memorandum in the form submitted for reasons which I shall shortly 
indicate and which seem to be in complete harmony with the Chair's 
consistent rulings as he has made them regarding what is testimony, 
what is evidence, and what is not in these hearings. 

First, however, having been unable to get a reply to my questions 
on this matter, I shall ask them now, and answer them myself on the 
basis of the legal papers in the NLRB cases which were submitted to 
the committee by Mr. Rauh himself. 

Question 1. Did the General Counsel of the NLRB issue a complaint 
against the UAW charging an illegal boycott against Kohler ? 



9300 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

I have already stated that the answer is "yes," and it is found in the 
papers submitted by Mr. Rauh. 

Question 2. Did the NLRB promulgate a cease and desist order 
directing local 833 and the International UAAV to cease and desist 
from engaging in secondary boycott activities against a nimiber of 
companies, including the Buteyn Construction Co.? Did this order 
require the unions to cease and desist from picketing these companies, 
or in any other manner "including threats, violence, orders, directions, 
constructions, or appeals" inducing or encouraging employees of this 
company to strike or to refuse to handle tlie products of the Kohler 
Co. witli an object of forcing these companies to cease doing business 
with Koliler? 

Again, the answer is "yes." 

I hold in my hand a copy of the Board's order submitted by Mr. 
Ranh himself as part of the evidence, and as supporting the con- 
clusion that this answer is "yes." 

The third question: Did the United States Court of Appeals in 
the Seventh Circuit, sitting in Chicago, enter a decree enforcing that 
order ? 

Mr. Chairman, again the answer is "yes." The decree was put into 
the record on Wednesday, March 12, it being one of the legal docu- 
ments submitted by Mr. Rauh as part of the evidence which I think 
we should accept as an exhibit. 

I am quite aware that the NLRB cease and desist order was based 
on a settlement stipulation in which the union stipulated that it ad- 
mits to no violation of law and the NLRB agrees that the stipulation 
shall not be admissible as evidence in other proceedings. I wish 
merely to point out that despite the stipulation, the NLRB's order 
and the court's decree, except for the stipulated provisions I have 
mentioned, are identical with and just as enforceable as an order or 
decree which results from an NLRB unfair labor practice case involv- 
ing the usual hearing. 

Mr. Chairman, this co-called legal memorandum which Mr. Rauh 
has submitted and which I have in my hand is not a legal memoran- 
dum, but is a statement of fact as well as statements about the law 
which may or may not be accurate and may or may not be true. 

At the end of the statement appear the names of Mr. Rauh and 
Mr. Redmond H. Roache, Jr., attorneys for UAW. 

Not only is this document not svv-orn to, it is not even signed, the 
two names appearing merely in type. 

It has already been distributed to the press. Hence, if the union 
wishes to put this statement into the record, or submit it as an exhibit, 
I ask that we follow the established practice in this committee of 
having it made a sworn statement, or, if the union prefers, Mr. Rauh 
or Mr. Roache, or any other attorney designated by the union, should 
be permitted to testify on this matter under oath. 

It seems strange to me, IMr. Chairman, that Mr. Rauh and Mr. 
Roache permit their names to appear on this statement, hand it in 
witli typewritten names at the bottom of it, despite the fact that they 
were both in the committee room when I asked if any UAW attorney 
was present who could answer my question. 

If they were competent witnesses when they wrote the mimeo- 
graphed sheet which was distributed to the press, they must have been 
competent witnesses at the time I said, "Is there anybody in the com- 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEtS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9301 

mittee room with firsthand knowledge who can stand and be sworn to 
testify on the subject?" 

Neither of them responded at that time. Mr. Rabinovitz in his 
testimony indicated that Mr. Cranefield, an attorney who was not 
present, whose name is not signed to this document, was the only law- 
yer who was qualified to talk about this matter, and that neither Mr. 
Rauh nor Mr. Roache had any firsthand knowledge of it. 

It seems to me that unless one of these attorneys wishes to testify 
about this matter under oath, we should not accept this mimeographed 
statement as an exhibit. 

Tlie Chairman. The Chair will refuse to accept any of it until 
somebody comes in here and swears to something. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, may I just respond very briefly? I 
guarantee I will not take as long as the Senator did to state his 
position. 

Senator Mundt. ISfay I inquire, Mr. Chairman, whether we are 
taking evidence now under oath or just getting a self-serving state- 
ment by tlie attorney for the UAAV. 

The Chairman. You made a speech. That was not evidence. I 
am going to grant this attorney a moment to reply and a moment only. 

Mr. Rauh. In my moment, sir, first, to explain my position with 
the union, because Senator Mundt seems to think there is something 
about it. I am the Washington counsel for the United Automobile 
Workers. 

The Chairman. All right. Let's stop there. Is that enough? 

Mr. Rauh. That was just answering one point that I thought ought 
to be cleared up since Senator Mundt 

The Chairman. That is nothing in the world but an argument be- 
tween counsel and a member of the committee, and it is not evidence. 

Senator Mundt. I beg the chairman's pardon. This deals with 
some testimony that has been injected into the record. I do not see wliy 
the cliairman thinks that is strange. This deals with testimony which 
has been injected into the record. It has been a continuing problem. 
We have tried to get the facts. We have had sworn testimony by Mr. 
Mnzey. I have asked questions on which the evidence has been re- 
futed. Mr. Rauh has submitted some evidence wliich in itself points 
out that Mr. Mazey was wrong. I think we should try to get the 
facts in this committee. 

The Chairman. I am perfectly willing to stay here until the day 
after next year to do it. 

Senator Mundt. I will be with you. 

The Chairman. But if we are going to get it, we will get it under 
oath. 

The idea of just throwing the record open to any kind of a state- 
ment that anybody wants to make, and then call it evidence, the Chair 
is not going to go along with. 

Make a brief statement and let's move to some evidence. 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Chairman, I couldn't agree with you more. I 
thouirht it would be helpful for this committee to have a legal brief, 
and I submitted one. 

The Chairman. A legal brief is not evidence. 

Mr. Rauh. It is all right. Don't put it in the record. 



9302 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. It is all right for you to offer it for the information 
of the committee, but it is not evidence. It is nothing but argument. 

Mr. Rauh. That is fine. You have no argument with me, sir. I 
am perfectly happy to have it simply treated as a legal brief and not 
be in as evidence. 

Now, may I just say there are a couple of other things. In the first 
place, there was a lot made about it not being signed. 

The original copy handed to the nice lady who picks these up is 
signed. I don't know that Senator Mundt by some reason had an 
unsigned copy, but the original, as I say, was signed. 

Senator Mundt. It was signed by whom ? 

Mr. IIauii. It was signed by Mr. Roache and myself, who are pre- 
senting the memorandum. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Rabinovitz said that neither you nor Mr, 
Roache were competent witnesses on this subject ; Mr. Cranefield was 
the one. 

Your own lawyer disqualified you as the proper signatories for that 
kind of information, Mr. Rauh. 

Mr. Rauh. I have to say that it is hard when I am not allowed to 
interrupt you simply to have you interrupt me every time the Chair- 
man gives me the floor. I am trying to make a consecutive statement. 

The Chairman. Gentlemen, do you not see where this is nothing 
but a harangue eternally i 

Let's put in evidence if we have it. Your brief is nothing in the 
world but argument, and just for the information of any member of 
the committee who might want to read it. 

Mr. Rauh. I agree with that, sir. I have been trying to answer 
some of the statements that were made here, and I am doing my best 
to do so. 

The Chairman. You have answered two. First, you are the Wash- 
ington attorney. 

Mr. Rauh. Right, for the United Automobile Workers. 

The Chairman. The next one you answered that you had signed the 
statement that he has a copy of where it is typewritten. 

Mr. Rauh. That is correct. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Rauh. The document is a legal brief, but it does attach all of 
the legal papers. I don't know exactly what it is that Senator Mundt 
wants sworn to. I can swear, and I don't think there is any problem 
here, that those documents attached to this brief on their face make 
clear what they are. In other words, I do not see why there is a 
dispute about the validity of the documents, and I don't think we even 
have a problem about putting the documents in. 

The Chairman. All right, then, be sworn. 

Mr. Rauh. I have been, but I will do it again. 

The Chairman. Are you sure ? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Rauh. I was sworn when you asked me if we had taken any 
pictures in this courtroom. 

The CiiAiuiNrAN. You stay under that oath. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9303 

TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH L. RAUH, JR.— Resumed 

The Chairmax. Present to this committee such documents as you 
are willing to swear to. 

Mr. K.AUH. May I please have the documents that Senator Mundt 
had in his hand ? 

The Chairman. Identify them as you do so, and I will make them 
exhibits. 

(The documents were handed to the witness.) 

The Chaikman. Mr. Rauh, identify the documents as you examine 
them, please. 

Just a brief identification, so they can be made exhibits. 

Mr. Rauh. The first document here is Senator Mundt's speech that 
he had written out. 

I better give that back. 

The Chairman. That is already in the record. Proceed. 

Senator Mundt. You can have that too, if you want to read it and 
check it. 

Senator Curtis. Can the witness swear to the accuracy of that? 

The Chairman. Gentlemen, let's get along. 

Senator Curtis. I will withdraw the question. 

The Chairman. Pick up a document and tell me what they are. 

Mr. Rauh. It will take me a minute or two. They have all been 
shifted around. Somebody will have to get them in order. Some of 
these have been taken from some other file, so we will have to separate 
them. These are not the way we submitted tliem. 

Senator Mundt. I have been studying them. 

Mr. Rauh. Thev are not all here, sir. Someone must — we had them 
all marked "A," "A-1" 



The Chairman. Have you anything there that you can identify to 
let us get started ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator Mundt. You may be missing your court decree. That was 
placed in the record yesterday, if that is what you are looking for, 
the court decree. 

Mr. Rauh. Was that taken out of the group that I gave you? 

Senator Mundt. That was placed into the record, yesterday. 

Mr. Rauh. With the able assistance of Mr. Roache, I think I have 
the papers in the order we first submitted them, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. Start with No. 1. 

Mr. Rauh. No. 1 is a complaint dated August 23, 1955, before the 
Labor Relations Board, which is the stipulated complaint. I am 
testifying under oath. This is what the confusion is about. This was 
a complaint that was written and agreed to between us and the Labor 
Board because the stipulation which I am about to introduce as an- 
other number is dated the same day. 

In other words, there were about five papers issued the same day. 
They were all agreed to between the union and the Labor Board. 
This was not a proceeding in the ordinary sense. This was a stipu- 
lated, agreed-to proceeding. It was the fact that Mr. Mazey was 
unaware, as I was, that, as part of the consent agreement, a complaint 
would be issued that the confusion on the record arose. 



9304 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

I think Senator Mundt will understand me when I say that this 
was simply a confusion over terms. We said the whole thing was 
stipulated to. It was. That was correct. It so happened that in this 
1 of the 3 cases, the stipulation was all handled by a complaint, an 
injunction, a stipulation together, all dated August 23. This is the 
first one, the complaint. 

The Chairman. That will be made exhibit No. 64. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 64" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. I want to interrogate Mr. Rauh as we go along. 

The Chairman. We have exhibit 64 in the record. Interrogate 
him about it. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Rauh, what you have just put into the record, 
if I am correct, is the complaint issued by tlie NLRB against the 
present Kohler boycott ? 

Mr. Rauh. On August 23, 1955, the date of the stipulation; yes, 
sir. 

Senator Mundt. Now, I relate that statement to the question that 
I asked Mr. Mazey. I have told you that I am not trying to get Mr. 
Mazey involved in any perjury difficulties. I am trying to straighten 
out the record. I apkecl him in good faith on March 10, I said "Mr. 
Mazey, has the NLRB General Counsel issued a complaint against 
your present Kohler boycott?" 

Mr. Mazey answered in three, simple, monosyllabic words, "They 
have not." 

I was shocked at that, because I knew they had. I said "They 
have not?" 

And Mr. Mazey said "No." I wasn't trying to trap him, as I could 
have, and handed it to the Attorney General and said, "This man is 
lying.'; 

I said "Mr. Mazey, do you want to let the record stand on that," 
and he said, "Yes; I don't believe a complaint was issued." 

So we are agreed now, are we, that Mr. Mazsy's statement was 
erroneous, wh.en he said they had not, when, as a matter of fact, they 
had issued the complaint? 

Mr. Rauh. It was erroneous, but in context it was not, bscause you 
and Mr. INIazey had previously been discussing the question of whether 
this was stipulated or not, and Mr. Mazey was taking the point it 
had all been stipulated. You were taking the point there had been 
a complaint, whereas in fact both were true. It is that which creates 
the confusion. 

Senator Mundt. We are going to go into the stipulation, I suppose, 
in a moment. 

But there was a complaint issued ? 

Mr. Rauh. A stipulated complaint ; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That has been made exhibit 64, for reference only. 

Mr. Rauh. The next document, Mr. Chairman, is the settlement 
stipulation. It is dated the same day as the complaint, and is part 
of the overall settlement of this dispute. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit 64-A. 



IMPROPER ACTTVITIEIS EST THE LABOR FIELD 9305 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 64— A" for ref- 
erence, and may be found in the files of the Select Committee.) 

Senator Mundt. At this point, I want to ask Mr. Rauh this ques- 
tion : Is it not true that this order which was issued required the union 
to cease and desist from picketing these companies or in other manner, 
including threats, violence, orders, directions, appeals, and so forth, 
inducing or encouraging employees of these companies to strike or to 
refuse to handle the products of the Kohler Co. ? Is that not true ? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes ; we agreed to that. That is the language of Taft- 
Hartley. We agreed not to violate it. Yes; that is perfectly true. 

Senator Mundt. I want to straighten out Mr. Mazey's testimony 
and the confusion on that point. Go to the third item. 

Mr. Rauii. I don't think there is confusion on that. Senator. 

The next exhibit is a decision and order of the Board dated August 
30, 1955, a week later, which is the decision and order resulting from 
the stipulation between the union and the Board. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit 64— B. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 64— B" for ref- 
erence, and may be found in the files of the Select Committee.) 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Rauh. The next exhibit, Mr. Chairman, is the petition for 
enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board upon 
stipulation of the parties for consent decree. This is the petition to 
the Circuit Court of Appeals. This document carries on its very face 
and in its heading the fact that it was a stipulated petition. 

The Chairman. That document may be made exhibit 64— C. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 64-C" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. Are there any questions ? 

Senator Mundt. Not at this moment. 

Mr. Rauh. The next document is the decree of the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which is the stipulated 
decree agreed to in the second of the documents we are submitting here. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman? 

You are now submitting, I take it, a copy, because the original was 
admitted in testimony yesterday, unless you sent the copy in yesterday. 

I thought you sent the original in yesterday. 

Mr. Rauh. I don't know which this is. I would have to look at it. 

I guess somebody took the original, then, from our file, and put a 
copy in place of it. I notice Mr. Bernstein is shaking his head "Yes," 
so I guess that answers the question. 

Senator Mundt. Do you want to put it in twice, Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Well, let us get it identified. What is the identifi- 
cation of it for yesterday ? 

We will find out if we should declare that it is one and the same as 
the exhibit submitted yesterday. 

Do you find the one for yesterday ? 

Present that to the witness, Mrs. Watt. 

I present to you exhibit No. 62. State whether that is the same, 
whether the exhibit placed in the record yesterday is the same as the 
one you are holding in your hand and which you testified to a moment 
ago. 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 



9306 IMPROPER ACTlVITif:S IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Let tlie record sliow at tliis point, to avoid duplica- 
tion, that the document tlie witness has testified to was made exhibit 
No. G2 on March 12, and that it is now an exhibit in the testimony. 

Senator Miindt. Now, Mr. Kauh, your answer to my third question : 
Is it not true that tlie United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh 
Circuit, sitting in Chicago, entered a decree enforcing that order ? 

Mr. Rauh. Witli the consent of the union; yes. A stipulated 
order, written by tlie Labor ]-)Oard and the union together, pointing 
out that the union should not violate Taft-Hartley, which it had 
already decided to do. 

Senator Mundt. Which made it a perfectly enforceable order? 

Mr. Rauh. It is enforceable. That is the veiy point we are mak 
ing. The very fact that we have an order outstanding against us. 
and we have never had any suggestion of contempt, demonstrates we 
are complying with the law. 

Senator Mundt. Right, and, of course, that demonstrated the fact 
that you were in violation of the law, or there wouldn't have had to 
have been any ordei's issued in the first place, or any complaints 
charged in the first place, or all of this legal entanglement in the first 
])lace, if somebody hadn't charged you with engaging in illegal 
picketing. 

]Mr. Rauh. On the contrary. Senator Mundt, a charge was made by 
a company, but it is perfectly clear now that Ave agreed to something 
we wouldn't have had to. 

The decisions of the courts, since the time we agreed to this stipula- 
tion, have indicated we were not in violation and, in fact, Ave wouldn't 
have had to agi'ee to it. We did agree to it not because Ave were in 
violation, but because Ave liaA^e had a simple principle from the first : 

In cases of doubt, don't do it. 

The Koliler Co, has never suggested we Avere violating the law. 

The Koliler Co. has never suggested it. You are the first ones Avho 
have ever suggested this. The Koliler Co. hasn't sued us. They 
liaven't tried to get contempt action. 

Senator Mundt. IIoav about the Buteyn Co. ? 

Mr. Rauh. ]\Iaybe there is a suit I liaA'en't heard about. But I 
haven't heard about any suit against us. 

Senator Mundt. And the Paper Products Co., Avhatever it was, in 
Mihvaukee; tlie i^aj^er company in Mihvaukee also? 

Mr. Rauh. These Avere com])laints to the Board. There was a 
stijiulated injunction, and a sti]Hilated agreement to cease and desist. 
But I point out to you that under the hiAv as it exists today, Avhich is 
Avliat I Avanted you to understand from your memorandum, the laAv as 
it exists today Avould have supported us if AA'e had decided to fight this 
order. 

Instead, on the princii)le of it in doubt, don't do it, we didn't fight 
this proceeding. 

(At this point, Senator Gokhvater left the hearing room.) 

Senator Mundt. It is pretty hard to figure out Avhat you would 
have done Avith a new law or the laAV as it exists today, as you say, 
ap])lied to a situation existing then. 

The fourth point that I made in my colloquy Avas that as a conse- 
quenc<> of the fact that these charges had been made against you, that 



IMPROPER ACTI^'ITIEe IN THE LABOR FIELD 930T 

tliey were filed by the NLRB, that you accepted the stipulated con- 
sents, amounted to what would be a plea of nolo contendere. 

Mr. Rauh. Well, we had that the other day. I am not going to 
bother to waste time with it. 

Senator Mundt. I was wrapping up this ball of wax for once and 
for all at one place in the record. 

Mr. Rauh. I would like to point out, Senator, that this complaint 
was filed against several unions. Our union consented to it. A num- 
ber of the other unions fought it and won. 

In other words, the Board ultimately decided in the case of other 
unions that there had been no violation. So I am quite right, I be- 
lieve, when I suggest to you that had we decided to light it, we, too, 
would have won. 

But I think the union was wise in the policy it adopted of "When in 
doubt, comijly." 

Senator Mundt. I think the only relevancy that that observation 
has is that apparently in the case of the other unions they didn't find 
them to be specifically involved. Had you gone through with j'ours, 
they might or might not have found you specifically involved. Since 
it wasn't tried out, your guess at a verdict can probably be no better 
than mine. 

Mr. Rauh. No, it is l^etter. Mr. Bernstein is wrong in the advice 
lie just gave you. The point they decided at the Board was that a 
l)oycott, where you try to induce railroad or municipal employees not 
to handle goods is not a violation, because these are not employees 
within the meaning of the act, and, therefore, the othei's won their 
case even though we consented without even trying to win ours. 

Senator Curtis. Senator Mundt, will you yield at that point? 

Senator Mundt. I yield. 

Senator Curtis. What you are saying, Mr. Rauh, is that the Taft- 
Hartley law prohibits certain acts or pressures with employees in the 
nature of a boycott, but it does not prohibit directing those acts against 
inanagement, is that correct? 

Mr. Rauh. No, that wasn't the point, sir. 

The point I was making 

Senator Curtis. That is true of the Taft-Hartley law, isn't it ? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, but concerning all acts against employees 

Senator Curtis. I didn't mean that. I meant that certain acts in 
the nature of a boycott are prohibited from being directed against 
employees, and, at the same time, a similar prohibition does not exist 
against management. 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. These cease-and-desist orders are common in a 
number of actions, labor board, management, antitrust, and a number 
of other things, aren't they ? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And oftentimes the purpose is not to assess pun- 
ishment for any past acts, but to give a directive for future conduct, 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Rauh. I would think that that was often true. I don't know 
that it is always true. 

Senator Curtis. And, for that reason, it is not unusual that there 
is a consent or stipulated decree prior to the issuance of a cease-and- 
desist order, is that correct? 



930S IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, that often happens. 

Senator CLrRxis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, that takes care of the controversy 
as far as I am concerned, and 1 tliink we can let the record speak for 
itself in conjunction with the testimony of Mr. Mazey. 

I ask only, and it will appear in its full context, that wliere the 
reference appears on these pages of the transcript, they refer to the 
printed pages w^hich come back to us, and that they be corrected in 
the printed copy to refer to the right page in the printed document. 

The Chairman. The reporter will make the necessary corrections 
to properly identify the place wliere these things appear in the record. 

All right. Are there any further questions ? 

Mr. liAuii. There are some more documents, I regret to say. 

The Chairman. Let us get those documents in. 

Let us get one more document in, if we can. 

Mr. Rauii. The next 3 I could give quickly by describing them all 
as 1. They are a petition for an injunction under the same proceed- 
ing — the petition dated August 23 — a stipulation to the court agree- 
ing to the injunction the same date, and an order of the court on the 
injunction the same day. They are all stipulated. 

Senator Mundt. I have no objection to those. 

Tho Chairman. They will be made exhibit 64, D, E, and F, re- 
spectively. 

(Documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 64, D, E, and 
F," for reference and may be found in tlie files of the select com- 
mittee.) 

The Chairman. Are there any others ? 

Mr. Rauh. That, sir, relates to one case. Tliat was the first case, 
the Milwaukee injunction case. 

There were tAvo other cases where no complaint was issued and 
where we did stipulate that we would discontinue. This was picket- 
ing in front of a plumbing distributor, and the issue that was m- 
volved there is whether that is legal picketing. 

At that time, the Board was holding that consumer picketing be- 
fore a plumbing distributor's house was not valid. Since tliat time the 
Second Circuit Court of Appeals has held that it is valid. But nev- 
ertheless, despite this, we have, in two instances, stipulated we 
wouldn't do it, even though the courts of appeals have held that we 
could. 

These two are the stipulations there. 

Senator Mundt. You are talking about the one in Los Angeles 
County ? 

Mr. Rauh. That is 1 of the 2. The first one I have here in my 
own hand is in Jackson, Mich. 

Senator Mundt. I w^ould like to point out that in the Jackson Sink 
case, as well as the one in Los Angeles, no judicial decree was entered 
in either of those, and so they have not been in controversy at any 
time in the hearings. 

I have no objection to burdening the front of the table with as 
many papers as Mr. Rauh wants to dispose of at this time, but they 
have' no bearing on the controversy whatsoever. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9309 

Mr. Rauh. If there is no question about the legality there, we 
gladly withhold them. Thank you. 

The Chairman. We are all settled, then ? 

Counsel, are there any questions ? 

Are there any questions of either witness ? 

All right, both witnesses are excused. 

Without objection, we will stand adjourned until 10 o'clock in the 
morning. 

(Whereupon, at 4: 20 p. m., the committee recessed to reconvene at 
10 a. m., Friday, March 14, 1958.) 



21243— 58— pt. 23 11 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



FRIDAY, MARCH 14, 1958 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN THE Labor or Management Field, 

Washington^ D. G. 

The select committee met at 10 :15 a. m., pursuant to Senate Reso- 
lution 221, agreed to January 29, 1958, in the caucus room, Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present: Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Sen- 
ator Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York ; Senator John F. Ken- 
nedy, Democrat, Massachusetts ; Senator Sam J. Ervin, Jr., Democrat, 
North Carolina; Senator Barry Goldwater, Republican, Arizona; 
Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota ; Senator Carl T. 
Curtis, Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Jerome S. Adler- 
man, assistant chief counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; 
Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session 
Avere Senators McClellan, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Heimke. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Heimke. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF STEEN W. HEIMKE 

The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Heimke. My name is Steen W. Heimke, S-t-e-e-n W. 
H-e-i-m-k-e. I live at 1932 North Ninth Street, Sheboygan, Wis., 
and I am the chief of police of the city of Sheboygan, Wis. 

The Chairman. You have counsel, or do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. Heimke. I waive counsel. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Kennedy. It might be well if we had Mr. Oakley Franks, who 
is also in the police department, at the same time. 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn, Mr. Franks ? 

9311 



9312 IMPROPER ACTrVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

You do solemnly swear that tlie evidence you shall g-ive before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Franks. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF OAKLEY FRANKS 

The Chairman. State your name and your residence and your bus- 
iness or occupation. 

Mr. Franks. My name is Oakley Franks, and I live at 522 Supe- 
rior Avenue, Sheboygan, Wis., and I am captain of the Slieboygan 
Police Department. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel, Mr. Franks? 

Mr. Franks. Yes ; I do. 

Mr. ICj3nnedy. You have been chief of police for how long, Mr. 
Heimke ? 

Mr. Heimkr. I became chief of police of the city of Sheboygan, 
October 1, 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. And, prior to that, you held what position? 

Mr. Heimke. I was captain of police. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you had the position of captain for how long? 

Mr. Heimke. Approximately 6 years ; 5 or 6 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliile you were captain of police, who was the 
chief ? 

Mr. Heimke, Walter H. Wagner. 

Mr. Kennedy. So, you were captain or chief of police during the 
period of the strike. You were captain of police for about lialf the 
time, and chief of police for the rest of the time ? 

Mr. Heimke. During the strike, I was either captain of police or 
chief of police. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you worl^ed on these various acts of vandalism 
that occurred in the city of Sheboygan ? 

Mr. Heimke. I worked on the acts, and assigned the investigations 
to other officers. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were also present during, or liad something 
to do with, the so-called clay-boat incident ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes ; I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were down there on tlie docks ? 

Mr. Heimke. For the latter part of the incident- 
Mr. Kennedy. You did not go down until about 2 o'clock ? 

Mr. Heimke. Not until I was notified at 2 : 20. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you explain your contact that you had with 
that incident? 

Mr. Heimke. On July 5, I was working in tlie backyard wlien I 
re<;eived a telephone call from the office to report to the chief at 2 : 20 
p. m. 

I went down just as I was, because they said it was urgent. When 
I got there, they told me that the chief wanted to see me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Go ahead, and just relate what happened. 

Mr. Heimke. I went in to see the chief, and he said, "Have you 
heard what has happened?" and I said, "No; I have been outside 
working in the backyard." He said, "Well, you had better go down 
to the dock and see what has to be done.'' 



IMPROPE'R ACXniTIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9313 

So, I went down to the dock, and I was surprised to see what I 
considered a mob down there out of control. After I appraised the 
situation in my own mind, I decided wliat had to be done, and I went 
back to I'eport to the chief. 

The chief said, "Well, you had better go up and see the mayor in 
his office. He is in charge." At that time I went up to the mayor's 
office, who at that time was Mayor Rudolph Ploetz, and he asked me 
how the situation was down there. I told him it was out of control. 

He said, ""Wliat has to be done?" I told him the first thing we have 
to do is get the equipment out of the middle of the road, because that 
is the center of attraction and the item that is holding the mob intact. 
I told him he should get in touch with the Buteyn brothers, who, I 
thought at that time, had control of the equipment; at which time he 
did call the Buteyns. 

Mr. Kennedy. Go ahead, just relate what happened, and what you 
did about it. 

Mr. Heimke. I don't know what the conversation was, but ap- 
parently the mayor had made some arrangements with the Buteyns to 
come down and get the equipment out of there. 

In tlie meantime, the mayor called Sheriff Mosch and told him to 
meet him down at Fifth and Pennsylvania Avenue, which is about 
three-quarters of a block from the mob area. "VVlien we got down 
there, the mayor and the sheriff. Sheriff ]Mosch, were in conversation. 

I wandered away from the area, and as I came back to the conversa- 
tion between the mayor and the sheriff, I approached them from the 
rear, and I got 2 feet away, and I heard the mayor say to the sheriff, 
"How much are you obligated to the union for?" And the sheriff 
turned around, and he was going to say something when he saw me, 
and he stuttered and stammered, and he said, "Let us go someplace 
where we can talk." 

So they crawled into the sheriff's car which was parked in the 
middle of the intersection and turned all of the windows shut, and they 
proceeded to engage in conversation. And so I rapped on the driver's 
window, and they opened it up, and I said, "What do you w^ant me to 
do?" after which they said, "We'll, come back in a couple of minutes," 
and they drove a block and a half away and they parked and they 
came back. 

I still received no instructions from the mayor, and then I suggested 
that we get a sound truck. The only sound truck available in the town 
at that time was a very fine ice cream sound truck which we were able 
to prevail upon them to bring down there. 

In the meantime, while we were waiting for the sound truck, I went 
home and changed clothes into a uniform. I gave the few officers that 
were on the scene additional uniformed men to cope with the crowd. 

By the time I got there in uniform it was about 3 o'clock, and the 
entire area was out of control, and I don't see how we could have gotten 
it back into control again. We were lucky that we could keep the lid on 
the situation without getting any worse. 

In the meantime, I had instructed that a tire company come down 
and try to put air into the tires with a small compressor. They got 
down there and they couldn't accomplish their purpose, because the 
tires had been punctured. But before we could get the little truck 
with the air compressor on it out of the area, there were two flat tires on 
that vehicle. 



9314 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

We didn't have enough officers down there to cope with or protect any 
equipment tliat was brought into the area to help us get the other 
equipment out. 

The Chairman. "Was anyone deputized to help the police ? 

Mr. Heimke. No; the sheriff was there, and after all the sheriff is 
the chief law-enforcement officer of the county and he was the only one 
there, and none of his men showed up, and there were no other 
deputized individuals except a few officers that had been assigned to 
the area in the early morning, and that amounted to approximately 
4 or 5 officers. 

The CiiAiRMAX. Was tliis within your jurisdiction ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. It was within your jurisdiction ? 

Mr. PIeimke. Within the city of Sheboygan, and it comes under the 
jurisdiction of the police de]:»artment, although in an emergency situa- 
tion the sheriff becomes the chief law-enforcement officer of the county. 

The Chairman. In other words, he was superior to the local police 
officials? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. And it was his duty to act in the situation ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. He did not act, and deputized no one, and neither 
did he make any serious effort to take care of the situation ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right 

The Chairman. So he just fell down on his duty ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, I didn't see him after that. 

The Chairman. At least while he was there he was doing nothing 
to try to correct the situation or get it under control ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Senator Curtis. May I inquire. At the time you were under the 
supervision of the chief of police, were you not ? 

Mr. Heimke. I M^as the immediate subordinate to Chief Walter H. 
Wagner. 

Senator Curtis. When Chief Wagner called you, he instructed you 
to contact the mayor and get your further instructions from him? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right, and he told me the mayor was in charge. 

Senator Curtis. And you reported to the mayor but got no plan of 
action from him ? 

Mr. Heimke. I got no instructions w^hatever. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you suggest doing? 

Mr. Heimke. The one item that was holding the crowd together and 
which the crowd was centering their attention on was this large 
tractor trailer and crane which was in the middle of the intersection 
at Fourth and Pennsylvania Avenue, which was approximately 100 
feet west of the entrance to the dock. It was diagonally across the 
street. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did you suggest doing to disperse the crowd? 

Mr. Heimke. I suggested that we get a loudspeaker down there, 
and appeal to the croAvd. When we did ^et the loudspeaker down 
there, I had an opportunity to see several individuals who I thought 
could disperse the crowd, and one was Allan Grasskamp. I went to 
talk to him and told him, and I said, "I am going to get a loudspeaker 



IMPROPER ACnVITIElS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9315 

down here. Would you appeal to the crowd to go home, so that we 
can clear up this situation before somebody gets hurt?" 

And he said, "I have nothing to do with this crowd and I don't 
know who they are, and I have nothing to say. I don't know who 
they are, and I am not responsible for these people." 

I said, "Well, I know who they are." I said, "Everybody that I 
have talked to and seen in the area has a Kohler striker button on. 
They are identified as UAW-CIO 833." 

Mr. Kennedy. Everybody down there was a Kohler striker ? 

Mr. Heimke, Tliere were quite a few buttons that were visible. 

Mr. Kennedy. You said that everybody that you saw had a Kohler 
striker button. Did everybody down there have one ? 

Mr. Heimke. I think that quite a few of them did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there any women down there ? 

Mr. Heimke. There were women down there and a few children. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the children have Kohler striker buttons ? 

Mr. Heimke. Not that I noticed. They were lost in the crowd. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you suggest anything else other than getting 
or trying to get the crane out of there ? 

Mr. Heimke. While we were still waiting for the loudspeaker truck 
to move into the area, I saw Don Rand, and I asked him to appeal to 
the crowd because I thought that most of them were strikers from 
the Kohler Co., from facial recognition. He refused to assist me in 
any way in talking over the PA system. 

Senator Curtis. Now, this Grasskamp, he is the man that was presi- 
dent of the local union ? 

Mr. Heimke. President of 833 ; that is right. 

Senator Curtis. And when you asked him to assist in dispersing 
the crowd, he told you in effect that he did not know who they were, 
and he had no responsibility. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right, sir. 

Senator Curtis. In reply, you pointed out to him the fact that great 
numbers of them were wearing the 833 button, as well as the fact that 
you recognized many of them as being strikers. 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis, Now, the Rand that you mentioned, is that Donald 
Rand who was an official in the UAW-CIO ? 

Mr. Heimke. He has been identified to me as the international rep- 
resentative of the UAW-CIO. 

Senator Curtis. And he refused to assist in dispersing the crowd? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. You specifically asked both of them ? 

Mr, Heimke, I did. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. So the crowd was not dispersed ? 

Mr. Heimble, No ; in fact, the crowd kept getting bigger. 

Mr. Kennedy. ^Vliat did you do or what did you suggest be done ? 
Let uf:: move along. 

Mr. Heimke. Some action is better than no action, and so I sug- 
gested to the mayor that we probably would get the fire department 
down there to clear the area with fire hoses, so that we could get to 
work on this equipment and move it out of the area, 

Mr. Kennedy. You wanted to use fire hoses on the people 'i 



9316 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is what you suggested ? 

Mr. Heimke. That was vetoed. 

(At this point, Senator Ervin entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Tlie mayor was not in favor of that ? 

Mr. Heimke. No ; he was not in favor of that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there people that were acting impi-operly down 
there ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, there was a lot of pushing and shoving. I 
centered myself around the big tractor-trailer crane because that is 
where the activity was. I took quite a beating there that afternoon. 
"V^riiile in uniform, I had my hat knocked off, I was pushed in the back 
and in the kidneys, and I turned around and you could not see who did 
it, and I turned around to find out who was responsible, and I would 
get punched from the other side. 

I took quite a bit of shoving because we just did not have enough 
personnel. 

Senator Curtis. If I may interrupt at that point, you have lived 
in that community for some time? 

Mr. Heimke. I have lived there all of my life. 

Senator Curtis. How long have you been connected with the i)olice 
force ? 

Mr. Heimke. I have been in law enforcement for 20 years, and I 
consider myself a career police officer, and my father was a police 
officer before me for 30 years, and I am dedicated to law enforcement. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Ervin, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

Senator Curtis. But so far as acquaintance is concerned, you have 
lived there all your life; you have attended school there, and you 
know a good many people ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. In this crowd that was where you Avere telling 
about, where you took a considerable beating, where you would turn 
one way and get hit, and you would turn around and you couldn't see 
who hit you, but you would be hit from the other side — in that crowd 
of people, did you recognize any of the Kohler strikers ? 

I am not asking for their names necessarily, but did you recognize 
Kohler strikers? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes; I did. 

Senator Curtis. Would you say that of those that were close 
enough to you to take part in this melee, the majority of them were 
the Kohler strikers ? 

Mr. Heimke. I would say immediately in the center, the core of the 
activity, the majority of them were Kohler strikers. On the outskirts, 
the fringe areas, there were a lot of spectators. 

Senator Curtis. In this core, where the participants were, did you 
recognize any of the non strikers ? 

Mr. Heimke. I don't believe I did. 

Senator (Curtis. Did you recognize any official or individual of the 
management of Kohler in the center of this melee, where the pushing 
and shoving was going on, and where you took some abuse? 

Mr. Heimke. No, I didn't see anybody from Kohler there. None 
of the officials of the company. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 9317 

Mr. Kennedy. There were acts of vandalism that were committed 
during the period of time that you were captain of police and also 
chief of police ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, my first experience was also at the dock incident, 
where that lasted into the late hours of the evening. We could hear 
windows being broken across the street from the area in which the 
crane was located. We appraised the damage in the morning. We 
found that all the windows were broken in the two houses immediately 
across the street from where the crane had been disabled. During the 
course of the evening, there was a car parked there which belonged to 
a Kohler worker in that block. It was the only car in that block. We 
were able to remove all the other cars from the area and save them 
from possible damage, but we could not locate this owner. 

Subsequently, the windows on the car were broken, rocks were 
thrown against this car, and eventually the car was overturned. We 
could do nothing about that. 

Wlien we finally did get the crane out of there, with the help of the 
Sheboygan Coimty highway department — they were the only ones 
in town that would come forward and move this equipment — then we 
opened the entire area to traffic again, figuring that the flow of traffic 
through there would help disperse the crowd. 

From time to time reports came back to us that Don Kand was 
breaking windows of passing automobiles with brass knuckles. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who told j^ou that ? 

Mr. Heimke. Unidentified people that came running up to me to 
report it. I was a block away from the area in which this was hap- 
pening. When I got down there, I couldn't find anybody down there 
that could give me any information. 

Mr. Kennedy. Somebody come up to you and told you Don Rand 
was breaking windows ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. In fact, I got that from three various 
sources during the course of the evening. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who were they ? 

Mr. Heimke. I imagine they were friends of law enforcement. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, but who were they ? What were their names ? 

Mr. Heimke. I don't know who they were. 

Mr. Kennedy. If somebody comes in and makes a complaint, and 
it is certainly a criminal act to break a window, did you arrest Don 
Hand then ? 

Mr. Heimke. I couldn't find him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you arrest him the next day ? 

Mr. Heimke. In the middle of the crowd, it is rather difficult when 
somebody comes up and tells you something to get out a pencil and 
paper, when you are trying to protect yourself. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had three people who came up and told you 
about Donald Rand's breaking windows. Did you make any arrest 
there that day ? 

Did you make any arrest ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, we didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't make one arrest ? 

Mr. Heimke. We didn't make any arrest. 

Mr. Kennedy. And somebody told you that Don Rand w^as going 
around with brass knuckles, breaking windows, and you didn't arrest 
him? 



9318 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Heimke. Well, at the time, the incident didn't mean much to 
me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Doesn't it mean something to you for a union official 
going around breaking windows with brass knuckles ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, you have to have proof before you can arrest 
him. 

Mr. Kennedy. You said three people came up to you and reported 
this to you. 

Mr. Heimke. From time to time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you get their names and use them as witnesses 
to Donald Rand breaking windows ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. Because right after that, after I received one of 
the complaints, I heard a commotion on Fourth Street and the entire 
crowd started surging north on Fourth Street, and they said, "There 
goes a scab. Let's get him." So I broke away from the crowd and 
I ran as fast as I could to the head of the croAvd, and here I saw one 
man walking about 15 feet in front of this mob, and I got ahead of 
him and saw that the entire front of his face was bloody and it looked 
as though his nose had been smashed. At that time, my only concern 
was to get him out of the area. 

Mv. Kennedy. Going back, you had three separate people coming 
to tell you about Donald Rand. The only reason I make such a point 
of this is that you told me down in the office that Mr. Zimmerman had 
told you that Donald Rand was breaking windows with brass 
knuckles. I then interviewed Mr. Zimmerman, and he said he told you 
no such thing. 

Now you say three people whose names you don't know — here is 
Donald Rand, that a lot of people felt was responsible for the violence 
down there, and responsible for some of the vandalism, and responsible 
for the mass picketing. You had three witnesses, or people that you 
said told you about Donald Rand breaking windows, and you made no 
arrest and made no attempt even to get their names. 

And yet, as I understand your testimony, you blame this situation 
on the fact that the chief of police and the mayor got in a car and 
had a conference and appeared to be friendly to the union. It just 
doesn't make any sense. Captain Pleimke. 

Mr. Heimke. Well, there were so many diversionary tactics there, 
and after I saw that this individual, who I learned later to be a Mr. 
Grunewald was taken in tow by another unknown person who took 
him to the clinic, they took after the other party who was trying to 
help him, and he was running for his car, which was parked on the 
armory lot. I did everything possible to try to hold the crowd back. 
I threatend them that anybody laying a hand on this man would be 
arrested. 

But I was only one officer in a group of about two or three hundred 
people who were surging forward after this injured man and the man 
who was trying to help him. All during the course of the time that I 
was down there, there were diversionary tactics trying to keep us busy 
and occupied and away from the scene of anything that was taking 
place. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you said in answer to Senator Curtis that you 
recognized the people that were down there and people that were 
surging around and causing this trouble. 



IMPROPER ACTrV'ITIElS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9319 

I am surprised that you didn't arrest any of them, if this is all 
correct. 

Mr. Heimke. I did try to take somebody out of the area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you arrest them? You could arrest them the 
f ollo^yillg• day or that night. 

Mr. Heimke. We could, but we still have to take them to court and 
prove a case. 

Mr. Kennedy. But did you arrest them ? 

Mr. Heimke. We made no arrests at the scene. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

Senator Curtis. Were you in charge, or were you still under the 
instructions to report to the maj^or and do what he said? 

Mr. Heimke. Chief Wagner told me that the mayor was in charge, 
so I looked to him for orders. 

Senator Curtis. Did any of your superiors ever follow up on sub- 
sequent days with investigations leading to an arrest ? 

Mr. Heimke. We are still working on those cases, even at this late 
date. 

Senator Curtis. Yes; but I mean at that time, the mayor or your 
chief, did they follow through immediately ? 

Mr. Heimke. Not to my knowledge. 

Senator Curtis. Not to your knowledge. 

Did you have a feeling when you were down there that you were 
free to take charge of the situation and follow through on subsequent 
investigations, or that it was a situation where you were expected to 
adhere to the instructions of your superiors ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, Wisconsin statutes provide that the mayor is 
the statutory head of the police department, and seeing as how my in- 
structions were that he was in charge, I looked to him for orders. 
After we got the sound truck down into the area, we moved it as close 
as we possibly could, and because I was the ranking police officer on 
the scene, I took the mike, and I appealed to the crowd to move back 
and give us an opportunity to get the crane out of the car. 

Senator Curtis. Did 3^011 ever get any direct help from either the 
chief or the mayor down there, that day ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. 

Senator Curtis. You did not. Well, now, who was the sheriff at 
that time ? 

Mr. Heimke. Theodore Mosch. 

Senator Curtis. He has appeared here as a witness and it was 
developed that the UAW-CIO was instrumental in his election. Do 
you know w hether or not the mayor was supported by the union ? 

Mr. Heimke. It is general knowledge throughout Sheboygan that 
he gained his election through the support of labor. 

(At this point. Senator Goldwater entered the hearing room.) 

Senator Curtis. In this conflict as to what happened and wdio said 
what, which was mentioned by the chief counsel with regard to reports 
that Grasskamp was breaking windows, do you have 

Mr. Kennedy. Eand. 

Senator Curtis. Eand was breaking windows — Do you have any- 
thing further on it that you want to say on that ? 

Mr. Heimke. No ; I don't ; except that w^e received an anonymous 
call at one time that said "Whenever Don Rand wears gloves, watch 
out because he has his brass knuckles under the gloves." 



9320 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

1 don't know who made the call, but we had our informants. 

Senator Curtis. I mean as to the conflict of where you got your 
report that Mr. Kennedy was referring to. Do you have anything 
further you wish to say on that ? 

Mr. Heimke. No ; I don't, because I did not take the names of the 
individuals. It was impossible for me to take the names at that time. 

Senator Curtis. I called Mr. Eand's attention to the fact the other 
day that in the picture that was taken almost on the first of June he 
had his gloves on, and he remarked it was chilly. 

About how large was that crowd ? 

Mr. Heimke. Wlien I was there about 2 : 30 or 20 to 3, I would esti- 
mate that there were probably 1,500 people there. 

That swelled 

Senator Curtis. Would you say that half of them may have been 
spectators ? 

Mr. Heimke. I would say about half, probably, were either sympa- 
thizers or just disinterested spectators. 

Senator Curtis. And the other half were people that, in varying 
degrees, created problems for the police, either in stopping them doing 
what they were doing, or at least getting them to go home, is that right ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. How many officers were assigned to that area ? 

Mr. Heimke. When I got down there at 2 : 30, there were 4 officers, 
I believe, 4 or 5. 

Senator Curtis. Four or five to deal with possibly somewhere be- 
tween 600 and 700 people ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. And that crowd kept swelling and 
swelling until late in the afternoon I would estimate that there were 
between 2,000 and 3,000 people there. 

Senator Curtis. The testimony is that the union had all of their 
men down there, their international representatives, these other people 
that they have brought in from other locals and so on, that they kept 
in the area. The testimony is that during the day they were all down 
there. Of course, I know that they deny that they had anything to do 
with it. I think that is an issue that the Justice Department is going 
to have to deal with. 

How many complaints, and I am talking about not this clay boat in- 
cident alone, and offenses did you receive that were strike connected. 

Mr. Heimke. Our department has on file 930 complaints which are 
strike connected. 

Senator Curtis. Are they of various kinds ? 

Mr. Heimke. Various kinds. 

Senator Curtis. What would some of them be that occurred quite 
frequently ? Wliat type of offense ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, there were cars painted, debris thrown on homes 
and cars; there were threatening letters, there was picketing of the 
workers' homes, air let out of tires, houses or garages smeared with 
human dung; there were phony deliveries to the homes, there was 
name calling, threats, malicious damage, nails, tacks and glass thrown 
in the street, sugar, water and salt placed in gas tanks. One time there 
was a cross burned in a backyard. 

Senator Curtis. In connection with most of these complaints, did 
the complainant identify the offender? 



IMPROPER AcnvrriBS m the labor field 9321 

Mr. IIeimive, Did the complainant identify the defendant? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Heimke, No, they didn't. They just reported it as an incident. 

Senator Cuetis. And they wouldn't know who had done it? 

Mr. Heimke. In some of the cases, wherever there was an identity 
made, then we were able to proceed. But most of the time — for in- 
stance, on the paint bombing of homes and the acid thrown at auto- 
mobiles, and the shotgun blasts into homes, it was all done mider the 
cover of darkness, where there were no witnesses. 

That in police and law enforcement is one of the most difficult 
crimes to clear up. 

Senator Curtis. To your knowledge, were the homes of any strikers 
blasted with shotguns? 

Mr. Heimke. No strikers' homes were damaged by gunfire. 

Senator Curtis. Were there any strikers' homes where the win- 
dows were broken and paint bombs or other offensive articles were 
thrown into the homes ? 

Mr. Heimke. I recall one incident in particular, the home of Allen 
Grasskamp. There was something thrown against his house. He 
claimed that he saw the man standing out in front with his arm raised 
ready to throw an object, and our investigation developed that he 
could give us no information, no description as to who it was. 

Senator Curtis. Were the vast majority of homes that were dam- 
aged or molested, the homes of the nonstrikers ? 

]Mr. Heimke. That is right. Most of the homes were workers at 
the Kohler Co. 

Senator Curtis. Do you have aii}^ figures on that, on those 900 com- 
plaints, or 930 complaints ? 

Mr. Heimke. There were 43 houses that were paint bombed, either 
with 200 watt bulbs that were filled with a diluted paint, or in which 
the windows were broken with a mason jar full of this paint. 

Senator Mundt. On that paint, I think the significant thing is not 
the number of homes, so much, but what percentage of homes or how 
many homes were the homes of strikers, how many were nonstrikers, 
how many were just ordinary citizens living in Sheboygan who may 
not have been involved directly in this conflict either way. 

Do your records show that, of the 43 homes, how many were non- 
strikers, how many were strikers, and how many you could not iden- 
tify as being on either side of this ? 

Mr. Heimke. We have two workei's, two strikers, rather, two strik- 
ers' homes which were damaged by paint, and 41 were workers. 

Senator Mundt. 41 were nonstrikers and 2 were strikers? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Thank you. 

As a police officer and a graduate of the FBI Academy, would that 
indicate anything to you, if, out of 43 acts of violence, 41 of them were 
against nonstrikers and 2 of them against strikers ? Would you draw 
any conclusion from that, on the basis of your profession or not? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, we entered this with an open mind, not knowing 
who to hold responsible for the acts of vandalism. We investigated all 
possibilities. But as the strike progressed, it became more and more 
apparent that all the offenses were against the workers, which led to 



9322 IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

only one conclusion, that we had to suspect that it was the union who 
was after the workers trying to keep them from working. 

Mr. KJSNNEDY. Of course, couldn't it have been the people who were 
on strike? You say the union. It could have been those who were 
on strike who were against those who went back to work, just as easily. 

Mr. Heimke. I probably did use the wrong word. I should have 
said strikers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did you get the figure of 900 from? Wliat 
period of time is that? 

Mr. PIeimke. These are the 930 complaints that are on file in the 
Sheboygan Police Department. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what j)eriod ? 

Mr. PIeimke. From the first day of the strike until we were sul> 
penaed, here. 

Mr. Kennedy. Until when? 

Mr. PIeimke. Until we were subpenaed to this hearing. 

Mr. ICennedy. Is this list here "The Kohler Co. strikers' com- 
plaints", is that a complete list ? 

INIr. Heimke. That is not a complete list, because my subpena did not 
ask for the complete information. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all right. But this is not the complete list ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is not the complete list. 

Senator Curtis. "Wliat did the subpena ask for ? 

Mr. Heimke. The subpena, section C, said to produce a list of all 
complaints by month and year made to the Sheboygan Police Depart- 
ment by Kohler Co. nonstrikers in the years 1054 to date. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1954 to date? 

Mr. Heimke. 1954 to date, to the present time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wouldn't that include the list that you have there ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. You only asked for the nonstriker complaints. 
We have 572 complaints which were filed by the Kohler workers, 58 
that were filed by the strikers, and there were 300 complaints filed with 
the Sheboygan Police Department from a third or disinterested party 
who was a witness to incidents involving strikers and workei-s. 

Mr. KIennedy. I don't understand that. What is that 300 figure ? 

Mr. Heimke. 300 complaints were filed with the Sheboygan Police 
Department by a third party not involved as a striker or as a worker. 
They were disinterested people, third party j^eople, who were not con- 
nected in either way on either side, but who either witnessed or were a 
part of an incident involving strikers and workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. ^^Iiat do you mean were a witness ? '\\niat do you 
mean by that? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, in Sheboygan, the strike built up a feeling of 
fear in Sheboygan, fear — fear of being retaliated against, fear of 
having their homes bombed, fear for thei)- families. When you have 
a town covered by fear, you can't get people to complain to the police 
department or give them information. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just trying to find out wliat the 300 figure is. 

Mr. Heimke. Well, 300 people who were disinterested individuals, 
third party peoj^le, not strikers or workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you know it had anytliing to do with the 
Kohler strike ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIElS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9323 

Mr. Heimke. Because our investigation showed that the parties 
involved in the complaint were either Kohler workers or strikers, or 
combinations of both. 

Mr. Kennedy. I thought you said that was the 500 figure. What is 
the 300 figure? 

Mr. Heimke. That's what I just told you about. 

Mr. Kennedy. But where is the 300? If it is not strikers or non- 
strikers, what does it have to do with the Kohler strike ? 

Mr. Heimke. I was telling you about the fear that existed in the 
town. 

Mr. Kennedy. Answer my question. 

Mr. Heimke. I will get to that right now. Just as one incident, 
there was a Mercury car salesman sitting at a bar in Sheboj^gan, 
trying to sell a worker an automobile when a striker came up to the 
salesman and said, "Do you know who you are talking to?" And 
the salesman says, "It doesn't make any difference." 

The striker says, "You better watch out who you are talking to. 
Don't try to sell him an automobile," after which he punched the 
worker in the back as he was sitting at the bar, and then walked out. 
The salesman said to the worker, "Aren't you going to report this to 
the police?" And the worker says, "No, let's just forget about it." 

So the salesman came to the police department to re|Dort it. We 
contacted tlie man and he said, "I don't Avant to have anything to do 
with it. I don't want to report it. I don't want to have any police 
interference." 

That is what I mean by a third party, a disinterested party, not 
involved in the strike in any way. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, you are trying to tell us, appar- 
ently, that the fear of the union was so great, or of the strikers was 
po great, that even when a nonstriker was hurt or attacked, and a 
witness saw him and reported it to you, when you went to the man 
who had been injured, he was afraid to swear out a warrant and, 
consequently, you could not make an arrest; is that what you are 
saying ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. The fear that had been built up in 
the community prevented the people from coming in to file complaints 
with the police department. 

Senator Mundt. And there were 300 cases of that general type, 
where a witness would come in and tell you about an altercation, you 
would make an investigation, you would go to the fellow who had 
been hurt, ask him to make out a warrant, and he would say, "Just 
go away and forget about it. I have enough trouble. I don't want 
any more trouble." 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. As time went on, it kept getting worse. 
In law enforcement, you have to depend upon the public for a suc- 
cessful operation of a police department. There are only two places 
in which you can operate, and that is getting information from people 
or from a scientific source; 99 percent of police work is contacting 
people for information. If they give you no information, your hands 
are tied. You cannot operate. 

Senator Mundt. In that connection, I would like to ask you this 
question. Considerable emphasis was made a little while ago in the 
(juestioning about the fact that you did not arrest Donald Rand on 



9324 IMPROOPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

the basis of the three complaints made against him by folks whose 
names you did not know, alleging that he had been striking windows 
and breaking them. I would like to find out something about that 
situation. As I understand it, these reports were made to you by 
people during the course of this melee or riot or incident, whatever 
you want to call it, down at the clay -boat dock. Three different people 
ran up and said, "You better do something about Donald Rand. He 
is striking windows and breaking them." Is that right ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And because you were busy trying to defend your- 
self, or defend others, or whatever you were busy doing, trying to 
maintain some semblance of order, you were unable to get out your 
pencil and paper, you say, and say to these fellows, ""Who are you, 
and what did you see him do, and will you swear out a warrant" ; is 
that the idea? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. Our first concern was the protection 
of the people that were there. 

Senator Mundt. Then the counsel emphasized did you arrest Donald 
Hand the next day, and he emphasized that question many times. 

I want to find out why you didn't arrest him the next day. Out 
our way it may be a little different than in Wisconsin. Even a police 
officer can't go around wally-nilly arresting people without some evi- 
dence. Out in South Dakota, we respect the police, but we don't 
give them authority to go around and arrest people on suspicion or 
on unidentified rumor. You either have to see somebody breaking 
the law or you have to have somebody swear out a warrant or a citizen 
would stand immune from arrest by a police officer. 

You just can't go in and arrest somebody if you don't like him. It 
may be different in Wisconsin, but I would like to know why it was 
that you didn't arrest him the next day. 

Mr. Heimke. For the very reason that you just stated, we don't 
go around promiscuously picking up people, unless we have a sufficient 
amount of evidence to pick them up. 

Senator Mundt. That has to be either a warrant sworn out by 
somebody or some firsthand information that the police had, to de- 
velop scientifically, or, preferably, if you catch somebody in the act 
of breaking the law, you don't need to have a warrant. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator JVIundt. We have some statutes in the book on false arrest 
because we do not believe that the policemen are beyond making mis- 
takes either. To protect a private citizen from capricious arrest, 
there are some rules for the police to follow in making arrests. 

I do not know whether that is true in Wisconsin or not. So much 
emphasis has been placed on the fact that you didn't arrest him the 
next day. 

I think we ought to find out why you didn't arrest him the next 
day. 

Mr. Hetmke. Our primary concern is with the protection of the 
individual's rights, regardless of who he is. We only pick them up 
Avhen we have a sufficient amount of evidence to proceed. 

Senator Mundt. That would have to be a warrant in a case like 
this, I suppose, or some scientific evidence leading to the fellow, or 
something specific. You cannot go and arrest somebody and protect 
yourself against a false arrest charge. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 9325 

Mr. Heimke. Or the arresting officer having seen it. 

Senator Mundt. Yes. You have me confused about the number 
of complaints. You said the subpena didn't call for something. 

What did the subpena fail to call for'^ We wanted the subpena to 
be complete. I think it was complete, but if you do not think it was 
complete, what is it that you didn't bring because the subpena in your 
opinion was inadequate or incomplete ^ 

Mr. Heimke. I brought everything pertaining to the Kohler strike. 
Last July when the Senate investigators came to Sheboygan, we made 
all of our records available to them. They worked day and night 
going through these complaints and everything else that we had. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask you this question: Regardless of what 
the subpenas did or did not call for you, you brought with you every- 
thing that you thought was pertinent? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Muxdt. Now, that is out of the way. I would like to re- 
capitulate 

The Chairman. Can you make those available now as an exhibit 
to the committee? 

Mr. Heimke. These are the actual complaints of the police depart- 
ment, which are still active, which we are still working on. They are 
the originals. 

The Chairman. They are the originals? I was going to ask you, 
if you could make them available for file. But if you cannot, that is 
all right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have 300 more, in addition to these figures 
that you gave us here ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right ; 300 more. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you say that they are all connected with the 
strike? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Aiid you say they are act of vandalism ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. They are strike-connected complaints. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you talk about the 900 acts, are they acts of 
vandalism ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. Not all of them are acts of vandalism. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many of the 900 acts are acts of vandalism? 

Mr. Heimke. In our opinion, taking in the houses and garages that 
were painted, houses that were paint-bombed, windows broken, car 
tires damaged, car windows broken, cars damaged in other w^ays, air 
let out of tires, shotgun blasts through the door, car overturned, car 
dynamiting, and explosions, sugar, water, or salt in the gas tank, 
nails, tacks, or glass in the road, cars set on fire, that is a total of 

Senator Mundt. I yielded to the chairman to ask you a question 
and I had the floor at the time. I was trying to establish — I don't 
want you to real all 300 different acts, but I am trying to put to- 
gether 

The Chairman. Just a moment. Wouldn't you let him finish the 
acts of vandalism? 

Senator Mundt. If he is going to read all 300 of them 

The Chairman. No ; he is telling you the different kinds of acts of 
vandalism and give you the total. 

Senator Mundt. O. K. 

21243 — 58 — pt. 23 12 



9326 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Heimke. In our opinion there are 349 actual acts of vandalism. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does that include strikers and nonstrikers? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right. Senator Mundt? 

Senator IVIundt. Have you the 349 broken down as to which are 
strikers and w^hich are nonstrikers? You broke down 1 figure of 
43 to 41 and 2. Have you broken down the 349 ? 

Mr. Heimke. I don't have that compilation right now. 

Senator Mundt. Could you make it from your records ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes; we could. 

Senator Mundt. May we have him do that, Mr. Chairman, and 
liave it supplied? 

The Chairman. The Chair has no objection. We will be glad to 
have you break it down. You have 349 actual acts of vandalism now 
as you interpret the complaint. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. You are going to undertake to break down those 
complaints that are against strikers and those complaints that are 
against nonstrikers ? 

Mr. Heimke. We will have that available for the committee. 

The Chairman. I say that is what you are going to undertake to 
do now, so there will be no misunderstanding ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right. Get it available by the first of the 
w^eek. Proceed. 

(At this point. Senator Gold water withdrew from the hearing 
room. ) 

Senator Mundt. We started out with the figure of 930. Now, those 
930 complaints that you have piled up in front of you; what were 
they? 

Mr. Heimke. That is everything in which a Kohler striker and 
worker were involved. 

Senator Mundt. Is this 349 a part of the 930 ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Are the 300 eyewitness accounts part of the 930? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator IMundt. That is 649 acts of vandalism and eyewitness re- 
ports — 349 acts of vandalism, plus 300 eyewitness reports of alterca- 
tions of some kind between strikers and nonstrikers ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Most of those, I take it, were acts of personal 
violence rather than acts of vandalism. If you hit a man in the back, 
to me that would be an act of personal violence rather than vandalism. 
I will show you a picture of a fellow who is pretty badly bruised up. 
I wouldn't call that an act of vandalism. I would call that an act 
of personal violence. 

Mr. Heimke. That incident. Senator, was not reported to us. 

Senator Mundt. This would be an extra one that wasn't reported. 

Mr. Heimke. That man said he didn't want to file any complaint, 
he didn't w^ant to do anything about it, and he didn't want the police 
to do anything about it. 

Senator Mundt. You have 930, and you have 649 accounted for so 
far. What were the rest of them ? 



IMPROPEE ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9327 

Mr. Heimke. There were 101 annoying and threatening telephone 
calls. The telephone calls came at all hours of the day and night. 

Senator Mundt. You call those acts of intimidation or threat, 
probably. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Heimke. Then there were reports from Kohler workers of 
suspicious cars and occupants continuously passing their home. 

The Chairman. How many ? 

Mr. Heimke. 58. Then we received 89 requests from workers to 
pay attention to their home, because they feared that something was 
going to happen. They had received threats. 

The Chairman. How many ? 

Mr. Heimke. 89. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let me ask you one thing: How many suspicious 
cai*s did you have in 1957 ? 

I want to get these figures straight, but I must say I think maybe 
unintentionally you might be misleading the committee. Tell me how 
many suspicious cars you had in 1957 ? 

Mr. Heimke. Involving Kohler workers ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No; just how many suspicious cars you had, cars 
passing such as you described, reports of suspicious cars. 

Mr. Heimke. Regardless of whether it was Kohler workers or 
Kokler strikers ? 

^Ir. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Heimke. In 1957 there were 64. 

Mr. Kennedy. 04, and how many of those were Kohler ? 

Mr. Heimke. Kohler-strike related ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Heimke. None. 

Ml*. Kennedy. Isn't it conceivable — liave you taken a suspicious car 
merely for the fact that it has passed by, somebody who is a striker 
or nonstriker, and chalked that up to the Kohler strike incidents in 
1954 and 1955? I mean, just the mere fact that a striker or non- 
striker is involved and sees somebody passing by in a suspicious car, 
you are including that ? 

Mr. Heimke. That became a pattern of operation for the strikers, 
to continuously harrass the property owners by driving past their 
houses in the early evening hours and at night. 

Mr. Kennedy. Evidently that is the common practice in Sheboygan, 
Wis., then, because you had 04 in 1957 that had nothing to do with 
the Kohler strike. 

Mr. Heimke. Those are alert citizens, and we have educated them 
to report to us any suspicious activity in their home. That is one way 
of cooperating with law enforcement. 

Mr. Kennedy. And nonstrikers in 1956, you have 70 of them. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. Nonstrikers, or routine complaints 
not connected with the strike, there were 70 ; 12 of them were reported 
by Kohler workers. 

Senator Curtis. Would you yield for a question ? 

I want to know this : Are you talking about a car passing by was 
not related to the strike, or do you mean the person who made the 
report was not connected with either side of the controversy ? 



9328 IMPROPER AcrnaTiEs in the labor field 

Mr. Hkimke. I am referring to the suspicious cars and occupants. 
There were 58 reports received from Kohler strikers or workers. 
Senator Curtis. In what year ? 

Mr. Heimke. F'rom 1954 to the present date. The prei)onderance 
of those coni])liiints came in 1954, 1955, and 1956. There were no 
complaints fi-om any Kohler people before that, and there were no 
complaints from Kohler people in 1957 pertaining to suspicious cars. 
But during the height of the complaints, in 1954, 1955, and 1956, 
there were riO, 1(5, and 12. 

Senator Mundt. From peojjle wlio were connected with the strikers 
at the Kohler plant ; is that right ? 

Mr. Heimke. "Would you re})eat that, please ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. The complaints came from people con- 
nected with the Kohler operation ? 
Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

(At this point. Senator Gold water entered the hearing room.) 
Senator Mundt. I hand you a picture and ask you whether you 
recognize the individual on the photograph. 
(The photograph was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Heimke. At the time I didn't know him, but when he went 
for medical care we learned that he was a party by the name of 
Grunewald. 

Senator INIundt. Was Grunewald a striker, a nonstriker, or a spec- 
tator? 

Mr. Heimke. I heard that he was a worker : or he had been a worker 
at the Kohler Co. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know what occasioned all those bandages, 
all those bruises and the black eyes and what looks to be a pretty bad 
facial beating ? 

Mr, Heimke. That was the man I was telling you about, that I 
tried to protect while he could get out of the clay-boat area. 

Senator Mundt. Did this attack on him occur during the course 
of this clay-boat "incident" ? 

Mr. Heimke. The clay-boat incident, right. 

In the late afternoon or the middle of the afternoon of July 5. I 
e.stimate that happened between 3 and 3 : 30. 

Senator Mundt. This was the man you were trying to protect, and 
at the same time people were coming up telling you "Don Rand is 
breaking windows", and you were trying, with four people, to estab- 
lish order down there ; is that right ? 
Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. Did you interview this man or did you find out 
what happened? You didn't protect him very well because he got 
]>retty badly beaten up. 

The Chairman. Do you want that made an exhibit so it can be 
identified ? 

Senator Mundt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 65. You identify 
it ; you know the man, do you ? 
Mr. Heimke. Yes. 

The Chairman. All right. It is exhibit 65. 

(The document referred to was marked "exhibit No. 65" for i-ef- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 



IMPROPER ACXrV^ITIEIS IX THE LABOR FIELD 9329 

Mr. Heimke. I didn't interview him personally, but other officers 
did. He didn't want complaint filed with the police department; 
wanted no investigation. He wanted nothing done about the event. 

Senator Mundt. You had no officers who were eye witnesses to 
what happened? When you came into contact, you just saw some- 
body who was badly beaten up and they were running away? 

Mr. Heimke. The only officers we had down there were on the crane. 

Senator Mundt. And there was nothing in your police-department 
records that would say what happened to this man, whether he ran 
into a post or whether somebody hit him in the face with iron knuck- 
les, or what happened? There is nothing in your records to show 
what happened ? 

Mr. Heimke. He refused to talk. He didn't want anything to do 
with the police, and he didn't want the police to interfere or conduct 
an investigation. 

Senator Curtis. Would the Senator yield at that point ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. In your opinion, why were people generally so 
reluctant to talk or to volunteer information so that they could be 
used as witnesses in court ? 

Mr. Heimke. There is one word that covers the entire situation, and 
that is "fear." 

Senator Curtis. Who were they afraid of ? 

Mr. Heimke. They were — I don't know who they were afraid of, 
but it appeared as though they were afraid of the strikers retaliating 
against their property and their homes and the members of their 
family. 

Senator Curtis. And that is the way you feel about it ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. So even if an officer does see this, even if an officer 
is an eyewitness to an assault, if the individual assaulted will not 
cooperate at all, it is pretty difficult to ever have a successful prose- 
cution, isn't it, if not impossible ? 

Mr. Heimke. In Wisconsin an assault and battery is a civil offense, 
in which the offended party is required to sign the complaint. We 
even went so far when he found we could not get these people to sign 
a complaint or sign a warrant to take the party to court. Our police 
officers signed the complaint on infonnation and belief, hoping that 
it would take some of the fear of retaliation out of the mind of the 
assaulted individual. And then we hoped that he would testify for 
the police department that he had been assaulted. 

They refused. They refused to testify under any circumstances, 
and the complaint many times had to be withdrawn for want of 
prosecution. 

Senator Curtis. Well, I think that the testimony we have taken 
here in reference to this pattern directed against Judge Schlichting, 
and I have information where it was followed in many other cases 
in the Reuther empire, fits right in with this fear and intimidation 
that goes down to people that they will not make complaints or be 
witnesses. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

Senator Mundt. I have one question, Mr. Chairman. 



9330 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

I iim wonderino;, you didn't liave a very bi^ force apparently, just 
four people down at a riot like that, or incident like that, to keep 
the language right. 

I wondered, what was the sheriff's office doing in this whole busi- 
ness? I can't understand wliy he vrouldn't be down there. 

Was that part of his responsibility, or under your Wisconsin setup 
do you have exclusive responsibility for maintaining order within 
municipal limits, and the sheriff's responsibility is limited to outside 
of the municipal limits? 

Mr. IIeiimke. Sheboygan is a part of the county, and the sheriff 
is responsible for law enforcement in the county. 

Senator Mundt. In other w^ords, you have dual responsibility for 
law enforcement in the city, and the sheriff has exclusive responsi- 
bility outside of the city. Is that the way it works ? 

Mr. Heimke. Generally ; althougli we have a working arrangement 
to let the city take care of the city, and the sheriff will take care of 
the county, although the city cannot go into the county without being 
deputized by the sheriff, although the sheriff can operate in the city. 

Senator Mundt. Tell us what the sheriff did there, and what did 
he do to help maintain order ? 

Mr. Heimke. Nothing. He didn't do anything. 

Senator Mundt. He didn't do anything? Didn't he send some law- 
enforcement people, deputies representing tlu-ni, somebody down there 
to help quell this rising tide of explosive sentiment? 

Mr. Heimke. I didn't see any officer fiom his department down 
there. 

Senator Mundt. You were appointed by the mayor, I suppose? 

Mr. Heimke. No. I am appointed by the j^olice and fire commis- 
sion, subject to the confirmation of the connnon council. 

Senator Mundt. You have a commissioner system and you have a 
police commissioner, and water commissioner, and fire commissioner ? 

Mr. Heimke. Tlie police and fire commission is a 5-man board ap- 
pointed by the mayor, confirmed by the council. 

Senator Mundt. And the sheriff' is elected ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes, he is elected. 

Senator Mundt. He >vas elected by CIO support or UAW support 
or union support? 

Mr. Heimke. They supported him in the last election. 

Senator Mundt. What attitude did he take in connection M'ith this 
long series of incidents, which you stacked up there almost half a 
foot high, of trouble of various types that evolved during tliis situa- 
tion? 

Mr. Heimke. We, in the Sheboygan Police Department, felt we 
stood alone in this entire situation. We got very little support from 
the sheriff's department, and, in fact, some of the sheriff's officers, 
deputies, who were interested in solving these situations came in to 
us with information and they were censored by the sheriff for work- 
ing on some of these cases, and they were told to lay off, and that 
any investigation would be done by the sheriff himself. 

Senator Mundt. Are you telling the committee that the sheriff, 
instead of trying to help solve these violations of law, was in fact 
telling his deputies not to interest themselves in getting that kind of 
evidence and to lay off ? Is that your testimony under oath ? 



lAIPROPE'R ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9331 

Mr. Heimke. Yes, we know of incidents like that. 

Senator Mundt. Have you any other information indicating that 
the sheriff was not interested in trying to bring order out of chaos 
in this area ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, it was just a general belief among all of the 
police officers in Sheboygan that we could not depend upon the sheriff 
at that time for any assistance. 

Senator Mundt. So it became a sole function, or sole responsi- 
bility of your police department, either you got the job done or nobody 
did it? 

Mr. Heimke. In fact we have gone so far as to appeal to the Gov- 
ernor directly. Any appeals to the Governor have to be done through 
the sheriff' and the district attorney's office but we received word that 
he would not interfere until all of the resources of the sheriff's de- 
partment and other law enforcement officers of the county had been 
utilized, and he felt that we hadn't used those resources at our dis- 
posal. 

Senator Mundt. The Governor felt that ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. You appealed to the Governor for what — for 
troops, or the National Guard or 

Mr. Heimke. For the National Guard. 

Senator Mundt. The National Guard ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. Where did this conversation take place that you 
overheard between the sheriff and the mayor in reference to an obli- 
gation that one or the other might owe to the union? 

Mr. Heimke. That was at the middle of the intersection of Franklin 
Street, Fifth Street, and Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Senator Curtis. On what day ? 

Mr. Heimke. The afternoon of July 5. 

Senator Curtis. 1954? 

Mr. Heimke. 1954. No ; that was 1955. 

Senator Curtis. "Wlio said what ? 

Mr. Heimke. As I approached the two individuals from the rear, 
the mayor said to the sheriff, "How much are you obligated?" 

Senator Mundt. What is his name? 

Mr. Heimke. Mayor Eudolph Ploetz said to Sheriff Mosch, "How 
much are you obligated to the union for?" after which Sheriff Mosch 
turned around, and he was going to answer and he saw me standing 
there, and the color of his face changed, and he stuttered and stam- 
mered, and he said, "Let us go some place where we can talk." 

Senator Curtis. That is when they got in the car and rolled up the 
windows ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. Then later on you went over and tapped on the 
window ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right, on the driver's side. 

Senator Curtis. What did you say to them ? 

Mr. Heimke. They turned the window down after a bit of pounding, 
and I asked them, "What do you want me to do?" and the answer I got 
was, "We'll be back in a little while." 

Senator Curtis. Do you remember who answered you ? 



9332 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. IIeimke. Tlie sheriff, because he was behind the wheel. 

Senator Curtis. Did you conduct any investigations on anonymous 
or tlireatening telephone calls ? 

Mr. PIeimkk. We were unable to get, through the equipment we had, 
where the calls were coming from. We have a dial system, which makes 
it difficult to trace calls. But we referred most of the annoying and 
threatening phone calls to the manager of the telephone company. But 
in the meantime, we had developed informants within the strikers 
who were sympathetic to law enforcement, and they informed us that 
the calls were coming from the strike kitchen or soup kitchen. 

We asked the telephone company to confirm this, but they said that 
they would confirm whatever information they had only by a court 
order. 

Senator Curtis. Did you ever get any information as to where the 
})aint bombs were coming from, either those made out of light bulb or 
those made out of a fruit jar? 

Mr. Heimke. We never were able to develop anything. We checked 
light bulbs. We thought we were getting close to the light-bulb type 
of paint bombing and we thought we were able to develop something, 
and they stopped, and then the technique switched to Mason fruit jars 
filled with paint, but we were never able to develop a source. 

We received a lot of information, but we were not able to develop 
anything. 

Senator Curtis. And when you were working on it, they switched 
over to the fruit jar type ? 

Mr. Heimble. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. Well, what plans did you develop to cope with 
the vandalism and violence ? 

Mr, Heimke. While I was captain we put on, or we had the men 
work overtime, and we put on six special officers who had aspirations 
of becoming police officers but who at that time were on the eligibility 
list. We put them on as special officers and made everybody work 4 
hours extra every day, and we divided the town up into sections, those 
sections that were getting hit the most with the paint bombs and types 
of vandalism. 

Whenever we concentrated in a given area, then the vandalism would 
stop and they would hit another area. We didn't have enough men 
to blanket the entire city, so we had to play our hunches, and through 
the use of pin maps try to find out where most of the vandalism was 
occurring and we would concentrate our men in those areas, and when 
we did, the vandalism stopped. 

Then they would hit another area, and when we moved to that area, 
they would go back to the area that we had vacated, which led us to 
believe that they were getting information on our operations from 
somebody. 

Senator Mundt. Were you in the committee room the other day 
when the Buteyn brothers were testifying ? 

Mr. Heimke. I was. 

Senator Mundt. Did you hear the testimony ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes, I did. 

Senator Mundt. Did you hear Mr. Buteyn say that the mayor — and 
I thought it was the mayor of Sheboygan and it might be the mayor 
of some place else, and I want to straighten this out — but he testified 



EVIPROPER ACTWITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9333 

that a mayor had tried to order him around, and he said, "I'm all 
through taking orders from you today," and so forth, and finally the 
mayor said he wanted Buteyn to promise he would never unload a 
clay boat again, and if he would do that then he would get police 
protection to take this particular machinery out of the area of the 
confusion. 

Was that the same mayor that you are talking about, that you just 
related to Senator Curtis as having had this bizarre conversation with 
the sheritf which you overheard ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. That was a part of the conversation 
that I heard while standing alongside of the mayor in his office when 
he called the Buteyns, demanding him to take the crane out of the 
area. 

Senator Mundt. You heard part of that conversation, too ? 

Mr. Heimke. Just the mayor's half of the conversation. 

Senator Mundt. The mayor's ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes, sir; and that is where that conversation took 
place. 

Senator Mundt. Can you state, then, under oath, that the part of 
the conversation that you heard said in the mayor's office, corrobo- 
rates and confirms the statements made by Mr. Buteyn insofar as that 
part of the conversation is concerned ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. I was also alongside of him 

Senator Mundt. This is the same mayor you heard ask the sheriff, 
"How much are you obligated to the union ?" 

Mr. Heimke. That is the same mayor. 

Senator Mundt. That was Mayor Ploetz ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. And Sheriff Mosch ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. Certainly it would look to me, Avith that kind of 
a situation, that your position as chief of police of the city of She- 
boygan was something less than enviable. 

Mr. Hiemke. I was captain at that time. 

Senator Mundt. You were not chief ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. 
Senator Mundt. You were captain ? 

Mr. Heimke. I was captain of police at that time, and it did create 
a problem for me. 

Senator Mundt. Was the chief of police cooperating with you ? 

Mr. HfeiMKE. I would say he was, yes. 

Senator Mundt. So that your problem didn't develop in the police 
department through the police commissioner, but it developed through 
the mayor's office and through the sheriff's office. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just on that question, I think your testimony is most 
interesting about the conversation between Buteyn and Mayor Ploetz, 
because Buteyn testified that this conversation took place on the dock 
when he was trying to repair the crane, and your testimony is that 
you overheard it on the telephone. 

Mr. Heimke. I was also standing alongside of the mayor when he 
took the microphone from the sound truck. 



9334 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. But in answer to Senator Mundt, you said, ''Yes, I 
overheard the conversation. I overheard half the conversation, and I 
was in the office when lie telephoned Buteyn," and Buteyn testified 
that this conversation took place at the dock. 

Mr. IIeimke. I heard the testimony, and I don't think that that is 
straight. 

Mr. Kennedy. I will get the testimony, because I know that is what 
it was, and it took place at the dock. And he said, "Get up here and say 
over the microphone that you will never take this material out of here 
again, and you won't unload the ship." 

Mr. Heiinike. That is right, he did that, and that did occur at the 
dock as you stated. But tliere was also the incident in the mayor's 
office when he called Buetyn. 

Senator Mundt. I am pretty sure Butejai testified this was a tele- 
phone call, but this is a matter which is demonstrable from the record. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was no question that there was a telephone 
call. There was a question that it was at the dock that the statement 
was made that, "You will get up and announce that you will not unload 
the clay from the clay boat again." That took place at the dock, and 
not on the telephone ? 

Mr. Heimke. That part of the conversation did take place at the 
dock. 

Senator Mundt. My question to the chief was not on that, and my 
question to the chief was whether or not he heard the mayor's part, 
where he was trying to order Buteyn around and Buteyn said, "I have 
taken all of the orders I am going to take from you." 

IMr. Kennedy. And he said he had heard the rest of the conversa- 
tion. 

The Chairman. Gentlemen, this record speaks for itself, and it has 
been made over and over. 

Mr, Heimke. At that time, the mayor also stated that, "If you don't 
come down, I will get the police officers to come and get you," but I 
was standing alongside of the mayor when he made his speech over the 
loudspeaker system at the dock, in which he said that that crane — or, 
first, I spoke, and they would not listen to me, and they said, "We don't 
believe you ; we want to hear it from the mayor." 

So, the mayor took the mike, and he said, "I promise you that this 
crane will be taken out of the area and it will be taken back to the 
Kohler Co. where it belongs, and that there will be no clay boat 
unloaded in Sheboygan." I was standing shoulder to shoulder Avith 
the mayor at the time. 

The Chairman. May I ask you a few questions, and we can go on 
all day and repeat it. Let us get down to 1 or 2 real facts now. You 
had 930 complaints ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. 349 of them were vandalism ? 

Mr. Heiimive. Yes. 

The Chairman. 101 were threats or threatening phone calls; is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. 58 of them were suspicious cars passing by; is that 
right? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 



IMPROPE'R ACTIVITIBS IX THE LABOR FIELD 9335 

The Chairmax. 89 was what, and you gave me the figure and I did 
not get it. 

Mr. Heimke. That was paying attention to residences or request- 
ing the police department to have officers pay attention to their 
residences. 

The Chairman. Expressing fear and asking you to watch their 
premises ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. What are the others, right quickly ? 

Mr. Heimke. There were 19 cars damaged, although this would be 
in the others. 

The Chairman. That would be vandalism ? 

Mr. Heimke. Illegal placing of strike posters, one. 

The Chairman. What else ? 

Mr. Heimke. General disorderly conduct of strikers. 

The Chairman. How many ? 

Mr. Heimke. 75. 

The Chairman. What else ? 

Mr. Heimke. 21 requests for Kohler workers to be escorted home. 

The Chairman. That is for escorts; they are afraid to go home? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Heimke. We received two requests to pay attention to the 
Kohler bus. 

The Chairman. The Kohler bus ? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Any thing else ? 

Mr. Heimke. There was one phony home delivery. 

The Chairman. What is that ? 

Mr. Heimke. A phony home delivery ; that is a\ here they ordered 
flowers and groceries, and all kind of things, to be ^ent to a particular 
worker's house without liis knowledge. 

The Chairman. One phony delivery. What else is there ? 

Mr. Heimke. In fact, there were 2 of them; 1 involved an ambu- 
lance and a wrecker, and so there were 2. Then we received seven 
requests to pay attention to the dock area. 

The Chairman. Seven what ? 

Mr. Heimke. Seven requests to pay attention to a dock area, the 
olay-boat dock area. 

The Chairman. All right. I am trying to make this record com- 
plete, since we have it. 

Mr. Heimke. There were 67 picketings of workers' homes. 

The Chairman. Sixty-seven of those? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes ; and we picked up 1 individual, or 3 individuals, 
with the possession of a gun. 

The Chairman. Two carrying concealed weapons ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. Did you list that as 3 offenses or 1 ? 
That was one offense, in the possession of a gun. 

The Chairman. You gave me two. 

Mr. Heimke. There were 3 people involved, but we listed it as 1 
offense. There were 67 picketings of workers' homes. 

The Chairman. We got that. 

Mr. Heimke. And six threatening letters. 



9336 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. Six threatening letters? 

Mr. ITeimke. Yes, sir: and 12 reports of suspicious persons. One 
compLaint against tlie union sound-truck disturbance. We receiver! 
seven complaints to escort trucks. "VVe have two here, discharging of 
fireworks, whicli is illegal in the State of Wisconsin. We Tiad 21 
fights. There Avere five reports of men beaten. 

The Chairman. That is reports of assault, all right. 

Mr. Heimke. We had five requests to pay attention to the Lyman 
School, where picketing was going on. 

Senator Mundt. Why would they be picketing a schoolhouse? 

Mr. Heiinike. They Avere building an addition to the Lyman School, 
and Kohler fixtures were going in there. 

Senator Muxdt. This is part of the boycott. 

The Chairman. AVhat is the next one ? 

Mr. Heimke. There were two complaints of damage to fresh cement. 

The Chairman. That is vandalism ? 

Mr. Heimke. Then we had one complaint of paying attention to 
the baseball game, invoh^ing Kohler workers, and they expected some 
trouble at a Softball game. 

Then we had a complaint from a home builder. 

Senator Erat^n. Did that come from the umpire ? 

Mr. Heiivike. No. 

The Chairman. Let us move along. 

Mr. Heimke. Then we had a complaint from a home builder that 
had been threatened. Then we received a request to guard the trains 
that were transporting equipment to the Kohler Co. 

The Chairman. This makes up a substantial part of the 930, does 
it not? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. We had name calling; there were IB 
complaints of name calling. 

The Chairman. Thirteen name calls? Did you include in that 
when the called them "scabs" ? Did you include that in the list? 

Mr. Heinke, Well, the dictionary does not define "scab" as a de- 
rogatory term, and we could never 

The Chairman. Whenever they were calling people "scabs," you 
did not include that? 

Mr. Heimke. It was oA^er and above the word "scab." 

The Chairman. The 13 is over and above the word "scab"? 

Mr. Heimke. Yes. 

The Chairman. Wimt else ? 

Mr. Heimke. There were 11 threats to do malicious damage. There 
was one Kohler worker that got married and he asked us to protect his 
home while he was getting married. 

The Chairman. I think that is a Aery important request. Was 
he protected ? 

Mr. Heimke. He was. 

The Chairman. Thank you. Proceed. 

Mr, Heiiseke. Then there were two boys beaten. 

The Chairman. Well, I think that would come under assaults. Is 
that in addition to those? 

Mr. Heimke. That is in addition. 

The Chairman. Two boys beaten. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 9337 

Mr. Heimke. This is segi'egating it from the adults to tlie teen- 
ager. There were 11 requests to pay attention to Kohler workers' 
cars who would be parked on the street overnight. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Heimke. And then there were a group of 72 complaints which 
we just could not catalog, or put in any particular category. 

The Chairman. I am just trying to get the great bulk of the 930, 
and so Ave have at least that now, do we ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right, I have not totaled them up, and I sup- 
pose tliey run somewhere in that neighborhood, what you reported. 

NoAv let me ask you this : Of all of these complaints including the 
349 cases of vandalism, how many of those complaints have been 
solved ? 

Mr. Heimke. On the vandalism, when we look at malicious van- 
dalism, damaging of property, we were not able to make any arrests 
except the one on Bonanse. 

(At this point, the following members of the committee were pres- 
ent: Senators McClellan, Curtis, Ervin, Mundt, and Goldwater.) 

The Chairman. You made one arrest for vandalism ? 

Mr. Heimke. And then there were two boys who were membei*s 
of strikers' families who didn't like a neighbor of theirs who was a 
worker, and they decided that they were going to imitate what had 
been going on, and they decided to paint the neighbor's car, so we 
referred tliose to juvenile authorities so it would not be on our 
arrest. 

The Chairman. They are not on your list, the two boys ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. That's a confidential record. 

The Chairman. I assume they were young children ? 

Mr. Heimke. They were. 

The Chairman. So they are not included in your list ? 

Mr. Heimke. They are not. 

The Chairman. All of the files you have there, the 930, as I under- 
stand your records there, those are still active cases ? 

Mr. Heimke. There was one arrest we did make. There was a 
window broken, a Thermopane window broken on the north side of 
the city of Sheboygan, and we were fortunate to have officers within 
the immediate area. We made an arrest of two individuals in a car. 
They had a slingshot, and they had agate marbles, similar to marbles 
that were found at the scene of the broken Tliermopane window, so 
we made the arrest. They were taken to court. We lost the case on 
their defense that they just happened to be in the area, and that the 
rubber innertube slingshot that they had with the marbles had been 
used to scare away starlings from their back birdhouse. 

The Chairman. So, in view of the fact that they were acquitted, 
that still remains unsolved, judicially ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. How many have been solved, out of the 930 ? How 
many have the police solved over this period of 4 years ? 

Mr. Heimke. None, except for the Bonanse case. 

The Chairman. The Bonanse case was a worker who did some- 
thing to the car of a striker; is that correct? 



9338 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. IIeimke. Yes. Our interrogation of him revealed that he got 
so fed up with being annoyed by the strikers that he got drunk one 
niglit and went out and did damage. 

The Chairman. Instead of painting the town, he painted the car. 

Mr. Heimke. That was such an amateurish job tliat we were able 
to solve tliat almost immediately. The others all had tlie profes- 
sional touch. 

The CiiAiRMAK. But the point I am making now is you still have 
these cases active after 4 years. You have not been able to solve them. 
or to find the guilty parties and prosecute. 

Mr. Heimke. I might say that we did make an arrest of the two 
Shraeder brothers who threw beer cans against a house trying to 
break a window. But their aim was bad and they hit the frame of the 
house. 

They were arrested. They are strike sympathizers, belonging to 
another union in Sheboygan. 

The Chairman. Were they convicted ? 

Mr. Heimke. They were charged with disorderly conduct, destruc- 
tion of property, and Gilbert Shraeder paid $50 and costs and Donald 
Shraeder had his case dismissed. 

The Chairman. So you have had two convictions, one fellow 
painted a car, and the other one that threw a tin can at a window and 
missed. 

Mr. Heimke. We have other cases that involve assault and battery 
and disorderly conduct, which were eitlier dismissed or they are still 
pending. 

The Chairman. I am not trying to reflect on you. I assume you 
did the best you could. You even had, didn't you, the assistance of 
some detectives hired by the Kohler Co., didn't you, trying to find 
out who was committing these crimes ? 

Mr. Heimke. They were a duly licensed detective agency and we 
did work very closely with them. We accepted any help we could get. 

The Chairman. In other words, you did work with them, and you 
have done all of this work since in the 4-year period of time. 

Mr. Heimke. That's right. 

The Chairman. "VYliat you have testified to liere now is the amount 
of solution you have been able to make in solving these crimes? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And you worked hard at it ? 

Mr. Heimke. It was a full-time, 24-hour-a-day job. We dropped 
everything else. We reached the pomt of frustration. We felt we 
lost the confidence of tlie people, and we were trying to regain their 
confidence so that we could operate again. 

The Chairman. How many detectives did the company hire to help 
you? 

Mr. Heimke. Two that I know of. 

The Chairman. You worked with two at least ? 

Mr. Heimke. They came in to us for information and passed on 
information to us that they had developed. 

The Chairman. Well, you cooperated. 

Mr. Heimke. Tliat is right. 

The Chairman. And you had confidence in them tliat they were 
trying ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9339 

Mr. Heimke. Right. 

The Chairman. And you know you tried. 

Mr. Heimke. I tried all the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. On those detectives, did they speak to you about 
putting a bug in the office of the union, or in the union's headquarters? 

Mr. Heimke. They asked me where the union stayed, and I told 
them they stayed at the Grant Hotel. They said "Do you know what 
part of the building ? " 

I said, "I don't know. What difference does that make?" 

They said, "Well, we would like to find out what is going on in 
there." 

That is all I heard. 

Mr. Ejennedy. These are the representatives of the Kohler Co. ? 

Mr. Heimke. That was this detective agency. 

Mr. Kennedy. Hired by the Koliler Co. ? 

Mr. Heimke. I assume they were, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You knew they were. 

Mr. Heimke. They told me they were hired by the Kohler Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. They asked you about where the union was staying ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Mr. EIennedy. Did they also speak to you about getting some equip- 
ment so that they could bug the hotel room ? 

Mr. Heimke. We don't have any equipment. I don't know where 
to get it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just answer the question, Chief. Did they speak to 
you about getting some equipment to bug the room of the union ? 

Mr. Heimke. They just said they wanted to get some information 
out of the room. What device or means — I assume they wanted to tap 
a line or bug it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they speak to you about getting equipment so 
that they could bug the headquarters of the union ? 

Mr. Hiemke. No, they didn't ask me to get equipment. 

Mr. Kennedy. Answer this question : Did they talk to you at all 
about bugging the room of the headquarters of the union ? 

Mr. Heimke. They didn't use the word "bugging". 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat word did they use ? 

Mr. Heimke. I thought they used the word "tap." 

Mr. Kennedy. They wanted to put a tap. All right. What did you 
say? 

Mr. Heimke. I told them that was their business, but we weren't 
going to be involved in that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they ask you for the equipment, whatever equip- 
ment you might have, to tap the wires of the union? 

Mr. Heimke. We have no equipment like that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just answer the question. Did they ask you to use 
your equipment ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. What conversation did they have with you about 
tapping the telephone wires of the union? 

Mr. Heimke. They just said that they would like to tap into that 
room and find out what is going on, if they could. That was the ex- 
tent of the conversation. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you told them that the union stayed at the 
Grant Hotel ? 



9340 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. That was their headquarters, their 
lodging headquarters. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they arrange, then, to go into the Grant Hotel? 

Mr. Heimke. I don't know. We never had a conversation after that 
again. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if they set up a room at the Grant 
Hotel in order to accomplish this ? 

Mr. Heimke. That I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't know if they had a room at the Grant 
Hotel? 

Mr. Heimke. No, I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what room the union had at the Grant 
Hotel? 

Mr. EfeiMKE. No, I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't know what steps they took after that ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. They never discussed this with you after that ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. They just asked if you would assist them, or said 
they wanted to do this, put a tap on, and you said that was up to them? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. They didn't ask for our assistance. 

Mr. Kennedy. They just told you that is what they planned to do ? 

Mr. HJEiMKE. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you don't know whether they did it or not ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, I don't, 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they also speak to you or any of your deputies 
about planting an informant in the strike kitchen? 

Mr. Heimke. No, I never heard that until I got here to Washington. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does your deputy, Mr. Franks, know about that? 

Mr. Franks. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they speak to you about getting an informant 
to work in the strike kitchen so that they could pick up the conversa- 
tions that were being carried at that time ? 

Mr. Franks. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you put them in contact with somebody who 
could work at the strike kitchen ? 

Mr. Franks. Well, I wasn't certain that it could be arranged that 
way, but I did make the initial contact, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they met with this individual to work in the 
strike kitchen ? 

Mr. Franks. To the best of my knowledge they did, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the payments were to be made to this informant, 
who was going to work for them and report, the payments were to be 
made by the Kohler Co., is that right ? 

Mr. Franks. I have no knowledge of that at all. 

Mr. ICennedy. Did they say that they were willing to pay ? 

Mr. Franks. They left me with that impression, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were at that time being retained by the 
Kohler Co. ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Franks. I assume that they were, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if they got this informant in the strike 
kitchen ? 

Mr. Franks. I cannot say with certainty that they did. but I sus- 
pect tliat it did happen. 



IMPROPEK ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9341 

Mr. KJENNEDT. Also, just on the methods that were used by these 
representatives of the detective agency, do you remember a man by 
the name of Silvia ? 

Mr. Fkanks. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Kj^nnedt. And Silvia was one of those suspected by the Kohler 
Co. of committing some of these acts of violence and vandalism ? 

Mr. Franks. The first time I got into contact with Silvia on that 
incident was through Sheriff George LeMieux of Fond du Lac County 
and Mr. Eugene McEssey, the district attorney of Fond du Lac County. 
I originally got into that particular situation on discussion with Chief 
Walter Wagner, the former chief. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he one of those suspected of committing some 
of these acts of violence ? 

Mr. Franks. Yes, he was. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Because he liked to drink, was it arranged to get him 
drunk, to see if he might confess to some of these crimes ? 

Wasn't that done ? 

Mr. Franks. I don't quite follow you on that, counselor. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Wasn't it reported that Mr. Silvia enjoyed drink- 
ing, and wasn't it arranged thereafter to get Mr. Silvia drunk, the 
Madson Detective Agency and yourself to get Mr. Silvia drunk, 
so that he would possibly confess to these crimes ? 

(The witnesses conferred with each other.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You know about it, I believe. 

Mr. Franks. I believe what you have reference to is the time I 
accompanied Madson and Sheriff LeMieux and District Attorney 
McEssey to Madison, where he took a polygraph test. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; and then you came back. 

Mr. Franks. On the way back, I believe it was Mr. Wiliomski said 
that the results of the test indicated — I am answering your question, 
but I am answering it this way — the results of the test indicated that 
he might have some knowledge of these incidents. But he said that he 
has done all he can, and "possibly," he said, "You might use the liquid 
detector on him on the way home." That is when I walked away from 
the conversation. 

I do know later on that he meant maybe if we bought him a few 
drinks he might loosen up a little bit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you stop at a few bars on the way back ? 

Mr. Franks. We stopped, I believe, at the Elks Club and had 
dinner. 

Mr. Kennedy. Di-d you have a few drinks at that time ? 

Mr. Franks. Yes ; we did have a few drinks. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he loosen up at all ? 

Mr. Franks. He asked to talk to Sheriff LeMieux alone, and the 
two of them went off on the side. After a while he came back, Sheriff 
LeMieux, and he said to me that he thinks Bill will talk. 

I said, "Fine." I said, "^Yliat is your plan ?" 

He said, "Bill wants to stay with me in my jail in Fond du Lac 
County voluntarily. He would like to sign a statement to that effect. 
He would like it if Chief Walter Wagner would come over and talk 
to him and then possibly he could throw some light on this." 

Mr. Kennedy. So the liquid test appeared, at least initially, to help ? 

Mr. Franks. I don't think he had that much to drink, counselor. 

21243— 58— pt. 23 13 



9342 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. He liad a few drinks ? 

Mr. Franks. He had a few ; yes ; he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it appeared that he was at least more coopera- 
tive after he had a few drinks than before ? 

Mr. Franks. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the representative of the Kohler Co. was 
present during all of this, the detective ^ 

Mr. FifANKS. Just so we don't get confused on this, this was Mr. 
Al Adams 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was working for the Madson Detective Co. 

Mr. Fr^vnks. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were employed by the Kohler Co.? 

Mr. Franks. That is my understanding. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Senator Ervin. 

Senator Ervin. Have you made any division of these what you call 
complaints as to those that were complaints as distinguished from 
those which were requests? In other words, some of the complaints 
you have listed as requests for escorts, requests to watch homes, or 
requests to Avatch automobiles. 

Mr. Heimke. They all originated as complaints. They complained 
that they had been threatened and then requested that we pay atten- 
tion to the residence. There were other instances where there was 
intimidation, coercion, which made them feel that some part of their 
person or property might be damaged or threatened, which resulted 
in a request to pay attention and act as a guard or provide an escort. 

Senator ER^^N. Then in every case you received a request where 
the people had been threatened or intimidated in some way before 
they called you, according to their statement ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Era^n. As I understand you, out of these nine hundred and 
thirty-odd complaints, only three persons have been convicted, con- 
victed in court ? 

Mr. Heimke. On vandalism. Malicious vandalism. There were 
other arrests. We had a total of 53 arrests pertaining to the strike. 

Senator Ervin. Yes, but I was distinguishing between arrests and 
trials and conviction. I understood you to tell Senator McClellan 
that 1 person had been convicted, 1 striker had been convicted of 
painting an automobile, and that 2 persons had been convicted in 
connection witli throwing beer cans against a house. Now, were there 
any other trials and convictions? 

Mr. Heimke. There were others. 

In fact, there were a total of 53 arrests, which were strike con- 
nected; 25 of those 53 are still pending. Sixteen of those complaints 
were withdrawn or dismissed, in which the complainant or the wit- 
nesses because of fear refused to testify or si^n complaints. Seven 
were found guiUy and five were found not guilty by jury trial. 

Senator Ervin. In other words, of the 53 arrests, all of them had 
been disposed of except 25, which are still pending? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. And of all of those which have been disposed of, 
the charge was eitlier withdrawn or an acquittal — they were witli- 
drawn or an acquittal entered and dismissal of seven cases? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9343 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. How many members of the police force did you 
have there ? 

Mr. Heimke. At the time of the chiy-boat incident we had 54. 
That was right during the vacation time when many of our officers 
were on vacation. 

Senator Ervin. I imagine at that time you had extra men on, didn't 
you, that you would not employ normally at other times ? 

Mr. Heimke. We put on six men who headed the police eligibility 
list, and we put them on as recruit patrolmen working in plain 
clothes. 

Senator Ervin. As far as you could observe from the conduct of 
other members of the police force, the members of the police force en- 
deavored in good faith to ascertain who had committed these various 
acts of vandalism, did you not ? 

Mr. Heimke. They tried to make it a full-time job, they were just 
as anxious to clear these events up as we were. 

Senator Ervin. And you have no reason to believe, do you, that if 
the members of the committee statf went out there and conducted an 
investigation at this time, anywhere from 6 months to 314 or almost 
4 years after these events occurred, that they would be any more able 
to detect who were the guilty parties than you were, could they? 

Mr. Heimke. They may have, because the pattern of the offenses, 
the modus operandi, method of operation, as we talk about it in law 
enforcement, established a pattern. A^^hoever was guilty of these 
offenses, you can always find some leaks in an organization. We were 
convinced it was a small, closely knit organization. We w^ere un- 
able to get information from a small group. Then we received in- 
formation from confidential informants that they suspected — these 
Avere workers, who were sympathetic to law enforcement, friends of 
ours. 

They came forward with : "Have you thought of the possibility 
that this might be an outside organization coming in to do this, im- 
ported individuals?" 

Well, we had thought about that, but that is difficult to investigate 
beyond the boundaries of the State of Wisconsin. 

Senator Ervin. In other words, as far as any investigation within 
the realm of the jurisdiction of the police force, it was as thorough as 
possible under the circumstances, wasn't it ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. You have no reason to believe, or do you, that mem- 
bers of this staff, who are unacquainted with the people there, so much 
more than the police force of your town, that they could go there now 
after all of this lapse of time and uncover things which you were 
unable to uncover despite your making it a 24-hour-a-day job ? 

Mr. Heimke. I feel that it is possible that maybe this committee 
can do more than we. We turned information over to them which 
took us out of tlie State of Wisconsin. 

Senator Ervin. Where would you send investigators, if you were 
to? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, we had a dynamiting, and we called the Wis- 
consin State Crime Laboratory in to make a complete investigation of 
the dynamiting of an automobile. They determined, because of the 



9344 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

pecularity of the dynamite, which was only used in certain sections 
of the country, tliat the closest place it could have come from was Iron 
Mountain, Mich. That is outside of the jurisdiction of the State of 
Wisconsin. We asked the crime laboratory to continue. They 
couldn't, and we couldn't go out of the State. We could have, but it's 
very difficult to get cooperation from other authorities. This informa- 
tion we turned over to Senate investigators, who have the all-power- 
ful Senate subpena. 

Senator Ekvik. How many dynamiting instances did you have with 
this type of dynamite ? 

Mr. Heimke. How many dynamitings did we have? 

Senator Ervin. Yes. 

Mr. Heimke. Five dynamitings. 

Senator Ervin. Where else in the United States would you send in- 
vestigators to find out what happened in these acts of vandalism in 
your town except in Iron Mountain, Mich. ? 

Mr. Heevike. Well, I don't know. We being a small peaceful com- 
munity, we had read about the same things that were happening in 
Sheboygan were happening in other large cities, such as Chicago, De- 
troit, the same malicious types of vandalism. It seemed to our opin- 
ion that they were professionals, well schooled in those teclmiques 
over the past couple of years, who were imported into Sheboygan. 
That is an opinion of all law enforcement in Sheboygan. 

Senator Ervin. Do you think by sending investigatoi*s into Sheboy- 
gan, that by an investigation there they could uncover the things 
which you all were unable to uncover despite your diligence? 

Mr. Heimke. They might. They have more authority. They have 
more authority to go places and talk to people, which we cannot get 
to. 

Senator Ervin. You have a great deal more authority than investi- 
gators have. You have authority to arrest people and many other 
things which they would have absolutely no authority to do. I just 
want to know if you think that the investigators of this committee, 
or someone we could employ, are so much smarter than you and the 
other members of your police force that they could uncover acts of 
vandalism in Sheboygan that you were unable to discover, notwith- 
standing the fact that you made it a 24-hour-a-day job ? 

Mr. Heimke. I feel that they could. I wouldn't say that they are 
any smarter than Ave are, but they have the authority to go all over 
and talk to people. 

If they don't want to talk to us, they don't talk. If they don't want 
to talk to you, you can subpena them. 

Senator Ervin. Absolutely. But if they tell us they don't know 
anything, how wnll we get anything out of them ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is exactly the problem we had. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Ervin. I have not finished yet. Senator. There is some 
evidence hero that on some occasions the acts of vandalism consisted 
of firing or blasting from a shotgun or other firearm into the homes 
of nonstrikers. 

How many instances of vandalism consisted of acts of that char- 
acter, where a firearm w^as discharged into the dwelling house of 
a person? 

Mr. Hei]mke. One 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9345 

Senator Ervin. I believe you did give us 43 cases in which paint 
bombs, used in the container in the form of either an electric light 
bulb or a mason fruit jar were used as weapons? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. I believe you said 41 were used against the homes 
of nonstrikers and 2 against the homes of strikers? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. I don't know whether I understood you correctly, 
but you were asked a question, as I understood it, whether, if a member 
of the police force, in Wisconsin, saw one, whom we shall call John 
Doe, beat another man, whom I will call Richard Roe, that you said 
a police officer, although he was an eye witness to that, he could not 
prosecute the case ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. If the police officer was an eye witness, he could 
sign the complaint. 

Senator Ervin. That is what I thought. 

Mr. Heimke. In that case, we usually arrest both parties and let 
the court and the judge decide who was responsible and who was the 
offender. 

Senator Ervin. I will ask you this : Under the law of Wisconsin, 
a police officer, in addition to being able to swear out a warrant, can he 
conduct a prosecution in case he sees an act of violence in his presence, 
and I will ask you if he cannot procure the issuance of a warrant or 
other process upon affidavit made by him upon information and belief ? 

Ml'. Heimke. I already stated that, that many times we tried that, to 
keep the public aware that we were triying to do a job. 

Senator Ervin. In the case of the salesman who was trying to sell, 
I believe you said, a Mercury automobile to a nonstriker and some 
striker came along and struck the nonstriker in the back, did the police 
force investigate that and find out who the name of the man com- 
mitting that assault and battery was ? 

Mr. Heimke. The one assaulted upon refused to identify his assail- 
ant. He says, "I don't want to have anything to do with it. I don't 
want the police to investigate it. Forget about it." 

Senator Ervin. And the salesman did not know him ? 

Mr. Heimke. Did not know him, and he was new there. They had 
just taken over the agency in town and they didn't want to become 
involved. 

Senator Ervin. You told about when you were down there at the 
clay boat, that there was a tremendous number of people there, some 
of whom you knew to be strikers, some of whom you knew to be 
sympathizers with strikers, and some of whom you knew to be merely 
curious onlookers. That is correct, isn't it ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. Under circumstances like that, a peace officer, either 
a policeman, a sheriff, or a deputy sheriff, is in a rather difficult posi- 
tion, isn't he ? 

In other words, I imagine you have such weapons as a pistol and a 
billy stick. 

Mr. Heimke. We only had our sidearms. We didn't even carry 
clubs into the area because we were afraid they might have been taken 
away from us and used against us. 

Senator Ervin. And you wouldn't use your sidearms except as a 
last resort, to protect yourself against serious injury, because you 



9346 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

didn't want to fire into the crowd and kill anybody or injure anybody 
with a firearm, and you realized you were just about as likely to hit 
an innocent onlooker as you were one of the participants, weren't you ? 

Mr. IIetmkk. We were resigned to the fact that we had to try to 
keep the lid on this situation without it getting any more out of con- 
trol than it was. 

Senator Ervin. That is right. As you mentioned, there was a great 
deal of fear and tension built up in the conununity. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. And any kind of an instrument under those cir- 
cumstances is likely to create a condition under which a multitude 
of people could be seriously injured or killed, isn't that true ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Ervin. And in those cases, it is impossible for a handful 
of peace officers to arrest several hundred people. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. Senator Kennedy. 

Senator Kennedy. Did you say someone in the company or some- 
one working for a detective agency in the employ of the company, 
came to you and talked about bugging or tapping a room ? 

Mr. Franks. No, I did not say that. 

Senator Kennedy. The gentleman on the right. Did you say it, 
Chief? 

Mr. Heimke. They came in asking information about tapping. 

Senator Kennedy. Do you mean how it was done ? 

Mr. Heimke, No. 

Senator Kennedy. Wliat information did they want? 

Where they could get the equipment ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. 

Senator Kennedy. "Wliat did they want ? 

Mr. Heimke. They just wanted to know where the room was and 
the availability of the room for tapping. 

Senator Kennedy. Wliat did you tell them ? 

Mr. Heimke. I told them I didn't know what room they were in, 
and I didn't know what the capacity w^as for tapping. 

Senator Kennedy. That is a most interesting conversation, Chief, 
that I think I have heard between a detective agency and a chief of 
police, about tapping a room, and to come to the chief of police to find 
out wiiere the room is, and have the chief tell them what the avail- 
ability is and size of the room. 

Do you feel that any citizen that comes in who wants to tap 
another citizen's room, you will give him that information if you can? 

Mr. Heimke. You may not be aware of law enforcement in Wis- 
consin. We have good, clean law enforcement, and we have never 
tapped a line, we have never bugged a room. We do not have the 
equipment and we do not intend to get equipment. 

Senator Kennedy. Chief, with that strong view, why is it that you 
seemed so willing to be helpful in this case? Why would they come 
to you at all ? 

Mr. Heimke. Well, Elmer Madson and I have been friends for 20 
years. 

Senator Kennedy. So the head of the detective agency came to the 
chief of police to ask him questions about the possibilities of tapping 
a room ? 



IMPROPE'R ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9347 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. That conversation took only a matter 
of a couple of minutes and it was dropped. 

Senator Kennedy. The important point is not how long it took. 
The fact is the conversation took place ; if your attitude was such that 
the head of the detective agency felt that it was possible to come to you, 
even though he was about to commit an illegal act, and ask your 
assistance. 

Mr. Heimke. They have to commit the illegal act first. 

Senator Kennedy. Isn't it the truth of the fact that you were a 
party to that, because they came to discuss the matter with you ? 

Mr. Heimke. Discussion is no violation. 

Senator Kennedy. I think if it w^ent before the jury, they would 
hold that you were a party to the violation, because you received 
information about it. 

Mr. Heimke. I received nothing about the tapping. I don't think 
they got in there. If they did, they would have given me the 
information. 

Senator Kennedy. The fact is, you did not warn them not to tap, 
but, in fact, you cooperated with them in ah illegal act. That makes 
you a party to it, if it took place. 

Mr. Heimke. No, I don't think so. 

Senator Kennedy. Why doesn't it ? 

Mr. Heimke. Because it was just conversation. He is familiar 
with the laws of the State of Wisconsin. If he wants to violate them, 
that is his responsibility. 

Senator Kennedy. All right, now, Chief 

Mr. Heimke. If somebody signs a complaint, I would have to 
arrest him. 

Senator Kennedy. If bandits came along and asked you the location 
of the First National Bank and how to get in there, what the guards 
were, and the conversation took 2 minutes, and the bank was later 
robbed, do you think you would be a party to that illegal act ? 

Mr. Heimke. There is no comparison. 

Senator Kennedy. Why isn't there ? 

Mr. Heimke. Elmer Madson, a former member of the FBI and with 
a nationwide detective agency, I have the greatest confidence in his 
ability, and if he could be of some assistance to us without our de- 
partment becoming involved, that was — he was hired to do a job. 

Senator Ivennedy. Chief, that is tlie strangest statement of respon- 
sibilities of a law officer of Wisconsin or any other State that I have 
heard. If your sensitivity to illegality is so dull that you did not 
see that you were a party to an illegal act, it puts in question many 
of your actions in this wliole strike. 

Mr. Heimke. First of all, the act has to be committed for it to be- 
come illegal. 

Senator Kennedy. Do you know whether it was committed ? 

Mr. Heimke. To my knowledge it was not committed. 

Senator Kennedy. Are you ready to say whether it was committed ? 

Mr. Heimke. I do not know for sure. Elmer Madson is the only 
one that would know^. 

Senator Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. I think we are on an important phase right now. 
We are talking about an illegal act. Let's find out if there was one. 



9348 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

To the best of your knowledge, was an illegal act committed in the 
nature of tapping a room in the Grant Hotel ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. 

Senator Mundt. To the best of your knowledge, no such act was 
committed ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. So as far as we know, you were not a party to a 
conversation about an illegal act, but it was talk about whether or not 
a room could be tapped, and whether or not you had any equipment. 
You said you had no equipment. I think as you said in your earlier 
testimony, your police department would not cooperate in this pro- 
cedure. 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The CiLviRMAN. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Chief, do you have any authority to go beyond 
the city of Sheboygan on a legal process of any kind ? 

Mr. Heimke. No. It is the sheriff that goes beyond. 

Senator Curtis. But you as one of the police force of the city are 
limited to the city limits, is that correct ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. So you would have no authority to go elsewhere in 
the State of "Wisconsin and serve any kind of process, would you? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

(At this point. Senator Goldwater withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Senator Curtis. In reference to investiga/ting, you can, of course, 
get information from voluntary witnesses, can you not, if they will 
volunteer ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. If the individual that you are talking to is himself 
a suspect, you can pick him up for investigation, can't you ? 

Mr. Heimke. Within our jurisdiction. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. Is there a time limit on how long you can 
hold him without formally filing charges against him and arraigning 
him ? You do not have to tell me how long it is. 

Mr. PIeimke. The courts state a reasonable length of time. 

Senator Curtis. And can you compel such a person who is a suspect 
to take an oath and answer your questions ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, we cannot. It has to be voluntary. 

Senator Curtis. If witnesses do not volunteer to give you informa- 
tion, can you, in the course of investigating something before any 
charges are filed, subpena witnesses and put them under oath and get 
their testimony ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, we can't, except under grand jury. 

Senator Curtis. Except under grand jury proceeding. And, of 
course, you have no authority in interstate matters ? 

Mr. Heimke. No, we don't. 

Senator Curtis. You have no authority to go beyond the boundaries 
of Wisconsin, to trace material whether it is dynamite or paint or 
anything else, do you ? 

Mr. Hei:mke. No, we don't. 

Senator Curtis. Would you have authority to gather a dozen or two 
dozen individuals, subpena them, and some of them might be in Wis- 



IMPROPEIR ACnVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9349 

consin, some of them might be in Sheboygan, and some of them might 
be in Michigan, would you have authority to bring a group together, 
place them under oath, bring them in one at a time, separated from 
each other so they do not hear each other's testimony, and question 
them under oath concerning what they knew of vandalism or property 
damage or the making of bombs out of light bulbs or fruit jars? 
Could you conduct such a procedure ? 

Mr. Heimke. No ; we have no authority. 

Senator Curtis. Now, in addition to that, you have stated that you 
felt that you did not get cooperation to the fullest extent, to the extent 
that you should reasonably expect, from the sheriff; is that correct? 

Mr. Heimke. We thought we could get more and should get more. 

Senator Curtis. You also felt that you were under wraps, at least to 
a degree, from your own mayor ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

The Chairman. I have just a question and then I hope we can quit. 

How many grand juries have met since 1954 in that county ? 

Mr. Heimke. None. 

The Chairman". You haven't had a grand jury all during that time? 

Mr, Heimke. We have not had a grand jury. 

The Chairman. In most States they meet regularly, I didn't 
know. How is the grand j ury called ? 

(The witnesses conferred with each other.) 

Mr. Heimke. The request of the district attorney to the governor. 

The Chairman. And in spite of all this vandalism, a grand jury 
that would have the power of subpena and call them in and taking 
their testimony under oath outside of the presence of other witnesses, 
in spite of the power to do that, that action has not been taken by the 
law enforcement officials of your county ; has it ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

The Chairman". In 4 years' time ; all right. 

Let me ask you one other question. Did you see the law violated 
down there at the docks on July 5, 1955, on the occasion you testified 
to ? Did you see anyone violate the law there, the criminal law ? 

Mr. Heimke. No; I did not. We were only in a small area, and 
you just couldn't see anything. There were hundreds of people 
around you, pushing, shoving, punching, name calling, and that, in 
my opinion was not enough 

The Chairman. You did not see the law violated ? 

Mr. Heimke. No ; I did not, except for the mob incident, the push- 
ing, and that was no violation of criminal law. 

The Chahiman. If you had seen the law violated in your presence, 
would you have the authority to make an arrest ? 

Mr. Heimke. I would have. 

The Chairman. And you say under oath now you did not see the 
law violated ? 

Mr. Heimke. I hope we are thinking about the same thing. 

The Chairman. I am thinking about just exactly what I said, about 
what I asked you. 

Mr. Heimke. There were acts of vandalism committed, such as the 
cutting of the air hose and the punching of the tires, the slashing of 
the tires, the letting air out of the tires, the pulling of the wires off of 
the distributor. 



9350 'TMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. Is that a violation of the law ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is a violation of tlie law. The windows were 
broken ; but 1 only saw it after it happened. 

The Chairman. You didn't see it happen ? 

Mr. Heimke. I didn't see it happen. 

The Chairman. In other words, there was no act committed in your 
presence ? 

Mr. Heimke. That was typical of the events down there, when an 
officer was present 

The Chairman. I am not arguing that. You were unable to see the 
commission of any offense, any criminal offense, during the time you 
were there ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is correct. 

The Chairman. You do know criminal offenses were committed, 
that is, you have strong circumstantial evidence, the cutting of tires 
and other evidences of vandalism, that offenses were committed while 
you were there, but you didn't see them ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. How often do your criminal courts meet in that 
county ? 

Mr. Heimke. We have an upper and lower branch of the municipal 
court and they meet daily. 

The Chairman. I am talking about the one that has authority to 
call a grand jury. 

Mr. Heimke. They meet in spring and fall sessions. 

The Chairman. Twice annually ? 

Mr. Heimke. That is right. 

The Chairman. So some 7 or 8 occasions have passed when a grand 
jury could have been assembled and these people called in there and 
put under oath and interrogated about these offenses? 

Mr. Heimke. There was a movement under way at one time to call 
one, but I don't know^ whatever happened to it. It never material- 
ized. 

The Chairman. The movement didn't bring fruition, did it? 
There was none called ? 

Mr. Heimke. None called. 

The Chairman. I just want to point this out. I am not trying to 
be critical. It seems to me to be 1 of 2 things: Either the people 
down there just got in such a state of mind they didn't want anything 
done, or the officers have been negligent in their duty by not using the 
instrumentalities of law at their command to try to find out who were 
committing these acts. I don't know which it is, but it seems to me 
there could be no excuse, with all this vandalism down there, and all 
of this national publicity growing out of these incidents and this long 
strike, that there could be no excuse for the officei-s having the re- 
sponsibility to do it not to call a grand jury and not to bring these 
suspects in and interrogate them under oath. 

Mr. Heimke. Senator, you have never lived in a town that has been 
so obsessed with fear, fear to speak out against the things that were 
wrong, to speak up for the thin;js that are right. They absolutely 
refuse to come forward and assist law enforcement. They let us 
stand alone. 

The Chairman. Does that apply to the officers, too ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEB IN THE LABOR FIELD 9351 

Mr. Heimke. The officers? No. They were trustworthy. They 
were doing everything possible to ferret out the perpetratoi*s of these 
crimes. Our hands were tied. 

The Chairman. Wait a minute. They haven't done everything 
possible. I am not talking about you. But law-enforcement officers 
that have the power to install a grand jury — and that isn't the right 
word at the moment — impanel a grand jury to inquire into these 
things under oath. You can't tell me that they fully discharged their 
duty under these circumstances. 

(The witnesses conferred with each other.) 

Mr. Heimke. That power for the request comes from the district 
attorney of Sheboygan County. 

The Chairman. I don't know the district attorney, but I am point- 
ing out that here we are trying to investigate 4 years later and find 
out who is responsible for some of these acts of violence, and we are 
doing it in spite of the fact that local officials who had the duty and 
obligation under their oath to do it have not even undertaken to do 
it with the instrumentalities at their command. 

Are there any other questions ? 

If not, thank you very much. 

You may stand aside. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. Are these witnesses coming back after lunch? 

The Chairman. They may, if you need them. 

They may stand aside for the moment, if you prefer to question 
them after lunch. 

Mr. Rauh wanted to file an affidavit this morning, for the record, 
but I asked him to wait since there were only two members here. 

You may make your request. 

Mr. Rauh. This is an affidavit by Emil Schuette, dated yesterday. 
He is the man referred to in Mr. Rand's testimony as the man Mr. 
Rand asked, as the leading labor official in Sheboygan, to tell the 
people to go home from the clay-boat incident. 

We have this affidavit explaining Schuette's part and Rand's part in 
the clay-boat incident, and we would like to read it into the record, Mr. 
Chairman. 

The Chairman. What is the pleasure of the committee ? 

I understand it is sworn to. 

Mr. Rauh. It is sworn to, sir, before a notary of the District of 
Columbia. 

Senator Curtis. Is Mr, Schuette here ? 

Mr. Rauh. Mr. Schuette is not here. He was here when he was 
referred to yesterday. I believe Mr. Rand suggested he was available. 
We have made it known that he was available. He can come back if 
you would like to have him. 

Senator Curtis. Where is he now ? 

Mr. Rauh. In Sheboygan, where he lives. 

Senator Curtis. He went home yesterday ? 

Mr. Rauh. Yes, sir. But we got the affidavit before he left. We 
wanted the affidavit at least. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, if the witness can be obtained, I 
would prefer to have the witness in person. 



9352 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. I shall not insist on it. I feel that we may want 
him later, but I am not going to be technical about the evidence here, 
because I just don't believe we should. 

The Chairman. This affidavit is sworn testimony now. It is up to 
the committee to decide. Are you going to receive it or reject it? 

Senator Kennedy. I move we receive it. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, I may be charged with being techni- 
cal, but my experience has been that when you reduce a witness' state- 
ment to writing, that testimony of George Washington and that of 
Ananias would look exactly the same. I am not making any statement 
about this witness. 

The Chairman. You may submit the affidavit for the committee 
to consider during the noon hour. We will determine when we re- 
convene. 

The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 

( Wliereupon, at 12 : 20 p. m., a recess was taken until 2 p. m. of the 
same day. Present at the recess : Senators McClellan, Ervin, Kennedy, 
Curtis, and Mundt.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session were Senators McClellan, Ives, Mundt, Goldwater, and 
Curtis.) 

The Chairman, The Chair makes the following announcement: 
When we recess this afternoon, we will recess until 10 o'clock on 
Tuesday morning. Some of us need a rest. Somebody told me that 
was St. Patrick's Day. I asked who he is. I will find out in the 
meantime. 

The witness will please come forward. 

In the meantime, Mr. Rauh, please come forward. 

Gentlemen of the committee, do you remember we had a request 
just before adjournment this morning to insert in the record an affi.- 
davit by a man whose name has been mentioned here with respect — 
I have forgotten what, but it has been mentioned. 

Is there any objection to this affidavit going into the record? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I was going to suggest, but we did 
not get a chance to discuss that during noon, since we have, I think, 
a precedent of accepting affidavits as part of the testimony, it seems 
to me it would be perfectly all right to do that in this case. 

The Chairman. I do not think the affidavit is awfully important, 
but it does go directly, in one paragraph to one thing here which has 
been at issue. 

Senator Mundt. I did feel, however, that we should follow the 
usual practice of having the affidavit printed in the record, rather than 
having it read by a witness who is not a party to the affidavit. If it 
is important enough to read orally, it is important enough to have 
the witness appear. 

The Chairman. I said yesterday we were reading, telegrams and 
so forth that were not sworn to and even letters that were not sworn 
to, into the record. 

Senator Mundt. In my opinion, I think the Chair is correct. I 
think a letter from a preacher and an affidavit are about the same 
category. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9353 

The Chairman. There is a legal difference, at least. Proceed to 
read the affidavit. 

Mr. Rauh. (Reading) — 

Emil Schuette, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he re- 
sides in the city of Sheboygan, in the county of Sheboygan, and lives at 909 
South 14th Street. That he is married and has two children. He is 45 years 
of age and is presently the president of the Sheboygan County Labor Council, 
being the merged organization of the AFL-CIO; that this merger took place 
June 12, 1957, and was the first completed merger of any single body in the 
State of Wisconsin. 

That the Sheboygan County Labor Council is composed of all the AFLr-CIO 
unions in Sheboygan Coimty; that he was formerly president of local 325 of 
the Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, and 
was its president for 5 years ; that he is now a member of the Sheboygan County 
board as a supervisor from the sixth ward of the city of Sheboygan. 

That on July 5, 1955, he was at the Hildebrant docks where the so-called 
clay-boat incident took place ; that he arrived there sometime shortly after 3 : 30 
in the afternoon; that he saw hundreds of people from the city of Sheboygan 
and having been born in the city of Sheboygan, he knows many people in 
that vicinity; that he knows of his own knowledge a large majority of the 
people present, men, women, and children who were not Kohler strikers. 

That the weekend of July Fourth is the designated vacation week for prac- 
tically all the workers in the Sheboygan factories and people were on vacation. 
That he has been close to the Kohler strike since 1934 when he was a mem- 
ber of the National Guard who disarmed the village deputies following the 
riot of July 27, 1934. 

That he has been a member of organized labor since 1933 and has been 
close to the labor movement particularly the Kohler strike. That he talks to 
many people both in the labor movement and in the business and professional 
field, and believes that the overwhelming majority of the people in Sheboygan 
are wholeheartedly in support of the strike and sympathize with the Kohler 
union ; and that in his opinion a great amount of people that came to the docks 
when they heard that the Kohler Co. was going to unload some clay for the 
Kohler factory were there because of the great amount of publicity that was 
given in the newspapers and over the radio concerning the unloading of this 
clay. 

That he bacame aware of the unloading of the clay when he returned from 
playing golf and his wife told him that she had heard about the unloading of 
the clay over the radio. He drove down and upon arriving at the scene he 
noticed a great concentration of people milling around, trying to look for some- 
thing of interest, and not a group of people intent to do any bodily harm or 
property damage, but rather a crowd that exhibited a holiday mood, people 
visiting, talking to each other, laughing, and just having a good time. That 
many of these people were going in and out of taverns in the neighborhood. 

That he saw Don Rand about tt in the evening and that Dun Rand told him 
that inasmuch as he did not know many of the people that he urged him to talk 
to as many people as he could and urge them to go home. At that particular 
time they were attempting to move from the area some equipment. He realized 
immediately that the removal of the equipment would be conducive to getting 
the crowd to be more orderly. He climbed upon the equipment and spoke up in 
a loud voice to the people to please get away from the equpiment so we could 
get the equipment out of the area and go home. 

That he did urge people by gestures and speech to move away from where 
the equipment was located. That after the equipment was moved out of the 
area he mingled with the crowd and discouraged them to refrain from remain- 
ing on the scene. Many of these people knew him because he presided over and 
spoke at almost every annual Labor Day picnic and many knew him as a labor 
leader and, therefore, would listen to him and leave the scene. That he then 
went home. 

(Signed) Emil C. Schuette. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of March 1958. 

(Sigaed) Samuel H. Blumenthal, 
Notary Public, District of Columbia. 



9354 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Thank you, Mr. Cliainnan. 
The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Do you want the witnesses to return who were on the stand before 
lunch? 

Mr. Kennedy. Chief Heimke and Captain Franks. 

TESTIMONY OF STEEN W. HEIMKE AND OAKLEY FRANKS— Eesumed 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt? 

Senator Muxdt. You are Captain Franks ? 

Mr. Franks. I am ; yes. 

Senator Mundt. When we left off this morning, we were going into 
another line of questioning, but you were talking about a man whose 
name, I believe, was Silvia ; is that rights 

Mr. Franks. Yes; 1 would like to 

Senator Mundt. At that place we left off'. First, I would like to 
ask you : There was some question about whether or not you and/or 
others were trying to get the man drunk. I would like to ask you the 
question under oath ; did you get him drunk ? 

Mr. Franks. No ; we did not get him drunk. 

Senator Mundi\ As I understand it, you were up at the Elks Hall, 
you had had a few drinks before dinner, you had dinner and somebody 
iiad talked to him to try to get him to indicate some evidence as to 
some of these acts of violence and vandalism. Somebody came back 
and said, "I believe that he is going to talk." 

If I recall, your last statement was to the effect that Mr. Silvia or 
somebody had said that he wanted to talk to your former boss, your 
former police chief. Is that correct? 

Mr. Franks. No ; that is not correct, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Straighten out the story of the Elks Club and 
finish it. It was left hanging someplace in midair. 

Mr. Franks. First of all, I think you should understand that the 
incident that Mr. Silvia was taken to Madison for did not occur in 
Sheboygan County. That was the car that w^as dynamited, I believe 
it was in St. Cloud or somewhere in Fond du Lac County. 

Senator Munixf. This is where you said there was a light kind of 
unusual dynamite located in Iron Mountain, Mich. ; is that it ? 

Mr. Franks. Chief Heimke told you that ; yes. 

Senator Mundt. Pick up your story. 

Mr. Franks. Silvia was a resident of the city of Sheboygan. I, at 
the time, was not in a position of command. I was working as a detec- 
tive. I was assigned by former chief, Walter Wagner, to accompany 
these people to Madison as an observer. I had nothing to do with 
controlling the situation in any fashion whatsoever. 

The suggestion was made that we got this party drunk. That is not 
the truth. The suggestion w^as made that the man had reached the 
point where the test from the polygraph machine indicated that he 
might have some possible knowledge of these dynamitings. The sug- 
gestion was made to, I believe it was Sheriff Lemuy, that on the w'ay 
home ])ossibly if they bought him a drink or two he might relax a little 
bit and we might get the information that he was seeking. 

I do not believe that the man had over three drinks. I think it 
should be pointed out that the man was approximately 30 j^ears of age, 
at least, and he knew very well what we was doing. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrriBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9355 

I would like at this time to try and identify Mr. Silvia a little better 
for a matter of the record. I assume this is William Silvia we are 
talking about. I believe the man is now a patient in a mental institu- 
tion in Massachusetts. Is that the man we are talking about ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe it is. 

Mr. Franks. Thank you. 

Senator Mundt. What I was trying to get to is this: You said 
something near the end of your testimony to the ejffect that Silvia 
wanted to talk to a police chief, did you not? 

Mr. Franks. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. Did he talk to the police chief ? 

Mr. Franks. I believe Sheriff Lemuy left Mr. Silvia in his county 
jail and he returned me to the city of Sheboygan, and 3 days passed. 
Mr. Lemuy called and asked if Chief Wagner was going to come over 
and see this man. I told him that I had so informed the chief. After 
3 days I was sent back to Fond du Lac and I returned Bill Silvia 
to the city of Sheboygan from where he was released. 

Senator Mundt. That does not quite answer the question. Did Mr. 
Silvia talk to Chief AVagner ? 

Mr. Franks. I say, Senator, I do not know for certain. I know 
that he did not talk to him in Fond du Lac. Just 2 weeks prior to 
my being subpenaed before this committee, I had a conversation with 
Sheriff Lemuy and we reviewed this situation. At that time he told 
me that Chief Wagner had not come over to see this man. 

Senator Mundt. That he, Chief Wagner, did not go to Fond du 
Lac to talk to him I 

Mr. Franks. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. I take it that it follows that no information came 
out of Silvia's testimony which enabled you to solve the dynamite 
incident ? 

Mr, Franks. That is correct. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. That is all. 

The Chairman. Who accompanied you on that trip when you had 
Silvia and were taking him back ? 

Mr. Franks. Well, there was myself, Mr. Al Adams, Sheriff George 
Lemuy, Fond du Lac County and District Attorney Eugene Mc- 
Kezie, of Fond du Lac. 

The Chairman. Was Mr. Madson along ? 

Mr. Franks. No, he was not. 

The Chairman. Mr. Adams — is that V. A. Adams ? 

Mr. Franks. Mr. Chairman, I only know him as Al Adams. He 
was associated with Elmer Madson at the time. 

The Chairman. He was associated with him ? 

Mr. Franks. Yes. 

The Chairman. Did you ever see the report that they made to the 
company on the trip ? 

Mr. Franks. No, I did not. 

The Chairman. How many bars did you say you stopped at? I 
understood this morning you stopped at a club. 

Mr. Franks. Yes, we stopped and we had dinner. I think it was 
the Elks Club. I would not want to be held to that. I know it was 
some fraternal organization of some sort. 



9356 EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. Let me read you part of a paragraph from Mr. 
Adam's report, or from the Madison Detective Agency's report on it. 
Then you can just tell me whether it is correct, whether it is true or 
untrue according to your knowledge of it. I read : 

Upon returning Silvia to Fond du Lac, Wis., stops were made at numerous 
bars where he was poured double shots of whisky which he drank, and he 
actually began indicating that James Kurtz was the individual he suspected of 
being responsible for the dynamitings occurring in the city of Sheboygan. 

Would you say that was accurate reporting ? 

Mr. Franks. Well, I would take exception to the words, "numer- 
ous bars," Mr. Chairman. I do not believe that that is an accurate 
report. 

The Chairman. What did he say about James Kurtz ? 

Mr. Franks. I believe that he did mention — Mr. Chairman, let me 
point this out to you again, that I was strictly an observer. I had no 
charge of that individual, nor did I have any control of their taking 
him off to a corner and talking to him or anything like that. 

The Chairman. I am not questioning that, but there is a little 
discrepancy in your testimony and this report. 

Mr. Franks. That is what I am trying to explain to you. There 
were occasions when I was not in that group. 

The Chairman. That could be true. 

Mr. Franks. As far as the double shots, I would not argue with 
that. 

The Chairman. This says "stops were made at numerous bars." 
I imderstood you this morning to say it was just at one club where 
you ate dinner. 

Mr. Franks. I only mentioned one, Mr. Chairman. I recall that 
we did make another stop. I believe we did. 

The Chairman. So there would be two instead of several or numer- 
ous stops ? 

Mr. Franks. Two that I can say for certain. Senator, yes. 

The Chairman. In other words, there were 2 and if 2 is numerous, 
this report is accurate ? 

Mr. Franks. That would have to be taken at its face value, then. 

Senator Mundt. Now that we have a suspect in the case, Mr. 
Kurtz, did you or your superiors proceed to investigate whether or 
not there w^as any validity to the assumption that Mr. Kurtz might 
have been involved in this dynamiting? 

Mr. Franks. Yes, we did, Senator. I would like to point out to 
you that I, myself, never did put too much stock in Mr. Silvia's testi- 
mony, or to his statements. There was some question in my mind as 
to whether he really did know anything about this. 

It was all basically rumor that the investigation was started on. 
We did, I recall, put a plant on Mr, Kurtz' home. He did state 
that there were some blocks, some square blocks, that he described 
that were in the garage of Mr. Kurtz, piled in between the 2x4's, the 
uprights on the concrete foundation. We checked that. That was 
not tnie. 

While Mr. Kurtz is known to law-enforcement people in the city of 
Sheboygan, I seriously doubt that he would engage in that type of 
operation. But we did have a surveillance on his home. Nothing 
materialized. We tailed him. Nothing developed that would tie him 
in with this at all. 



IMPROPEiR ACnVmElS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9357 

Senator Mundt. So he was neither arrested nor prosecuted for the 
charge ? 

Mr. Franks. Definitely not. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

(Members of the select committee present at this point were Sen- 
ators McClellan, Ives, Mundt, Curtis, and Goldwater.) 

The Chairman. Has Congressman Hoffman arrived ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Grunewald. 

The Chairman. Mr. Grunewald, please come forward. 

Is Mr. Grunewald here? Does anyone know where he is? Have 
the policeman call him or page him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Lieutenant Zimmerman, come forward, please. 

The Chairman. Lieutenant Zimmerman, come forward, please. 

You do solemnly swear that the testimony you shall give before 
this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth so help you God ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF CLARENCE E. ZIMMERMAN 

The Chairman. State your name, place of residence, and business 
or occupation. 

Mr. Zimmerman. My name is Clarence R. Zimmerman. I live at 
1538 Block Court in the city of Sheboygan, Wis. I am a lieutenant 
of police of the Sheboygan Police Department and I waive counsel. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Proceed, Mr, Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Lieutenant, how long have you been in the police 
department ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Twenty-five years, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you present during the clay-boat incident ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I was 

Mr. Kennedy. You were down at the dock at the time ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What time did you arrive at the dock ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Approximately 8 o'clock, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. You stayed down there to what time ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Until about 5 o'clock in the afternoon. 

Mr. Kennedy. During that period of time while you were down 
there, did the crowd of people that were down there seem to have any 
direction as to what was going on ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, there were some members of the union down 
there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they appear to you to be directing the crowd ? 

Mr, Zimmerman. More or less so ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlio were some of those people ? 

Mr, Zimmerman. Donald Rand, Robert Treuer. 

Mr, Ejjnnedy. In what way did they appear to be directing the 
crowd? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, he was standing in front of the picket line 
when I arrived there. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is a picket line in the morning ? 

21243— 58— pt. 23 14 



9358 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Zimmerman. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennfidy. This was this ^roup of people that were walking 
back and forth ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Back and forth in front of the gate of the dock. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVlio was "he"? Who was doing that, Donald Rand 
or Treuer ? "Wliich one, or both ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Donald Rand ; and Robert Treuer was standing 
there also. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you say that they appeared to be directing, at 
least it appeared that they were directing those people walking back 
and forth ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they make any statement at that time or indi- 
cate to you that they w-ere not going to allow the clay boat to be 
unloaded ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did they say to you and who said it ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. When I arrived there, I gave orders that the 
entrance to the gate should be open. Tliere was a car parked in front 
of the entrance. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliose car w\as that ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That was Robert Treuer's car. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. And Donald Rand came up to me and said, "Lay 
off." He said, "We have to try to make this as costly to the Kohler 
Co. as we can." 

Mr. Kennedy. Donald Rand said that to you ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That he said to me ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Right from the beginning early in the morning 
there seemed to be an indication that the union, at least as far as the 
spokesman, Donald Rand, was concerned, was going to take every 
step possible to prevent the unloading of the boat ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Later on, more and more people arrived: is that 
right? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Rand, or Mr. Treuer, or any other union official, 
did they take any step to try to have those people go home or get 
away from this area ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they appear to be directing the crowd at all ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Like I stated, more or less so, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do you mean "more or less"? What did they 
do? ^ 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, trying to keep the picket line intact in 
front of the gate. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were they doing? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, they* told them not to leave the equip- 
ment in. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do you mean? That is early in the morning. 
Later on, what were they telling them ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, I did not see too much of them after that. 
1 believe I saw Mr. Rand again when, right around dinnertime, Mr. 
Biever came down in the police-detective car. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9359 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Biever came down in the evening ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. At noon, I would say. 

Mr. Kennedy. At noon ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And for what reason did Mr. Biever come down ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I wouldn't know why he came down. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did that get the people very excited ^ 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes ; it did. 

Mr. Kennedy. The fact that he came down ? 

Mr. Zimmerman, That it did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think it was a mistake bringing him down 
at that time ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I do not know what the feeling is toward Mr. 
Biever. I have never worked for the Kohler Co. I have never been 
in their plant, ^^lat their feeling is toward him, I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand that. I just asked on the question of 
bringing Mr. Biever to the dock, at that time, did you feel that was a 
mistake ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes. It seemed to excite the crowd more than 
they were. 

Mr. Kennedy. More than anything else ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes ; I would say so. 

Mr. Kennedy. More than what ? I did not hear. 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes ; it would. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did Mr. Rand do during this time ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, he was running around the detective car 
and the people were reaching inside the car trying to get at Mr. 
Biever. So I got my detective to get back into the car and get out of 
the area, because the preservation of human life was my primary 
interest at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about Mr. Rand ? What did he say ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I don't remember him saying anything at that 
time. There was too much shouting going on at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you see him later on in the evening ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No; I was relieved from duty about 5 o'clock 
that afternoon. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there any other union officials there who 
seemed to be directing the crowd ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I would say not. I don't know who the officials 
are, and I know a lot of the local people that were there, but when 
you say "officials," do you mean local or international or who ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Local or international officials. 

Mr. Zimmerman. I did. see Allan Grasskamp there earlier in the 
evening, and he was standing across the street, and that is the only 
time I saw him during the day. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he taking an active part ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, sir ; he did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, did you see a lot of people that you knew 
down there ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, after 25 years on the police department, you 
get to know quite a few people in the community. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the makeup of the crowd ? 



9360 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Zimmerman. It was a mixed crowd, as has been testified before. 
It was the week of July where most of the factories close for vacation, 
and there were many union people down there, and there were also, I 
believe, many sympathizers and curiosity seekers which always come 
to a crowd. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it was made up of union sympathizers and people 
who were just curious about this crowd of people, is that right? 

Mr. ZiMMERMAiN. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any way in which to exercise greater 
control over the crowd, in your estimation ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, I asked — or let me state: Before I left 
headquarters, or when I was detailed down there, I told my lieutenant^ 
who was Lieutenant Splinter at the time — it is customary procedure — 
I told him to hold the midnight shift back, which is a shift that works 
from midnight to 8 in the morning, which at that time constituted 
approximately 15 men. That precaution I used, and I found out 
later that they were sent home. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you could have definitely used them down at 
the dock ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I could have used all available manpower we had, 
yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Whose responsibility was it at that time for not 
making these other men available to you ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, I believe it would be the chief's responsi- 
bility. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was Mr. Wagner at the time ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. But to deal with such a large crowd, in the mood 
that this crowd was in, you needed every available man ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Every available man ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there anything, or did you suggest anything to 
be done to deal with this crowd ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. After the station wagon incident, I did call head- 
quarters and told them what the situation was. After the crane inci- 
dent, I sent the dispatch writer up to report. 

At noon I went up personally and reported. I received no help all 
day. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. They didn't furnish you with any extra people? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I was sent down there with 4 or 5 officers to deal 
with a crowd that ran into thousands later on. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you suggest that the hoses be turned on the 
people ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, sir. The only time that I called the fire de- 
partment was when the gasoline started running over the road, and I 
was afraid someone would light a cigarette and hundreds of people 
would have been burned. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you advocate such a suggestion, that the hoses 
be turned on the people ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I didn't have that authority. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think that would have been a good suggestion 
at the time ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9361 

Mr. Zimmerman. At that time the crowd was in suchi a turmoil, I 
don't think it would have helped. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Heimke, the witness who preceded you, indicated 
that that is what he suggested at that time, and that suggestion was 
not followed. 

Mr. Zimmerman. It is a matter of opinion, and I don't know if it 
would have helped at that time. 

Senator Mundt. You heard Captain Heimke's testimony, did you ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. I think that he said in response to an inquiry that 
in his opinion the crowd was about half comprised of strikers, and 
union men, and their sympathizers; and the other half were stand- 
ers-by or curiosity seekers. 

Would you think this was a good estimate, or would you change it ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I would go along with his estimate there. It is 
hard to determine. 

Senator Mundt. There was nobody making a count and tabulating 
or keeping score, but we are trying to get a rough estimate. 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Were you there at the time, by the way. Lieuten- 
ant Zimmerman, when the station wagon or the automobile station 
wagon finally was escorted by the police out of the gate? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I was. 

Senator Mundt. I would like to ask you some questions about some 
testimony which rather surprised and shocked me from Mr. Treuer. 
He talked originally in terms of an automobile moving at slow speed 
out of the gate, and let me ask you about how fast that car moved 
out of the gate ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. He couldn't move very fast. We had to pu^ the 
people aside in order to get him out. He was barely crawling along. 

Senator Mundt. Would it have been possible for that car to hit a 
woman and knock her on top of the automobile? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Did you happen to see anything about this inci- 
dent that he described ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I did. 

Senator Mundt. Can you give us a firsthand eyewitness report of 
how she got on top of the car ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I was standing on the right side of the car keep- 
ing the people back so that the station wagon could go through when 
this woman walked up and threw herself against the hood of the car. 
Immediately a big turmoil started that he ran her over, and shouting, 
"Arrest him" and "Arrest him," and I didn't even have a chance to 
determine whether she was injured or not. 

Immediately they whisked her into the crowd, and the last I heard, 
I think it was Art Palmer, I said if he felt that there was an offense 
committed that he should go and see the district attorney and get a 
warrant out for the driver. 

The district attorney was John Bucken at the time, and he called 
me, and he wanted to know what the circumstances were, and I told 
him what I saw. And he said, "Do you stand by that?" and I said, 
"I stand by what I saw," and he refused to issue a warrant in the case. 

Senator Mundt. This woman deliberately climbed on the car or 
threw herself on top of the car ? 



9362 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, she didn't go on top of the car. She threw 
herself against the hood. 

Senator Mundt. Threw herself against the hood ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. The front of the hood. 

Senator Mundt. Did she do that, or was she intoxicated, or was it 
because she wanted to agitate trouble, or why would a woman throw 
herself against the hood of a car ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. She is known to us, and she has been in almost 
every demonstration, and she was up at the bowling alley incident,, 
and 

Senator Mundt. You know who the woman was ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Was she a striker ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I don't know what her connection is, if her hus- 
band worked at Kohler or not, and if she was a striker's wife or who. 
I know her name. 

Senator Mundt. She had been in previous demonstrations ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. After that she had been, and she was quite active. 

Senator Mundt. So that this was not just an isolated effort to stir 
up trouble, but she had either before or after engaged in similar types 
of activity. 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. Also I would like to ask you a question concerning 
Mr. Treuer's testimony. As I understood it, he said that the reason 
why, and this may be Mr. Rand's testimony, and I am not sure which, 
one or the other of them went down there and the reason why the 
workers were trying to keep the equipment out was because Mr. Biever, 
whom they called "'Butcher Biever," I believe, was in the crowd. 

I would like to find out from you w^hether the picket line wa& 
formed before or after Mr. Biever arrived at the scene. 

Mr. Zimmerman. The picket line was there when I arrived and 
the station wagon containing Mr. Biever, Mr. Desmond, and Mr. Born 
came down after I was there. 

Senator Mundt. So that the picket line was actually in operation 
before Mr. Biever arrived there ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. It was not a consequence of his coming but some- 
thing that happened prior to that ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Did you see any buttons on any of these people 
down there ^ 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What would be inscribed on these buttons ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. As a police officer I don't belong to any union or- 
ganization, but I believe tJiey issue a button when you pay your dues 
every month, or every quarter or something, and they are conspicu- 
ously displayed on their caps. 

Senator Curtis. You saw a number of bottons down there ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you get pushed and shoved around ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACrrVITIDS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9363 

Senator Curtis. Were you hit any time ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, I was hit from the back, I know. When 
we got the station wagon through, there was a lot of shoving and 
pummeling, and I know some of my officers had bruised ribs for a 
week, and Officer Herman had a rabbit blow in the neck there. 

Senator Curtis. Would these blows to your officers always come 
from the back ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Most of the time ; yes. 

Senator Curtis. Were you hit at any time when you were able to 
determine who did it ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you have any conversation with Treuer ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, sir. All I did, I ordered that the car that 
was parked in front of the gate be moved, and Robert Treuer said^ 
"I will move it." 

Senator Curtis. Was Raymond Majerus there? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I did see him at a distance. 

Senator Curtis. You did not talk to him ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. But you did have a conversation with Rand ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. Now I want to make sure, what did you say to 
Rand? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I told him that they had to open the gate. 

Senator Curtis. To let this station wagon through ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, no, the station wagon was not there yet, 
Senator. 

Senator Curtis. I see. 

Mr, Zimmerman. The equipment was there at that time, the Buteyn 
equipment. 

Senator Curtis. What did he say ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. He say, "Lay off. We have to try to make this 
as expensive to the Kohler Co. as possible." 

Senator Curtis. Did any other officer hear that ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, my officers that went down with me were 
right with me at the time. 

Senator Curtis. But I mean do you know^ whether any of them were 
right there when Rand made that remark ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, they were there. 

Senator Curtis. Within hearing distance ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Cutrtis. Who w^as ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Officer Herman, and Officer Hutz, and they were 
right alongside of me. 

Senator Curtis. You believe that they heard it or could have heard 
it? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you gather from Rand's remarks that he was 
in charge down there or one of the principals in charge ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I would infer that, yes. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Senator Mundt. Did Mr. Biever when he got there do anything to 
provoke the crowd? Did he engage in abusive language or give a 
speech or w^hat did he do to agitate it or was it just his presence ? 



9364 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Zimmerman. Just his presence there. 

Sen.ator Mundt. Did he get out of the car ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, not at all. lie did inside the dock area, 
when the first time they came down in the station wagon. They went 
away down to the boat, and I believe they talked with some of the offi- 
cials of the steamship company, and who they were I did not go 
down there, but then they got back in the station wagon and came back 
out. 

Senator Mundt. He was the manager of the plant ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. I don't laiow his capacity, and I did not even 
know tlie man. I was just told it was Mr. Biever. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was plant manager. 

Senator Curtis. Was there violence occurring both before and after 
Biever was there ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, there was violence during the two interims 
that he appeared, and that was the crane incident. 

Senator Curtis. He was not there at that time ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you hear any profane or threatening talk or 
shouts around there ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. There was so much noise down there. Senator, that 
people were cursing or you did not know what they were saying unless 
you were right next to them. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it possible to arrest any of the officials of local 
833 at that time? 

Mr. Zimmerman. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Well, Senator, if there has been an inference 
here all of the way, going back to 1934, 1 think that I can reiterate a 
little bit, I became a police officer in 1933, and we were plagued with 
strikes in Sheboygan in 1934. 

I have a little background on strikes. We had the Garden Toy Co., 
Leberon Shoe Co., and Young Shoe Co., and a WPA strike, and I can 
safely say that every time just about when trouble begins to pop, they 
seem to disappear. 

Senator Mundt. Wlio disappears, the strikers ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. The leaders, the head ones. 

Senator Mundt. The leaders of the strike ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You mean when a union has a strike, at the time 
things begin to pop the union leaders always disappear, that has 
been your experience ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. It has been my observation in all of them that I 
have been in. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was disappearing in this one ? I was thinking 
mostly of the clay boat. 

Mr. Zimmerman. I did not see Rand until later in the day. I know 
Allan Grasskamp, I just saw him across the street. Robert Treuer 
was gone. 

Mr. Kennedy. I just thought I might read you this, to see if you 
think this is a correct appraisal of the situation down there. The 



IMPROPER ACnvrriEIS EST THE LABOR FIELD 9365 

detective agency also made an investigation or a study on that day, 
and they stated, 

A surveillance of the dock area indicates that it was a highly tense group of 
people, and it is the opinion of the agency that a wrong statement or a wrong 
action on the part of one of the individuals assembled in this mob could have 
started a riot wherein women and children and curious spectators would have 
been hurt. 

It is the opinion of this agency that the matter on the Sheboygan waterfront 
was very poorly handled, and that no attempts were made by either the mayor 
or the police department to prevent the congregation of curious spectators, 
members of striking local 833 and sympathizers with this local. 

It was also suggested to the police department and to Chief Walter Wagner 
that the proper action to have taken would be to call the striking local's bluff 
and to go in and arrest any individuals who refused to return to his home or 
leave the dock area. 

Would that have been possible, to go in and arrest them ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. Not with that mob, sir, I don't believe it would 
have. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators 
McClellan, Mundt, and Curtis. ) 

Mr. Kennedy. And then there is this statement : 

The conversation existing between individuals assembled by the dock area in 
the city of Sheboygan was to the fact that the riot actually was instigated by 
Mr. Ed Biever's appearance on the waterfront on the morning of July 5, 1955. 

You would agree with that ? 

Mr. Zimmerman. That is right. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? If not, thank 
you very much. You may stand aside. 

Congressman Hoffman, 

Congressman, have a seat. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. CLARE HOFFMAN— Resumed 

The Chairman. You appeared before the committee some few days 
ago and requested the privilege of testifying. At that time, I believe 
the oath was administered, is that correct ? 

Representative Hoffman. That is correct. 

The Chairman. You will remain under the same oath. You may 
proceed. Do you have a prepared statement ? 

Eepresentative Hoffman. I do not, sir. I understood that the 
chairman and the other members of the committee wished a factual 
statement as to violence in connection with the UAW-CIO, and the 
participation of some of the officers in that program. Is that correct? 

The Chairman. Sir, I have no idea just what your testimony will 
be. Personally, I thought it was a courtesy that certainly the Senate 
should extend a Member of the House if he requested to testify. I 
don't know what other Members may have said to you. 

Representative Hoffman. My understanding is you want state- 
ments of fact. 

The Chairman. Yes, sir, I would much prefer a statement of facts. 
Proceed. 

Representative Hoffman. Any time the chairman or any member of 
the committee wishes to interrupt or ask a question, that will be 
agreeable. 

The Chairman. All right, sir. Thank you. 



9366 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

You may proceed and make your statement. 

(At this point, Senator Ervin withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Representative Hoffman. The Associated Press on March 8, 1958, 
reported Mr. Reutlier as stating that the UAW "made every possible 
ett'ort to minimize violence." 

He was tlien referring to the Kohler strike. He then said : 

The UAW does not claim perfection because no organization made up of imper- 
fect human beings can hope to be perfect. 

Then tliis : 

In the heat of bitterness and the high emotion, the provocation on the part of 
the company, certain UAW members did violate the policy of nonviolence of the 
UAW. 

The Chairman. Congressman, wouldn't you prefer to sit down ? 

Representative Hoffman. Thanks, I'd rather stand. Permit me to 
call the committee's attention to a somewhat similar statement of 
Justice Frankfurter, the Milk Wagon Drivers Union against the 
Meadowmoor Dairies (312 U. S. 293) : 

And so the right of free speech cannot be denied by drawing from a trivial, 
rough incident or a moment of animal exhuberance, the conclusion that otherwise 
peaceful picketing as a taint of force. 

On the question of the policv of the UAW-CIO, permit me to 
quote from the testimony of Natlian Cowan who appeared on October 
16, 1944, before a House committee. His testimony will be found on 
page 373 on this question of violence. Perhaps it would be better to 
read from the official report. 

Mr. Cowan. Mr. Chairman, before starting, Mr. Murray — 

that is Philip Murray, president of the CIO at that time — 

asked me to express his regrets to the committee that he was unable to appear 
in person this morning. He is tied up with another governmental agency. 
He has certain testimony here and he asked me to appear before your committee 
and present it to your committee. 

During the course of his testimony he was asked, among other 
things, and at that time the bill before the committee was one on 
unemployment, and the committee was being asked to create 8 mil- 
lion jobs, this question : 

Assume your picket line has been formed and that I am on my way to go to 
work in the factory, and there was a job there for me and they want me to work 
there, and I want to work there. Should I be allowed to work there or should 
I go on this unemployment fund. 

And the answer. 

No, I would not. I still say that we have a right to picket in this country. 

Question. Yes, I think so, too. The Supreme Court has said you have. Do 
you feel that you are in favor of the mass picket line, which, by closed ranks, 
and by threats of violence and by intimidation, keeps away other men who want 
to go to work in that factory? 

Mr. Cowan. I certainly do, if I was working in that plant, I certainly do. 

Question. Just what right, legal or moral, have you for keeping me from a 
job in a factory? Keeping me from a job by force when you want to picket and 
I want to work? 

Mr. Cowan. Well, I feel that when there is a group of people working in a 
factory, and a certain majority group is functioning in there as a collective bar- 
gaining agent, unit, that the minority should go along with the majority in that 
plant. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9367 

Question. If they do not want to do that, you are not going to let them do it. 

Mr. Cowan. That is the custom in this country. I believe it is the rule of 
the majority. I think that has been set up in this country for a long time. 

Question. Did you ever know of any instance in this country where the ma- 
jority had the right to beat up the minority? 

Answer. No, I do not believe in that. I do not believe in that. 

Question. You do not, but you do believe that that is the right thing to do, 
do you? 

Mr. Cowan. That is right. I believe in persuasion every time. I believe it 
will do the most good. 

Question. Do you believe in mass strikers, shoulder to shoulder, trying by 
force to prevent others from entering a factory where they want to go to work, 
and these people want to keep them out? 

Mr. CowAN. Yes, indeed. I have been in picket lines like that, as a matter 
of fact, and if you were in a picket line, you would feel a little differently 
about it. 

You would know what you are up against. 

Question. Block the gates so that man cannot go into the plant and go to 
work when they want to work? 

Mr. CowAN. That is true. Labor has to do something to gain its proper 
place. 

Mr. Cowan stated before in answer to questions that he was speak- 
ing for Mr. Murray, the president of the CIO. 

The Chairman. What was his position at that time ? 

You say he was speaking for Mr. Murray. 

Representative Hoffman. Legishitive director, CIO, appearing on 
behalf of CIO President Philip Murray, who, he stated, was unable 
to appear. He is speaking officially there. 

The Chairman. Do you know where Mr, Cowan is now; what 
position he holds, if any ? 

Representative Hoffman. I do not. 

Mr. Chairman, I have not attempted to obtain any knowledge, only 
just casually or incidentally, with reference to the Kohler strike or 
the Perfect Circle strike. 

The Chairman. I was just thinking he might be a high official in 
the union now. I didn't know. 

Representative Hoffman. Well, he might have changed his mind. 
Then we had Mr. Emil Mazey, the same gentleman who has been be- 
fore the committee here. He was on a strike at Clinton, Mich. That 
will be referred to later. But on this question as to the right to block 
entrance to the plant, and the attention 

Senator Mundt. Do you know. Congressman, what position Mr. 
Mazey held at the time you are about to quote him? Was he then the 
secretary-treasurer, as he is now ? 

(At this point, Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.) 

Representative Hoffman. He was connected at that time with the 
CIO organization in Detroit. I don't recall just what particular 
position. He wasn't in charge himself of the Clinton strike. There 
was a Mr. McAuley in charge there. But Mazey was over there. 
Mazey had testified that he brought 400 pickets down at Clinton. He 
said union men. Then he was asked about the general practice. 

Mr. Mazey brought them down or came down with them. Clinton 
was a town of 1,600 people. It is 70 miles from Detroit, where these 
people came from. 

And, Mr. Reporter, if I use the word "goons" at any time, please 
change it in the transcript to members of, or some similar term. 



9368 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

At page 326 he was asked, after taking these 400 down there : 

And did that, intending that they should do what when they got there? 

Mr. Mazet. I said we were going down there to protect our people ; stop them 
from being pushed around. 

Mr. Hoffman. Do you mean, what do you mean by protection? 

Mr. Mazey. Well, if any scabs attempted to push our pickets around as they 
had done on the occasion on which the back-to-work movement was organized, 
we wouldn't stand idly by and see them pushed around. 

Mr. Hoffman. You were going to use force and prevent that? 

Mr. Mazett. If our people were pushed around, yes. 

Mr. Hoffman. You mean that if the employees of the Thomas Co., of the 
Clinton Machine Co., attempted to go through the picket line, you were going to 
assist your pickets in keeping them out? 

Mr. Mazey. I did not say that. 

• ♦*•••• 

Mr. Mazey. What I said was that if any of our people on the picket line 
were to be pushed around as they had been in the previous — Mr. Thoma.s 

Mr. Thomas was president of the company — 

incidentally beat up on the president of our local union physically, a man of 
about 220 pounds. If that had occurred we would have given our people 
protection. 

That may have been the president, but from my knowledge it was the 
superintendent. 

Mr. Hoffman. Now, I think we have had that three times on the record. 

Mr. Mazety. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hoffman. And we accept it as your statement. Now, my question is 
this : Was it your purpose if, when you got to Clinton, you found a picket line 
down at the plant and that the employees or some of the employees of the 
company attempted to go through that picket line and if it became necessary in 
order to get through for them to push or shove your pickets aside, that you were 
going to call for action from so many of your 400 supporters as might be 
necessary to prevent that? 

Mr. Mazey. That was our purpose and our record there speaks for itself. 
We did not prohibit anybody physically from going into the plant. 

Mr. Chairman, at that time, the attention of Mr. Mazey was called 
to the fact that we had a statute which made it an offenses, a misde- 
meanor, at least, to prevent a worker, or anyone else for that matter, 
going to or from a plant. 

Mr. Hoffman. I say, did you intend to use as many of your 400 from Detroit 
as might be necessary to strengthen that picket line? 

Mr. Mazey. Our people walked the picket line that morning. 

Mr. Hoffman. Your people from Detroit? 

Mr. Mazey. That is right, 

Mr. Hoffman. Now, you say, you contend that the picket lines there in 
Clinton had not been keeping the workers who wanted to return from going into 
the plant? 

Mr. Mazey. I did not say that. 

Mr. Hoffman. Well, do you say that — wait, put it this way 

Mr. Mazey. I did not say that. 

Mr. Hoffman. * * * This statement that I read : "We are going to demon- 
strate to employers in small towns that they are not going to push our workers 
around." Now, as to these other employers in other towns, what were your 
400 going to do? 

That was from the Detroit papers, the quote. 

Mr. Mazey, We just wouldn't tolerate the smashing our picket lines, that is 
what I said. 

Mr. Hoffman. What would you do in Clinton that would tell somebody, for 
instance, in Dowagiac, some employer, that you — that he couldn't push your 
folks around? 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9369 

Mr. Mazey. I think if the average employer saw where he was dealing with 
a small union — that this union had the support of a larger organization both 
physically and financially and morally — that they probably would treat our 
people a lot better. 

Mr. Hoffman. He might be induced to make concessions and agreements 
ihat the union wanted? 

Mr. Mazey. Unions operate on that basis ; we believe that an injury to one of 
our members is an injury to all our members. 

Mr. Hoffman. Yes. Just stick to the questions. How many pickets were 
there at Clinton on this day when you went there, approximately? 

Mr. Mazey. I brought 400 from Detroit. 

Mr. Hoffman. Give us — yes, I know, give us an estimate of about how many 
were there. 

Mr. Mazey. Probably 550, 1 didn't count them so I don't 

Mr. Hoffman. Now, I continue to read from the paper: '"This demonstration 
by the Detroit and Toledo locals is just a sample of what is going to happen if 
this strike continues." What did you mean by that? 

Mr. Mazey. I meant that if the strike was to continue we would bring addi- 
tional people, thousands if we had to. 

Mr. Hoffman. Thousands, if you had to? 

Mr. Mazey. That is right. 

Mr. Hoffman. Clinton is a town of some 1,600 people? 

Mr. Mazey. That is correct. 

Mr. Hoffman. What were you going to do if the strike continued, what were 
YOU going to do with a thousand people down there? 

Mr. Mazey. Convince the community and the people who wanted to scab that 
it wasn't the way to settle this matter. 

Mr. Hoffman. How were you going to convince them, by just having your 
I teople present ? 

Mr. Mazey. Just being present. 

Mr. Hoffman. I say, are you familiar with the fact that in Michigan we have 
& statute which makes it unlawful for more than 50 people to gather together, 
30 people to gather together riotously, tumultuously? 

Mr. Mazey. No ; I am not familiar with that and I would like to know what 
the date of this act is. 

Oh, yes, Mr. Mazey also testified, and it is in the book here, that he 
didn't think much of that law. He didn't approve of it. 

Mr. Mazey. We have been conducting strikes for several years and there have 
been no limitations on our pickets. There isn't any limitation on the number of 
pickets that we can have. 

Mr. Hoffman. There is no limitation on the number of pickets that you can 
have, but are you aware that you cannot block entrances to any plant? 

Mr. Mazey. I understand that is unlawful ; that is one law that I do not 
believe in. 

Mr. Mazey's attention was called, and there was filed there and I 
will file with the committee if permitted, a list of the statutes and of 
the State laws which have adopted the common law, the rioting statute. 
I might say that as I recall, 48 States have statutes which expressly 
prohibit interfering with workers going to or from their jobs. 

Of course, the old common law, which is in force in all of the States, 
as I recall, calls it a riot when more than 30 assemble, and empowers 
the sheriff, or whoever may be there in the capacity of a law officer, 
to call upon any bystanders to assist. Under the Michigan statute, 
and in most of the others, it is an offense, a misdemeanor, to refuse to 
assist the sheriff to enforce the law. 

Mr. Hoffman. Weren't you the high ranking union oflBcial in command? 

Mr. Mazey. No ; Mr. McAuley was the ranking oflScial in command. I was 
a visiting fireman that day. 

Mr. Hoffman. I see. With 400 assistants. Well, frankly, now, the purpose 
was to convince Mr. Thomas that the picket line was going to remain around 
the plant and that any back-to-work movement wasn't going to be successful, 
wasn't it? 



9370 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Mazey. I think we convinced him, we settled the strike that afternoon. 

Mr. Hoffman. I say, that was the purpose? 

Mr. Mazky. Yes. 

I might add that there is other testimony in the record that they were preparecf 
to bring down 2,000 additional pickets, additional to the 400. 

Getting hack to the ob.servation I was about to make, I want to .state that 
for a number of years we have been assisting sister local unions when they 
are in difiiculty. What took place in Clinton, Mich., has taken place in a num- 
ber of other communities for the last 10 years. I have been in Flint. I have 
been in Pontiac. I have been in every section of the State assisting our local 
unions to settle their problems with management and this is the only time that 
people seem to have gotten excited in this particular hysterical era that we are 
living in today with the Taft-Hartley Act and so on ; this thing has been made 
quite an event, quite an affair. 

Mr. Hoffman. Quite what? 

Mr. Mazey. It has been made quite an event, quite an affair, but we have for 
year.s, we have been able to build our organization and maintain it on the basis 
of assisting our local unions when they are in diflBculty ; we have been doing it for 
10 years and we intend to continue doing it. 

Mr. Hoffman. Now, let us analyze that just a moment. You intend to con- 
tinue, for example, sending in to say Berrian County and Benton Harbor 
hundreds of thousands of men from other unions in order to assist local unions? 

Mr. Mazey. If our services are needed ; yes. 

Mr. Hoffman. And when they come in do you intend to assist them on the 
picket line? 

Mr. Mazey. Yes. 

Mr. Hoffman. And that is becoming members of the picket line? 

Mr. Mazey. Absolutely. 

Mr. Hoffman. Do I understand that you intend that those picket lines are- 
going to prevent workers from returning to work? 

Mr. Mazey. No, no ; I didn't say that. 

Mr. Hoffman. You are going to run right into the local oflBcers when you try 
that. 

Mr. Mazey. We have run into a lot of them. 

Senator Mundt. What was the year of this Clinton strike that this 
testimony involved ? 

Representative Hoffman. There were 2 strikes, 1947, in April, 
wliich lasted 3 days, and then one a few days later in May, after a vote 
had been taken, which was overwhelmin<>:ly in favor of going back to 
work. The vote was taken by the chamber of commerce, not by the 
company. A Mr. Priest testified, and the record shows that at least 
three- fourths of the workers, more than that, wanted to go back. I 
think there were 39 that didn't want to go, and several hundred that 
did want to go back to work. 

Senator Mundt. What I was trying to establish for the record is 
what calendar year did Mr, Mazey, speaking for the union, state 
under oath that it was a policy of his union to move strike aid or union 
members from place to place to place in order to help locals win 
strikes ? 

Representative Hoffman. That was the established custom. As 
I go on, if permitted, it began in, most of it, the mass picketing, in 
1937, and it continued down, and there are strikes all the way along 
the line, records of which I have here. This one was October 1947. 

Senator Mundt. He was testifying as of the policy which was 
operating for 1 947. 

Representative Hoffman. My statement today is in answer to the 
statement made last Sunday by Mr. Reuther that the policy of the 
union was to avoid violence, that in some few cases they couldn't 
help getting into it, but the overall policy and custom was to avoid 
violence. The statements which I read are to the contrary. You 
have it. Then there is another statement. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9371 

Mr. Van Bittner. There was a strike over at Monroe, Mich., and 
it happened that I saw what happened, on the main highway. The 
citizens of Monroe, and perhaps it is out of order — maybe I should 
tell about the Monroe strike now, Mr. Chairman, instead of going back 
and forth to it ? 

The Chairman. I am not familiar with it. I don't know where 
it fits into your testimony about it. I will trust your judgment 
about it. 

Representative Hoffman. All I intended to speak about here was as 
to the custom. There was a strike at Monroe, Mich., where the citi- 
zens threw the pickets out. They formed what is referred to some- 
times as vigilantes, and the picket line in that particular case didn't 
win out. On this Sunday, in a park north of Monroe — this was when 
Governor Murphy was Governor of Michigan, and 1937 is the date 
of it — on this Sunday there was a meeting in the park just north of 
Monroe. 

The highway runs north and south. Monroe is south of Detroit 
and north of Toledo. Monroe was south of the group in the park, 
which, according to — it depends on which story you read. Some 
reporters said it was 4,000. The union officials, 1 of them, said it 
was 30,000 people, from outside, gathered. They were meeting in 
the park. At that time, the pickets hadn't been successful in taking 
over Monroe. The strike was on, I think, Newton Steel Co. At that 
time, in charge of the strike was a man named Van Bittner, a CIO 
organizer, at Monroe. 

The statement that I have, and this was taken at the time, the 
two words are not in the New York Times, but I picked them up over 
there on a local publication of some kind, Mr. Bittner said, using 
an oath, "They will pay for what they did at Monroe and pay well." 
Other papers quote that except the oath. 

I say to the people of Monroe, if you aud your Knaggs want to run your — 

and Knaggs was the name of the mayor — 

want to run your government as you are running it, we will block you off from 
the rest of the United States. Do they imagine they will keep us out of Monroe 
forever? No; if it wasn't for our loyal workers, we'd leave them alone to 
starve in their own folly. But we'll bring our union in there and make decent 
citizens out of these hoodlums. 

We will have pickets in Monroe within 2 days. We didn't want to do it 
today, for Sunday is not a day of work. So, we will allow the crowd in Monroe 
to rest in peace today. But, beginning tomorrow, there'll be no peace in Monroe 
until Republic — 

that is Republic Steel Co. — 

signs with SWOC. We will have to assert our rights in Monroe to teach every- 
body that they can't trample on us. We are going to Monroe and stay there as 
long as steel is made there. The government of Michigan and the United States 
are with us. 

Perhaps it is relevant to add that the Governor of Michigan has 
promised protection earlier, and did later. But when a company of 
artillery was sent to Monroe, and I just happened to be going through 
there that day, the company was bivouacked south of the town, so 
that Monroe was between the camp of the pickets and the artillery 
company. 

On that occasion, there were citizens of Monroe, a couple of bank 
clerks or merchants, there were some officers, there was one little fellow 



9372 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

there whose son was driving in a car east of Monroe a couple of days 
before, and had had the car pushed over into the river. 

As we stood there, down from the north came a large automobile 
with 4 rather large gentlemen in it, who got out of the car and walked 
down toward where this group had been camped for 2 days. I think 
probably there were 25 people there, and the 4 had their hands in their 
coat pockets, this way. I didn't see anything that looked like a gun. 

They came up to these citizens of Monroe and said, "Open up and 
get out," in substance, that was what they said, and the little fellow 
who was the father, not any larger than I am, of the boy whose car 
had been pushed into the river, he said, "No, you don't." One of the 
fellows said "Well, who is going to stop us?" 

And this fellow stepped up and said, "I am." Some of the citizens 
had guns, not very effective looking guns, odds and ends. But this 
little fellow said, "I am," and when the fellow asked him, "What 
with?" he said, "With this," and he reached around, and he was 
looking for trouble, I guess. 

And he had a corn knife, not one of those that runs down and bends 
oflf, but he had one of those that looks like a bread knife, with scallops 
on the edge. The fellows took a look at it, all four of them, and 
they walked back and got in their car and drove away. It seemed to 
me to be an incident of a man who was in the right winning a point. 

I know there has been some question here of a man's right to defend 
his property or to resent a beating — do things that otherwise he 
wouldn't do. 

That happened there that day. 

That was typical of the way the picket lines usually operated. I 
might add, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, that the 
citizens of Monroe were not alone in their efforts ; that the American 
Legion, through official action, volunteered to go into Monroe and 
assist those citizens. 

The Governor didn't do it, and the sheriff couldn't, and the city 
marshal couldn't. So the American Legion took official action, said 
they would go down and help the citizens of Monroe if they had any 
more trouble with the pickets. 

That finally ended. There was other violence, but the strike final- 
ly, as all strikes do, ended. That is all that I have on that par- 
ticular 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Congressman Hoffman 



Representative Hoffman. May I interrupt you. Senator ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Representative Hoffman. I appeal to the chairman. It was my 
privilege watching the hearings on TV the other day, and I noticed 
what a wonderfully fine job you attempted to do in shortening up 
the testimony of a witness. If I get off the beaten track, if you will 
just remind me, I would appreciate it. 

Tlie Chairman. All right. Congressman. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Congressman, I want to ask something for the 
record. I think I have the information, but I want it for the record. 

How long have you represented a Michigan district in the House 
of Representatives ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITTEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9373 

Eepresentative Hoffman. Since 1935. 

Senator Curtis. During that time, have you made a study of labor 
matters ? 

Representative Hoffman. Labor matters ? 

Senator Curtis. Labor union matters ? 

Representative Hoffman. Well, I have had occasion to, in a way ; 
yes. Wait a moment. 

A study ? I have been present at hearings, for example, when Lee 
Pressman, the general counsel of the CIO, and John Abt appeared, 
and when Nathan Witt, another Communist, was attorney for the 
National Labor Relations Board. 

They were Communists. All three of them belonged to the same 
cell here in Washington, according to the testimony of Mr. Press- 
man. If you want to call that a study, I have known about their 
activities. 

Senator Curtis. Have you conducted some investigations vour- 

self? ^ y 

Representative Hoffman. Yes; for two House committees. 

(At this point. Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Senator Curtis. Both in the capacity of a committee member, and 
you have investigated the situation in Michigan in your own right; 
have you not ? 

Representative Hoffman. I know something about Michigan strikes 
and some other strikes. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. Well, now, you have presented to us here 
the statement of Mr. Reuther that violence is not the pattern and 
practice of the UAW-CIO in carrying out and reaching their ob- 
jective. You have presented statements of some of these other men 
to the contrary. What do you have in the way of evidence as to 
what has happened, incidents that have taken place, that proves 
ivhich statement is correct ? 

(At this point. Senator Gold water entered the hearing room.) 

Representative Hoffm a n. Those files are in this box. 

Senator Curtis. Let's hear a few of them. 

Representative Hoffman. Wouldn't you like to hear something 
about where this matter started ? 

Senator Curtis. All right. 

Representative Hoffman. And the communistic background ? 

Senator Curtis. All right ; give us the facts. 

Representative Hoffman. There was something about it in 1922, 
over at Bridgman, Mich., when they had a secret conference, a 
convention. 

The people at that meeting called it the illegal Communist Party. 
We had a statute at that time which made such a meeting unlawful. 
Mr. Ruthenberg — not Reuther, Ruthenberg — was convicted of a crimi- 
nal offense, and the conviction was affirmed by the Michigan Supreme 
Court. The case went to the United States Supreme Court on a writ 
of error, but Mr. Ruthenberg died before they could reach a decision, 
before the case was heard, finally, the case was then dismissed, 

I learned that there had been an investigation by the FBI, and State 
troopers, and they arrested the Communist leaders. They had two bar- 

21243—58 — pt. 23—15 



9374 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

rels of secret documents buried in the sand dunes. Among them was 
the part of a speech by William Z. Foster, 

Back in 1922, in my own district in Michigan, the FBI discovered 
the real origin of the CIO. 

In those days, the Communist Party was an illegal underground 
organization and it came all the way to Bridgman, Mich., to hold a 
secret convention. 

After FBI agents and State constabulary arrested the Communist 
leaders they discovered two barrels of secret documents buried in the 
sand dunes. 

A transcript of a speech by William Z. Foster showed that he told the 
delegates : 

After OTiv delegation came back from Moscow last year, it brought with us a 
program which we thought was a good practical program for this country * * *. 

We drafted a program for industrial unionism and sent out 11,000 copies to 
every trade union in America * * *. 

I am not trying to overstress the importance of industrial trade unionism. 
The workers of America are ready for new ideas. 

In our conference we should * * * adopt a program calling for industrial or- 
ganization, and adopt a revolutionary program as a basis of our work. 

Also among the documents seized was a report that read in part : 

At best the prospects of our influencing the labor movement are mainly in 
the * * * International Ladies Garment Workers, Amalgamated Clothing 
Workers, Hat, Cap and Millinery Workers, etc. 

There is a splended chance for our propaganda and a strong revolutionary 
element, and there are strong nuclei among the textile workers ; also the United 
Mine Workers. 

Among the shoe workers there are great possibilities for our work. Also 
among the automobile workers '■' * * 

It is significant that it was the unions in these very fields that 
banded together to form the CIO a dozen years later. 

(At this point, Senator McClellan entered the hearing room,) 

Representative Hoffman, There is where a part of the CIO orig- 
inated, later on, some of those same people. Go through the list of the 
names in this book, this is Reds in America, You will find the names 
of some of the people who were there. As we go through and tell 
about the violence and strikes, you will find those names recurring 
all down the line. You will recall that we had some warnings about 
this, 

Mr, Chairman, I have here parts as may be relevant, this item, I 
wish to offer the document for insertion into the Senate record, an 
item by Mr. Lodge on January 3, 1924. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit 66, for reference. 

(Tlie document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 66"' for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the Select Committee.) 

Representative Hoffman. I will quote various statements scat- 
tered in the publication. This is what was in there, among other 
things. This is John L. Lewis making a report, after a rather long 
investigation, and he made it as president at that time of the United 
Mine Workers. Of this movement he says : 

It is purely a revolutionary organization and makes no pretense at legal- 
ity * * * This party has at its head the supreme executive revolutionary com- 
mittee in America, responsible only to * * * officials of the Communist In- 
ternational. 

On the surface and working partly in the open is another revolutionary or- 
ganization, known as the Workers Party of America * * *"— 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9375 

With a mission — 

fundameutiilly the same as that of the Communist Party of America, i. e.. 
to overthrow the Govierument of the United States. 

Continuing to quote : 

Joined with these two revolutionary parties * * * is the Trade Union Educa- 
tional League, headed by William Z. Foster * * * This league is * * * the di- 
rect instrumentality * * * of the Communist InternationalV 

They are fused into united effort, giving mutual support to each other in their 
numerous activities. 

These Communist groups interlock also with the Communist International and 
the Red Trade Labor Union International at Moscow, so that the revolutionary 
movement in America is the direct offspring and agency of the Communist regime 
in Russia, for the purpose of seizing and possessing themselves of the American 
Continent through the mediumship of revolution inspired and conducted from 
tbe stronghold of bolshevism on the other side of the Atlantic. 

Mr, Lewis, later, helped organize as did the Senate Civil Liberties 
Committee in 1939, the CIO and the officers of the CIO were John L. 
Lewis, the president; then Philip Murray, and Walter P. Reuther; 
the UAW officers were Homer Martin, R. J. Thomas, and Walter P. 
Reuther. The CIO was organized by six unions which left the A. F. of 
L, and the president, Charles P. Howard, of the international printers, 
and Max Zaritzky, president of the United Hatters, Cap and Millinery 
Workers. 

Then the other four unions joined shortly after that was formed, 
United Automobile AVorkere, Rubber Workers, Associated Iron, Steel 
and Tin Workers, and the Flat Glass Workers, and the two unions, 
and the A. F. of L. and CIO, they were merged, as you know, in 1955. 

Later, when Lewis became president of the CIO, he referred to three 
of the gentlemen who were very active later, and who participated in 
some of these strikes, John Brophy, Howard Hapgood, and Adolph 
Germer. 

Here is wdiat Mr. Lewis, at the convention in Indianapolis in 1930, 
said, and I quote: "Fakirs, repudiated leaders, traitors to the unions, 
opportunists, and purveyors of every falsehood, slander, and decep- 
tion." 

Those were officers. 

Perhaps the committee would be interested in this. I will offer it in 
evidence, if you want to look at it. 

The Chairman. That will be made exhibit No. 67. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 67" for reference, 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Representative Hoi<tman. If you follow down through the strikes 
of 1937, on into 1941, and into 1955, and especially in the South in 
1955, you will find the names of these individuals recurring. They 
were used by Lewis after he said that the Communists were trying to 
take over the labor movement in \merica. 

Before we go into the record showing violence in strikes, it might be 
well to put on the record in a concise form a report giving something 
about Mr. Reuther who yesterday was at the White House advising 
the President as to how to conduct our national affairs. 

He was born on September 1, 1907. He quit school at 16. Ap- 
parently he has made a great deal of progress since. He worked him- 
self up and through. He went to Detroit in 1927. He was employed 
first at Briggs. 



9376 IMPROPER ACTIVITIKS IX THE LABOR FIELD 

lie worked nights, attended high school, studied 3 years at Wayne 
University, taking, first, law, and then transferring to sociology and 
economics. In 1931 and 1932 he was foreman of 40 men in the tool 
and die room of the Ford Co. 

In 1933 he was discharged for union activities from the Ford Co. 
In 1933 lie went to Europe, 1934, and traveled in Europe. 

In 1934 he worked in an industrial plant in Russia. On January 
20, he Avrote that famous letter, which will be referred to later, and 
which was published in the Saturday Evening Post, and in other 
places. 

In 1935, Walter and his two brothers, Victor and Eay, participated 
as leaders in a conference in Columbus, Ohio, at which the Communist 
National Student League and the Socialist Student League for Indus- 
trial Democracy were merged to become the American Student Union. 
The three brothers were all vouched for by Celeste Strack, who was 
then a representative of the central committee of the Communist 
Party. 

At that meeting, Walter and Victor supposedly represented Brook- 
wood Labor College, which had been branded as communistic by the 
American Federation of Labor. 

Eoy, who was registered as a representative of Wayne University 
of Detroit, represented them. 

Now, I might add there now, there has been a statement in some 
of the papers. I noticed that at the Flint strike, Walter and one of 
the others were quoted as telling the strikers where there was violence 
to follow the cops and I don't know what else it was, but to do some- 
thing to them. 

But I took the trouble to contact the reporter of the Flint Journal, 
and he said that was a mistake; the Flint Journal was correct, the 
other paper was not, that Walter wasn't in that, except as he was 
carrying on with the strike generally ; and that it was Roy and Victor 
who gave that advice as to what should be done with the cops. 

Getting back to Reuther, he joined the UAW on the west side local 
174 in 1935. In 1936 he was a member of the executive board of the 
UAW — since 1936. In 1937, as a volunteer organizer, he raised the 
membership of local 174 from 78 to 30,000 within a year. 

In 1937 he had been known throughout Detroit as a union leader, 
no longer able to get work in any plant, and apparently the employers 
boycotted him. 

In 1937, in June, he incurred the displeasure of Homer Martin, for 
activities in promoting wildcat and sitdown strikes. 

Martin at that time was president of the UAW in Detroit, and 
there were several factional fights there. In 1939 he was made di- 
rector of General Motors department of UAW. In 1942 he was elected 
first vice president of the UAW, and elected president in 1946, in 
March, and elected vice president of the CIO in November. 

In 1952 he was chosen to succeed Philip Murray as president of the 
CIO, and in 1955, he was elected vice president ox the AFL-CIO, and 
president of the industrial union department. 

As shedding some light on what happened with reference to the 
strikes, just briefly here, this comes fi'om the Detroit News, but I would 
like to get the Free Press first. 

The Chairman. Can we make those all an exhibit. Congressman, 
and let you quote from such parts of them as you desire? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 9377 

Representative Hoffman. Yes, and it would be a very short way out 
of it, and I would not even need to testify if there weren't statements 
in here which show the policy of the UAW-CIO all of the way 
through, statements as to what they were going to do. 

The Chairman. Let us make them all an exhibit. You have a series 
of photostatic copies of issues of different newspapers? 

Representative Hoffman. That is the Detroit News, the New York 
Times, and the Detroit Free Press, but very, very incomplete. I don't 
have any staff, and I have to do this myself, and I don't get them. 
I apologize for tlie fact that they don't run down as they should. 

The Chairman. That is all right. They may all be made exhibit 
No. 68. 

(Documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 68" for reference 
and may be found in the files of tlie Select Committee. ) 

The Chairman. They will be received in bulk, and then as you read 
from any paper, identify the date of the issue. 

Representative Hoffman. I want to go back to this Flint one. There 
is a great deal of complaint over Flint. For example, they were 
trying to organize Flint and there was a strike in a restaurant. There 
was considerable violence. There was complaint, but they received no 
satisfaction. 

I heard something when I was sitting back here about officers, local 
officers not performing their duty. There isn't any question but what 
many of them do not perform their duty because they haven't the 
ability. 

When strikers move in by the hundreds, as I will cite here, and by 
the thousands, what is a local officer going to do ? He is just out of the 
picture — crowded out. 

If I may be permitted the expression of a personal opinion, that is 
that there isn't any reason eitlier morally or legally why the owner of 
property sliould get up and get out of his own home, his own yard, his 
own factory, just because somebody tells him to. I can't subscribe 
to the doctrine that that is what he should do just because some union 
wants to move in on him. 

Now, in this Flint situation, the restaurant I was referring to. 
For example, on January 4, on page 1 of the Detroit News, there 
is a reference to the strike, and then on the 7th, and 5th, and 12th — on 
one of those dates and I think it is the 5th of June — Reuther himself 
called a strike in the Cadillac plant. On the 12th, for example, Ken- 
neth Cole, who was financial secretary of local 14 of the UAW, Toledo, 
and there was a strike on in Michigan, said this : 

I expect between 3,000 and 5,000 Toledo union men will be in Flint before 
night. 

That brings up the point, what are the city police or the home folks 
going to do when that kind of a thing happens ? It is true that we 
had a Governor at that time who said several times that he was going 
to protect the people. He said he would protect the strikers. He 
said he was going to protect the strikers and the owners of the prop- 
erty. He never said anything about protecting the public. 

They seem to have gone without any protection. In that strike at 
Flint on the 20th, there was the announcement that employees from 
Ohio were on the way, gathering with those from Flint; 3,000 from 
Toledo, and some more from Ohio. The Governor called out the 



9378 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

126th Infantry, and later called out the cavalry, but he didn't give 
any protection, however, to the public. 

In the meantime, these i)eople were in the ])lants. In one case they 
had charge of a plant in Flint, the second floor, 400 of them. The 
troops came and what did the troops do? The troops prevented the 
people from <i"oing down and attemptmg to throw them out of the 
private ])ropei"ty. 

The (xovernor's published statement was that he didn't want any 
bloodshed, but nowhere does lie tell the officers of the union — at that 
time Lewis was president — to go home. So the protection was given 
to the strikers, and in those plants, in some, of them, they welded the 
doors shut and they did all sorts of damage, and they beat up, in this 
one case, 24 people. There were 24 people injured. 

When the Governor was talking about what he was going to do 
about it on January 4, the Governor lived in Detroit, and he took 
the train from Detroit over to Lansing to carry on his official busi- 
ness, and who do you think was with him? Those who made the 
train trip with the Governor were Homer Martin, president of the 
UAW; John Brophy, with pictures on that, and Lewis called him 
a faker and a liar, director of the CIO; Lee Pressman, general coun- 
sel of the CIO, a Communist, and that is where the Governor was 
getting his advice; and Larry S. Davidow^ he was the attorney for 
the union ; and Ed Hall. Now, don't forget Ed Hall. You Avill find 
his name running all through strike situations where there was vio- 
lence. 

If you think that this was all just a happenstance, as you might 
gather from some of the testimony, there was a strike at the Bohn 
Aluminum & Brass Co. in Detroit. That was in 1939. That company 
had a contract with the Navy to produce munitions of war. The 
company had patterns from the Navy. They had other things that 
belonged to the Navy. 

But this CIO called a strike. Being curious, I just asked the then 
Acting Secretaiy of the Navy, Mr. Edison, to tell about it. I asked 
him some questions, whether the Navy Department did have a con- 
tract with the corporation, and he said it did. 

I asked whether a strike would interfere with the activities of the 
Navy De]:)artment, and the Navy answered that a strike actually 
occurred in the plants of the corporation which did interfere with 
the activities of the Navy Department. 

You are familiar with the practice in the House. I asked how 
long the strike continued. 

Answer. A strike was called at the plant No. 1, Detroit, on August 29, 1939. 
At the time the strike was called, plant No. 1 was engaged in the manufacture 
of special bearings for aircraft engines for manufacturers with whom the Navy 
had contracts. 

On September 15, 1939, a second strike was called at all of the seven plants of 
the corporation in the Detroit district in sympathy with the strike at plant No. 1. 
At the time of calling the second strike, plant No. 2 was engaged in the manufac- 
ture of castings for airplane engines, in the process of manufacture at the Naval 
Aircraft Factory. 

The Navy had a contract for a special type of marine engine there. The dura- 
tion of the strike in plant No. 1 (bearings) was from the 9th day of August to 
October 8, inclusive, 41 calendar days. The duration of the strike in plant No. 2 
(castings) was from September 15 to October 8, 24 days. 



IMPROPE'R ACTIVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9379 

The statement shows that the CIO called a strike there and they kept 
those plants closed on September 28, 1939 : 

The resident inspector of naval materials in Detroit, Mich., informed the 
regional director of the United Automobile Workers and Congress of Industrial 
Organizations in Detroit of the delay in the materials due and also the urgent 
need of the shipment of the patterns — and those belonged to the Navy — and 
requested that he instruct his representative in charge of the picket line at the 
corporation's plant No. 2 to allow a representative of the inspector of naval 
material and a truck to pass through the picket line to pick up Government-owned 
patterns and ship them on a Government bill of lading. 

That is the United States of America, and a free comitry and a free 
people. 

The Chairman. The document will be made exhibit No. 69. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 69" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Representative Hoffman. I will read another paragraph : 

The regional director of the UAW sent three representatives, and the repre- 
sentatives of the union were given full access to the files, and were informed 
the delay in releasing the patterns for delivery was seriously jeopardizing the 
manufacture of airplane engines at the Naval Aircraft Factory. 

Mr. Reuther lives in Detroit, and if he didn't have knowledge of 
that, it was his own fault. 

So far as I have been able to learn over the years, and in my search 
of the papers, I have yet to see the first statement until last Sunday 
where Mr. Reuther ever criticized or condemned members of the union 
who were using violence or who were holding up Government contracts. 

Incidentally, I might mention the one over in Allis-Chalmers, AVis- 
consin, which continued for 67 days, where they were manufacturing 
material for the Navy, and that, as I recall, was during the wartime, 
and Mr. Harold Christophel was the gentleman who was at the head 
of the strikers. 

He was a Communist, as was his wife who worked for the Agri- 
culture Department here, and later he was, after 7 years" eft'ort, con- 
victed because of perjury before the House Committee on Education 
and Labor. 

I hold in my hand here a report of the United States Department 
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics in "Washington, Department No. 
A-36, "Work Stoppages in which there were Deaths by Violence, 1937 
to 1948," and it lists here strikes by the AFL and the CIO, and the 
record is just as bad on the AFL as it is on the CIO. 

If you are wondering why I never say anything about Mr. Hoffa — 
Mr. Hoffa, according to his own record, is a racketeer and extortion- 
ist, and of course the committee has had him and knows in part about 
his record. 

Now, this shows here the number of strikes, and those in which the 
CIO was interested are checked in red, and it shows those strikes 
carried on by the CIO and Mr. Reuther has always been an active 
participant in UAW-CIO strikes. He has been in it and he was in 
the overpasses where he claims that he and Frankenstein, in Detroit, 
back in 1937, were given a beaten, and they were. 

That is when they attempted to stop the workers from going to 
work. They were on the losing side. So far as I know, there may 
have been some instances, but I don't know of them personally, but 
Mr. Reuther has never, so far as I know since he got that beating, been 



9380 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

out on a picket line. Others have been doinfr the work. He is like 
Mazey. 

Mazey, in his testimony, claims to be the champion when it comes 
to arrests, but until he was arrested over at Kohler, I don't know of 
any conviction. I have Iniown about his participation in strikes, but 
he was the fellow who told John Doe to go down and beat them up. 
But he stayed back where they didn't get him. You can't say that 
about Iloffa. He is willing to tight any time. 

Now, the list of strikes, and I want to offer that in evidence, Mr. 
Chairman 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 70. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 70," for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select coimnitt^e) . 

Representative Hoffman. The ones checked in red are the ones for 
which the CIO was responsible, and this shows that there were 41 
deatlis in strikes conducted by the CIO during that period. 

Of those, however, seven were with the United JNIine Workers and 
should be deducted because that was Lewis and not Reuther. 

The Chairman. They will be deducted. 

Representative Hoffman. Unfortunately, the people that were 
killed — and there w^ere seven of them — can't be brought back to life. 

The Chairman. They cannot. 

Representative Hoffman. You can strike seven out, but you can't 
get them out of the cemetery. 

I was wondering, may I later, without taking too much time, and I 
know you are pressed for time, go through these statements here and 
make the quotations from the newspaper accounts instead of reading 
them ? 

The Chairman. You may do that if you wish and submit them, and 
then they can be placed in the record. 

Representative Hoffman. It seems in a way an imposition to read 
these to the committee unless they want it, because the statements are 
in here. 

The Chairman. I will tell you what you may do. It will be just the 
same. If you will take those and mark the particular statements, 
you can retain those, and turn them in as an exhibit, and you mark on 
those papers the statements that you would like to mark. 

Representative Hoffman. I might read an editorial here. 

The Chairman, Those newspapers that the Chair has admitted as 
an exhibit, were exhibit No. 68, and I understood you wanted to take 
some excerpts from them, instead of taking the time of reading them 
and to have the excerpts placed in the record. That will be done, if 
you will simply mark the particular quotes you would like to have 
placed in the record. 

Representative Hoffman. There are a few of them, if the commit- 
tee has the time, which are contradictory to this. 

The Chairman. You may read 2 or 3 of them. The Chair is not 
trying to cut you off. I thought that is the way you asked to do it. 

Representative Hoffman. I am afraid I was not presenting the 
thing that should be presented. Here is one editorial of June 17, 
1937. 

If someone had searched diligently for an action against the UAW in paving 
the way for its eventual self-destruction, he could not have hit upon a better one 
than the strike which paralyzed Bay City yesterday. Several industrial plants 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9381 

there were closed down by union orders, so that picket lines might be reinforced 
at the Bay Manufacturing Co. plant. 

About one-third of this plant's employees are UAW members. When they 
walked out yesterday morning, the plant naturally remained open, a one-third 
membership being insufficient to cripple its operations. The only way to make 
such a strike effective is by the open use of force, and that is what the union 
leadership in Bay City used. 

It set out deliberately to overawe, if not to offer Power City authorities, whose 
plain duty is to protect the rights of the two-thirds majority of the nonunion 
Bay City employees. In pursuance of this reckless enterprise, it visited an 
alarm and inconvenience on the whole population. The UAW leaders considered 
themselves better than the public. How long do they think the public will let 
itself be pushed around by any organized minority? 

It was at Monroe that the vigilantes finally went down and said, 
"Now you fellows are through," and they were. What may happen 
if violence in connection with strikes continues, what has been threat- 
ened several times to my personal knowledge is that the outsiders, 
the people who are not members of the union, when these people come 
in from outside, some of them like they did over at Bay City or Mon- 
roe, some of them are going to arm themselves, Mr. Chairman, and 
they are going to enforce their own laws, as they did in the wild West 
back in the clays when they had so much trouble there. 

It is something which should never be permitted to happen in this 
country and will not if the Congress and the States give relief. 

Now, it is not the workers who want always to go on strike. For 
example, in the Chevrolet plant, early in the sitdown strikes, 1 paper 
has it 9,000 with pictures, and the statement, and the other one has 
12,500 workers in 1 plant protesting, and they protested to the gov- 
ernor. As I recall, they protested to the President of the United 
States, and the Congress voted in the House at least 340 some to 1 for 
an investigation. They protested the closing of their plant. They 
wanted to work. There was only a small minority on strike. 

Here is another one from the Detroit Press, referring to the same 
incident or a similar incident on the 14th of January 1937. This 
says, "12,500 protest the strike. Workers assemble in Detroit and 
Saginaw." 

The Chairman. That paper will be made a part of exhibit 68. 

Representative Hoffman. Then to show you the difference between 
some of the States, during this 1937 strike in the automobile industry, 
the sitdown strikes, some of the union men had an idea that they would 
go down to Anderson, Ind., and close that plant. 

Some 30 automobiles loaded with union men went down. They 
stopped at a restaurant on the public highway and asked that the man 
who was working there, who had been a worker and had not gone on 
strike in the automobile industry — said they wanted him. 

The owner of the restaurant said, "No, he is working here, let him 
alone." Well, they started trouble and the restaurant owner got his 
shotgun, and when these fellows saw him coming they got into their 
automobile but they did not get in quick enough. 

He gave them 2 barrels and there were 10 of them that went to the 
hospital with shot in their legs. That shows what sometimes happens. 
Then they decided they would go down and teach the Anderson people 
a lesson, that is the UAW-CIO did, and Mr. Reuther was an officer. 
He was active in their work. 

He did not say anything about this. They were going down there 
and they got in their cars, a motorcade and started down, and the 



9382 impropp:r actritier in the labor field 

Governor of Iiulianu, I tliiiik at that time he was a Democrat, told 
the State troopers to stop them. The State men went up there and 
there was not bh)odshed, and there was not one luiit, oecause the 
troopers said, "Xo you don't," and they did not. 

That is cited ao;ain as an ilhistration tliat sometimes when a firm 
stand is taken, and the individual has the ability, these strikers don't 
have their way. They don't travel the highways bringing violence 
to a ])eaceful connnunity. 

In this Allis-Chalmers strike that I talked about, my attention has 
been called to that. In that strike there were 45 million of contracts 
for defense items. The production stopped when the Communists 
pushed the button, 

I think 1 will skip from there to 1941. This isn't a third of what the 
record shows. 

The Chairman. All of those papers may be made a part of exhibit 
68. 

Representative Hoffman. This is in 1941. Now I would like to 
show something of what happened at the Ford strike. 

The Chairman. The clerk will make all of those papers, news- 
papers, one exhibit, No. 68. 

Representative Hoffman. The chairman being an attorney may be 
interested in some of these photographs, because some of them came 
from Judge Tuttle, who was United States district judge in Detroit, 
The others came from an injunction suit that was started over there. 
They are all numbered, and I have them all numbered from 1,001 
on up. 

If you are interested, these proceedings were in Detroit in 1941. 
It was to try to get the sitdown strikers out of the plant. It is doubt- 
ful the committee or anyone today realizes the situation over at Flint 
and around Detroit at that time. 

In the eastern part of jNIichigan, the Consumers Power Co., and the 
Commonwealth & Southern and its affiliates. Over there the UAW 
and the CIO, with many of these individuals who have been named 
here or named in some of these exhibits, were Communists, turned off 
the electricity. 

Do you Iniow what that meant ^ It meant the ending of service 
in the fire department, and in the police department ; that is, effective 
service. It meant that the lights in the hospitals where people were 
sick and about to be operated on, were turned oft'. That is what hap- 
pened over there. 

We had a Governor and he had the troops. If you can call that 
nonviolence, and not the use of force, well and good. 

The Chairman. Do you want those pictures that you have just 
referred to made an exhibit? 

Representative Hoffman. Yes. I wanted to talk about a hospital 
strike, and I wanted to get the "West Penn strike in Pennsylvania on 
the record later. That was engineered by Communists and ex-con- 
victs. 

The Chairman. Let me get those pictures in the record, 

Re[)resentative Hoffman. This was on the injunction hearing. 

The Chairman. Those pictures on the injunction may be made ex- 
hibit 71. 

(Documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 71," for refer- 
ence, and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 



IMPROPE'R ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9383 

Representative Hoffman. I have excerpts from the testimony taken 
before the judge where the application for an injunction was pending. 

I want to refer to these pictures. These pictures were in connection 
with that application. There has be^n some talk here about warfare, 
and over in my office you can have some of the implements of warfare 
which were given to me, obtained from the CIO. 

You will hnd some that look like the pictures in this one. I don't 
know whether j^ou gentlemen can see it or not. They are on the 
picket line. I would like to have you look at this picture, and also 
this one. On the back you will notice this is Ford Motor strike, 
August 3, 1941. 

If you care to look at this one, this is Patrolman Landsman, of 
Detroit police, pulled from his car and beaten. By the way, when 
they sent the police out there, they took away their guns. 

Here is one of the Ford Motor strike. If you look at the picture up 
there, you will notice on the caps, "UAW-CIO,'' and there is no 
doubt about who it was. 

Here is a picture of policemen and I will ask some members of the 
committee to look at the caps to see who was there. They say they are 
not responsible for it, but the officers of the union forgot to take their 
caps from them when they permitted them to go out. 

Now, I heard something the other day about what a picket line is. 
Here is one that is blocking Miller Road at a bridge, and by the way 
I happened to drive down Miller Road, and the automobile was turned 
over ahead of us. Where were the State troopers ? 

They were back of the 7-foot fence. Who was out in front? The 
boys with the CIO caps on were out there, UAW-CIO, with a club 
like this. They say they are innocent bystanders. 

Listen to this one : This is Roosevelt B. Potter, employed by the Vet- 
erans' Administration to carry mail and deputized by the Federal 
Government. They not only kicked the constable around. 

If some members of the committee or committee staff think it is 
strange why Sheboygan officers did not do more, listen to this one. 
This is a Federal official dejnitized by the Federal Government on the 
2d day of April. He was traveling with this mail, and passing the 
intersection of Maple and Schaeffer he was stopped by 2 men, 1 of 
whom asked him where he was going. The witness said he was going 
to the Veterans' Administration. 

He was not going to work on a production line. They said, "Well, 
you don't get through there,'' After these 2 men boarded the truck, 
the witness said there were approximately 1,0()0 men on top of the 
viaduct, and they said, "I don't think you can go through there." 

He testified : 

Then I drove 5 to 10 feet and then I heard a yell, but I did not know what they 
said, and then a brick came through the left front door window, breaking into the 
car and it scattered the glass and cut the top part of my lip, and the peak of my 
nose. 

By that time the bricks were constantly hitting the truck. 

This is a Federal mailman. 

After that I did not proceed. I turned back, right back around and went right 
straight back through the crowd of men that were there. The whole mob of men, 
to left and right, when they saw me coming back, came in to the middle of the 
street throwing their hands up as if to stop the truck. I did not take any chance 



9384 IMPKOPKIJ ACTUITIES JX THE LABOK FIELD 

with people of that type, aud I stepped on the gas and picked ui) luy speed and 
hlew my horn and went i»n throuuli the crowd and I went to the Dearborn police 
station and made a report. 

Fortunately, he did not run over any pickets. Otherwise he would 
have been accused of violence. They were out in the street. 

The CouKT. What I wjis trying to fifijure out was whether this was a violation 
of the i>ostage law or some other law, because any interference with the United 
States mail until it is delivered is a violation of the postal law. I was wonder- 
ing within this statute, that definition, whether this mail had been delivered or 
hatl no been delivered as yet. 

Answer. Your Honor, the mail had not been delivered to the source to which 
it was going. It was en route. 

The Court. It is addressed to this place? 

Answer. To the A'eterans' Administration facility. 

The Court. Do you have a box here and go to that box to get it, or does some 
post-otRce clerk here turn it over to you? 

Answer. No, sir ; we go to the rear door, the same as the regular Federal 
trucks, and the inspector of the post ofBce has someone to bring the mail to us, 
and we go to the main window and sign for the registered mail ourselves and 
we are responsible for that mail until all registered mail is delivered to the 
Veterans' Administration. 

The Court. All right. 

Mr. DoEixE. He is deputized by the United States Post Office to carry the mail 
to the facility. 

The Court. It was a violation of the law — 

and so on. It shows they are not respecter of persons. 

I had better go through with the pictures. 

Here is the picket line. The other one was a picket line. That is 
another one of the same proceeding in court. Those pictures, some 
of them, might be helpful to some members of the committee who 
might not know what a picket line is. I understand there is some dif- 
ference of opinion about that. 

Here is a picket line, too, another form of it. 

Here is one more picket line, "Trouble at Gate No. 4 on April 3, 
1941." Perhaps the committee could learn by asking Keuther or 
some of his people what these pictures are all about and whether those 
things actually occurred. 

Here is another one. There is the overpass, if I remember cor- 
rectly. That is the one that Mr. Frankenstein and Mr. Reuther tried 
to negotiate but Avere not quite successful. They will undoubtedly 
claim that superior numbers beat them up, which probably Avas true, 
because it was a pitched battle. 

Here is one at gate No. 4, an air view of the gate before the fight. 

Here is another picture of gate 4 right after the fight. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make an inquiry 
here. 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. What is the exhibit number of these pictures? 

Mrs. Wait:'. They will be in exhibit 71. 

Senator Curtis. In exhibit 71, the ])articular photo referred to as 
Hoffman File No. A-6, it says : 

Legal proceedings in Detroit, Ford Motor Co. strike, 1941. Ford workers 
being chased over the bridge by strikers and pickets. 

Can you tell the committee who was on strike then and at what 
plant? 

Representative Hoffman. That is at Ford. 



IIMPROPE'R ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9385 

Senator Curtis. The UAW? 

Eepresentative Hoffman. The UAW; surely. Teamsters did not 
have anything to do with those strikes. 

Senator Curtis. Does this have any reference to an incident you 
referred to as the overpass ? 

Representative Hoffman. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. Do you identify anybody in this picture ? 

Representative Hoffman. Me ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Representative Hoffman. I do not know any of them. 

Senator Curtis. You do not know any of them ? 

Representative Hoffman. If I may make a suggestion, ask some 
of the fellows who were engineering the strike, some of the union 
officials. 

Senator Curtis. Did I understand you to state that this was the 
incident where Mr. Reuther was involved, personally ? 

Representative Hoffman. That I do not know. 

Senator Curtis. Not this particular picture, but this particular 
strike. 

Representative Hoffi^ian. I do not know whether that was the 
overpass. They may have a half-dozen for all I know. 

Senator Curtis. Was this the strike ? 

Representative Hoffihan. It was earlier. I think in the early part 
of the strike. He and Frankenstein went down to this overpass and 
they were going to stop the employees. Unfortunately for them — 
and they will characterize him as a brutal bruiser — Harry Bennett 
was in charge at that time, during those years, and he just protected 
the Ford property, contrary to what some people think is the estab- 
lished right. And they had a fight and came out second best in that 
one. 

Wliere is that picture ? I have a picture here of Frankenstein and 
Reuther right after they got through with that fight. 

Senator Curtis. That is what I want to see. 

Representative Hoffman. Here it is. The big boy is Frankenstein 
and the smaller one is Reuther. This was May 28, 1937. 

Senator Curtis. May I have that marked as an exhibit, Mr. Chair- 
man? 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 72 for reference. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 72" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You were talking about there were no teamsters 
involved in this strike ? 

Representative Hoffman. Well, I said that. Maybe I shouldn't 
have. I found nothing — if you want something about the teamsters, 
over in my office you will find plenty. 

Mr. Kennedy. Congressman, I just want to say that your investi- 
gation was most helpful in all the work we have done. 

Representative Hoffman. I have tried to help. We turned our 
files over to that special unit established in the Department of Justice, 
and there were several convictions. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the hearings that you held, the basic hearings, 
were the hearings that we followed when we had our hearings last 
summer. 



9386 IMPROPER ACTrV'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Representative Hoffman. We did not have anything; at tliat time 
about Reutlier, because I was cut oft' before we <;ot to Reuther. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the reason that 3'ou Avere cut otN 

Representative Hoffman. Well, as the chairman said, I think it was 
yesterda^y, v,-e ought to have evidence instead of speculation. There 
were two reasons. 1 iiad incurred the lack of friendship on the part 
of some of my committee members because I had criticized their so- 
journs abroad at committee- expense, and I had written a letter in 
June, June 29, 195-'), telling them that inasmuch as Congress was 
adjourning, we should go a little slow on investigations. 

Of course, you know, it did not make me any more popular with 
members of the committee. Then when we got into these investiga- 
tions, when I got to Detroit on a Monday morning, to get some papers 
from Mr. Reutlier — and, by the way, he turned over to us wire record- 
ings and other stuff — not Reutlier, Holfa. Pardon me. 

About the first thing, he came up and shook hands and he said, 
"Clare, you know, I am a Republican, too." And I said, "Yes, I 
know." Then he told me about his influence in Detroit and how many 
votes he got for the candidate to State supreme court, one of the 
judges. 

He said that he Avas responsible for it, but I knew better. Then, it 
also api)eared or developed that he had a million dollars in the treas- 
ury of the union which his executive board had authorized him to 
spend such parts of as he thought would be helpful in elections. 

He had spent some of it, he said, he testified, for the election of local 
judges. From then on we had some subpenas out for down in Indiana 
on the telephone strike and the Studebaker strike. 

I do not know who it was on this occasion, but the chairman — we 
had a 5-man committee, 2 from Labor and Education and 2 from Gov- 
ernment Operations, and I was on both, which made it 5. 

Wint Smith was chairman. Wint was called out and when he came 
back I asked him, "AVliat is the matter? They told me not to serve 
the subpenas they had authorized before," and Wint went this way 
to the reporters, saying, "It came from on high," and that is all there 
was to it. 

My oAvn opinion is that they thought 

Mr. Kennedy. Who is "they" when you say, "they" thought ? 

Representative Hoffman. Well, you know, before that there had 
been a conviction of some junk dealers who had handled Briggs junk' 
and I think someone connected — I mean by "they" — someone con- 
nected with the motor industry, this I learned afterward, thought 
that I knew about some crooked deal that there Avas betAveen some of the 
companies and the union on the sale of junk. 

I never heard of it except as to the conviction. I never knew any- 
thing about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. What conclusion did you arrive at as to why your 
investigation Avas called off? 

Representatives Hoffman. Well, from what Avas said to me by both 
Democrats and Republicans, I figured that they did not Avant any 
investigation in the unions because both Avere trying to get the union 
leaders to support them politically to get the union vote. That was 
never my theory. I did not think the leaders could ever control all 
the votes. That is, they could control votes and spend their money, 
but not decisively. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIDS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9387 

Mr. Kennedy. What did Mr. "Wint Smith mean ? 

Representative Hoffman. What '? 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you mean by Congressman Smith ? 

Kepresentatives Hoffman. Congressman Smith was called out on 
a long-distance call from Washington. That is all a matter of public 
knowledge. When he came back, the reporters, as we adjourned, 
asked him whether the hearings were going to continue, and he said, 
"No." And then they asked why and he went this way [indicating], 
showing somebody on high. 

I do not know who he talked to, but it was somebody in Washington. 
I do not think he talked to the President. I know he didn't. Of 
course, who the individual was, I do not know. I do not care. 

You were asking some questions, I believe. Senator Curtis? 

Here is another picture, showing the State police. But the State 
police always stayed in the background. 

Senator Curtis. I want to say. Congressman Hoffman 

Representative Hoffman. Mr. Curtis, just a moment, if I may. 

Here is how they finally felt when the strike was over: "Sit down 
Strikers Leave the Plant." 

Senator Curtis. You have assembled here considerable material that 
is of value and will be helpful to us. I am not familiar with all of it. 
I expect to read the important portions of these newspapers that you 
have photostated, 

I want to say that I have followed your work over a period of years 
and how j^ou have documented the happenings in labor-management 
contests and relations. I want to say that I appreciate the material 
you have Iiere. 

I expect to pursue it further, because I am sure there is considerable 
of it that will relate to other testimony that has been given and will 
be given. I do not have any specific inquiries further, at this time. 

Representative Hoffman. If the chairman Avill permit, here is a 
picture, or several of them, in fact, taken at the Ford strike. Most of 
them are on Miller Road. 

Here is one with the automobiles turned over. 

Talk about a peaceful picket line, take a look at this. Some of you 
members of the committee and some of the staff, here is a beating that 
a fellow took. Mark you, Senators, Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Let us get this group made exhibit No. 73, this 
group of pictures. They will be exhibit No. 73. 

Representative Hoffman. The others were the injunction suit. 
These are in an entirely different suit. The first one is an application 
for an injunction. This suit was before Judge Tuttle and I got these 
pictures from Judge Tuttle. He sent them down shortly after the 
case was over. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 73" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Representative Hoffman. Here is another picture. 

Now, here is a picture of the same strike. I would like to have the 
members of the press look at this one, too. This is before we had the 
Civil Rights Act. 

The Chairman. They may look at them. 

Representative Hoffman. Do you see the gentleman being led out- 
side is a colored gentleman ? 



9388 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Here is one in the same series. 

Here you find your colored boy laying on the railroad track. That 
is a different one than the other one. 

Here is one with the 

The Chairman. You would not say his civil rights were violated, 
would you ? 

Representative Hoffman. No, not if the pickets were doing it. Of 
course not. That is, according to established practice, if you are 
referring to that. Of course, the law is a different matter and so is 
common decency. 

Take a look at this boy after they got through with him. 

Show it to the chairman, please. Here are two more. 

Here is one I want you to really take a look at, if you will. 

Here is one, and this was taken, mind you, in 1941, here are at 
least five fellows beating up the timekeeper who wanted to go into 
the plant to make out the checks to pay the fellows who had gone 
on strike and who were not working. Take a look at the CIO-UAW 
caps, 5 to 1, and the individual, Mr. Chairman, that is back of the 
man who is being beaten. That is Jess Ferraza ; that is 1941. 

Senator Curtis. Did you say Jess Ferraza ? 

Representative Hoffman. I pronounced it "Ferraz" but Ferraza is 
probably right. He and his brother are both in that picture. 

Senator Curtis. What picture is that? We have so many pictures 
that I want it identified so I can refer to it in the record. What strike 
is it? 

Representative Hoffman. That strike is the Ford Co. in Detroit in 
April 1941, and Jess Ferraza, as you call him. 

I have attached these two items together. I do not know what it is, 
but it from the Kohler Co. Up in one corner, here is the same Jess. 
For 16 years that boy has been a member of the CIO-UAW, acting 
under orders — and Reuther is in this outfit — arid for 16 years he has 
been beating people. Maybe they do not know it, but I hope they read 
the record and find it out. 

Here is the one I referred to a moment ago, the same strike. If you 
will notice, here are the State police on horses, and they are back. 
In front there is a fellow getting ready to swing a club. lAHiat did 
the State police do? Nothing. I know. I saw it, Mr. Chairman. 

The pickets had their caps on and they had a stick, a 2-by-2 stick 
with a spike, about a 20, driven through the end of it. That is Frank- 
furter's free speech business. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we could have this 
particular picture identified so that we can refer to it in the record. 
It is rather significant in these hearings. 

The Chairman. Has that one already been made an exhibit? 

Senator Mundt. I believe it is part of a group of exhibits. 

The Chairman. We will make it an exhibit, then. 

Senator Mundt. Can we make this No. 74 ? 

Representative Hoffman. I think that is the Kohler April 3 pub- 
lication. 

The Chairman. Let us get it properly identified. Will you exam- 
ine this picture and document and state what it is ? 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9389 

Representative Hoffman. On the other side it is, "Violence on the 
Picket Line." 

The Chairman. Can you identify the picture ? 

Representative Hoffman. As you look at it, it is upper right corner 
that Jess Ferraza — liis name is on there. 

Senator Mundt. Will you read the names of the other people on 
there? There are some of the same names that we have had in the 
Sheyboygan hearings. 

The Chairman. That document may be made exhibit No. 74. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 74" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Representative Hoffman. Vinson to the left ; Gunaca. 

Senator Mundt. William Vinson ? 

Representative Hoffman. William P. Vinson. 

Senator Mundt. That is the same man we had in the Sheboygan 
matter. 

Representative Hoffman. Gunaca. You understand, I am not 
reading from the Ford strike now. 

Senator Mundt. T thought you were talking about the Ford strike. 

Representative Hoffman. I was. I was talking about the Ford 
strike in 1941, where Jess with his brother was beating up that fellow. 
Then, I came down along to the Kohler strike, and all I am saying 
about that is 

Senator Mundt. I misinterpreted it. I thought you were talking 
about these people being in the Ford strike. 

Representative Hoffman. I do not know about these people, no. 
I do not know whether they were in the Ford strike or not. 

The Chairman. The document that has just been made 74 refers 
to the Kohler strike, does it ? 

Representative Hoffman. The picture refers to the Ford strike 
and the other one, I think, came from the publication put out by 
Kohler. I just happened to notice it and hooked them together. It 
is for the sole purpose of showing the violence. 

The Chairman. Well, we have the pictures of the Kohler strike and 
the Ford strike in exhibit 74. 

Representative Hoffman. And showing that off and on for at least 
16 years he had a job of beating up people. I referred a few moments 
ago to the West Penn Hospital. That is up in Allegheny County. 
They called the strike on one hosj)ital. There are 20 others in that 
county that they intended to close with strikes. 

The people that were doing it, as I said a while ago, were convicts 
and ex-convicts and Communists, some of them. 

Here is a file on that. There is no need to put it in here because it 
is too big, but it shows that they have not any more respect — didn't 
have then — than later on when we had the Michigan sitdown strikes 
and they cut off the hospitals there. 

Senator Mundt. Wliat union is involved in the West Penn strike? 

Representative Hoffman. The question of the CIO strike calling 
for membership. They wanted the hospital employees to join up. It 
would be interesting, incidentally, if you care to read some of the 
statements in the papers. 

Senator Mundt. Wliat union ? 

Representative Hoffman. What ? 

21243— 58— pt. 23 16 



9390 IMPROPER ACmiTIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mixdt. Which union ^ 

Representative TIoffmax. It was a CIO union: wliicli particular 
one, I don't know. It is in tlie hie. You can see it. 

Here is another bunch of pictures. 

Here is one the connnittee might be interested in because I have 
Avea]ions like these, some of them, over in the oflice, if you want to take 
a look at them. These were at the Ford Motor Co. 

The CiiAiKMAX. That picture may be made exhibit No. 75 and any 
others there related to it. 

(The documents referred to were marked "'Exhibit Xo. 75*' for 
reference and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Representative Hoffman, That one at West Penn is local 601, and 
the strike was called by David Kanes. 

I made a mistake. I said 20 hospitals. There are 25 others. It 
is 26 in all. 

Let us talk about tlie one for a moment, if you have time, over at 
Shakespeare, Mich. At the Shakespeare strike, 200 goons came in in 
the early morning 

Senator Curtis. Where is Shakespeare? Is that a town in Michi- 
gan? 

Representative Hoffmaxt. Yes. It is 23 miles from my home. It 
is in Kalamazoo County, Mich. 

Senator Curtis. Fine. 

Representative Hoffman". It is the home of the Shakespeare Tackle 

Senator Mun^dt. Which union are you talking about there? 

Representative Hoffman. The tired look, the inevitably tired look 
on the faces of the members of the committee — I do not want to tire 
you, but I do want to get 

Senator Curtis. I am interested about the Shakespeare situation, 
but I was not sure I knew the location. 

Senator Mundt. I would like to know which union, so we could 
know which unions are involved as you go through these. 

Representative Hoffman. Counsel advises me that I neglected to 
put in here strikes in defense industries, May 26, 1941, Office of Pro- 
duction Management, Labor Division. That was during the war. 

Here is a list of the strikes. You might be interested in it. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 76. 

(The docimient referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 76*' for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select connnittee.) 

Representative Hoffman. I venture the opinion, if it might be per- 
missible, if you Avill list those strikes and send your staff to look at 
the newspapers, you will find there was violence in practically all of 
them. They are defense industries, mind you. 

I tried to get out of the Labor Department something more on that 
since that time, but was not very successful. They are also listed 
there under AFL and CIO. 

Now, I will go back to Shakespeare. These 200 goons 

Senator Mi^ndt. I will go back to my question. Which union is 
involved in the Shakespeare strike? 

Representative Hoffman. The UAW. I am not talking about any 
union today except the UAW, CIO or some of their affiliates. 

Senator Mundt. The hospital strike would not be a UAW strike, 
would it? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9391 

Representative Hoffman. Wait a moment. That was December 
4, 1948, December 4, 6, and 17. Here is the union : Local 3619, United 
Steel Workers of America, CIO, serviced by international repre- 
sentatives from Detroit, Thomas Shane and Glenn S. Sigman. 

Senator Mundt. So the Shakespeare strike was the United Steel 
Workers strike ? 

Representative Hoffman. Yes; but the strike is at Shakespeare, 
but they are all in bed together. 

Do you want to know what they did to Shakespeare ? 

Senator Mundt. Go ahead. 

Representative Hoffjman. All right. They came down there in 
the morning. The chief of police stayed in the city hall. The sheriff 
stayed over in the county court building, and the strikers worked 
their will down there. They burned a truck. Thej'^ stopped out- 
side a fellow from Tennessee, who was out there waiting to get in, 
a little fellow, and started an argument with him and broke his arm. 

One of the girls sitting there that lived up in my home area, they 
walked up to her, two of those fellows — and this is all sworn testi- 
mony — grabbed her by the hair, and slapped her, and I saw her face, 
black and blue, and a good-looking girl at that. I do not suppose Mr. 
Reuther knew anything about that. 

Certainly he did not, but he must have heard about it sometime. 
I made noise enough about most of these strikes in Michigan. 

That is your Shakespeare. 

Now, to get otf the strike, to kind of give you a rest a minute, I will 
tell you something about Mr. Reuther, if you are interested. 

He said something about a member of the committee a few days ago, 
something about being a coward. On Mr. Reuther, here is his selec- 
tive service record. I would not read it. I will put in part of it. 

The questionnaire was mailed to him on the 16th of January 1941, 
to be returned January 21, 1941. It was returned on the 21st, signed 
by Walter P. Reuther. This is from the record of the draft service. 

Here it is : 

First joint large toe on right foot amputated ; 8 years elementary school ; 
4 years high school ; 3 years at Wayne University, economics, sociology, labor 
problems. 

At the present time, CIO have begun this for 3% years ; salary $57.50 a vpeek. 
Employer : International Union, United Automobile Workers of America, CIO, 
at 281 West Grand Boulevard, Detroit, Mich., w^hose business is a labor organi- 
zation. 

Other business or u^ork in which I am now engaged is member of interna- 
tional committee on training, within the industrial division of the National 
Advisory Council. Served apprenticeship at Ford as tool and die worker, all 
types of tool and die construction, bench and machine, 1924—36. 

Married, March 13, 1936, and lives with his wife. Wife, Mary Wolf Reuther, 
age 30, received $1,000 per year. 

Also claims Anna Mae C. Reuther, age 17, sister. Date when support began : 
September 1. 1940, $10 weekly, NYA. 

And it cost me to maintain my home for the last 12 months, $1,000. Rents 
house at $60 per month. Reuther was born in Wheeling, W. Va., September 1, 
1907. 

Reuther's statement regarding classification : 

My wife intends to discontinue work within the next month or two, at which 
time she will become entirely dependent. 

Signed, "Walter P. Reuther." 

And then the action by the board. There was a letter that came 
in there. . 



9392 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Put this in tlie I'ecord. I will not read it all. 

A letter came in there from Phil Murray and R. J, Thomas, ask- 
ing that Reuther be deferred because of his occupation, to keep peace 
in the labor movement and things of that kind. Then the deferment 
was passed on. But Reuther didn't want to be deferred on depend- 
ency. He wanted to be deferred on the other. 

These two officers of the CIO failed to appeal from the draft board 
in the first class. 

The Chairman. Which was he finally deferred on? 

Representative Hoffman. He finally was deferred 

The Chairman. On the defective toe ? 

Representative Hoitman. Dependency. 

The Chairman. Dependency, or that he could keep peace in the 
labor movement ? 

Representative Hoffman. He w^as deferred on dependency because 
that was of a higher classification than the occupational one. They 
give you the top mark. He didn't ask to be deferred on dependency, 
mind you. 

I found something in the Congressional Record, a talk by Mr. Cox, 
the Record is not always accurate, Congress Cox was reliable and it 
refers here to Weinstein and Morris Sugar. Well, Walter Reuther 
once was a candidate for council man in Detroit. Morris Sugar was 
also a candiate. I had his campaign literature. He ran as a Com- 
munist, and he put out that statement that there is no God, religion 
is a fraud, the priests and ministers are hypocrites. That is Morris 
Suijar who has been associated all through. Morris was an attorney 
for the CIO-UAW, too. 

He was a Communist. He didn't deny it. Unfortunately, I can't 
produce that, Mr. Chairman. I loaned it to two Plouse Members, one 
of whom became a Member of the Senate. 

The Chairman. Is he still a member of the official family of the 
UAW? 

Representative Hoffman. Sugar? He was their attorney. 

The Chairman. You don't know whether he is still a member of 
their official family or counsel for them or not ? 

Representative Hoffman. No ; I think he faded out. He was con- 
victed for some sort of draft evasion and they discarded him. That is 
my recollection. 

Here is something at about that time : The Communists at Detroit 
perpetrated frauds on the city by swearing that they were unable to 
pay for medical examinations. Among those who so defrauded the 
city of Detroit were Walter Reuther and his wife and his brother Vic- 
tor Reuther and his wife. 

At the time the city of Detroit was so defrauded, both Walter and 
Victor Reuther had good incomes from their CIO union activities. 
Testimony of John D. McGillis, secretary, Detroit Council, 305 
Knights of Columbus, volume 3, page 1248. 

I know nothing about that, except as I get the record. 

Then : 

Walter Reuther was president of the West Side Local 174 — 

lie called one of the strikes against Cadillac — 

automobile workers iu Detroit at the time he si^ied a statement that he could 
not afford to pay for medical examination and treatment for himself and wife 



IMPROPER ACnvrriDS IN THE LABOR FIEILD 9393 

and got such examination and treatment at the expense of the city of Detroit. 
At that time the West Side local, of which Reuther was president, claimed a 
membership of 30,000. 

Sgt. Harry Mikulic, Detroit Police Department, testimony, volume 2, page 
1286. 

Both Walter Reuther and his wife got these treatments, and in 1 case, 1 
voucher or charge amounted to $122 paid by the city of Detroit to Dr. M. N. 
Shafarman. 

The same individual's testimony is at page 1287. 

Then the others, Victor, if you are interested in Victor and his wife, 
they got it, too. I mean they got relief at the same time. 

Now if you are interested, going back a little bit, in August of 
1941, I think it was, there was a fight on. Here is a 4-page mimeo- 
graphed piece of material distributed by George Addes. He was the 
opponent in the UAW-CIO of Reuther at that time for an office. 
This meeting was at Buffalo, N. Y., in August, I think it was the 8th, 
at the municipal auditorium on Main Street. 

The convention developed into a fight between supporters of John 
L. Lewis and Sidney Hillman. The Addes group belonged to the 
Lewis crowd, and the so-called Walter Reuther group were supporting 
the Hillman side. 

As a result of this bitterness, both sides entered into personalities, 
and on the night of August 9, a caucus was held by the Reuther group 
on the first floor of the auditorium, and the opposing Addes gTOup 
held a caucus of several hundred men on the second floor. 

It was during this caucus meeting that this material was handed 
out by Addes, Reuther's opponent. Wliether it is true or not, I don't 
know, but the report of the convention is accurate as far as that goes. 
Then the letter is in here. 

At that time, this letter, you will remember, came up. The letter 
was produced there. 

Mr. Bishop was asked whether that letter had been written to him, 
and he said it was. 

I want to offer this. 

(At this point. Senator McClellan left the hearing room.) 

Senator Curtis. I would like to have it made an exhibit. 

Senator Ervin. That will be exhibit No. 77. 

(The docmnent referred to as exhibit No. 77 was marked for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the Select Committee.) 

Representative Hoffman. If the committee is interested in that 
letter at all, and it has been back and forth over the years, here is an 
article in the Saturday Evening Post of January 14, 1948, which I 
want to make reference to, with the privilege of putting in such ex- 
cerpts as may be necessary and relevant, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Ervin. Who wrote the article in the Saturday Evening 
Post? 

Representative Hoffman. Well, one of their staff members. One of 
these articles states something about getting rid of the Communists, 
and the CIO did get rid of certain Communists : If you will remem- 
ber James Carey, at times he insisted that that electrical union either 
kick him out or he kick the Commies out, I don't know which it 
was. But I haven't seen any evidences that he had anything to do 
with the Communists except fight them. 

Senator Erven. Frankly, Mr. Hoffman, we are supposed to receive 
testimony of witnesses or sworn affidavits as evidence. 



9394 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Representative Hoffman, You may be supposed to, Mr. Chairman, 
but tliat liasn't been the practice, as I have watched it. 

Senator Ervix. No; it hasn't. I will say that. It has been the 
practice, but it has not been enforced. We have some rules in this 
committee whicli the committee members, perhaps including myself, 
have not obsei-ved strictly. 

Frankly, I just do not know why the article in the Saturday Eve- 
nin<r Post should be printed in the record. 

Kepi-esentative Hoffman. I wouldn't Avant the whole article. All 
I am suggesting is if you are interested, perhaps members of the 
committee want to use this to ask Mr. Reuther some questions. Mr. 
Reuther can be asked about all these incidents. 

Senator Curtis. Would you give us the date of the issue you are 
talking about? 

Representative Hoffman. This article ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Representative Hoffman. August 14, 1948, and other pages. 

Senator Ervin. Isn't there some certain date ? Isn't the Saturday 
Evening Post published weekly ? 

Representative Hoffman. Yes; August 14, 1948, and August 21, 
and September 2, 1948 ? 

Senator Ervin. I would suggest that you refer to any part of it 
which you deem appropriate, and anyone who wishes to use it as a 
basis for questions can do so. But unless the committee overrules me, 
I w^ould not put it in the record at this hearing. 

Representative Hoffman. I agree Avitli you that is what the rules 
should be. 

But, unfortunately, pretty near everybody is putting in testimony. 
The statements that you get from the paper are only the reporter's 
story of what he thinks he saw, and his interpi-etation of it. 

But if those stories are all false about all of these strikes, some of 
them — some of them I saw myself, I know about that. So you will 
have to add that to whatever weight you give to my statements. If 
these stories are false, don't you think we should have a law that the 
i-e):)orters ought to be required to tell the facts? 

Senator Ervin. Yes; but it has not been a practice of this commit- 
tee to ])ut the newspaper articles in the record. 

It has been a practice of this committee, thought, for any member 
of the committee to use a newspaper article for the purpose of asking 
a witness whether he can verify the facts in that article. 

Representative Hoffman. From a legal point, I agree with you. 
But the committee cannot get anywhere unless it consults the news- 
papers. You might say that the news])apers are 5()-percent true, if 
you want to say only that much. Personally, I accept the reix)rter's 
statement when he is talking about facts. I don't pay any attention 
to what the editor or the columnist says. 

Senator Ervin. Yes, sir. Yon will be at perfect liberty to refer 
to any of those passages in the Saturday Evening Post that you deem 
relevant or appropriate. 

Representative Hoffman. It might be relevant and it might be help- 
ful. For instance, the Post incjuired about the "Dear Mel" letter, 
and it is my understanding that Mr. Reuther said it was a youthful 
something or other, when he was young and foolish, which might be 
true. 



IMPROPE'R ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9395 

So far as I can see, he is knocking- tliem right and left — I will strike 
that out. His men are knocking them right and left today. I don't 
go along ^Yith this guilt by association, but I do go along Avith guilt 
by participation. 

And when over a period of twenty-odd years an organization to 
which I belong has been engaged in sucking eggs or stealing chickens, 
I want to resign. 

(At this point, Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.) 

Representative HoFF^iAisr. There is another one here. There are 
two. 

The Chairman. I understand that is a Library of Congress pub- 
lication ? 

Eepresentative HorrMAN. Yes, and it has to go back there. 

Senator Curtis. It has not been otfered as an exhibit. He merely 
had him identify the volumes to which he referred. 

The CiiAiRMAisr. Yes. And if anyone wants them to be made ex- 
hibits, they can be made exhibits by getting photostats of them. 

Representative Hoffman. One was Avritten by Stohlberg and the 
other one was written by Jack Alexander. Here you are. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Representative Hoffman. If the committee is interested this is a 
list of hearings that were held whicli show violence. 

The Chairman, That list may be made exhibit No, 78, for ref- 
erence. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 78'" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Representative Hoffman. It might be helpful to some members 
who want to consult the newspapers about that same date. 

Senator Mundt. May I ask you a question. Congressman ? In this 
August 14 issue of the Saturday Evening Post, there is what purports 
to be a copy of a letter signed "Vic and Walt", meaning, I presume, 
Victor and Walter Reuther, addressed to "Dear Mel and Glenn", dated 
January 21, 1934. I don't think anybody has seen copies of that 
letter, or alleged letters, several times, so I wanted to ask you whether, 
from your knowledge, any suit had ever been filed by the Reuther 
brothers against the Saturday Evening Post disclaiming the validity 
of the letter. 

Representative Hoffman. No. I inquired about that. I know of 
no other suit that has ever been filed by Reuther, though there may 
have been, for libel or anything else, along that line, except one for 
$100,000 he filed once against the Ford Motor Co., in Detroit. 

But the outcome of the thing or what they did with it, I was never 
able to learn. 

Senator IMundt, Was that suit based on this letter ? 

Representative Hoffman, What? 

Senator Mundt, Was that suit against the Ford Motor Co, based 
on this letter ? 

Representative Hoffman, No. It was something else. 

Senator Mundt. I don't know anything about whether the Messrs. 
Reuther wrote this letter or not. I have seen copies of it from time 
to time. It would seem to me that if they did write it, it wouldn't 
appear in the Saturday Evening Post, and if they didn't write it, it 
would be a case where they could instigate a suit for damages, be- 



9396 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

cause the Curtis Publishing Co, is a substantial company. Do yon 
know if they have ever sued the Curtis Publishing Co. ? 

Representative Hoffman. You can ascertain that by asking the 
Curtis Publishing people. They have an office downtown. 

Senator Mundt. I was asking from your knowledge. 

Representative Hoffman. Not to my knowledge, no. I have never 
learned that Reuther ever protested until last Sunday the violence in 
which his members have been engaged, consistently. I never heard 
of it. 

Here is the meat strike. This meat strike covered 20 States. 

Senator Mundt. Is that a UAW strike ? 

Representative Hoffman. No, not a UAW. It is a CIO. 

Senator Mundt. At the time WaUer Reuther was an officer? 

Representative Hoffman. I don't know that he did, but I know this, 
that some of the same men that have been engaged in these others — • 
there is a perfect pattern that runs through the history of these 
strikes, the same individuals all the time. They were over in Dayton, 
Ohio. I saw violence there. 

Senator Mundt. May I ask you this : Is this your position, and is 
this what you are trying to establish by a list of these strikes, that 
there is a pattern of violence wherever strikes are occurring in which 
Mr. Reuther's union or the associates of Mr. Reuther are participants ; 
is that what you are trying to establish ? 

Representative Hoffman. That is the fact. At the time of the 
meat strike, Walter Reuther was president of the UAW-CIO, and vice 
president of the CIO. It was a CIO strike. Only the meatpackers' 
locals were carrying it on. It is the same group. They were all 
either Catholics or Protestants, this whole outfit, in all of these 
strikes. They are all tied up together. 

Senator Mundt. Is it your position, then, that the strikes in which 
Mr. Reuther's unions have participated, or in which people associated 
with him in official union ranks participated, always produce violence? 

Representative Hoffman. They are all in the same pattern, basi- 
cally by the same people, using the same methods, which was mass 
violence. 

Senator Mundt. That answers the question. 

Representative Hoffman. Of course, Mr. Reuther did not know of 
all the incidents, either before or right after they occurred. But if 
he read a newspaper, he certainly had knowledge of what was going 
on, generally. Ask him about it when he comes on. Is he so ignorant ? 

Well, I am making a speech now. I wdll quit. Ask him if he didn't 
know, and if he didn't, why didn't he know ? 

On the meat strike, here are 20 of them. Someone told me that 
the chairman said the committee had an investigation on these strikes. 
TNHiether Reuther is in it or not, you are interested in somebody be- 
sides Reuther, I take it. 

Talking about violence, these strikes covered 20 States. I want to 
ofTer some of these pictures: May 12, 1938, Wilson & Co., entrance, 
Albert Lea, Minn. It shows the picture of the UPWA-CIO Local 6 
and two automobiles turned over. These traveled the highway carry- 
ing meat products. 

I want to offer them, every one of these. These pictures are part, 
according to tlie record, of several hundred, and the only reason these 
few were ])ut in was l)ecause of the expense of printing all of tliem. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9397 

Many of these pictures were taken by our staff representative, wiio 
testified under oath here that they were accurate, and taken at the 
scene. 

On page 209 they are talking about the violence. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Hoffman, I would like to ask you a question. 
I am interested in this subject. What remedy would Congress be able 
to devise to take care of the violence situation in strikes ? 

Kepresentative Hoffman. May I suggest something before we get 
to Congress ? The local law-enforcement officers. Then, leaving out 
Little Kock, and the President's authority to stop that violence, we 
will forget that for a moment, you want to know what the Congress 
can do. 

The Congress, by legislation, which is applicable only to the unions, 
the Norris-LaGuardia Act, the Sherman Act, the Wagner Act, and 
all of that, they are outside of the trust legislation. 

In my judgment there is no more reason for exempting a miion 
than there is for anyone else. Under the Wagner law they had 
many, many privileges. Under the Taft-Hartley Act they have many, 
many special privileges which do not apply to the average individual 
or the average businessman. I have been characterized as being bit- 
terly antilabor, which, of course, in my judgment, is far, far away. 
We need legislation 

The Chairman. Let me ask you a question a moment. You said 
something about Little Rock. I don't know what Little Rock has 
to do with this. 

Representative Hoffman. He asked me what the Congress could do, 
and I slopped over into the executive branch. The President sent 
troops down there on the school business. That was his judgment, 
not mine. 

The Chairman. You do not anticipate Federal troops would ever 
be sent in to stop a strike, do you ? 

Representative Hoffman. Do I think so ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Representative Hoffman. Not as long as you elect a President by a 
political party and by ballots. 

I will have to take that back. Grover Cleveland did it in the Pull- 
man strike in Chicago. Then President Teddy Roosevelt did it, when 
he said, "You will either dig coal or we will." 

There are two Presidents who did. 

Well, those Presidents were good men. Presumably if a govern- 
ment called upon a President for help he would give it. 

The Chairman. I don't think there will be any more Little Rocks. 
I think there has been enough. 

Representative Hoffman. If the civil rights legislation that we 
passed applied to the average, ordinary, decent citizen — gave him pro- 
tection when he wanted to earn a living — well, it doesn't apparently. 

The Chairman. All right ; let's proceed. 

Senator Ervin. The reason I was asking the question. Congress- 
man Hoffman, is because I believe you and myself both believe in 
keeping the Government as near at home as possible. 

In other words, we believe in local self-government, and government 
by the States, and I think we agree on the proposition that the sup- 
pression of violence is essentially a matter for the State governments. 



9398 LMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Kepreseiitutive Hoffman. That is right; firet tlie local govern- 
ments. 

Senator Ervix. Personally, I am opi)Osecl to legislation Avhich would 
give the Federal (government the power to go into a locality merely 
to enforce laws against assaults and things of that kind. 

Representative Hoffman. I agree with you. I agree with you as 
long as the local officers will perform their duties and only the other 
should come as a last resort and to prevent the peojjle at home who 
aren't protected by their officers, from going in, as they did at Monroe, 
as they did at Bay City, as they did in 2 or 3 other places, and taking 
the law into their own hands, which only leads to civil war. I am 
against that. 

In the fourth district of my State, the judge sent a man to jail for a 
year or two for violence on a picket line, and the Governor pardoned 
him within 29 days, and he was down on the picket line again in a few 
days. What are tlie law-abiding people to do i 

We don't have violence in the fourth district. Our sheriff takes 
them to jail now. You see, that is all there is to it. 

But you talk about the Federal Government. There is something 
that I think the Federal Government can do. We have granted special 
privileges to the members of the unions. If I have a boy and he drives 
my automobile too fast all the time, I take it away from him. I would 
take away by legislation those special privileges when they engage in 
a strike which ties up a municipality. 

For instance, here you had the transit strike, didn't you, and thou- 
sands of workers— didn't we — and thousands of workers didn't get 
to their jobs with the Federal Government. 

We sat back and let them do it. I Avouldn't stand for that. I would 
make the company operate the plant, the transit system, and if there 
was a loss, I would charge it off against the taxpayers. 

I wouldn't let them turn off the lights here. They do it in the smaller 
communities. They stop your water supply, your fuel, and Hoffa. in 
Detroit — I couldn't ship my own ap])les into Detroit by truck unless 
I paid him $25, so I sent them somewhere else. Every fellow can't do 
that. 

The Chairman. The Chair will announce that this is a quorum call 
preceding a vote. However, in the Senate you can never be quite sure. 
There might be someone who will start talking again when they get 
a quorum call. 

We will proceed until we hear the signal for a vote. 

Representative Hoffman. In those meat strikes, they are talking 
about violence: Bottles of bleaching liquid thrown though the win- 
dows, and so on, quart beer bottles thrown through other windows, 
shattering inside. 

All through, there is a whole list of them here, on page 209. 

The Chairman. That document may be filed and made exhibit No. 
79, for reference. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 79" for refer- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Representative Hoffman. Here are others: St. Joseph, Mo., show- 
ing car l)eing tui'ned over by a mob. 

April 20, 1946, 10 : 20 a. m., official photograph of Chicago Police Department 
showing 31st Place and Benson Avenue, Armour Soap Works, pickets surround- 
ing truck — 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9399 

And SO on. 

Here is another truck turned over, on page 217. I want to offer all 
of these. 

The Chairman. They have all been made an exhibit already. 

Representative Hoffman, Perhaps the members of the committee 
are interested. Certainly some of the union officers who direct strikes 
ought to be interested in tliis one, Mr. Chairman. Here is one from 
Omaha, Nebr., on April 26, 1948, at 6 : 45 a. m., 33d Street. This is 
what they call a slick picket line. You gentlemen who are interested 
in what a picket line was, raincoats are smeared with dirty crankcase 
oil. Picket marked "1" has entire back of the coat covered with the 
dirty, carbon-filled oil. They are shown at the entrance to the Cudahy 
plant. Several employees, male and female, have had their clothing 
ruined. They go out there and put on a long raincoat, then they 
smear grease all over it, and then they stand in a picket line. 

It makes it effective. Not much force, but just the greasing. If 
you have noticed in these picket lines — I noticed the other day some- 
thing about picket lines and what they were — you will find them 
linked arm to arm. 

The Chairman. Congressman, it is not force in the sense that we 
usually use it, but it has a persuasive force. 

The individual that wants to go somewhere anticipates that there 
might be something doing. 

Representative Hoffivian. ]\Iay I have these all in ? 

The Chairman. I have already placed them all in. 

Representative Hoffman. All right. Then I will just call your 
attention to one. This is John Morrell Co., showing logs and lumber 
piled on the railroad tracks, barricading the freight cars. That hap- 
pened in South Haven, Mich. They didn't put logs on, but just per- 
suaded the engineer and conductor not to run the train down there. 
Here is another one in April, the same plant, a charred piece of 
lumber removed by the employees shown in the picture, when they 
extinguished the fires. They built fires under the railroad cars on 
the track, where they carried meat products. 

I understand they w^ill all go into the record with a notation at the 
bottom. 

The Chairman. The whole document has been made an exhibit, 
exhibit 79. 

Representative Hoffman. You have had a quorum call ? 

The Chairman. Yes. But I was hoping we could conclude before 
we go to vote. 

Representative Hoffman. I was, too. But there is no end to this 
business. You have to cut me off where you want to. 

The Chairman. Well, let's find an end to it somewhere. 

Representative Hoffman. Here is the North Electric Manufactur- 
ing Co., Galion, Ohio. This is in an adjoining town. The Govern- 
ment had a $4,000 switchboard down there, and they went in and 
wrecked that. 

The Chairman. That book may be made exhibit No. 80. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 80" for refer- 
ence, and may be found in the files of the select comm.ittee.) 

Representative Hoffman. I might say, if that is all the committee 
wants to hear, it is all right with me. I have probably twice as much 
as that. 



9400 mPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. Maybe at a later date we can accommodate you 
further, but the committee has put in a long day today. We do have 
to get over there to vote. 

The committee will stand in recess until 10 o'clock Tuesday. 

(Whereupon, at 5 : 10 p. m., the hearing was recessed, with the fol- 
lowing members present: Senators McClellan, Ervin, Curtis, and 
Mundt.) 



INVESTIGATION OF I3IPR0PER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



TUESDAY, MAKCH 18, 1958 

United States Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN THE Labor or Management Field, 

Washington^ D. O. 

The select committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 
221, agreed to January 29, 1958, in the caucus room. Senate Office 
Building, Senator Jolin L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present : Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Senator 
Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York; Senator Pat McNamara, 
Democrat, Michigan; Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South 
Dakota ; Senator Carl T. Curtis, Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Jerome S. Adler- 
man, assistant chief counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; 
Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session 
were Senators McClellan and Ives.) 

The Chairman. The Chair will make an announcement. There are 
only 2 of us present ; 1 chairman, and 1 vice chairman, and 1 is a Repub- 
lican and 1 a Democrat. We get along pretty well in these things, but 
I feel that, under the circumstances, we should not proceed until at 
least 1 other Republican member of the committee is present, and the 
vice chairman agreed with me. Therefore, we will suspend until some- 
one arrives. 

(Brief recess.) 

(At this point. Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Walter Wagner. 

The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Wagner. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WALTER H. WAGNER 

The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Wagner. My name is Walter H. Wagner. I reside at 238 
Washington Court, city of Sheboygan. I am the retired chief of 
police of the city of Sheboygan as of October 1, 1955. 

9401 



9402 IMPROPER ACrrVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. How long did you serve in that capacity, Mr. 
Wagner? 

Mr. Wagner. Twenty-nine years and eight months. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel, do you ? 

Mr. Wa(jner. I do. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Wagner, you were chief of police during the so- 
called clay -boat affair in July of 1955 ? 

Mr. Wagner. I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were present at the time that the incident took 
place down at the dock, or at least part of the time ? 

Mr. Wagner. Part of the time ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went down to the docks early in the morning, 
did you ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you see a group of people present at that time '. 

Mr. Wagner. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you relate to the committee what you saw 
early in the morning when you went down there ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, gentlemen, I believe I can give you quite a clear 
picture as to what happened there that morning. 

The Chairman. Go right ahead. 

Mr. Wagner. I received a call from Sergeant Zimmerman, telling 
me, he said, "Chief, I believe we are going to have some trouble down 
there this morning." 

He said, "They threw up a mass picket line." I told him to get 
down there with either 10 or as many men as he could spare from his 
shift, and at the same time hold the No. 3 shift in reserve, because the 
time was shortly before 8 o'clock. So I proceeded down there. 
When I arrived there, here Avas a picket line of 19 pickets in the 
entranceway to the dock. There also were about 12 to 15 pieces of 
unloading equipment, and what I observed then was Rand talking to 
Buteyn. 

Then Rand came back up to the head of the column of the trucks 
which were facing the entranceway, and then he came up and he 
reactivated the picket line by using his fingers. At that time there 
were about 3 or 4 more pickets stepped into that line. Then he stepped 
out at the head of the column there on the driver's side of the trucks, 
and he motioned to the driver, and he said, "Come on; get out of here 
You are just holding up the traffic." 

However, the truckdriver paid no attention to him. Well, it seems 
strange to me that the truckdrivers did not w^ant to go in there, be- 
cause I asked them. I said: "If you fellows want to get in there" — 
and he told me, the first truckdriver did, that he did not want to cross 
the picket line. 

So I proceeded down to about the third or fourth truck, and I asked 
another truckdriver, and lie told me then tliat he would not cross the 
picket line. So I came back up and then is when Mr. Buteyn came 
up at the head of the column and he waved on his truckdrivers and told 
them to proceed and go on liome. 

Until about tlie fifth or sixth truck, that is when these Caterpillars 
were tlien taken off. The rest of the equipment and everything left 
the scene at tlie time. 



IMPROPER ACTWIT'IES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9403 

Then I saw a consultation going on in the dock area between Mr. 
Desmond, Mr. Biever, and 1 or 2 others, and also Mr. Buteyn. So 
I entered into this consultation and here is what the discussion was: 

It appeared to me that there were all kinds of surprises to them 
that these truckdrivers had taken this attitude. So then Mr. Biever 
said, "Well, I don't know what shape our equipment is in, but," he 
said, "we will make an attempt to go and unload it ourselves." 

So at least I left, and I told Sergeant Zimmerman to remain there 
and I don't know just exactly what was going to happen, and I in- 
formed them that I felt as though the Kohler Co. might want to 
unload their own truck. 

Up until that point, I always had, and when I went there I had 
something in mind as to what might happen, and it might have spelled 
some trouble. 

The Chairman. What do you mean by that ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, there was an injunction pending in the circuit 
court, an injunction pending against them to cease and desist, and here 
they were in mass formation again. 

Mr. Kennedy. There wasn't any question in your mind that there 
was a picket line present ? 

Mr. Wagner. Absolutely. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the purpose of it was to keep the equipment 
from unloading the ship ? 

Mr. Wagner. That I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. The purpose was to keep the equipment out of the 
dock area ? 

Mr. Wagner. Tliat is as it appeared to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the picket line, in your estimation, was being 
directed by Mr. Rand ? 

Mr. Wagner. Absolutely. 

Mr. Kennedy. An international organizer of the UAW? 

Mr. Wagner. T)iat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, do you want to go ahead and tell what occurred 
later in the day ? 

How many people were down at the dock area when you first arrived ? 

Mr. Wagner. When I first came there, I would say, as I stated be- 
fore, there were 19, and on both sides of the roadbed there probably 
were 50 more on each side of the road area, and across the sidewalk 
area, and they, however, were not picketing. They were standing 
around. This was a mixed group. 

Mr. Kennedy. What time in the morning was this ? 

Mr. Wagner, This was shortly before 8 o'clock. 

Mr. Kennedy. So there were between 100 and 150 people down 
there? 

Mr. Wagner. Probably it could have been 200. 

Mr, Kennedy. About 200 people, of which about 20 of them 

Mr. Wagner. Scattered around. 

Mr, Kennedy, Twenty of them were blocking the entrance to the 
dock area ? 

Mr, Wagner. That is correct, 

Mr. Kennedy. After you had the conversation with Biever and the 
representatives of the company, did you leave that area and go back? 

Mr. Wagner. I left that area, because people that were gathered 
there, they were dispersing, and they were leaving. 



9404 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel there was not going to be any more 
difficulty ? 

Mr. Wagner. "Well, after I heard Biever say that they are going to 
make an attempt to unload the boat themselves, but he didn't know 
when, depending upon the shape the equipment was in. 

So there was no definite time set when they were going to unload 
that boat. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you expect that there would be difficulty if they 
tried to unload the boat ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I anticipated trouble, yes, as it appeared to me; 
yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you express your feelings to the representative? 
of the company that there would be trouble ? 

Mr. Wagner. No, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not? 

Mr. Wagner. I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. If you felt there was going to be trouble, why didn't 
you tell them that j^ou had these feelings about it, if they tried to 
unload the boat? 

Mr. Wagner. Why I did not tell them, you mean ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I couldn't answer that. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Anyway, you left the dock area, and you went back 
to your office ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did you take any steps then to insure that when 
the company attempted to unload the boat, that they would have some 
protection ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, when I arrived at the station, here was a group 
of officers, probably numbered 12 to 15, being held in reserve, and 
Mayor Ploetz was then there, and he asked us what had taken place 
down at the dock. 

I told him what had taken place, and that the Kohler Co. was going 
to unload the boat themselves. He then told me or asked me whether 
I had received a letter from the Kohler Co., and I told him that 
I had received a copy of the letter that he had received. 

He then mentioned that he didn't like the idea of the Kohler Co. 
making demands on the city of Sheboygan, and not wanting to settle 
the strike. Then he said, "How many men have you got down there ?" 
I told him about 10 down there. 

He said, "Two is enough. I am going down there and handle it 
myself." 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell him that you anticipated difficulty ? 

Mr. Wagner. Not at that time, because we didn't know just when 
they were going to unload that boat. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you tell him ? Did you tell him that men 
were needed down there or were not needed down there ? 

Mr. Wagner. No. I also asked him as to what about this reserve 
shift, and he said, "Send them home, you won't need them." 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel that you would need them ? 

Mr. Wagner. I didn't know. I didn't know when the Kohler Co. 
was going to unload the boat. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you attempt to find out when the Kohler Co. 
was going to unload the boat ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9405 

Mr. Wagner. I did a little later. Mr. Biever and Mr. Desmond 
then came into my office. 

Mr, Kennedy. Did they tell you when they planned to unload the 
boat? 

Mr. Wagner. They already had this one piece of equipment on its 
way down there, and he said, "There is a howlin mob down there," and 
he said, "I don't believe that we will be able to unload the boat." So 
he said, "However, there are two men on the trailer and we fear for the 
safety of those men and can we get somebody to go down there and get 
those men up here." 

Well, I told him, I said I only had detectives left,, and I assigned a 
detective squad to them to go down with them to point out these two 
men which they wanted to bring back. 

I told them to bring them back to police headquarters. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you anticipated that the Kohler Co. was going 
to unload the clay ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did, but I didn't know when. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you anticipate it was going to be that day ? 

Mr. Wagner. It could have been, and I had it in mind. 

Mr. Kennedy Did you inquire? 

Mr. Wagner. I did not. I was under the impression that they 
probably would let me know just when they were leaving the plant, 
but they did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. You autici])ated that there would be difficulty when 
they did try to uload the boat ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And ultimately they sent the equipment down, and 
then came and told you that their people were in difficulty at the dock 
area ? 

Mr. Wagner. And Mr. Desmond and Mr. Biever came in and told 
me that. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the meantime, the police who had been held in 
reserve had been sent home ? 

Mr. Wagner. I sent them home. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was on instructions of the mayor, Mayor 
Ploetz? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kjennedy. Then, when they told you about the difficulty with the 
drivers, did you send some detectives down to try to protect the drivers, 
the Kohler Co. drivers ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And were they able to get them out, and extricate 
them? 

Mr. Wagner. They went down, the detectives, and they brought 
them two back, and also Mr. Desmond and Mr. Diever came back up 
again. 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. Wliat conversations did you have with them then ? 

Mr. Wagner. Then Biever told me, and so did Mr. Desmond, and he 
said, "It is useless to try to unload a boat with that mob of people 
around there." He said, "We're going to leave that equipment set 
where it is, and do with it what you want to," Mr. Biever told me. 

Mr. Kennedy. The equipment at that time was about a block away 
from the dock ? 

21243— 58— pt. 23 17 



9406 LMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

]Mr. Wagner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what did you do about the equipment, and what 
did you do then ? 

Mr. AVagnek. Well, the mayor being in cliarge down there, I didn't 
do anythin<r for the time being, but then it was brought to me, and to 
my attention, and I don't recall how I received the information that 
there was a telephone campaign on underway by the strikers, calling 
one another down to the clay boat, telling them to come down to the 
clay boat. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were various members of local 883 calling 
other members? 

Mr. Wagnek. Calling one another. 

Mr. Kennedy. And telling them to go down to the clay boat ? 

]Mr. Wagner. Yes ; and so I proceeded down tliere, and I noted that 
there was quite a gathering down there, and I figured it Avas useless 
to do anything at the time so I left and got in touch with Captain 
Hiemke at the time, and I told him to report to headquarters, which 
he did. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Ives, and Mundt.) 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the makeup of the crowd when you went 
back there that time ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, they were milling around and standing around. 

Mr. Kennedy. Describe the crowd. What was the makeup ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I would say there was a thousand people there, 
or more, and they were kind of milling around alongside of this 
equipment. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they all men ? 

Mr, Wagner. No ; they were men, women, children, spectators, and 
more or less a mixed group. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there many members of local 833 present, da 
you know? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it was pretty hard to tell. There was some there 
I will say. It appeared to me that it got to a point where mostly 
spectators were coming down there and taking up the street area. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you put Captain Heimke in charge, did 
you? 

Mr. Wagner. I told Captain Heimke to go down there. I, myself, 
made several unsuccessful attempts, trying to get that equipment off 
of the street, but nobody wanted any part of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. What time was it that you went back down, where 
you saw approximately a thousand people down there? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I was there twice. This could have been along 
about — well, first I was there, I will say, shortly before noon, and 
then again about 10 o'clock or thereabouts. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go back down there again after that ? 

Mr. Wagner. I just drove down there; yes. I did not get mixed 
into the crowd or anything, but I could observe that from an incline 
that was at the intersection. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you try to get more police down there to help 
keep the crowd orderly ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did not. Not at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee why ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9407 

Mr. Wagner. I had men down there. There were approximately 
10 men assigned to that in the morning. I did not withdraw them, 
even though the mayor said that 2 will be enough. 

Now, of course, these men, they were back and forth. There was 
motorcycle men, squad car men, beat men, and the sergeant was there. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many men did you have in the police depart- 
ment at that time ? 

Mr. Wagner. I had 55. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had a crowd down there of 1,000, and there were 
some indications that it might be disorderly. Why didn't you try to 
get some more men down there to assist ? 

(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Wagner. Well, the mayor directed me. He said "I will take 
care of the situation myself." 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go and talk to the mayor and say "Now, as 
chief of police, I feel more men are required down there?" 

Mr. Wagner. No ; I did not. He told me "When I need you," he 
says, "I will call you." He added that. 

Mr. Kennedy. You felt that it was in his hands rather than your 
hands ; is that right ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that you had no more responsibilities as far as 
assigning more men down there ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I had responsibility, but at that time it was a 
crowd that could very easily get out of hand. 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be a reason, I would think, that you 
would want more men down there. Chief. 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I probably would have gotten more men down 
there in case something would have got started down there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think, looking back on it, that it might have 
been a mistake on your part not to have assigned more men at that 
time? 

Mr. Wagner. No ; I didn't think so. 

Mr, Kennedy. Do you now? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it is an unfortunate thing that it happened. 
Let me put it that way, I will say it that way. 

Mr, Kennedy, You don't think that possibly the police could have 
used some help down there ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, we could have had probably more men down 
there. I will agree to that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you reach any conclusion as to who was respon- 
sible for what was going on down there ? 

Mr. Wagner. No ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you feel tliat the union was responsible, or rep- 
resentatives of the union ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it certainly is a long outgrowth of the strike. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was the union or union representatives directing 
the crowd ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did not see that. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not ? 

Mr. Wagner. Not at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. At least initially, at the beginning, it was directed 
by Mr. Donald Rand ? 



9408 IMPROPER ACTIVITIPvS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite ri^lit. 

Mr. Kennedy. As far as what was going on later in the day, you 
cannot tell us ? 

Mr. AVagner. I am not familiar with that. 

Mr. Kennedy. But at least the initiative was taken by a repre- 
sentative of the union early in the morning ? 

Mr. Wagner. It was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go down there after that? 

Mr. Wagner. I drove by there 

Mr. Kennedy. Other than the time you drove by, did you take 
any other steps in connection with it ? 

Mr. Wagner, Later in the evening — yes, I did tell Captain Pleimke 
then to go down there and find out what it takes to get that piece of 
equipment off. Then it was he coming on with his shift. I assigned 
him there with his crew of men down there then. 

Mr. Kennedy, And he has related to the committee what steps he 
took. Was anybody arrested by your police officers or by your police- 
men for what was going on down there ? 

Mr. Wagner. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you inquire into why no arrests had been made? 

Mr. Wagner. I don't recall any more. We had consultation with 
Captain Heimke and with the officers down there. I didn't ask them 
why there wasn't any arrests made. 

So for that reason I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you make any investigation to find out who was 
responsible, or if any responsibility could be placed on any group or 
an}^ individual ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, the captain, he made quite a thorough investi- 
gation of that. There were some windows broke and a car turned 
over, but no one knew w^ho it was. I was informed that it was 4 
youngsters, 4 boys, that broke some windows within the immediate 
neighborhood. 

Mr. Kennedy, Were there a lot of children down there? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes ; there were. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you find out whether there had, in fact, been 
a telephone campaign going on ? 

Mr. Wagner. I cannot think or recall how that was brought to my 
attention, but there was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you inquire as to whether there was, in fact, a 
telephone campaign ? Do you Imow ? 

Mr, Wagner. That I do not know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you inquire into that? 

Mr. Wagner. Only from my informant. It seems to me as though 
one of my police officers at that time had brought it to my attention. 
But I don't recall who. 

Mr, Kennedy, Did you speak to any of the union officials about 
whether there had been a telephone campaign ? 

Mr. Wagner, I did not. 

Mr. Kj5Nnedy. Did you feel that that was of some interest if the 
union was attempting to get people down at the dock when there was 
this difficulty and trouble? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, there were telephone campaigns of some nature 
going on all the time. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9409 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Yes ; but here you had some difficulty and problems 
at the dock. You had some information that the union or union 
members were telephoning, and telling other people to come down to 
the dock. Did you inquire into, first, whether that was in fact true, 
and, No. 2, if you did find out it was true, did you speak to the union 
officials about it ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. "No" to both questions ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. There are questions on other matters, but as far 
as the clay boat that concludes my questioning. 

The Chairman. Let me ask 1 or 2 questions. I believe you have 
stated positively there was no doubt but what there was mass picket- 
ing down there that morning ? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes; it was mass picketing. 

The Chairman. And it was effective insofar as its purpose, to keep 
that boat from being unloaded ? 

Mr. Wagner. I do not know that definitely. 

The Chairman. Well, the boat didn't get unloaded ; did it ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite true. 

The Chairman. And there were people down there with machinery 
to unload it? 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite right. 

The Chairman. When machinery came up there, this Don Rand 
was in charge of a picket line. 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The Chairman. And had, by motion, put more men into the line ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The Chairman. And told the truckdrivers to get out of there ; they 
weren't going to unload it ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The Chairman. So it was an effective mass picket line ; was it not ? 

Mr. Wagner. I think it was. 

The Chairman. I don't know how it could be more 

Mr. Wagner. I don't know what the agreement was. 

The Chairman. I am not talking about the agreement. I am talk- 
ing about it was effective for the purpose that they couldn't get in 
there and unload the boat. 

Mr. Wagner. They couldn't get in there. 

The Chairman. You were an officer on duty and, therefore, wit- 
nessed and observed what kept them from getting in and unloading the 
boat. You know it was the mass picketing that kept them from getting 
in and unloading the boat ; don't you. 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The Chairman. Did anybody deny down there that morning that 
they were mass picketing? I mean, it was perfectly obvious; wasn't 
it? 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite true. 

The Chairman. To anyone that saw it ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The Chairman. Did you hear Don Rand or any of the other na- 
tional leaders, labor leaders of the union, saying they were going to 
pull out all stops if necessary to prevent that boat from being un- 
loaded ? 



9410 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Wagner. I didn't hear that. 
, The Chairman. You didn't hear that ? 

Mr. Wagner. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Was that their general attitude, though, from what 
you saw? 

Mr. Wagner. Apparently it was. 

The Chairman. You could sense that from what you observed, 
couldn't you, being an experienced officer ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The Chairman. They just meant for that boat not to be unloaded, 
and they were successful in carrying it out ? 

Mr. Wagner. I believe that is correct. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you. 

Senator Mundt? 

Senator Mundt. Chief, I am a little bit curious as to why, with a 
police force of 55, and what you call a howling mob taking place in 
the fair city of Sheboygan, that you didn't send more policemen down 
there to do something about it. You were the chief of police. 

INIr. Wagner. I had no more unless I would have called more men 
in, and then after the mayor gave me this information that he was 
going to take care of it, I left it up to him. 

Senator Mundt. You turned it over to Mayor Ploetz ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did not turn it over. He 

Senator Mundt. He took it over ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And he told you he was going to handle it with 2 
men, that 2 men would be enough ? 

Mr. Wagner. He asked me how many men I had there, and I said, 
"About 10" ; and he said, "Two will be enough." 

Senator Mundt. Will you enlighten me how the mayor thought he 
was going to be able to do it with 2 when you could not do it with 10 ? 

Mr. Wagner. I can't answer that. I don't know. 

Senator Mundt. What do you think he had in mind ? 

Mr. Wagner. I have no idea. 

Senator Mundt. Did he have a couple of supermen around some 
place that he was going to put in there to do the job that 10 weren't 
able to do ? 

Mr. Wagner. I have no idea. 

Senator Mundt. You don't think two could handle it, do you? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, there were more there. I didn't withdraw the 
men that were there. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, you kept your men there, even 
though he said two would be enough ? 

Mr. Wagner. I kept the men there, yes. 

Senator Mundt. Then you ought to be able to answer the question of 
whether you thought two would be enough or not. You weren't 
putting eight men in to do something that didn't have to be done, 
were you? 

Mr. Wagni:r. Well, the 10 were there on my instructions early in 
the morning. They were not withdrawn. 

Senator Mundt. So you did not thing two could do the job ? 

Mr. Wagner. I didn't think so. 

Senator Mundt. You don't normally send 10 men down to do a 
job that you think could be done by 2, do you ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 94 11 

Mr. Wagner. Ordinarily, not. 

Senator Mundt, Ordinarily not. 

You can't recall who told you about this telephone campaign ? 

Mr. Wagner. Sir? 

Senator Mundt. You can't recall who told you about this telephone 
campaign ? 

Mr. Wagner. I cannot remember. 

Senator Mundt. Do you tliink it was one of the officers ? 

Mr. Wagner. I cannot remember. One of my own officers ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Wagner. Yes. I believe it was one of the policemen that told 
me, but I do not recall which one it was. 

Senator Mundt. But after you heard about that telephone cam- 
paign, you went back down to the scene of the strike, did you not ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did. 

Senator Mundt. AVas there more people down there after you heard 
about the telephone campaign or less ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, people were coming and leaving all the time. 
There was more automobiles driving by there. 

Senator Mundt. Did you hear about the telephone campaign before 
or after the vandalism was committed on the truck and the caterpillar? 

Mr. Wagner. I don't know. I don't know. It appears to me that 
it was after that I got this information. 

Senator Mundt. That you got the information after the vandalism 
on the truck ? 

Mr, Wagner. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. What investigation did you make about the $6,000 
damage committed against this truck, this equipment, the crane, the 
flat tires, the breaking of the air hoses, the smashing of the radiators, 
and so forth? This was in your jurisdiction. This was your re- 
sponsibility to find out who did it? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. What investigation did you make ? 

Mr. Wagner. It was absolutely a police matter. But Captain 
Heimke was assigned to that that afternoon, plus — there was four 
detectives. I don't recall as to what the report read. But there is 
nothing more that became of it, nor was there any arrest made to my 
knowledge. 

Senator Mundt. No arrest was made ? 

Mr. Wagner. Not to my knowledge, no. 

Senator Mundt. Wlien you finally, late in the afternoon, got the 
equipment out of there, was it you or was it the mayor who made 
an announcement that you wouldn't help get the truck 

Mr. Wagner. No 

Senator Mundt. Wait a minute. You haven't got the question. 
Wlio made the announcement that you wouldn't help get the equip- 
ment out unless they promised never to use it again in unloading a 
clay boat ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did not make that statement and I was not there 
when it was made. 

Senator Mundt. You did not make it ? 

Mr. Wagner. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. And you have been in this hearing room all the 
time we have been discussing the clay boat incident ? 



9412 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Wagner. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. You heard the testimony that such a statement was 
made ? 

Mr. Wagner. Riofht. 

Senator Mundt. I thought you made it. 

Mr. Wagner. I did not make it. 

Senator Mundt. You didn't hear it made ? 

Mr. Wagner. No. I wasn't there at all when it was made. 

Senator Mundt. All right. It must have been Mayor Ploetz who 
made it, then. I don't recall exactly who made it. We will have the 
mayor on the stand later, I suppose, and find out. But you did not 
make it? 

Mr. AVagner. Right. 

Senator Mundt. Did you ever get a report or make an investigation 
of a dynamite cache in the back of the strike headquarters, the soup 
kitchen ? 

Mr. Wagner. I did. 

Senator Mundt. Will you relate that to the committee ? 

Mr. Wagner. We had, I believe as a matter of record, five automo- 
biles that were dynamited, or at least dynamite thrown under the cars. 

Senator Mundt. Whose automobiles were those ? 

Mr. Wagner. They were Kohler workers. 

Senator Mundt. Strikebreakers? Scabs, I guess they call them. 
Strikebreakers ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I wouldn't relate to them that way. 

Senator Mundt. They were people working in the Kohler plant? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. All right. Go ahead. You had 5 reports that the 
automobiles of 5 men working in the plant had been dynamited. Go 
ahead, 

Mr. Wagner. So we received some information that there was some 
dynamite found a half mile north of what is known as the soup 
kitchen, which was being maintained by the Kohler strikers, to the 
north. It was along a river bank. The sheriff and myself and the 
mayor, I believe — yes — and Sergeant Zimmerman, we went out there 
on a Sunday afternoon to investigate under what circumstances that 
dynamite was there. 

We found that hid in a clump of underbrush, and there was caps 
and dynamite, fuzes. 

Senator Mundt. You actually found the dynamite A'^ourself ? 

Mr. Wagner. We did. 

Senator Mundt. Go ahead. 

Mr. Wagner. We discussed it, then, and we put a stake out on that 
dynamite for, I believe, a period of 4 days. This stake-out and the 
personnel was made up out of police officers from the city of Sheyboy- 
gan and deputy sheriffs from the county sheriff's department. 

Senator Mundt. As I understand the phrase "stake out,'' that means 
you put some men in hiding to see whether somebody will come in to 
get the dynamite, so that you can find out to whom it belonged and 
make an arrest. 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite right. 

Senator Mundt. All right. Go ahead. 



IMFROPEIR ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIEiLD 9413 

Mr. Wagner. I believe it was about the fourth day, early in the 
morning, there was four men walking along the river bank, and one, 
he went direct to where this dynamite was. Apparently what the 
officers told me at the time was they were quite convinced that he had 
knowledge of that dynamite being there. It was not an accidental 
find. So they held all four men there at gun point and called me 
at my home and also the sheriff. We went out there. 

We took those men in custody, together with the dynamite. We in- 
terrogated those four men. However, they denied it, and that they 
had no knowledge. They said that they had absolutely nothing to do 
with it. They didn't know how it got there. So we called in the dis- 
trict attorney, and he also talked to them. We finally got them to go 
down to the State crime laboratory for a lie detector test. They sub- 
mitted to that voluntarily. So I believe it was the following day after 
arrangements had been made with the crime lab that we went down 
there, and we spent all day down there. 

I was then told that one of them might as well be discharged be- 
cause they felt he had no knowledge of it. There was three others. 
The director of the lie detector was quite certain that they knew some- 
thing about this dynamite. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, 1 of them passed the lie detector 
test, and 3 of them flunked it ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. All right. 

Mr. Wagner. Arrangements had been made by myself and the dis- 
trict attorney, 2 or 3 days later, I don't recall which, that they was to be 
brought back once more. However, that never did materialize, be- 
cause they refused to go down there and take any further tests on 
advice of counsel. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, the three men who flunked the 
lie detector test then had counsel, and counsel advised them not to 
go down and submit themselves to any more questioning ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. All right. Then what happened ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, the district attorney felt as though there was 
not sufficient reason there for the issuance of a warrant, and that was 
the end of that. 

Senator Mundt. Who were these four men ? 

Mr. Wagner. I couldn't even — I don't recall their name. However, 
they were all men that were Kohler strikers. 

Senator Mundt. They were strikers ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. And all four of them were union men on strike ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. One of them, apparently, was innocent, if the lie 
detector test is to be relied upon, and three of them were involved, 
if you can rely upon a lie detector test, but the attorney general felt 
that simply relying on a lie detector test was insufficient evidence to 
prosecute in court ? 

Mr. Wagner. Not the attorney general. It was the district attorney 
of Sheboygan County. 

Senator Mundt. So the case was dropped at that time ? 

Mr. Wagner. Right. 



9414 IMPROPER ACnVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mttndt, So what we have as concrete evidence is, No. 1, 
five automobiles owned by Kohler workers were dynamited; No. 2, 
your police officer found the dynamite cached. 

Mr. Wagner. That is riglit. 

Senator Muxdt. No. 3, you had a stake-out, surrounded the place, 
waited for 4 days, and finally found 4 people walking along, and 1 
of them went directly to the dynamite cache ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. You arrested them at gunpoint, did what you 
could to build a case against them, without any firsthand evidence, 
without anybody making a confession, and 1 of them cleared him- 
self with the lie detector test, 3 of them failed to do so, but all 4 of 
the men caught at the scene of the dynamite were union strikers ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. I should add that they refused to go back for a 
further test on advice of counsel. 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. As I understand it — in fairness to the four men, so 
it will be completely correct — the 4 men took the lie detector test, is 
thatriglit? 

Mr. Wagner. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. One of the men passed the lie detector test, is that 
right ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is as I have been informed by the director. 

Mr. Kennedy. And on three, from a study of the lie detector test, 
it was undetermined as to whether they knew anything about it or not, 
is that correct? 

Mr. Wagner. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they were going to bring them back and give 
them a lie detector test to find out if they knew anything about it 5 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was not a question of flunking the lie detector 
test, but it was a question that the results of the lie detector test were 
inconclusive. 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say this was in a field outside, in back of the 
strike kitchen ? 

Mr. Wagner. It was in a wooded ravine area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel that the union, members of the union, 
or the people around there, knew that you were staking out the place? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it is possible. It was rather difficult to get in 
there, in and out, without being seen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wasn't it fairly certain that the members of the 
union and the people in the strike kitchen knew that you were out there 
watching this area ? 

Mr. Wagner. I wouldn't know. I wouldn't know whether they did. 
It is possible that they knew about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. What would be your best judgment on it as to 
whether they knew or did not, from the physical location of the 
place ? 

Mr. Wagner. I can't answer that. In my estimation, I don't be- 
lieve that they knew. 



niPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 9415 

Senator Mundt. I don't suppose you were standing out there like 
iron deer in a parkway. You would think of some means to try to 
conceal yourself. 

Mr. Wagner. I wasn't there, Senator, but these officers 

Senator Mundt. I know that. But I mean the men that you were 
directing. 

Mr. Wagner. These officers, they were in hiding there in the bush. 

Senator Mundt. In hiding ? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes. But for them to get in and out it was rather 
difficult. 

Senator Mundt. I think we should have on the record that when 
the tests were found inconclusive on the three, they were asked to go 
back and take the test. Why didn't they take the test the second 
time? 

Mr. Wagner. On advice of counsel they said they wouldn't take 
any further test. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know who their counsel was? Was it a 
union lawyer ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it was ; yes. 

Senator Mundt. It was a union lawyer ? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. And he had ad^'ised tliem not to go back and take 
the test ? 

Mr. Wagnj:r. As I remember it correctly, I received a letter. I do 
not remember from which one of the attorneys. In fact, there were 
two involved. They informed me that they had advised their clients 
that they were not to go down there. 

Senator Mundt. Do you have that letter in your possession ? 

Mr. Wagner. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Do you have it in your files ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it would be in the files, but I have no possession 
of any files no more. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, it would seem to me that letter 
would be rather pertinent evidence. I think we should make some 
effort to obtain it and get it before our committee. 

I do not know whether you missed the last part of the testimony 
or not, but he said he had in his files a letter from the lawyer advising 
that on advice of counsel they were asking the men not to take the 
test. 

I said it would seem to me that since that letter is available in the 
files, we should make some effort to get it. It would seem to be very 
pertinent evidence and we should have it before us. 

The Chairman. Do you recall who the lawyer was tliat wrote the 
letter? 

Mr. Wagner. I do not recall. 

The Chairman. Where is the letter ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it would be in the police department files in the 
city of Sheboygan. 

The Chairman. Can you procure a copy of it and send it to the 
committee under oath ? 

Senator Mundt. He is not with the police department. 

Mr. Wagner. I am not with the police department any more. 



9416 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You are not with the police department any more. 

Senator Mundt. I think we should get it from whoever is the present 
chief. 

Who is the present chief ? 

Mr. Wagner. Steen Heimke, the one who testified here Friday. 

Senator Mundt. Is this the fellow you referred to earlier in your 
testimony as Captain Heimke ? 

Mr. Wagner. He was captain at that time, when I was in command. 

The Chairman. Counsel, make a note of this letter and check 
with them. See if they will supply it. If they will not, we will sub- 
pena it. 

What about the date of the letter, so we can have some idea. What 
year was it, and about what time of the year ? 

Senator Mundt. It was the one dealing with the lie detector test. 

The Chairman. I understand that, but about what time was it ? 

Mr. Wagner. It seems to me it was in the early months of 1955. 

The Chairman. In the early months of 1955. Do you remember the 
name of the attorney who wrote the letter ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, there were two attorneys. Mr. Rabinovitz was 
one, and I believe there was another one from Milwaukee. I don't 
recall his name. 

The Chairman. One was Mr. Rabinovitz from Sheboygan ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The Chairman. And another one was from Milwaukee. Was the 
letter from one or from both of them ? 

Mr. Wagner. I don't recall that. I don't remember. 

The Chairman. Counsel, make a not« of that and see if you can 
secure a copy. 

Senator Mundt. It would probably be in April, May, or June of 
1955, because that is the time that this incident took place. 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Chief Wagner, do you remember the names of 
these four men ? 

Mr. Wagner. No ; I do not. 

Senator Mundt. Do you have a record of it someplace ? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes ; there is a record of that ; they are on file up there 
also in the police department. 

Senator Mundt. I think, Mr. Chairman, perhaps counsel has al- 
ready arranged to have these men subpenaed, but if not it seems to 
me we might well subpena them and put them under oath and pursue 
this a little further. This is a pretty serious act of violence or vandal- 
ism. 

The Chairman. The four men ? 

Senator Mundt. I do not think we should subpena the fellow that 
was cleared by the lie-detector test. It can be all four as far as I am 
concerned, but I was thinking primarily of the three who refused to 
take the second test. 

The Chairman. Do you have their names ? 

Senator Mundt. He says they are on file in the police department. 

Mr. Wagner. They are on file. 

The Chairman. All right. Get the names of the 4 men. We will 
see what we can ask them about it. I might call counsel's attention 
to this, Madson Detective Agency, apparently signed by Elmer A. 



IMPROPEIE ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9417 

Madsoii. It states with reference to this the conckision they came to. 
If you still ■want them siibpened, it is all right. He said, 

It is the thought of Mr. Adams and Mr. Madson, and this thought has been 
orally relayed to Mr. Conger and Mr. Kohler, that these men were merely sent in 
as a trip to the plant ; that they know the police officers were there, because there 
was no question in anyone's mind that the union and members were aware of 
the surveillance. 

In the first place, the cache of dynamite could always be seen from strike 
headquarters. Secondly, other strikers had been in there and seen the police 
officers even though they were disguised ; and, third, the strikers had surveyed 
the car of the deputy sheriff on duty at the plant when they left the plant. In 
addition to this, from the number of people who visited the plant when it was 
first discovered on Sunday, April 24, it is almost ridiculous to believe that they 
were not observed by other interested parties. 

That is the report of the detectives. 

If you want to spend money to get those 4 men down here, it would 
be all right. 

Senator Mundt. Tliat is something, INIr. Chairman, we could take 
up in executive session, but to me it would be most significant to learn 
T\ho sent them m to trip the trap, because someone must have been 
very much interested in trying to trip the trap, in trying to throw off 
the peoi3le who were endeavoring to discover who was using the 
dynamite. 

I think it would be very pertinent evidence to find out who was so 
concerned about the fact that the police had discovered the evidence, 
that when they learned, if they learned, that it was under surveillance, 
that they sent some men into there to try to break down the sur- 
veillance and protect the identity of those actually using the dynamite. 

I think that is very pertinent information. It may or may not 
have been that the men who were caught and apprehended were the 
same men who dynamited the cars. But from what the detective 
agency says, that they were sent in, certainly it would be good to 
know who sent them in and why. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc- 
Clellan and Mundt.) 

The Chairman. All right, proceed. 

Are there any further questions of the witness ? 

Mr. EIennedy. I would like to ask briefly about this ; There was a 
great deal of vandalism in the city of Sheboygan while you were chief 
of police? 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite true. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you take some steps to try to curb the vandalism ? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes, I did. In fact, at one time in discussion with 
the former mayor, I infoT-med him we did not have enoug:h personnel 
to cope with a situation of this kind because certainly conditions 
weren't normal. So we did then put on a double shift between the 
hours of 9 and 3 o'clock in the morning. 

Well, vandalism then did somewhat subside, and then later on when 
Mayor Ploetz was elected in 1955, we did put on additional personnel 
of 10 more men. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever find out who was responsible for the 
vandalism ? 

Mr. Wagner. Nothing more than what the record showed here as 
presented to you, and I could only concur in what Chief Heimke has 
said. 



9418 IMPROPER ACnVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. You were not able to apprehend anybody in con- 
nection with it ? 

Mr. Wagner. No, excepting what the records showed. However, 

1 might say at one time we did make an arrest of 10 men for disturb- 
ances. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that part of the home demonstrations ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you selected 10 or 11 men who were present at 
the home demonstrations ; is that right? 

Mr. Wagner. Sergeant Zimmerman and Captain Heimke, they were 
in charge of that raid up there at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were tried ? 

Mr. Wagner. They were tried. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the result in their case ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, after trying to select a 6-man jury, it took over 

2 days to do it, and they found them not guilty. 

Mr. Kennedy. To what do you attribute the violence that took place, 
the vandalism? 

Mr. Wagner. I w^ish I knew. 

Mr. Kennedy. But there is no question in your mind that it arose 
out of the strike ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite true. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the bitter feelings, particularly on the part of 
the strikers against the nonstrikers ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think it was planned, the vandalism ^ 

Mr. Wagner. I cannot answer that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yo do not know ? 

Mr. Wagner. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. And j'ou have no idea who was responsible^ 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I will say it is an outgrowth of the .■strike, \w- 
cause that is not typical of Sheboygan. 

Mr. Kennedy. But do you have anv idea who was responsible for 

it? 

Mr. Wagner. No, I have not, not as individuals. 

The Chairman, Do you have an idea of a group or an organiza- 
tion or something as being responsible ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, we did not have that type of oi-der up theie bo- 
fore tlie strike. 

The Chairman. You attribute it to tlie strike ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

The CriAiRMAN. In other words, then are you saying whoever was 
responsible for tlie strike must also be responsible for the vandalism ? 

Mr. Wagner. I would not say in that many words eithei-. 

The Chairman. All right, have you get any less woi-ds oi- .-onie 
other way to say it in ? 

Mr. Wagner. If I was definitely sure and wonld he in a position 
to put my finger on any of them, I would so state. 

The Chairman. But you don't feel tiiat sure of it. 

Mr. Wagner. Sir? 

The Chairman. You don't feel that sure of it. so notwithstanding 
you were chief of police out there at the time, and through all of it, 
vou just simj)ly are not able to have any definite concrete i<lea of your 



IISIPROPER ACTWITIE6 IN THE LABOR FIELD 9419 

own that you are willing to express as to who was responsible for the 
vandalism, 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite true. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

All right, thank you very much. 

Mr. Kennedy. I have just one last question. We had Chief Heimke 
testify that he worked with the Madson Detective Agency who was 
working for the Kohler Co. 

Mr. Wagner. Well, gentlemen, in fact Mr. Lyman Conger called 
me one day and wanted to know of me whether I knew some agency 
or detective agency, and I am the one that referred the Madson De- 
tective Agency to Mr. Conger. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Did you work closely with them during this period 
of time, to try to solve these acts of vandalism ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, yes, and in fact they did. They practically 
came into the police station every dsij when they were in Sheboygan. 

Mr. Kennedy. Even with their assistance and their help, you were 
not able to solve these things ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Chief Heimke testified as to some advice that 
he gave the Madison Detective Agency during this period of time, 
regarding the Grand Hotel. Did you ever have any discussions with 
the Madison Detective Agency or Adams of the Madison Detective 
Agency regarding the Grand Hotel where the union had some rooms? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, it is not quite clear to me any more, but I do 
know this : That Adams came in one day and wanted to know of me 
how well I knew the manager of the Grand Hotel, and whether I 
wouldn't introduce him, which I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr. Wagner. He wanted to go over and into the hotel, so he didn't 
want to go over there unless the facts wei'e known to the management. 

Mr. Kennedy. He just wanted to meet the manager of the hotel? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there something he wanted to accomplish in the 
hotel? 

Mr. Wagner. I don't know, and I can't state that. 

Mr. Kennedy. He spoke to you about something; did he not? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, as I heard stated here. 

Mr. Kennedy. I want to know what he said to you. Chief Wagner. 

Mr. Wagner. I don't recall any more, just what that convereation 
was. 

Mr. Kennedy. What conversation did he have with you about 
meeting the manager of the hotel ? 

Mr. Wagner. He wanted to see what the hotel looks like. 

Mr. Kennedy. He could go by and see what the hotel looked like 
without getting the manager. 

Mr. Wagner. But he didn't want to go over there unless he was 
properly identified to the manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't he want to go over there ? 

Mr. Wagner. I have no idea. 

Mr. Kennedy. He didn't say anything to you about it ? 

Mr. Wagner. No, he in fact did say, I recall, something about put- 
ting a tap in there but I don't recall the conversation any more. How- 
ever, I do know this, that nothing ever did materialize. 



9420 EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you telephone the manager ? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what did you tell the manager? 

Mr. Wagneu. I don't quite recall any more. It seems to me that I 
just telephoned him to find out whether he was in, and I believe I 
went over there with Adams, and I am not too sure about that. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have had a problem, have you, in the last 5 
days. Chief Wagner, about remembering things? 

Mr. Wagner. No, I haven't. I just don't recall, there was much 
conversation. 

Mr. Kennedy. Five days ago you told an investigator of the com- 
mittee that you called the manager, and that Mr. Madson came to you, 
and he said he wanted to put a bug in the hotel room of the union. 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite right, I was asked about that, and I told 
him it wasn't clear to me then. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you called the manager of the hotel, and you 
told the manager of the hotel that the Madson Detective Agency 
wanted to bug the hotel room of the union. 

Mr. Wagner. And I did state at that time it was Mr. Madson. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is quite different from what you are saying 
here, that all he wanted to do was to look at the hotel. 

Mr. Wagner. That is right, and there was some discussion, not by 
Madson but by Adams, and when I related that statement that you 
have there it wasn't clear in my mind then and it isn't quite clear in 
my mind now just what the facts are. 

Mr. Kennedy. I ask you to relate the conversation. Chief Wagner, 
and now what did he say to you ? Mr. Adams said he wanted to bug the 
hotel room ; isn't that right ? 

Mr. Wagner. There was some discussion about it ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was the purpose for calling the manager 
of the hotel ? 

Mr. Wagner. That I do not know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Chief Wagner, you called the manager of the 
hotel, this man, Mr. Adams is over 21 and he could get a hotel room 
there by himself, and he could find out where the Grand Hotel was. 

Mr. Wagner. I called the manager to see whether he was in the 
hotel at the time, and I believe, and this is over and above what I 
stated, but since you have talked to me about this here my memory is a 
little bit more refreshed than it was today. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who refreshed it for you ? 

Mr. Wagner. Myself; I did not know then, and I am not so defi- 
nitely sure now. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have forgotten a lot since then, too ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is quite true. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your memory has been refreshed on some things, 
and it has been unref reshed on others ? 

Mr. Wagner. I don't know about that, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat you told the investigator was that Mr. Adams 
came to see you and said he wanted to put a bug in the hotel, and you 
said, "Fine." You called and said, "I will get in touch with the man- 
ager of the hotel." You discussed it with the manager of the hotel and 
told liim this group was friends of yours and they wanted to bug the 
union room. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABO'R FIELD 9421 

Am I right so far, and that he should cooperate with him; isn't 
that what you told the investigator ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That the manager of the Grand Hotel should co- 
operate with the detective agency to bug the room of the union ? 

Mr. Wagner. No ; I am sure that was not my intention, nor was that 
any discussion or any motive on my part that the room should be 
bugged. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Wliy did you call the manager ? 

Mr. Wagner. To acquaint them with the agency. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that the agency had told you that they 
wanted to bug the hotel room. That is all right, Mr. Wagner, and I 
am just trying to get the facts. 

Mr. Wagner. I don't recall the facts of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just answer this : Did Adams tell you he wanted to 
bug the hotel room ? 

Mr. Wagner. There was some discussion about that. 

Mr. Kennedy, He told you he wanted to bug the hotel room? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he asked you to call the manager ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you called the manager ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you arranged for an introduction ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And for the purpose so that Adams could bug the 
hotel room? 

Mr. Wagner. I won't say that it was for the purpose of bugging the 
hotel room. 

Mr. Kennedy. At least for a discussion of bugging? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. For a discussion of bugging the hotel room ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the manager then arrange to give them a room 
on the same floor ? 

Mr. Wagner. I do not know that. 

Mr. Kennedy. You told them to ti*y to arrange to have a room on 
the same floor ? 

Mr. Wagner. There was some talk about that, that they wanted to 
get a room there. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that they could bug the union room ? 

Mr. Wagner. I do not know that. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was a discussion ? 

Mr. Wagner. That was somewhere along that line, I don't know 
just word for word of what was said. 

Mr. Kennedy. Thank you. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Senator Mundt. Was the hotel room ever bugged ? That seems to 
be the important point here. 

Mr. Wagner. To my estimation, as far as I know, never. 

Senator Mundt. You do not think it was bugged ? 

Mr. Wagner. No, sir. 

21243—58 — pt. 23 18 



9422 IMPROPER ACTTV'ITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator JMuxdt. Did you ever get any reports from Adams or 
Madison tliat they had bugged it, and that tliey got this information, 
or that information out of listening to the bug? 

Mr. Wagnkr. No, sir. 

Senator Muxdt. It is your best information as police chief then 
that the hotel room never was bugged ? 

Mr. Wagner. As far as I know, that is right. 

Senator Mundt. Did you go with Mr. Adams to see the manager 
of the hotel? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes, I believe I did. 

Senator Mundt. What transpired in that conversation ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I just went over there, and I told him who he 
was, and he went back in the corridors there, and he was pointed out 
where the union officials had their office. 

Senator Mundt. Which union officials were they ? 

Mr. Wagner. They were all over there at one time or another. 
They came and went. 

Senator Mundt. This was the union headquarters ? 

Mr. Wagner. Yes; well, this was where they had their office. The 
union headquarters was within half a block of there. 

Senator Mundt. But they also had an office in the hotel ? 

Mr. Wagner. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. O.K. Go ahead, was there anything else? 

Mr. Wagner. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would just like to find out where you found out 
that they had not put a bug in, and who refreshed your memory on 
that? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, since the interview that I had, I thought about 
that, and when I was approached about that I did not recall it. I 
did not remember it at all, but since I had the interview, I remembered 
some of it, and it is rather vague to me at the present time. 

Mr. Kennedy. You remembered, as I say, a good deal more 4 or 
5 days ago. You did not know whether they had bugged the room or 
not, and I was just wondering who refreshed your memory that you 
were able to find out that they did not bug the room. 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I believe if that room would have been bugged 
over there, and information gotten from it, I certainly would have 
heard about it. But there has never been brought to my attention at 
no time, at any time, that there was any tap in any of those miion 
quarters. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the fact that reports were not made to you ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Wagner. Well, I at least did not hear any. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. Ploetz, Mayor Ploetz, will you come around, please? 

The Chairman. You do solemly swear that the evidence you shall 
give before this Senate select committee sliall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Pi/)ETZ. 1 do. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9423 

TESTIMONY OF RUDOLPH J. PLOETZ 

The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Ploetz. My name is Rudolph J. Ploetz. I reside at 1824 Elm 
Avenue, Sheboygan, Wis. At the present time, I am the operator 
of a bar and restaurant in Sheboygan. 

The Chairman. You are the operator of a bar and restaurant ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes. 

The Chairman. You were at one time mayor of Sheboygan, were 
you? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Over what period? 

Mr. Ploetz. 1955, 1956, and 1957. Prior to that time, I had served 
as alderman for two terms in the city of Sheboygan. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I do. 

The Chairman. All right; Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Ploetz. Pardon me, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Chairman, I wondered if you would permit me to make a short 
;statement at this time. 

The CifAiRMAN. Have you a prepared statement? 

Mr. Ploetz. I have, sir. 

The Chairman. Have you submitted it, under the rules ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I do not know what the rules are, Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. The rules require you to submit it 1 day in advance. 
Will you let me see a copy of it ? If it is brief, possibly we can waive 
the rule. 

(A document was handed to the chairman.) 

(Members of the connnittee present at this point were Senators 
McClellan and Mmidt. ) 

The Chairman. I think that you are entitled to make that statement, 
in view of the previous testimony. You will be subject to cross- 
-examination on it. Just a moment while Senator Mundt looks at it. 

(The document was handed to Senator Mundt.) 

The Chairman. The witness has not complied with the rules of the 
■committee by submitting his statement 24 hours in advance, but it is 
'A brief statement, and I think, upon request, he would be entitled to 
make it orally ; what he is saying tliere. 

Senator Mundt. I have no objection to his making it, but I do think 
that at an executive meeting one of these days we should reexamine our 
rule on these 24-hour statements, because, every time it is brought up, 
we waive it. It seems to me a rule that is waived every time it is chal- 
lenged might as well be eliminated. 

The Chairman. I am ready to adhere to the rule so rigorously that 
Ave will all feel it ; any time the rest of you are. 

Senator Mundt. I don't object to his reading it, but I simply point 
out that, every time it is brought up, we have this same routine, and 
maybe the rule is something which is not enf orcible. 

The C^HAiRMAN. There is obje^^tion, so you will not read your state- 
ment, and you can proceed to make a brief verbal statement. 

Senator Mundt. So the record will be clear, if there is objection it 
does not come from the Senator from South Dakota. 



9424 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. All right ; objection to it is waived. You may read 
your statement. Proceed. 

Mr. Ploetz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Gentlemen, I wish to emphasize that I have nothing to gain from 
this hearing. I am out of politics now and I have no political aspira- 
tions at this time. 

1 have always felt that the problems in the Kohler strike are not so 
insurmountable that its settlement cannot be reached. 

Wliile in office us mayor or the city of Sheboygan, I made many at- 
tempts to get both parties together. This needs no further explanation, 
as the record speaks for itself. 

If there is anything I can do now as a private citizen to bring about 
a fair, equitable, and honorable conclusion to this long and bitter dis- 
pute that is satisfactory to both parties, I most certainly am willing 
to do so. 

In any event, it is my sincere hope that all existing differences can 
be ironed out in the very near future, and that Sheboygan can be re- 
stored to its normal economic and social status. 

At this point, Mr. Chairman, I wish to point out that in testimony 
given March 14, Sheboygan Police Chief Steen Heimke swore under 
oath he heard me, as former mayor of the city of Sheboygan, say to the 
former sheriff of Sheboygan County, Theodore Mosch, on July 5, 1955, 
"How much are you obligated to the union for?" 

I charge Steen Heimke with being a perjurer. I never made such 
a statement that day or any other day, or anything similar to it. 

In substantiation of my charge, I wish to read from an affidavit 
sworn to by former sheriff Theodore Mosch, which is as follows 

The Chairman. Just a moment. You can't read from the affidavit 
until we have seen it. 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, Mr. Chairaian 

The Chairman. I haven't seen the affidavit, and I Avant to know 
what is in it before you read from it, and know it is an affidavit. 

(A document was handed to the chairman.) 

The Chairman. May I inquire if this affidavit has been made a part 
of our records up to now ? It is an affidavit of Theodore J. Mosch, 
who, I assume, was the former sheriff. He testified here, did he not ? 

Mv. Kennedy. That is right. 

The Chairman. I am going to let you state anything you want to, 
but you keep this affidavit for the present, and it will not go in the 
record as of now until we have a chance to review it. 

Do you want to look over it. Senator Mundt? 

Proceed. You waive counsel, do you ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I do. 

The Chairman. You have made a pretty serious charge, and you 
have charged somebody with perjui-y, and, of course, I don't know who 
at this time will be telling the truth and who will not be. 

The Chair will make this announcement: Whenever there is con- 
flict between the evidence of any witness in this series of hearings, 
where there is definite conflict, irreconcilable conflict as between the 
statement of one witness and the statement of another with respect 
to a matter that is regarded as material to these hearings, the Chair 
would feel it is his duty, with the approval of the committee, to refer 
the transcript of such conflict to the Justice Department for appro- 
priate action. 



IMPROPER ACnVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9425 

So I give you that notice, as we proceed now, and testimony may 
be developed. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I concur completely with the Chair, 
that where we have a situation of this kind, I think we should give this 
transcript to the Department of Justice and find out who is perjuring 
himself ; when you have a direct challenge and conflict of sworn testi- 
mony. 

I think perhaps, though, that if the Chair will read the affidavit he 
will find that it is not exactly the same language referred to in the 
affidavit as was referred to in the original charge by the policeman, 
and so it may not be that we have got quite the direct conflict of evid- 
ence here that would appear on the surface of the statement thus far. 

The Chairman. May I make this observation : The Chair has not 
ruled out this affidavit as of the moment, but I didn't feel that the 
witness should be permitted to read from it until we had had an oppor- 
tunity to examine it. 

Senator Mundt. It appeai-s to my inexperienced eye, Mr. Chairman, 
to be a regular affidavit, and I have no objection to having it go in the 
record if the Chair also feels that it is an affidavit. It is a copy, but 
I think it is signed. 

The Chairman. Do you know who procured this affidavit? 

Mr. Ploetz. I received that affidavit in the morning mail, special 
delivery, air mail, from the former sheriff, Theodore Mosch. 

The Chairman. You had requested an affidavit to support your 
position ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I called Sheriff Mosch Sunday evening. 

(At this point, the following members of the committee were pres- 
ent: Senators McClellan and Mundt.) 

The Chairman. The Chair will let you read from that portion of 
the affidavit which is pertinent. I do not want you to read all of it. 
Then the affidavit will be made, without objection, exhibit 81 for ref- 
erence. 

You may read what you regard as the pertinent part with respect 
to the conflict of what your testimony is, where you charge him with 
perjury, charge the chief of police, I believe it is, with perjury, and 
any part of that affidavit that may throw any light on it. 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 81" for ref- 
erence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Ploetz (reading) : 

At DO time did Mayor Rudolph Ploetz and I discuss what 

Senator Mundt. Mayor, you should, in reading that, read the quo- 
tation marks as well. 

Mr. Ploetz (reading) : 

At no time did Mayor Rudolph Ploetz and I discuss what my critics would 
call "political obligations." I have never felt myself obligated to either party 
in the dispute, either the union or the Koehler Co. My duty has always been to 
all of the citizens of the community regardless of who supported me in my two 
campaigns. 

The Chairman. All right. That is an affidavit from former Sheriff 
Mosch. It may be filed as exhibit No. 81 for reference. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, the reason I thought we should 
have the affidavit in at this point, so it can all be in the same news story, 
is because certainly I agree that 



9426 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES I\ TTIE LABOR FIELD 

The CiiAiRMAX. Tlie Chair was not particidarly o]jje<:'tinp to the 
affidavit, but I do tliink we have a ri<;lit to see what a witness wants 
to put into the record. We have a right to examine it. 

Senator Mundt. I quite agree, and having examined it, in view of 
the fact that tliere is a charge against an incumbent chief of police of 
l)eing a perjurer, it is what we might call the right of the charged. I 
think we should have the affidavit read to the record because tlie affi- 
davit says he did not hear the phrase "political obligation," and there 
was nothing, I repeat, nothing, in the original charge about political 
obligations. The original charge was that he was overheard to say, 
"How much are you obligated for?", which is something entirely dif- 
ferent. It could be finances. It could be something altogether dif- 
ferent from political obligations. So I say we do not have quite the 
challenge of evidence, but it is quite the contrary, that appeared from 
the original statement by the mayor. 

It is in the area of the type of thing which we might well turn over 
to the Department of Justice, however, to investigate through the FBI 
to find out whether, in fact, perjury has been committed before our 
committee by any of the witnesses on this point. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were mayor of Sheboygan for 2 years ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And your term began in April of 1955 ? 

Mr. Ploetz. 1955, April. 

Mr. Kennedy. And extended to April 1957 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were mayor during this so-called clay boat in- 
cident ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have had testimony regarding the fact that you 
took over the operation of the police during the period that the people 
congregated on the dock area on July 5, 1955; that there was some 
violence; that there was some destruction of property, and this is your 
responsibility, because you took over the operation of the police as 
mayor. Wliat time did you get down to the dock ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I believe it was around about 8 o'clock in the mornings 
Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. You had received a letter from the Kohler Co., prior 
to that time, saying that they anticipated some problems and diffi- 
culties ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I received three letters from the Kohler Co. I have 
a photostatic copy here of all three letters that I received from the 
Kohler Co. The first was one on June 28 ; the second one on July 1 ; 
and the third one on July 2, and a copy of the third letter had been 
also sent to the then Chief of Police Walter Wagner. 

The Chairman. Those letters may be made exhibit Nos. 82-A, -B, 
and -C. 

(The documents referred to were marked as "Exhibit Nos. 82-A, -B, 
and -C" for reference and wnll be found in the appendix on pp. 
9477-9479.) 

The Chairman. These letters are photostatic copies, are they ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. In view of the fact that the Kohler Co. indicated ro 
you that they expected some problems and difficulty, what steps did 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9427 

jou take to prevent any disorder at the time tliey expected to unload 
the boat ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, Mr. Kennedy, I had several meetings with the 
chief of police, and in regard to not only that incident but other inci- 
dents of violence and vandalism as well. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let's stick to this one, and will you tell the com- 
mittee specifically what steps you took other than just having a meeting 
with the chief of police ? What positive steps did you take to prevent 
disorder at the dock after you were told by the Kohler Co. that they 
anticipated trouble ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, to begin with, I had talked it over with the 
chief of police and other members in the office of the chief of police 
as to what had been done and what had transpired prior to the clay 
coming in, in 1955, because at least 2 boats of clay had come in in 1954. 
I was wondering what steps had been taken in 1954, and I was told 
that they had a few officers down in 1954, but that there was no dis- 
turbance at the dock at either time in 1954. 

The chief was not too concerned that there would be any violence 
of any nature or consequence in 1955. I told them about the letter 
that I had received from IMr. Desmond. We referred also to the copy 
that he had received. So as far as being prepared is concerned, he 
thought that he could handle it in 1955 just as well as in 1954. 

However, Mr. Kennedy, as far as help is concerned, we had also 
several meetings with the then sheriff of Sheboygan County, Theo- 
dore Mosch, who was then the sheriff, as early as, I think it was, 
just a matter of a couple of days after I took office in 1955, of April. 
I have here the newspaper clippings also to substantiate that. 

The headline reads "Mayor invokes police powers to crack down on 
vandalism." 

I would like to submit these also as an exhibit and part of the 
evidence. 

Mr. Kennedy. As I understand, as far as the incident on July 5, 
1955, after conversations with the chief of police 

The Chairman. I will let you put this in a little later. We are on 
the clay boat now. You may put it in a little later at the proper place. 

Let's finish with the clay boat if we can. I am not denying it to 
go into the record, but I want to get it in at its proper place. Remind 
me of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. As I understand your testimony, you felt that based 
on the previous experience, you and the chief of police felt based on 
previous experience with the unloading of the clay boat in 1954 that 
no extra precaution is needed to be taken on July 5, 1955, when the clay 
boat was going to be unloaded at that time ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, I felt, Mr. Kennedy, that with the additional po- 
lice power or help that had been given to the chief by adding these new 
emits to the force in April, together with the help that was volunteered 
by the sheriff, that in the event 

Mr. Kennedy. Of any problem- 



Mr. Ploetz. We would have the manpower there. 

Mr. Kennedy. They had the people available, or at least there were 
some extra police available, on the morning of July 5, 1955, on the 
initiative of the cliief of police ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 



9428 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. The equipment was brought up by the Kohler Co. 
or by their agents, to try to unload the boat, and tliey were unable to 
get their equipment on to the dock ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. The chief of police, according to his testimony, then 
came back and had a conference with you; is that right? That is, 
shortly afterwards? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, I just don't know whether it was shortly after 
that. I had several conversations with the sheriff, or the chief. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you at that time said that the problem seems to 
be over, and tell all the extra people to go home ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir, ISIr. Kennedy, I never made such a statement. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, did you tell the chief of police to send anyone 
home ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I never made such a statement. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell the chief of police that he could relieve 
some of those individuals? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear his testimony here ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I heard that testimony. 

Mr. Kennedy. That testimony is not correct ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir, Mr. Kennedy, it is not. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not tell him that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then either your testimony on this point or his 
testimony is wrong, is that right, or incorrect, anyway ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I am willing to take a lie-detector test any time at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not tell him anything like that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I did not tell him anything. 

Mr. Kennedy. You anticipated that these extra people would re- 
main on duty the whole day ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I anticipated that. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the testimony by the chief of police that he 
sent them home and that it was on your instructions is not correct; 
is that right? 

Mr. Ploetz. Mr. Kennedy, let me put it this way : I did not even 
know that he was going to keep the third shift back at all. We 
hadn't even discussed that at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat does that mean, the third shift back ? 

Mr. Ploetz. The shift that is on from midnight until 8 o'clock in the 
morning that he had referred to, that he was going to keep man- 
power back. I didn't even know that he wanted to or anticipated 
keeping that manpower back. 

I just took for gi'anted that he would provide for enough help, and 
with the meetings that we had, together with the meeting that we 
had with the sheriff of Sheboygan County, that he would avail him- 
self of all the manpower that he needed. 

Mr. Kennedy. I^t me ask you this : Did you have any discussions 
with liim after he reported on what occurred in the morning, did 
you have any discussions with him as to how many people .were avail- 
able? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABO'R FIELD 9429 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you mean you as the mayor of the city and the 
chief of police go in and discuss a problem regarding the clay boat 
and neither one of you discusses how many policemen you had avail- 
able? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, I discussed it at various time, Mr. Kennedy, as 
I stated before. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. I am not asking you if you discussed it at various 
times. Did you discuss that morning how many policemen you had 
available to deal with the problem ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Sure. But what I had reference to before, Mr. Ken- 
nedy, was the fact that he was going to keep the third shift back. 

Ml*. Kennedy. Didn't he tell you at that time something about the 
third shift? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, he didn't mention anything about 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people did you imderstand were avail- 
able for immediate duty ? 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as manpower available was concerned, if it 
would come to the point where with the regular day shift he could 
not cope with the problem, he could call in the second and third shift 
as he found necessary. 

Mr. Kjinnedy. Did you find out how many people were waiting 
in reserve and could be called on duty immediately ? 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as reserve is concerned, the entire force always 
stands in reserve. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, but how many people were in immediate re- 
serve ? I know there were a lot of policemen at home, but how many 
people were standing by, ready to go to work ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, I had the regular day shift. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people were actually available that could 
be sent down to the dock immediately if some problem broke out? 

How many people were there ? 

Mr. Ploetz. He could draw on the entire 55 men of the department. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you would have to get them from home, you 
would have to get them suited up, and the rest of it. How many people 
did he actually have that were available to go right down to the dock 
immediately ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't know the exact number, but as far as his day 
force is concerned, I believe at that time it numbered somewhere 
between 15 and 20. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss that matter with him ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't recall whether I just discussed it at that par- 
ticular time or not, but as far as I felt at that time, he was the chief 
of police, he had thirty-some years of police experience, he experienced 
strikes before in Sheboygan. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let me ask you this : Did you anticipate any further 
trouble ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would that be the reason that you were not very 
concerned as to how many policemen there were that were available ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Partially so, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you that the Kohler Co. expected to come 
in and unload the ship themselves? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, that he did not mention to me. 



9430 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not find that out at all? 

Mr. Ploktz. I didn't know about tliat until in the afternoon wlien I 
had tlie telephone conversation with Mr. Buteyn, that the Kohler Co. 
entered into the picture as far as the equipment Avas concerned. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not know until the equipment came down 
on the dock that the Kohler Co. planned to unload the ship themselves? 

Mr. Ploetz. What was that question ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it your testimony that you did not know that the 
Kohler Co. expected to unload the ship themselves ? You did not know 
that until the time the equipment was actually down on the dock? 

Mr. Ploetz. That the Kohler Co. wanted to do the unloading? 

Mr. Kennedy. That the Buteyns were being withdrawn and they 
were going to do it themselves. 

Mr. Ploetz. That I did not know until I talked to Mr. Buteyn in 
the afternoon, in the telephone conversation that I had. 

Mr. Kennedy. Again, you say that the chief did not inform you 
that the Kohler Co. had told him that they were going to unload the 
ship themselves ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir, I had no such conversation with the chief. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would think that that is the most basic piece of 
information that could possibly be given to you, when you are reach- 
ing a determination as to whether the violence was over or not. Of 
course, the violence might be over, if there wasn't going to be any- 
thing further done on the dock, but if the company was coming down 
there with their equipment, and were going to try to unload the 
boat, naturally then there might be further problems. 

From what I understand from your testimony, you never even dis- 
cussed it witli the chief of police. 

Mr. Ploetz, Mr. Kennedy, I was under the impression that the 
Buteyn brothers were going to do the unloading. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you expect that the Buteyns' were going to 
imload the boat that afternoon ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I was under the impression, and I thought that they 
would unload the boat. I didn't anticipate any of the trouble. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did anticipate that somebody was going to try 
to unload the boat that afternoon, and yet you felt that there was not 
going to be any difficulty down at the dock ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. How could you possibly reach that conclusion? 

Mr. Ploetz. Mr. Kennedy, when I was down there in the morning, 
there were not too many people down there. 

I was discussing it with the chief of police, that even though there 
were people down there, as far as actual trouble is concerned, pre- 
venting the unloading, I didn't anticipate at that particular time 
until the 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't the union tell you then or earlier that they 
were not goiug to permit the unloading of the boat? 

Mr. Ploetz. The union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. No representative of tlie union told you that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9431 

Mr. Kennedy. Certainly early in the morning you found out that 
they were not going to permit the unloading of the boat. 

Mr. Ploetz. When I got down there 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you answer that question? Didn't you find 
out early in the morning that they were not going to permit the 
unloading of the boat ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, sir, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't you find that out from the chief of police? 

Mr. Ploetz. I had no such discussion with the chief that the boat 
was not going to be unloaded. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you something. Do you mean to sit 
here before this group and before this whole audience and the whole 
American people and tell them after going down there that morning 
you, as mayor, didn't know what the situation was ? Is that what you 
are swearing? 

Mr. Ploetz. Mr. Chairman, the question was asked whether or not 
I knew whether the boat was not going to be unloaded. 

The Chairman. You knew that they didn't intend to let it be un- 
loaded after you went down there and saw the situation, didn't you? 

Mr. Ploetz. When I went down there in the morning, the situation 
was not as such that it might not be unloaded. 

The Chairman. Well, you knew it was the intention of the union 
at that time not to let that boat he unloaded, didn't you ? 

They had pickets out there for that purpose. 

Mr. Ploetz. No, I did not know what intent of the union was. 

The Chairman. Do you mean to say you were that dumb ? Are you 
swearing that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I did not have a conversation with the union, that they 
didn't have the intention of unloading. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 

( Wliereupon, at 11 : 50 a. m. the hearing was recessed, to reconvene 
at 2 p. m. of the same day. The following members were present : 
Senators McClellan and Mundt.) 

afternoon session 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 
(Members of the committee present at the convening of the ses- 
sion were : Senators McClellan, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Will Mayor Ploetz come around, please. 

TESTIMONY OF EUDOLPH J. PLOETZ— Eesumed 

Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Mayor, we were talking this morning about the 
clay-boat incident and your arrival on the dock in the morning of 
July 5, 1955, and whether you know that it was the intention of the 
union or its representatives to prevent the unloading of the clay 
boat. 

I think we were in the midst of discussing that when the session 
ended this morning, is that correct ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes. 



9432 IMPROPER ACTIVITIEvS IN TITE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, is it your testimony that you did not know that 
the, UTiioii or its re])resentatives were interested in preventing the clay 
boat from boing unloaded? 

Mr. PiX)ETz. Well, Mr. Kennedy, this morning I was under the 
impression that the question was directed as far as having any official 
discussion with the union with regard to the unloading of the clay. 

Wliile I did not have any official discussion with them, I think it 
was more or less of a common knowledge that everybody down in the 
dock area was of the opinion that the clay should not be unloaded. 

Mr. Kennedy. So we have established that point, that you at least 
were aware of the fact that the union or its officials and the people 
down at the clay boat were interested in keeping the boat from un- 
loading its clay for the Koliler Co., is that right? 

Mr. Ploetz, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you also knew that the Kohler Co. was going 
to attempt to unload the clay ? 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as the Kohler Co. is concerned 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, the Kohler Co. or its agents, and it is not 
important whether it is the Kohler Co. or somebody hired by the 
Kohler Co., is that right? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You knew that? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. As I understand it, you still took the step, after the 
discussion with the chief of police, Wagner, you took steps to dismiss 
the police or did not make any arrangements to have more police 
assigned to the dock area. 

Why didn't you do something about it then ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, as far as the first part of your question goes 

Mr. Kennedy. There is no first part. Why didn't you do something 
about it, No. 1, when you knew the union was interested in keeping 
the clay from being unloaded, and No. 2, when you knew the company 
was interested in getting the clay unloaded and was going to take steps 
to do so ? And why didn't you take some steps to prevent any violence 
and allow the company to unload their clay ? 

Mr. Pi>OETz. I was under the impression that, as fnr as the policing 
end of it was concerned, it was being taken care of. 

At the time I was down there at the dock, I did not see any vandal- 
ism or violence at that particular time. And in my discussions with 
the chief during the coui^se of the day, it was such that he had the 
situation well in hand. 

However, as far as my prime concern in regard to the entire dock 
occurrence, it was that I was primarily interested not to have anybody 
injured down there or killed down there. And as long as the chief 
was of the opinion that he had the situation well in hand, as far as 
the policing end of it was concerned, I was satisfied. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you take over the operation of the police? 

Mr. Ploetz. No, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Chief Wagner testified that you said you were going 
to take personal charge. 

Mr. Ploetz. No, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Chief Wagner testified that you said you were going 
to take personal charge. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIBS IN THE LABO'R FIELD 9433 

Mr. Ploetz. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You did not ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You heard the chief of police make a statement to 
that effect? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say that is incorrect? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. He did not tell the truth to the committee ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Mr. Kennedy, in answer to that also, which is part of 
the affidavit that was submitted this morning, it is that the chief of 
police was contacted by Sheriff Mosch as late as 6 o'clock that day, and 
the chief told Sheriff Mosch that he did not need any assistance. 

The Chairman. Just one moment, now. This morning you opened 
your testimony and the Chair permitted you to read a prepared state- 
ment, charging that Chief Heimke had perjured himself. 

He said no more contrary to what you are saying now, or to what you 
say you said at the time or didn't say. Then what you say now is 
contrary to what Chief Wagner said here this morning. 

You come in here boldly charging someone with perjury who had 
testified differently from you, and Chief Wagner testified differently 
from you here this morning. 

Wliat do you say about it? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, as far as the affidavit is concerned 

The Chairman. We are not talking about the affidavit, we are talk- 
ing about what he swore to here this morning, that you took this 
operation away from him. 

Mr. Ploetz. I did not. 

The Chairman. You wouldn't call that perjury, where he makes 
that positive statement, then, would you ? 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as the statement is concerned, it is definitely 
incorrect. And, Mr. Chairman, to further substantiate the charge I 
made this morning, I had a telephone conversation with former 
Sheriff Mosch during the lunch time. I believe that there is a tele- 
gram now in the hands of the chairman, or should be ; at least I have 
a copy of that telegi'am, that we sent to the chairman within the last 
2 hours. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. The Chair has received no tele- 
gram. The Chair did receive during the noon hour the original of 
the affidavit which I permitted you to file as an exhibit this morning. 
I received no telegram, and in the Chair's opinion — and I may be 
overruled — a telegram from him would not be admissible in evidence. 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, I have a copy of that telegram and I thought 
perhaps the chairman would like to see this telegram. 

The Chairman. I will be glad to look at it, but unless I am over- 
ruled, I won't put it in evidence. It is not sworn testimony. 

(A document was handed to the chairman.) 

Mr. Kennedy. The chief of police's testimony is that you were the 
one who was responsible for the fact that there was not further or 
more orderly conduct within the crowd on July 5 down at the dock. 
You say that that was his responsibility ? 
Mr. Ploetz. You mean the former chief, Wagner ? 
Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 
Mr. Ploetz. Yes. 



9434 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennkdy. lie said you took over tlie conduct of the police. 
You have tlie most confused city, I Avill say that, jSIr. Mayor, with the 
chief of police sayin<^ tliat you are responsible, and you saying the 
chief of police is responsible, and the result was that there was vio- 
lence down tliere. There is no wonder that there was. 

If nolx)dy knew, or if the testimony of both of you is believed — 
and both sides cannot be correct — but in view of the testimony of both 
YOU and the former chief, there had to be absolute chaos down there, 
because nobody, according to your testimony, was responsible. Each 
one was expecting the other one to be. 

Mv. Ploetz. Well, Mr. Kennedy, as far as the responsibility is con- 
cerned, the responsibility as far as the police department is concerned 
is the same as any other department of the city. 

If I wanted to take charge of every department of the city, why, 
24 hours in the day wouldn't have been enough. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was rather an unusual day ? 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as this particular incident is concerned, as I 
stated this morning, I had conversation Avith the chief and the various 
officers prior to the coming in of the clay boat, and we reviewed the 
1954 situation, and I was under the impression that everything was 
going to be well taken care of. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let us go beyond that, leaving unsolved the ques- 
tion of whether you actually did take over the police or whether it 
remained in liis control. The fact is that you did go down to the 
dock later on that day, on your own personal initiative, and you did 
see that things were not what they should be, that there was a large 
crowd massecl on the dock area, and that some attention should be 
given to it. 

Did you arrange at that time to have further police assigned to 
the dock area ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I did have several meetings with the chief of police. 

Mr. Kennedy. I know a lot of people can have meetings and not do 
anything, and set up committees and not do anything, but this is some- 
thing more than that. 

Mr. Ploetz. I was given the word from the chief of police that as 
far as the policing end of it was concerned, he had the situation well 
in hand. 

Senator Mundt. You were here in the coimnittee room this morn- 
ing, were you not, Mr. Ploetz ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. And you heard former Chief Wagner testify ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. And he testified this morning that he had told you 
that he thought more police were needed down in the dock area, and 
that you told him, "two are enough." 

Did you say that? 

Mr. Ploetz. I never made that statement, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Did you hear Mr. Wagner make it ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I heard that statement made. 

Senator Mundt, You are testifying under oath, and therefore when 
Mr. Wagner made that statement he was perjuring himself? 

Mr. Ploetz. If that is what it can be construed as, I would say 
"Yes." 



IMPROPEIR ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9435 

Senator Mundt. Well, to fi:et away from the legal term, you are 
testifying under oath that when Mr. Wagner made that statement, 
he was not telling the truth under oath ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, this is the most clear-cut case of 
perjury on the part of somebody that we have had since these hearings 
and this labor investigation has begun. Xone of us can tell whether 
Mr. Ploetz or wdiether Mr. Wagner is telling the truth, but all of us 
know one of them is lying under oath. 

I think that we should send this as rapidly as we can to the De- 
partment of Justice, and ask them to try to unravel this enigma, and 
to proceed to prosecute whoever is lying to this committee under oath, 
because it is clear cut, and we are being imposed upon by somebody. 

The Chairman. The Chair made that announcement when this wit- 
ness first testified, and called somebody a perjurer. 

Senator Mundt. This is a different man, and a different case. 

The Chairman. I announced at that time that all testimony where 
there is an irreconcilable conflict would be handled accordingly. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Mayor, early in your testimony this afternoon 
you were asked about any discussions with the imion in regard to 
whether or not they wanted the clay boat unloaded. Your reply, as 
I understood it, was that you did not have any official discussion 
with them. 

Did you have any unofficial discussion with them about whether or 
not the clay boat should be unloaded ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, Mr. Senator, as far as the general knowledge was 
concerned in the dock area, as I stated earlier, all of the people down 
on the dock area were interested in not seeing that clay unloaded- 

Senator Curtis. I remember you saying that, but did you have any 
discussion with anybody in the union about it? 

You have said that you did not have any official discussion. But did 
you have any unofficial conversation with anybodv in the union about 

it? 

Mr. Ploetz, I don't recall of any discussion with the union officials 
at all on that. 

Senator Curtis. Well now, in your opinion did the Buteyn Co. 
suffer by not being able to perform the work that they had con ti acted 
todo? 

Mr. Ploetz. I presume they did. 

Senator Curtis. That is a small business ; isn't it ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I do not know the size of the business, Senator. 

Senator Curtis. You know it is a local concern compared to our 
great industries, with a small number of employees? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And so far as you know they had no labor trouble 
of their own ; did they ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Not that I know of ; no. 

Senator Curtis. It was testified here that the inability to perform 
that contract created financial hardship on Mr. Buteyn. Did you 
feel that the constituted authorities had any obligation to the Buteyn 
Co. to see to it that they could carry on their business ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well Senator, my primary concern was the safety and 
welfare of the people in that area. It simply was against my religion 
and against my principles and religion at this time to have placed 



9436 IMPROPER ACTniTLEfS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

property ri<Thts above human rifjhts, when I remembered, and I was 
an eye witness also, to the 1934 episode, when I saw what happened 
at that time. 

I definitely did not want to see anyone injured, blood shed, or any- 
body shot, in that dock area, and I definitely would not have been a 
part of such an act as happened in 1934. 

Senator Curtis. Now ray question is. Did you consider that the duly 
constituted authorities had any obligation to the Buteyn Co. to see to 
it that they could carry on their business ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I presume, as far as the contract was concerned, there 
was a contract between the Kohler Co. and the Buteyn Bros., as far 
as the delivery of that clay was concerned. But, after such a crowd 
had congregated inTliat dock area, I made the statement at that time, 
and I made it over the air that I had arranged a meeting between the 
union officials and the Kohler Co. the following morning in my office, 
and I definitely would not allow the clay to be unloaded as long as the 
safety and welfare of the people was in jeopardy. And that as long 
as — or shall I put it this way, if we could have had perhaps more 
police power put into that area a day or 2 later, perhaps the clay 
would have been miloaded. But the ship left before any such steps 
had to be taken. And the ship was not directed to any other destina- 
tion by myself. That order had been given during the course of that 
afternoon already. 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Mundt, and Curtis.) 

Senator Curtis. What is the answer to my question ? Did you feel 
that the constituted authorities did or did not have an obligation to 
the Bute5m Bros, to see that they could carry on their business? 

Mr. Ploetz. I think the obligation was more to protect the human 
rights than the property rights at that particular time. 

Senator Curtis. Would you say you had no obligation? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, definitely, as I stated, as far as the protection of 
the people is concerned, that nobody was to be injured down there, or 
possibly even killed. As had been labeled at that particular time, it 
was always referred to as a black Tuesday. In my own mind I am 
satisfied that there was no bloodshed or it might have been labeled a 
red Tuesday. 

Senator Curtis. Did you have a telephone conversation with Sheriff 
Mosch that day ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, at approximately 8 o'clock in the evening. 

Senator Curtis. Did you call the sheriff at anytime and arrange 
to meet him down at 5th and Pennsylvania Avenue? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, Senator, I did. 

Senator Curtis. Did you meet him there ? 

Mr. Ploetz. At approximately 8 o'clock in the evening. 

Senator Curtis. That is about three-quarters of a block from where 
the crowd began ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't remember just where I met him or what loca- 
tion of the dock, but I met him down at the dock area around 5th 
and Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Senator Curtis. You met him there for the purpose of' discussing 
the situation? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 



IMPROPEK ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9437 

Senator Curtis. Did you discuss it with him ? 

Mr. Ploetz. We did. 

Senator Curtis. Did Mr. Heimke come up to you while you and the 
sheriff were talking ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't recall whether Chief Heimke, who was then 
captain at the time, whether or not he got into that particular con- 
versation at the time, because we didn't spend too much time in the 
dock area. 

Senator Curtis. I didn't ask if he got into the conversation. I said 
did he come up to where you and the sheriff were talking ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't recall whether he did or not, Senator. He 
might have. 

Senator Curtis. He might have. Your first conversation, was that 
in the car or outside of the car ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I believe it was outside the car. "\'\nien the sheriff 
drove his car down there, he came out of the car and came over to 
where I was standing, I believe. 

Senator Curtis. So you did have a conversation outside of the car, 
and then later did the two of you get in the car ? 

Mr. Ploetz. We both got into Sheriff' Mosch's car and drove out to 
Sheboyban Falls to see the chairman of the county board. 

Senator Curtis. Just a minute. Did you drive away immediately 
when you got in the car ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. You did not remain there conversing ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No; I don't believe that we spent any time on the dock 
at all, because we had discussed outside of the car that we should go 
out and see the county board chairman. 

Then we continued our conversation as we drove out to Shebovgan 
Falls. 

Senator Curtis. You did not get into the car, roll up the windows 
and continue conversing ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No ; I don't remember that we ever did that. 

Senator Curtis. You don't remember, or you didn't? Which is 
your answer? 

Mr. Ploetz. I would say that we didn't. 

Senator Curtis. Were you in the car talking at any time that the 
captain came and rapped on the window ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Not to my knowledge, Senator, 

Senator Curtis. When you were conversing outside of the car, did 
you say to the sheriff, "How much are you obligated to the union for ?" 

Mr. Ploetz. No ; I never made a statement like that. 

Senator Curtis. Did you make any statement or ask any questions 
similar to that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No. I never made a statement like that or similar to 
that at that time nor at any other time. Mr. Senator, while I cannot 
introduce the telegram as far as that is concerned, or become part of 
the evidence, I would like to state at this time, if I may, tha<^ T did 
have a telephone conversation with the former Sheriff Mosch during 
the noon hour, and I related to him the happening of this morning's 
meeting and told him about Senator Mundt thinking the construction 
did not imply that particular statement. 

21243— 58— pt. 23 19 



9438 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Tliere is a telegram in the hands of the chairman, and I also received 
a copy, tliat tlu^ sliorifl' sent to me a copy of, that Chief Heimke def- 
initely liad lied ill regard to making tliat statement, that he never 
made a statement at that time noi- at any other time. 

I wanted to have that snbstantiated by having that telegram sent 
to me, which the chairman also lias tlie original of now. 

The CiiAiioiAX. I am tr^-ing to lind out if I liave it. I do not have 
it. It may have reached the office. 

Mr. Ploetz. That is what I seen. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. You have stated that yon did not say this or any- 
thing like it, "Plow much are yon obligated to tlie union for?" 

AVere you obligated to the union ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Was I obligated to the union, Senator '. 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Afi-. Ploetz. Xo, 1 was not. 

Senator Curtis. Were you obligated to them for political support. 

Mr. Ploetz. Senator, I think that yon have experienced it time and 
time again the same as I have, that yon seek the support from every- 
body, running for an}' office, which I did. 

I sought the support not only of labor, but I sought the support of 
everybody in the community. At the times when I ran either for 
aldernnin and was elected, or at the time that I ran for mayor, I re- 
ceived the support and was elected, not jnst by labor but by the rank 
and file of the people in the city. 

Senator Curtis. Was the Kohler strike in progress when you I'an 
for mayor ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, Senator, it was. 

Senator Curtis. And it had been going on for some time? 

Mr. Ploetz. It had been in progress for 1 year. 

Senator Curtis. Had this particular union, ^'?y^ of the UAW, liad 
they been active in your behalf, in your campaign I 

Mr. Ploetz. Mr. Senator, at the time that I ran, there was a what 
was called the Farm-Labor Political League, who was qnite instru- 
mental in my election. But that Farm-Labor Political League was 
not only made np of labor people or nnion people, but members from 
every walk of life belonged to that or were allowed to join that par- 
ticular organization. 

As far as 8;>3 is concerned, I presnme that 8'^;> also lent their sup- 
port to my election, the same as everybody else did. 

Senator Curtis. Yon don't know whether they did or not? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, as far as some of the members are concerned, 
I do know that some of the members helped circnlate my cards, cir- 
culated some of my literature, and gave me general support. 

Senator (\'rtis. Who did? Who gave you general su})port ? 

Mr. Ploetz. 8-'v3 along with the rest of labor. 

Senator Curtis. Tliey did distribute some of your 

Mr. Ploetz. Or the rest of the people in the connnnnity. 

Senator Curtis. They did distribute some of your literature? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, Senator, they did. 

Senator Curtis. Did they provide an}' literature? 

Mr, Ploetz. Did they provide any literature? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9439 

Mr. Ploetz. As fur ;is providing literutiire is concerned, if you per- 
haps have reference to the support that I received either in their strike 
bulletins or on their — whatever else they put out as far as publicity 
is concerned, I presume 3^ou could call it that — support. 

Senator Mundt. Will the gentleman yield I 

Senator Curtis. Just one more question. They did give you some 
support through the strike bulletin? 

]\Ir. Ploetz. Yes. They gave me supi)ort, not only myself, Senator, 
as far as other candidates are concerned also, as far as supporting cer- 
tain candidates are concerned. 

Senator Curtis. What other candidates? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, as far as city officials are concerned. In fact, as 
far as 

Senator Curtis. Which ones? 

Mr. Ploetz. The names of them I 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, Senator, I don't recall the names of any of the 
candidates that they might have supported at any one time. 

Senator Curtis. Specifically, who else did the TTAW 833 support 
at the time you were running for mayor? 

Mr. Ploetz. At the time that I ran for mayor, it was just a city wide 
election, not a county election. 

Senator Curtis. Who else did they support in their strike bulletins 
and by distributing literature? 

]Mr. Ploetz. Well, I believe some of the aldermeiu As far as some 
of the other city officials are concerned, they perhaps supported, as 
far as city treasurer, city clerk is concerned, or the city assessor — any 
one of the city offices. 

Senator Curtis. But in their strike bulletins, they had information 
or statements beneficial to you, that you felt were beneficial to you 
politically ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Ci'Rtis. I yield to Senator Mundt. 

Senator Muxdt. What year were you running for mayor? 

Mr. Ploetz. 1055, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. And you say this was a citywide election? 

]Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Only the people in the city vote for mayor. It is a 
municipal post you were running for ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. You mentioned something to Senator Curtis about 
a farm-labor political league, and I was wondering what the farm- 
ers were doing in this municipal campaign. 

]\Ir. Ploetz. No, Senator, the Farm-Labor Political League had 
not only been functioning as far as city elections are concerned, but 
also as far as county, State, or National elections were concerned. 

It was an organization made up of the rank and file of the people, 
as far as 

Senator Mundt. There wouldn't be any farmers either voting 
for you or your opponent when you are running for mayor. 

Air. Ploetz. No, but it was the same organization. Senator, tliat was 
also active in other elections. 



9440 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. It could very well be, but I am simjply pointing 
out that insofar as having any impact on their membership in a 
municipal election, only that branch comprised of the City League 
could vote. No farmers could vote for you or against you when you 
are running for mayor ? 

Mr. Ploetz. No; but they didn't change their name or tlieir con- 
stitution or anything like that. 

Senator Mundt. Who was the chairman of the Sheboygan County 
Farm-Labor Political League ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I do not remember. Senator, who the chairman hap- 
pened to have been at that particular time. 

Senator Mundt. Would it refresh your memory if I were to ask you 
if it was William Rawling ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, I believe William Rawling was the chairman 
at one time. Whether he was chairman at that particular time, that 
I don't know. But he was chairman at one time. 

Senator Mundt. He was chairman according to an article in the 
Kohlarian published April 7, 1955, and that is the year you told me 
you were running for election, and it quoted him as being chairman 
of the Sheboygan County Farm-Labor Political League. 

Is that the same William Rawling who was also chief steward of 
the strike committee of local 833 ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I think it was, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. The same man. So that the chairman of the 

Political committee which was supporting you and endorsing you, tlie 
heboygan County Farm-Labor Political League, was headed by the 
chief steward of the strike committee of the local which was on strike ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, what his activities were in the strike, that I do 
not know. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. He is listed as chief steward of the strike commit- 
tee, member of strike committee, local 833. 

How much did the labor union contribute in money to your cam- 
paign ? 

You must have to make a report, I suppose. 

Mr. Ploetz. I have that information right here, Senator. I had 
the city clerk give me a duplicate of the expenses that were filed. 

Senator Mundt. Just the expense statement filed by you as a can- 
didate or by the committee ? 

Mr. Ploetz. This was an expense account that was filed by me. 
However, I wish I Avould have brought along the expense account 
also, if there was any, that was filed by the committee, which I pre- 
sume that there was. 

I liave here on March 12, 1955, that I received from the Farm Labor 
Political League for advertising $25 and on April 2, 1955, from the 
Sheboygan Farm-Labor Political League I received another $160. 

What expenses they incurred. Senator, that I do not know. 

Senator Mundt. That is the amount that aou reported as the total 
of $185? 

Mr. Ploetz. On my oAvn expense account. 

Senator Mundt. Your own expense account. Is tliat all that (hey 
contributed to vou in cash? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9441 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, no, I don't recall whether it was in cash or 
whether it was in check. That I don't recall, either. 

Senator Muxdt. Is that all of what they contributed to your cam- 
paign either in check or in cash ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, except for what they may have spent as far as 
other advertising is concerned. I presume that there was. 

Senator Mundt. Do you have a brother in Sheboygan ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I have two brothers in Sheboygan. 

Senator Mundt. What do they do ? 

Mr. Ploetz. One brother is engaged in a tavern business and the 
other one is working for the park board for the City of Sheboygan. 

Senator Mundt. What were your two brothers doing in 1955 ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I believe the one was with the park board at that time 
already — or was he with the school board ? 

That I don't recall. At least he was working for the municipality, 
and the one that is in the tavern business was on strike. 

Senator Mundt. Do you have a brother by the name of William ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Is William a member of Local 833 ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. He was on strike, then ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That's right. 

Senator Mundt. At the time you were running for mayor. And 
at the time the Sheboygan County Farm-Labor Political League was 
endorsing j^our candidacy. I have a copy of the Kohlarian. Are you 
familiar witli the Kohlarian? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, I am, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. That is the official union paper of local 833, is 
it not? 

Mr. Ploetz. I believe it was. 

Senator Mundt. In its issue for Thursday, February 3, 1955, under 
the headline "Political Support of Ploetz by UAW-CIO Local 833," 
it says : 

The AFL-CIO and independent unions of the Sheboygan area are backing 
Rudolph J. Ploetz in his bid for the mayor of Sheboygan. Rudy, as he is com- 
monly known, received the endorsement of Sheboygan County Farm and Labor 
Political League, an organization made up of AFL-CIO and independent labor 
imions, and cooperating farm organizations. While Ploetz is not a member 
of any labor union, he has always been sympathetic to the cause of organized 
labor. 

Rudolph Ploetz knows well the problems of local 833 in its historic struggle 
for justice at the Kohler Co. Rudy's brother Bill is a loyal 833 member, well 
known and on our picket lines. 

What I have read you, is that a statement of fact ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Welf, as far as my brother being a fonner striker is 
concerned, that is true. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. And that you had received earlier, in some earlier 
campaign, as well as in this campaign, the support of the Sheboygan 
County Farm-Labor organization ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Let me put it this way. Senator: As far as the en- 
dorsement of the support is concerned, I made many, many contacts 
and appeared before many groups, labor and other groups, as far as 
seeking the support of the rank and file of the people is concerned, 
whether it was labor or not labor, union or nonunion, and while many 



9442 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

other candidates sou^lit that same support, I think tliat any candi- 
date running" for any office considers himself quite fortunate to get 
the endorsement from as many <!:roups as he j)OSsibly can. 

Senator Muxot. Did you buy any advertisin<r in the Kohlarian? 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't recall whether I did. I mifjht have, Senator. I 
don't recall whether I did, but 1 might have. 

Senator Mindt. How much is their advertising i-ate? 

Mr. Ploktz. I don't recall what their advertising rate is, either. 
But as far as adveitising is concerned. J tried to advertise in as many 
different papers and organs as I possibly could. 

Senator Mi'xdt. Well, the Kohlarian for March 24, 1955, thei'e was 
a three-quarter-page ad by the Sheboygan County Farm and Labor 
Political Ijcague, sliowing you as their endorsed candidate. 

I presume you did not pay for that. That would be paid for by 
the league, is that riglit ? 

Mr. Ploetz. It would state on the ad as to who the party is that 
paid for that particular ad. 

Senator IVIuxdt. It stated on the ad that the Sheboygan County 
Farm and Labor League paid for it. 

Mr. Ploetz. They paid for it. 

Senator Muxdt. So this Mould be a contribution over and above the 
$185 you said you got yourself from the league ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. That was an expenditure on tlie ,part 
of the league. 

Senator Muxdt. In the Kohlarian for July 21, 1055, which would 
be after your election — is that right ? We find this on page 3 : 

The Farm-Laboi- League backs Ploetz. The Sheboygan County Farm-Labor 
Political League instrumental in electing the city of Sheboygan administration 
now in office. 

Were you running for reelection or were you running for the posi- 
tion for the first time ! 

Mr. Ploetz. In 1955? 

Senator INIundt. That is right. 

Mr. Ploetz. That was the first time I was elected. 

Senator Mttxdt. The first time you were elected. So apparently 
they had backed your predecessor in office whoever it was, because 
they said: The Sheboygan County Farm-Labor Political League, in- 
strumental in electing the Sheboygan County administration now in 
office, the league announced its continued support of Mavor Rudolph 
J. Ploetz. 

I am simply pointing out the identity of interest between the so- 
called Farm-Labor Political I^eague and your campaign when you 
were running for mayor. It goes down in several issues of the 
Kohlarian, ])ointing out their support. So, you were known as the 
candidate endorsed by labor in this particular contest. None of your 
op])onents, I take it, had that endorsement. Is that right? 

Mr. Ploetz. So far as my op])onents are concerned ^ 

Senator IMuxdt. Did you have more than one opponent for mayor? 

Mr. Ploetz. I had two opponents, and, while the one es|>ecially 
sought tlie endorsement of labor and did not receive it, I did receive 
it. 

Senator Mux-dt. So, you wei-e the labor-endorsed candidate? 

Mr. Ploetz. I was the labor-endorsed candidate. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 9443 

Senator Mundt. The other fellow tried to get it, and did not get it. 

Mr, Ploetz. I merely wanted to point out, Senator, that I was 
not the only one that sought the support or endorsement of labor, but 
1 was the one that did receive the support and the endorsement. 

Senator Muxdt. Did you make a statement on the occasion of the 
clay-boat incident to the effect that the crane would not be taken into 
the"^ dock area, but if you were permitted to move it you would take 
it back to Kohler, where it belonged ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I made the statement. Senator, as I stated before, that, 
as far as the unloading was concerned, it would not take place unless 
I was sure that the safety of the people and welfare was not in jeopardy, 
and, as far as the removal of the crane is concerned, it was known to 
me by that time that the crane belonged to the Kohler Co., and that 
statement was made by me, that the crane should go back to tlie Kohler 
Co., because, after all, it was Kohler property. 

Senator Mundt. You made the statement, I think, to Mr. Buteyn, 
1 of the 2 Buteyn brothers, is his presence, anyhow, to the crowd, so 
he quoted you as saying over the microphone that, if they would 
permit the crane to be taken out from the premises, it would never 
again be used in unloading the clay boat. Is that a correct statement? 
Did you make that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. It would never be used again ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Ploetz. No. As far as the statement is concerned, it is like I 
stated before, Senator, that if I could have been assured that the safety 
and the welfare of the people was not in jeopardy, perhaps the boat 
would have been unloaded the next day or the following day. But as 
long as the safety and the welfare of the people is in jeopardy, it defi- 
nitely was against my principles to allow the unloading to take place 
for fear that there might be some injured 

Senator Mundt. Who was threatening the safety and welfare of the 
people ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, as far as the number of people are concerned that 
had assembled on the dock, I was afraid that somebody might be 
injured, because, after all, there just was not enough police power 
there. 

Senator Mundt. You were responsible for that. You didn't send 
them down. You said there was nothing to worry about. You didn't 
send them down. 

Mr. Ploetz. While the crowd. Senator, was not of any violent type, 
as far as the people are concerned, they were all milling around ; there 
were people down there from every walk of life ; it was vacation week ; 
there was a lot of women down there, a lot of children down there. 

Senator Mundt. Did you think the women and children were going 
to create a riot, have violence, and threaten people's welfare and 
security ? 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as the riot is concerned, I don't even like to see 
the word "riot" used, because, as far as any violence is concerned, 
there was no violence while I was down at the dock. The people were 
all, comparatively, in a peaceful, jovial mood. They were milling 
around; they were talking; they were laughing; they were joking. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know about the case of Mr. Grunewald? 

Mr. Ploetz. Merely what I heard. 



9444 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mr not. Here is a picture of it. This is what happened to 
him clown tliere in what you don't like to call a riot. 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as that incident is concerned, Senator, I didn't 
know at that particular time what actually had happened. When I 
got back to the police department, I inquired whether or not any 
arrest had been made, or what information they had, and there is no 
record of it even to this day, to my knowledge, any record of that 
particular incident. The only thing is what I read in the paper and 
what 1 heard the people talking about. 

Senator Mindt. Here is a picture taken in the clinic, supplied by 
the clinic, on Wednesday, July 6. 

Mr. Ploetz. Who caused it or anything, or who did it, I don't know. 

Senator Mundt. We had testimony from one of your police officers 
that Mr. Grunewald refused to name his accuser. He didn't want to 
get any more trouble, so he refused to serve out a warrant. I am quite 
sure you are right when you say it never was brought into court circles. 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. I don't know. 

Senator Mundt. But it would indicate that you would not have to 
be quite so cautious about using the word "riot," because there certainly 
was some riotous activity down there, so far as what happened to Mr. 
Grunewald is concerned. 

Mr. Ploetz. Like I say, Senator, if that ever would have been 
brought to a head as far as that was concerned, as to who actually was 
the cause of it 

Senator Mundt. It was brought to his head ; he is all bandaged up, 
and smashed up. It is true, if when you went to him and said, ""Wlio 
hit you?'' he said, "I don't want to get into any more trouble, I don't 
want to swear out a warrant against anybody." As far as the police 
were concerned, they couldn't proceed beyond that, because there, 
apparently, was not a policeman at the spot to see what was happening. 

Did you ever propose to the Federal Conciliation Service, the Federal 
Conciliation Service, that an embargo be made against clay shipments 
toKohler? 

Mr. Ploetz. I just about contacted every gi-oup or individual or- 
ganization. Senator, on a local. State, or national level. I wrote letters 
to the clergy in Sheboygan. I wrote letters on a State level, and I 
wrote letters as far as the national level is concerned. I believe I even 
wrote a letter to President Eisenhower at that time. 

Senator Mundt. In all that correspondence, did you propose to the 
Federal Conciliation Service that they have an embargo on clay ship- 
ments as far as the Kohler Co. was concerned ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I may have. Senator, if I would look, perhaps, through 
my files I maybe would have found something to that effect. 

Senator Mundt. This is a press statement on July 27, 1955. Let me 
read this and see if it refreshes your memory. You were then mayor, 
were you not ? 

Mr. Pix^ETz. 1955, yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. This is in the Sheboygan Press of that date. 

A proposal by Mayor Rudolph Ploetz for an embargo on clay shipments to the 
strike-involved Kohler Co. pending the outcome of renewed negotiations was 
rejected llatly and quickly Tuesday night by the Chief of the Federal Conciliation 
Service. Mr. Finnegan. Ploetz said he requested the Federal Mediation and 
Conciliation Service to obtain a voluntary, temporary halting of clay movements?, 
whereby all shipments of clay to the Kohler Co. would be held in abeyance until 
negotiations opening today reached a successful conclusion or are terminated. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9445 

That is the quotation attributed to you in the Sheboygan Press. Does 
that refresh your memory ? 

Mr. Ploetz. It does, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Did you make such a statement ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I did. 

Senator Mundt. You did. A^Hiat was the response you got from 
Mr. Finnegan and the Federal Conciliation Service '? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, as you stated there, it was a flat "no." It became 
rather frustrating. Senator, to seek every avenue and contact as many 
people as I possibly could think of, hoping and praying that the settle- 
ment of the strike could be brought about. As I stated before, I con- 
tacted the clergy, I met with the 

Senator Mundt. The question, Mr. Ploetz, was, "\^^iat response did 
you get from the Federal Conciliation Service to that suggestion? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, I don't recall what the exact answer was. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Let me read you what was in this same article in 
your hometown paper and see if that refreshes your memory : 

Joseph Finnegan, head of the Service, said in a telephone interview from his 
Washington, D. C, home, the request represented an irresponsible, self-serving 
politically expedient statement, calculated to serve no useful purpose, except to 
impede mediation efforts. 

Did you get any other response than that, or was that the final 
response that you received ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I think that was the final response that I received, 
Senator. 

Senator Mundt. I couldn't hear you, Mr. Ploetz ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I believe that was the final response. 

Senator Mundt. That was the final response. 

Mr. Ploetz. I was just looking in my brief case. I thought per- 
haps I had the letter from Mr. Finnegan right in here. 

I don't believe I have it. 

Senator Mundt. You don't have it. 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't believe I got it in here. 

Senator Mundt. I don't believe you need it, the letter. You have 
verified the accuracy of the news story and the approach that you 
made and the answer that you got. It seems to me that unless you 
have something else you want to contribute in that connection, you 
wouldn't need to find the letter. That speaks for itself. Mayor 
Ploetz, hindsight is always better than foresight. If you were going 
to start in today, with the experiences as you had them in connection 
with this clay boat incident, what would you do differently now from 
what you did then ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Senator, if there would be a recurrence, or, I should 
say, if I were to do the same thing over again, my prime concern 

Senator Mundt. Do you mean now that 3''ou are telling the com- 
mittee that if this were all to happen again, knowing everything that 
you know now you still wouldn't have sent any more policemen down 
there to keep order ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, you didn't let me finish. Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Well, that is what you said that far. That 
startled me so that I wanted to see if I heard you correctly. 

Mr. Ploetz. Let me set the record straight on that, as far as the 
police powers are concerned. 



9446 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

No doubt I "would try to get as many policemen down tliere, or law 
enforcement peo])le down there, as I possil)ly could. 

Senator Mu jXdt. All right. The first difference that you would do 
now, with the backaround of experience that you have had, would be 
that you would liave put more policemen on the job, on the spot, 
right'? 

Mr. Pr.oKTZ. Tliat is right. 

Senator Muxdt. What else would you do differently ? 

Mr. Ploetz. But as far as the actual unloading is concerned of tliat 
clay, regardless of how many men I would have doAvn there, if I 
thouglit that there might be any people injured, or might be any 
bloodshed, or anj'thing of that nature, I still would not allow any 
loading to go on until I know that the safety and welfare of the people 
was not in jeopardy. 

Senator Mundt. Let's stop at that point a minute. You mentioned 
that a great many times, that you were against bloodshed and against 
killing, and that certainly is a commendable position. 

But just wlio did you think was going to create the bloodshed down 
there? 

Who did you think might be killing somebody? It wasn't going 
to be the spectators. We can start out by eliminating them. It 
wouldn't be the women and children who were going to attack any- 
body ; would it ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, with a milling crowd like that, one never knows 
what may happen, because as far as the people are concerned that 
were milling around in that area, many things might have happened. 

Senator Mundt. All right. But to have a riot, to have killing and 
to have bloodshed, it takes somebody going in there deliberately trying 
to engage in some kind of personal attack. Who did you think was 
going to make that attack ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I^et me put it this way, Senator, that after all it takes 
two to have, shall we say, a fight, and if the attempt would liave been 
made to unload the clay, it would have excited the people that were 
in sympatliy not to have the clay unloaded, and one thing perhaps 
would have led to another. 

Senator Mundt. So that you think that determination on the part 
of the union not to have the boat unloaded was sufficiently strong, 
sufficiently great, sufficiently deep seated, so that if necessary they 
would have tried to stop it by force; the peo})le trying to bring it in 
might liave i-esorted to force, and then jon would have had violence; 
is that what you are trying to tell me ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Tlie determination on the part of the union. Senator? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Ploetz. It wasn't only the determination on the ])art of the 
union. As far as some of the people were concerned who were down 
there, I am sure they felt that the clay should not be delivered. But 
as far as the makeup of the crowd was concerned, it was made up not 
only of union people, and I am not just referring to 833, but union 
members from other locals. And as far as nonunion people are con- 
cerned — — 

Senator Mundt. Do you mean there were other locals down there? 

Mr. Ploetz. It was vacation week and people from all walks of life 
were dowui there, people from other shops. Practicallj^ every shop 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9447 

in the city had vacation that week. There were women down there, 
children down there. 

Senator Mundt, Did you liear anything about the telephone cam- 
paign that the former police chief mentioned this morning to encourage 
people to go down there ? 

Did you know about that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. The first time that I heard about that was in this morn- 
ing's testimony. 

Senator Mundt. You had never heard about that before ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I have never heard about that before. 

Senator Mundt. I think that is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. Did you have a meeting the Saturday preceding 
the clay boat incident wtih Louis Reml, the business agent for the 
union ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Rami? 

Senator Curtis. Rami ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Is that the spelling you have there ? 

Senator Curtis. I though it was R-e-m-1, Louis. 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, there is a Louis Rami, who I understand is a 
business agent for the builder trades council. 

Senator Curtis. I am talking about the business agent. Did you 
have a meeting with him the Saturday before the clay boat incident? 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't remember, I might have. Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Did you have one with Ed Ehlert, an assistant 
business agent of the truck drivers local ? 

Mr. Ploetz. I might also have, Senator. I don't recall. It has 
been quite some time ago now. 

Senator Curtis. Well, did you have a conference with these two 
men or either of them during which you urged them to withdraw 
Buteyn's truckdrivers and laborers on the day the clay was to be 
unloaded ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That I urged them to withdraw the truckdrivers ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Ploetz. I don't recall, Senator. I might have had a meeting 
with them. I don't remember what the nature of the discussion 
was, if I did have a meeting with them. But I don't recall off- 
hand. Like I say, it is quite some time ago. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I did have one other question. 
We got diverted, Mr. Ploetz. We were talking about your campaign 
for mayor, and the statement that you filed. I meant to ask you how 
much did you spend altogether in your campaign for mayor. Does 
your statement show that ? 

Mr. Ploetz. On March 5, 1955, display advertising — — 

Senator Mundt. You don't have to break it down. I am interested 
in the total. How much did you spend altogether ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, that was $115, Senator. 

March 12, 1955, in addition to this $115, now, $142 ; April, $47, and 
a few cents in on that ; and April 9, $203 and some cents, 84 cents. 

Senator Mundt. Well, now, I don't quite understand those papers 
vou are reading from there. 



9448 IMPROPER ACTTVITIE-S IN THE LABOR FIELD 

You do not file a separate statement for every expenditure you 
make, do j'ou ? 

Mr. Pix^E-rz. No. The figures that I gave you, Senator, is that 
there is a financial statement filed right before the primary, and 
then after the 2)iiinaiy, and before the general, and after the general, 
and that is why 1 had these four figures in there. 

The first figure I g'lve you was $115. 

Senator Mundt. That was before the pi'imary? 

Mr. Ploktz. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. $115? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, sir. 

Senator MuNirr. And you spent $142.47 and $203 ? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Are you testifying then under oath, Mr. Ploetz, 
that all you spent in your mayoralty campaign was $o02. 

Mr. Ploetz. ^Yliat I personally spent? 

Senator Mundt. What you spent. 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Did you have any other committees working for 
you besides the farm-labor political committee? 

Mr. Ploetz. Not that I can think of, Senator. 

Senator Mundt. You must know that. This was only 2 years ago. 

Mr. Ploetz. I had j^eople working in my behalf as far as that is 
concerned, but as far as the actual expendituies that were incurred at 
that time 

Senator Mundt. Was anybody else spending money in your behalf 
besides you; your $392, and the farm-labor group, $185, and did any- 
body else spend any money in your behalf? 

Mr. Ploetz. Not to my knowledge. Senator. That is why I say, I 
wish that I would have thought of this at that time, but instead of 
just bringing my own expense sheets along, I would have brought the 
other expense sheets along also, w^hoever was spending any. 

Senator Mundt. Did local 833 contribute anything to your cam- 
paign ? 

Mr, Ploetz. Not to my knowledge, no. 

Again, Senator, I have the reports here as to who made those con- 
tributions, and the Farm-Labor Political League, there is nothing in 
there as far as 833 is concerned on my report here. 

Those reports were taken from the city clerk's office before I came 
to Washington. 

Senator Mundt. Did they contribute the money which was spent 
by the Farm-I^abor Political League? 

Mr. Ploetz. Did 833 take some of that money? 

Senator Mundt. Not "Did they take it." 

Mr. Ploetz. To use it for campaign ]mr]ioses, you mean? 

Senator Mundt. That is correct. 

Mr. Ploetz. Not to my knowledge; no. If thei'e was anything, it 
was betwe<^n the P^arm-Labor I'olitical League. If they did spend 
any money, they filed their ex])ense account with tlie city clerk the 
same as I did, showing exactly where tliose ex])enditui'es wei'e made, 
and what ])uri)ose it was for. That is a matter of recoi'd. 

Senator Mundt. And where they got the money, do they file that? 

Mr. Ploetz. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. That is a matter of record ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9449 

Mr. Ploetz. That is a matter of record with the city clerk in 
Sheboygan. 

Mr. Kexxedy. I have just a couple of questions. 

Did you or the law-enforcement officials in this county and this 
area, work closely together to try to solve this vandalism that was 
going on ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, Mr. Kennedy, I believe that I couldn't have done 
any more than I did do. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were working with the other law-enforcement 
officials in the area ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, Mr. Kennedy, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. It seems to me that it is a most unusual law-enforce- 
ment i)rogram that you have out there. 

For instance, in the middle of the strike while these acts of van- 
dalism were going on, and there was this bitter feeling between the 
strikers and nonstrikers, the sheriff, who is in charge of the whole 
area, receives a major financial contribution from the union. In the 
meantime the chief of police in charge of Kohler Village is working 
for the village in which Kohler Co. pays 80 percent of the taxes, and 2 
out of 3 work for the Kohler Co., and therefore his salary is being 
paid by the company. 

During this same period of time, you are receiving support from the 
union, and receiving financial support from an organization that is 
closely associated with the union. 

The deputy chief of police in the city of Sheboygan is having con- 
ferences with the representatives of the Kohler Co. about putting a 
tap on the union telephones, and the chief of police is having another 
conversation about putting a bug in the room of the union head- 
quarters. 

It seems to me that you have five people working out there, and it 
is not the closest and most amicable relationship that I ever head of. 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, Mr. Kennedy, if you could have lived up in She- 
boygan during this time, perhaps you could have a better insight of 
the stoi'y. 

Mr. Kennedy. We had quite an insight just from those facts about 
the five law-enforcement agencies. Then on top of that, as I under- 
stand from Chief Heimke, the district attorney never called a grand 
jury, nor did the judge, and 2 or 3 requests were made to the Governor, 
and he never intervened. 

I don't wonder that this thing has deteriorated as it has, in view of 
the facts that have been developed here. 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, as far as the law enforcement of it is concerne-d, 
and to try and curb the vandalism and the violence and everything else, 
as I exhibited this morning, and I would like to submit this as an 
exhibit here. 

It is on April 22 and 23, 1955, from the Sheboygan Press clippings 
here, the headline reads: "Mayor Invokes Police Power To Crack 
Down on Vandalism," and "The Mayor Invokes His Executive Police 
Power To Crack Down on the Recent Wave of Vandalism Sweeping 
Sheboygan." 

The Chairman. Is that a newspaper article ? 

Mr. Ploetz. It is a newspaper article, and a photostatic copy of it. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 83. 



9450 IMPROPKR ACTIVITIP:S I\ IHE LABOR FIELD 

(DcKMunent referred to Avas marked "Exliibit Xo. 83,"' for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman, That is for reference only, and you mav ([uote from 
it 

Mr. Ploktz. Now, it was only, I believe 2 nights after I took office 
that we had another dynamitin;L; take place of an automobile. It was 
about 10 :'")0 in the evening. 

I innnediately, the followino- day, oot to<>ether with Chief Wa<!ner 
and we put on the additional men that Avere on the eligibility list that 
had been created by the fire and police commission. 

Mr. Kexxedy. I am not questioning your sincerity. All I say is 
that the facts regarding you and these other gentlemen ai'e rather 
unusual, and I think that you liave made your point and the record 
is complete on it. 

Mr. Ploetz. The thing is, Mr. Kennedy, that J was ])ringing this 
out. 

Ml'. Kennedy. How many of these acts of vandalism did you solve 
while you were mayor ? 

Mr. Peoetz. To my knowledge, as far as the arrests that were made 
and the one that was found guilty, I believe is this Bonanse. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just one person found guilty in all of the acts of 
vandalism that occurred during your tenui'e of office ? 

Mr. ]'*E()ETZ. I think there might be another one, but that isn't what 
I recall. Here is another one, Mr. Kennedy, "200 Volunteers To Fight 
Vandalism,'' and this is a date of April 1955, that I had a meeting with 
the chief of police, Wagner and tlie sheriil'. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why don't you just get them all together, and just 
prP!"5ent them to the chairman, and he can look them over. 

Mr. Ploetz. Then I would also like to point out, if I nuiy, Mr. 
Kennedy, that this morning the dynamite cache was brought out. 
Now, I have ])hotostatic copies also of that entire hapjiening. 

In fact, to set the record straight on that, it was on a Sunday after- 
noon at approximately 2 : 30. 

Mr. Kennedy. I don't think we ha\'e to go really all through it 
again, and I think the facts are in, unless you think thei-e was some 
reflection on you. 

Mr. Ploetz. The part that I ])layed in it is that Sheriff Mosch 
came over to my home at about 2 : 30 in the afternoon, and it was 
Sheriff ]\Iosch. 1 of his deputies, and myself together with Mr. Zim- 
merman who testified here the other day, the 4 of us went out there. 

Chief Wagner hadn't even been along out there on that first oc- 
casion. Then the headlines came out: "Arrest 4 Strikers at Cache 
of Dynamite." 

The following night, the Milwaukee Sentinel said, "Free 4 Kohler 
Strikers Seized Near Dynamite." 

That morning when I received the call from the police department, 
I believe it was Chief Wagner, tliat tlie dynamite had been located 
and they had an ironclad case against these four fellows. 

Had this dynamite been leiPt in that particular ])lace instead of 
jumping right out there and getting these four men, perhaps we 
might have been able to actually a])prehend the guilty parties, and 
instead the decoy was taken away, and there was no more case. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why don't you just present those? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9451 

The Chairman. They may be made exhibit 83, A and B, and any 
further letters required. 

(Documents referred to were marked "exhibits No. 83, A and B'', 
for reference, and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. I think that that is all, unless there is something- 
else that you have to say, particularly. 

Mr. Ploetz. As far as the violence and vandalism was concerned, 
I would like to point out that I myself had my home stoned, and I 
received letters threatening, and I also have a photostatic copy here 
which is in the hands of the Federal Bureau of Investigation now, 
where I received a threatening letter and I turned it over. It is 
dated February 1956, which in turn was handed over to the FBI 
through the postal department in Sheboygan. 

I would like to give that to you. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit 84 for reference. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 84,"- for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Ploetz. I have letters here that I can't even read here in the 
hearing room but if you would like to have copies of those letters, 
there are the most foul things there that I received. 

The Chair3ian. They can be filed for the trasli can. "We don't 
need them. 

Mr. Ploetz. Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Chairman, I also have here, if 
you would like to have tliat as an exhibit, a letter that I wrote to botli 
Mr. Koliler, and to 833 president, Mv. Grass kamp, and I have both 
of their ansv.ers as to what their position was. 

The Chairman. Your letter may be made exhibit 85, and the other 
letters 85-A and B. 

(Letters referred to were marked "Exhibits 85, 85-A and B,-' for 
reference, and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Thank you very much. 

Senator Curtis. I have just one tpiestion. At the time that you 
ran for mayor, was it a violation of the law of Wisconsin to make or 
receive political contribution from a labor union ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Was it a violation to receive a contribution from a 
local ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes, either to make it or receive it ? 

Mr. Ploetz. Well, I am not too familiar with all of the Liavs, as 
far as the contributions or disbursements are concerned for political 
reasons, but as far as my own case was concerned, I haven't any ques- 
tion in my mind as to where I received this or how it was spent, be- 
cause it never was contributed to me by any specific local, and neither 
was it disbursed by any particular local. So I never gave it any 
further thought. 

As far as my contributions are concerned, they came from the Farm- 
Labor Political League, or from some political faction perhaps con- 
tributed to these. 

Senator Curtis. I wasn't asking you to redescribe how it was done, 
and my question is this : 

Do you know whether there was a State law that prohibited unions 
from contributing to political campaigns? 

Mr. Ploetz. Yes, I believe it is called the Catlin bill. I believe 
that it is the one that covers that. 



9452 IMPROPER ACTIVITLES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Curtis. I have before me what purports to be section 
346.12 (1) : 

No foreign or domestic cori)oration, no association organized under chapter 
185 doing business in this State, and no labor union or labor organization shall 
contribute money or thing of value directly or indirectly to any political party, 
political organization, political committee, or individual candidate for any 
political purpose whatsoever or to promote or defeat the candidancy of any 
person for nomination or election to any political office. 

No political party, political organization, political committee, or individual 
candidate shall accept or receive any contribution prohibited by this section. 

That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr, Edward J. Biever, will you come around, please? 

Will you be sworn ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. BiEVER. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF EDMUND J. BIEVER, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS 
COUNSEL, LYMAN C. CONGER 

The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Biever. My name is Edmund J. Biever, and my residence 
is 407 Ridge Court, Kohler, Wis. 

Mr. Conger. Mr. Chairman, may I make a statement? Mr. Biever 
has a prepared statement. 

The Chairman. We know it, and let me get him identified for the 
record, please. 

Have you stated your business or occupation ? 

Mr. Biever. I am plant manager of the Kohler Co., Kohler, Wis. 

The Chairman. Thank you, sir. 

Do you have counsel present to represent you ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir ; I have Mr. Conger. 

The Chairman. All right, that may be noted for the record. You 
have a prepared statement that you have requested the privilege of 
reading before being interrogated ? 

Mr. BIE^^SR. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You have, have you ? 

Mr. Conger. Might I make one comment on the statement, if I may ? 
The statement was prepared some days ago, and submitted to the 
committee, and several of the exhibits mentioned in the statement have 
been submitted with my previous testimony, so that Mr. Biever has 
one exhibit to present with the statement, although more than that 
are referred to in it. 

The Chairman. All right. As you read your statement and come 
to an exhibit that has already been accepted by the committee, you may 
so state. When you come to one that is noted, so advise the Chair, and 
he will make it an exhibit. 

The statement was filed under the rule, within due time, and you 
have a copy, 1 assume. 

Senator Curtis. I was going to ask for one. I did not get a copy. 

Mr. Kennedy. They said they had no more copies. 



IMPROPER ACrrV^ITIEIS IX THE LABOR FIELD 9453 

Senator Curtis. If they have one, I will give it back to them. I 
would like to follow it. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Biever, you may proceed and read 
your statement. 

Mr. Biever. My name is Edmund J. Biever, and I am a resident of 
the village of Kohler, Wis. 

I am plant manager of Kohler Co. and have held that position since 
3949. Plant protection has been my direct responsibility since that 
time. 

We made some strike preparations when we were openly threatened 
with a strike — when 

The Chairman. We are not hearing you very well, if you could 
get the microphone adjusted there. 

Mr. BiE\T5R. The union had taken a strike vote and was making- 
open preparations for the conduct of a strike. 

It was my responsibility to see that in the event of a strike there 
would be the necessary supervisory personnel within the plant to 
provide for the necessary functions such as operation of the power- 
house and pottery kilns and for protection against fire, sabotage, or 
vandalism. 

I knew of the record of the UAW-CIO for violence in strikes. 
They openly boasted that their rise to power came as the result of the 
illegal seizures of property in the sitdown strikes at the automobile 
companies. 

I was in the bargaining session when Emil Mazey boasted that he 
was the "Patton of the picket line." 

The Chairman. What bargaining session was that, in this par- 
ticular strike ? 

Mr. Biever. Prior to the strike ? 

The Chairman. In the bargaining session, you mean, immediately 
preecding the strike ? 

Mr. Biever. No ; it was in the original bargaining meeting. 

The Chairman. That does not tell me anything. When was the 
original bargaining session ? 

Mr. Biever. In 1952. 

The Chairman. Back in 1952 ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Biever. I heard Jess Ferrazza's threats as to violence in case 
there was a strike, and Mr. Conger had advised me of Jess Ferrazza's 
background as a participant in the violence in the automobile strikes. 

I heard Robert Burkhart, international representative in charge 
of the local union, announce on the union's radio program — 

If the Kohler Co. attempts to operate the plant during the strike, it will 
only be provoking trouble. As the company said in its latest publication, it is 
perfectly legal for a man to become a strikebreaker but no decent man wants 
to be one. It is also perfectly legal for a person to step off a curbstone into 
speeding traflSc, but no sensible person would do that. 

The Chairman. Was that statement made in connection with this 
strike? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Just preceding it ? 

Mr. Biever. It was just preceding the strike ; yes, sir. 

21243— 58— pt. 23 20 



9454 improp?:r activitiks ix the labor field 

The CiiAiKMAx. That was relating to this ])ai-ticiihu- strike? 

Mr. BiEVKH. Yes, sir; and we can give you the reference to that. 

The Chairman. You may be asked to do that hiter but I wanted 
to identify these things as we go along with it. 

Mr. BiEVER. We arranged for food and sleeping accommodations 
for ])ers()ns who might be com|)elled to remain within the plant, even 
converting one of our enameling furnaces into an oven to bake bread, 
because we anticipated that there would be difliculty in passing through 
the picket line in tlie event of a strike. 

And, in view of what actually hap]:»ened as this committee has seen 
by the pictures shown here, I do not believe that anyone can say that 
we Avei'e unduly api)rehensive. 

The union was advertising its strike pre])arations, leasing a tavern 
to be used as a soup kitchen, and equipping it with stoves, refrigera- 
tors, hotplates, and similar equipment. 

Tlie Chairman. When did that occur ^ Was that before the strike 
started i 

Mr. BiEVEK. It was before the strike started : yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Was that during the 30 days of grace, after the 
contract had expired and you were still carrying on negotiations ? 

Mr. BiEVER. I think it was during that period. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. BiEVER. Mr. Kitzman in his testimony made reference to an 
offer bj the union to supply maintenance men during the strike. 

I^ut he neglected to tell this connnittee that the union's oifer was on 
condition that the company close the plant and make no attempt to 
operate it. 

Employees who want to work have a right to do so and we have a 
right to operate our plant if v.e can whether the union calls a strike 
or not. 

Our belief that a majority of our em])loyees did not desire to strike, 
that there were substantial numbers of them that wanted to continue 
working has been confirmed by evidence before this committee that 
only about a third voted in favor of this strike. 

To have closed our plant because the union had called a strike would 
have been equivalent to locking out those employees who did not want 
to strike, and had a right as American citizens to earn a lawful living. 

On January 23, 1953, Mr. Emil Mazey, secretary-treasurer of the 
TL^W-CTO, ])resented us with an ultimatum that we must meet the 
union's demands by February 7 or face a strike vote on February 14, 

I discussed the matter of ])lant protection with JNIr. Conger and 
asked him if it would be legal to purchase some tear gas. lie advised 
me that as long as I was a deputy sheritl' there was nothing illegal 
about possessing tear gas. 

Senator Curtis. Can the witness speak a little louder ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

On A])ril (S, 1954, 3 days after the strike started and aftei" I had seen 
the violent and lawless maimer in which the union was conducting its 
strike and that we could expect no protection from the sheriff, I 
ordered 300 more rouiuls of tear gas. 

In June of 1955 the union started an extensive publicity campaign 
alleging that possession of tear gas by the village police was illegal 
and demanding (hat the sheriff, the district attorney, and the attorney 
general take action to disarm the village police. 



IMPROPE!R ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9455 

Mr. Conger told me that the only purpose of such a campaign that 
he could see was to disarm the village police so that an attack on the 
plant could be conducted without interference, and inquired if I was 
ready to meet such an emergency. 

I told him that I was not and, on June 7, 1955, I ordered 12 more 
shotguns and a case of buckshot. 

When the sheritf revoked my appointment as deputy sherili' on May 
21, 1954:, I consulted with Mr. C'onger. He advised me to turn the 
tear gas over to the chief of police of the village of Kohler, which I 
did immediately. 

I call the attention of the committee to the following salient facts: 

1. The company made no strike preparations except when it was 
faced with an open threat of a strike. 

2. The company violated no law in any of its strike preparations. 
The tear gas was at all times under my personal control. 

3. The company had every reason to fear that the UA"\V would con- 
duct its strike violently and with complete contempt for law and 
order, and that is exactly what happened. 

4. The tear gas and guns were obtained for one purpose only, to 
defend employees in the plant, the plant itself, and the Government 
property within it in the event of an attack upon it. 

Anyone who knows the record of the UAW for violence and illegal 
seizures of plants in the sit-down strikes, or its general patternof 
illegal conduct will know that we had reasons for such apprehension. 

5. Xone of the gas or guns were ever used. 

Although our plant was besieged for nearly 2 months by a violent 
and lawless picket line, none of this material was ever used nor was 
anyone ever threatened with its use. 

None of it was ever exhibited to the pickets and their first knowl- 
edge that we had it came when the union attorney at the AVERB hear- 
ing — desi)erately seeking for some smokescreen to distract attention 
for the union's illegal conduct — asked Mr. H. V. Kohler about it. 

I want to clear up some of the confusion which has been caused 
V)y the introduction of evidence as to i)urchases for normal plant 
protection and for normal recreational activities. 

In June of 1952 we obtained a contract for the manufacture of 
105-millimeter artillery shells for the War Department. 

I submit as an exliibit a copy of tlie Standards for Plant Protec- 
tion issued by the I)e])artment of Defense. 

The Chairman. Has that been previously made an exhibit ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Xo, sii" ; this is the copy. 

The Chairman. Tliat may be made exhibit No. 86. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 86'' for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

^Ir. BiEVER. That is the manual on plant protection, June 1952, 
issued by the Department of Defense, Munitions Board. 

Tlie Chairman. That has been made an exhibit for reference only. 

Proceed. 

Mr. BiEVER. I call attention to page 7, which specifies that plant 
guards should be armed and trained in the use of their weapons. 

We followed this direction. Our guards were armed with ..38-caliber 
revolvers and were given instruction and target practice in the use of 
tliese Aveapons. 



9456 IMPROPER ACT1VITIE.S IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Cji AiKMAx. Would you mind at that point indicating how many 
guards you liad that were given such instructions i 

Mr. BiEVEK. Approximately 25. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. BiK\ KK. Koliler Co. conducts an extensive recreation program, 
including bowling, basketball, baseball, band and chorus, card play- 
ing, photography, archery, horseshoe pitching, and many similar 
activities. 

Since at least ll>17 this recreation program has included rifle and 
pistol shooting, both large bore and small bore, and on outdoor and 
indoor ranges. 

The Govermnent furnishes part of the equipment and anununi- 
tion through the Director of Civilian Marksmanship, and this is sup- 
plemented by purchases through the company- 
Some individuals desire to possess their own equipment and this is 
sometimes purchased through the company with reimbursement made 
to the compan}'. 

In 1952 we began the Range Club, a trapshooting organization, as a 
part of our recreation program. 

jNIr. Lyman C. Conger and myself have been active members of the 
rifle and pistol club for over 30 years and were among the organizers 
of the Range Club. 

The purchases of pistols, pistol ammunition, powder, and primers 
were all for plant guards, plant-guard training, the rifle and pistol 
club, and for resale to individuals. 

All the .22 caliber-ammunition purchases were for the rifle and 
pistol club or for plant-guard training. 

All the targets, bullseye or silhouette, were for the same purpose. 

All the clay pigeons and the No. 6, 7i/^, and 8 shotgun shells were 
purchased for the Range Club and the company was reimbursed for 
them by those who used them. 

None of those purchases were in any way related to strike prepara- 
tion. 

The union seeks to justify their present conduct by a completely 
false and perverted account of the riot of 1934. I was an eyewitness 
to that event. Grasskamp and Kitzman were not. 

The riot of 1934 took place after 12 days of mass picketing and riot- 
ing which had kept the plant in a state of siege with no one, even 
office workers, allowed to enter or leave. 

Even executives, with the single exception of Walter J. Kohler, 
then president of the company, were barred from entry to the plant. 
On the morning of July 2'7 the pickets prevented entry of coal cars 
needed to run the powerhouse. 

I was at that time an engineer on leave of absence from Kohler 
Co. and acting as assistant chief of police of Kohler Village. 

With some other deputies we went out and brought the coal cars in. 
We also gave the pickets instructions that they could picket legally 
but could not prevent entrance to the plant. 

Aside from the statement, we have some of the clubs that we picked 
up oft' the picket line that day, in the city of Washington. If you 
wish to see them we will be happy to bring them in. 

The Chairman. All rightj let us get the prepared statement read 
first. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9457 

Mr. BiEVER. All afternoon there were threats hurled at lis, "Just 
wait 'till tonight," "We'll get you rats tonight"; and others of similar 
import. 

As soon as it was dark a mob attack on the plant started simultane- 
ously on both ends of the plant. A howling mob of thousands with 
rocks and bricks demolished windows and everything breakable. 

A squad car of the village police was attacked with rocks and all 
the windows broken. The automobile of the comity probation officer, 
a woman, who liappened to be driving through, was attacked with 
rocks, the windows demolished and she was compelled to leave the 
car and seek refuge in the American Club. 

When the two mobs converged togetlier in front of the company 
office again the windows and everything breakable was demolished. 

I am submitting herewith as exhibits photographs showing some 
of the damage caused by the mob. That is one that was entered last 
Wednesday by Mr. Conger. 

The Chairmax. I don't recall the number of it, but a number was 
entered and this is one of those entered last week by Mr. Conger. 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

The CiiAiRMAX. All right. 

Mr. BiEXER. All this damage was caused before any shots or even 
any tear gas was tired. 

After the mob had destroyed everything breakable at the office, 
shouts arose, "T^t's get the village," and, "Let's fire tlie plant." 

At this point. Chief of Police John Case, I, and other deputies fired 
tear gas into the mob. With the assistance of the sheriff's deputies, 
the village police succeeded in splitting the mob and driving it out 
of town. 

At the south end of the village we were successful in keeping the mob 
out of the village, but at the north end the wind had shifted and made 
the use of gas impossible. 

Tlie mob sui-ged back into the village, attacked a residence, and 
members of tlie mob began shooting at the deputies. 

At the corner's inquest numerous witnesses, many of them uncon- 
nected with Kohler Co. or Kohler Village, testified to the shooting 
from the mob. 

I understarul you have a transcript of all of the coroner's inquest. 

I fired nothing but o:as that night but I was shot at from the mob. 
Some of the slieriff's deputies and the village deputies fired into the 
pavement in front of the mob and succeeded in halting them. The 
deputies were subjected, not only to gunfire from the mob but to bar- 
rages of rocks and bricks and many of them were injured, some quite 
severely. 

I was surprised at Mr. Kitzman's definitions of a peaceful picket 
line the other day, but I am positively amazed that he could call a 
riot like this a peaceful picket line. 

This committee does not have to take my word for the events of 
this riot. I call attention to the following official actions at the time. 

The coroner, after an inquest into the deaths, issued the following 
statement : 

It clearly appears from the evidence that the decedents came to their death 
in a general gun fight between rioters and deputies in the village of Kohler 
on the night of .Inly 27. The deputies, both county and village, were acting in 
line of official duty in the suppression of a riot, as required by the Wisconsin 



9458 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 

statutes. The jiersoiis who tired the fatal shots, and whether they were deputies 
or menihers of the mob. reuiain uuknown. 

The deaths were most unfortunate, and ecjually so was the riot wliirh led 
to the shooting. 

The widow of one of the men killed in the riot brought suit against 
Kohler Co., its officers and myself, making the same charges now made 
byUAAV-CIO. 

I offer as exhibits notices of trial showing that attorneys for Kohler 
C^o. and myself forced tliis case to trial. This was also entered by Mr. 
Conger last week. 

The Chairman. That is a previous exhibit. All right. 

Mr. BiEVER. I also offer as exhibits orders of the court showing that 
when the cases were forced to trial the union attorneys for the plain- 
tiffs dismissed the case. This was also entered by Mr. Conger. 

The Chairman. It has been previously made an exhibit. All right. 

Mr. BiEVER. They did not dare try to prove their charges. This is 
the official and conclusive answer to Mr. Kitzman's statement that 
company guards shot down strikers. 

I am also introducing as an exhibit the order of the Sheboygan 
County circuit court awarding judgment to Kohler Co. for damages 
caused by the riot. 

I am advised that this statement has also been turned in by Mr. 
Conger. 

The Chairman. That has been made an exhibit. 

All right, is there anything additional you wish to say now before 
we proceed ? 

]Mr. BiEVER. Yes, I have photostatic copies of the map of the village 
of Kohler which might be helpful to the committee. 

The Chairman. Are these separate copies ? 

Mr. BiEVER. They are all separate copies, and there are 11 copies. 

The Chairman. Does it take 11 of them to make 1 map of Kohler ? 

Mr. Bieat:r. Xo, they are all the same. 

The Chairman. "Well, one of these may be made exhibit No. 87 
and others may be made available for the use of the committee. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 87'' for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc- 
Clellan, Curtis, and ]Mundt.) 

Mr. BiEVER. I would like to point out to tlie committee that 

The Chairman. You maj" proceed. 

Mr. BiEVER. I would like to point out to the committee that in 
the upper left hand corner it shows the direction of north, and in 
the upi^er right quarter of the map it shows the industrial area. 

That is the Kohler Co. factory. 

The Chairman. Where is the industrial area ? 

]Mr. BiE\-ER. In the upper right hand 

The Chairman. I see the sign here American Club. 

j\fr. BiEVER. That is across. 

The CifAiRMAN. Tlie industrial area is right across from the Amer- 
ican Club ^ 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. What are those buildings right in front of the 
American Club. Is that the office? 



IMPROPER ACTIMTIBS IN THE LABOR EIELD 9459 

Mr. BiEVER. That building directly across High Street from the 
American Club, on the semicircle, is the general office of the Kohler 
Co. The building at the extreme top of the sheet is the pottery, 
and at the lower end of the industrial area j^ou can see a building 
which was then the south foundry. It now houses the artillery-shell 
mill. 

The upper road shown on the map, the Upper Falls Road, is High- 
way 23, and below the factory area, bisecting the map, you see High- 
way 28, known as the Lower Falls Road. I think that pretty well 
covers it. 

The CHAIR3IAX. All right. That has been made an exhibit. Is 
there any further statement you wish to make before being interro- 
gated ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. 

The Chairmax. Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kenxedy. How long have you been with the Kohler Co., Mr. 
Biever? 

Mr. Bie\t:r. I started at the Kohler Co. in September of 1924. 

Mr. Kexxedt. What was your position at that time ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Mechanical engineer. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were working in the plant, w^ere you ? 

Mr. Biever. I was in the engineering department. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you are plant manager now ? 

Mr. BiEA ER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been steadily promoted since that time ? 

Mr. BiEVER. I was promoted to chief engineer, and in July of 1949 
I was made the plant manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1949. When were you made chief engineer ? 

Mr. BiEVER. 1935. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1935. You were promoted in 1935 ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What position did you have in 1934, during this 
strike that you have been discussing here? What position did you 
have in the plant ? 

Mr. Biever. I was a mechanical engineer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some official position with the deputies 
or with the law enforcement ? 

Mr. Biever. I was on the village reserve police force since 1931 but 
was not active at any time until 1934. When the strike started I was 
given a leave of absence and made the assistant chief of police. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the time the strike began ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you devote your full time to that then ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that with the concurrence of the Kohler Co. ? 
They agreed to that, or they made the arrangements ? 

Mr. Biever. They did not make the arrangements. The village 
board appointed me. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did they happen to select you? Was that at 
the recommendation of Mr. Kohler ? 

Mr. Biever. Not at the recommendation of anything in the Kohler 
Co. It was the village board that appointed me. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did they find out about you ? 



9460 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. BiEVER. Well, I presume that working with the chief of police, 
John Case, he must have recommended me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is when you had been a deputy, is it? Prior to 
that time you had been a deputy ? 

Mr. BiEVER. I had been a reserve policeman, but never active, since 
1931. 

Mr. Kennedy. "VVlio did you have under your command then after 
the strike started ? 

Mr. Biever. After tlie strike started — at the time the strike started, 
the village had two policemen, the chief and a night patrolman. That 
group was increased to 20 men for patrol work through the village, 
and 1 was given men as they were sworn in to build up to a police 
force. 

Mr. Kennedy. You trained these men, did you ? 

Mr. BiE\'ER. Yes, sir. Well, we didn't have much chance to do train- 
ing. There was, I think a 12- or a 14-day period until the riot, the 
day of the riot. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why was it felt that it was necessary to get these 
extra police? 

Mr. Bievj:r. The police were required, in my estimation, because of 
the violence on the picket line. 

Mr. Kennedy. The violence had already been exhibited on the 
picket line ? 

Mr. Biever. From the very first day. 

Mr. Kennedy. What sort of violence was it ? 

Mr. Biever. Well, they had a closed picket line and carried a long 
rope, three or four hundred feet long, and about an inch or an inch 
and a quarter in diameter, that they paraded forth and back. 

They would march in one direction in front, closing off both of 
our gates, our main gates. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was this the UAW? Or was this another union? 

Mr. Biever. This was the Federal Union 18545. 

Mr. Kennedy. But they were doing the same tactic of mass 
picketing? 

Mr, Biever. It was mass picketing, and I think was riotous from 
the very first day. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was riotous because it is mass picketing? 

Mr. Biever. Yes; and because of the tremendous shouting and 
yelling that they were doing. Every time that they reversed direc- 
tion in carrying their rope in front of their plant, they would scream 
and yell "Yah." It would be heard all over the village, and people 
in the village, women and children, just couldn't get rest. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tiiei-e was a lot of this yelling and screaming. 
Then you got these 20 deputies and they started working under j'ou, 
is that right? 

Mr. Biever. No, sir; they worked under the chief of police. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was your responsibility, you, specifically? 

Mr. Biever. I was given recruits into the police force. 

Mr. Kennedy. IIow many recruits did you have by that time? 

Mr. BiEVEK. At the time of the riot, I think we had close to 80. 

Mr. Kennedy. They were working under you? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you responsible for their training? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9461 

Mr. BIE^'ER. Well, Ave had very little chance for training. The 
only training that we were able to give them was lectures, and that 
was done by Ernest Schuelke, who was a captain in the National 
Guard and a deputj^ sheriff. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you distribute the guns to them ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who distributed the guns to them ? 

Mr. Biever. The only guns that the deputies had were their own 
shotguns that they brought in from home. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they instructed to bring the shotguns? 

Mr. Biever. They were not instructed to. They did. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you approved of their having the shotguns dur- 
ing this period ? 

Mr. BiEVEB. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And up to the time of the riot, the members of the 
union were marching up and down and yelling and screaming ; is that 
I'ight ? 

Mi\ BiE\TER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was very disturbing to the company in- 
side? 

Mr. Biever. It wasn't disturbing to the company. There wasn't 
any one in the plant. The plant was completely closed down. 

Mr. Kennedy. Nobody was working at that time ? 

Mr. Biever. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. On the evening of the riot, had you distributed your 
people around? 

Ml". Biever, On the evening of the riot, the group that I had were 
in the rear of the American Club 

Mr. Kennedy. Doing what ? 

Mr. Biever. Up to the point of the gas shooting. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were they doing in the rear of the American 
Club? 

Mr. Biever. They were just lield there in reserve in case of any 
further use. 

Mr. Kennedy. The 80 of them ? 

Ml". Biever. I don't remember — I don't think there were 80 at that 
time, because with a new police force of that kind, many of them 
disappeared. 

Mr. Kennedy. Approximately how many did you have ? 

Mr. Biever. I would guess that we had from 50 to 60 actually, in 
reserve. 

Mr. Kennedy. You tired the gas shells at that time ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. After the mob, the two mobs, converged from 
both the north and the south, and came in front of the American Club, 
and the general offices, as you can see on the map, the mass — there 
was, I estimate, 5,000 peoj^le. 

Estimates higher than that were made at that time, some as high 
as 15,000. 

They were very riotous, and it was not until they threatened to fire 
tlie plant and to get the village that the village president and the 
chief of police ordered me to fire gas projectiles. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had they set the plant on fire up to that time ? 

Mr. Biever. They had not, no. 



9462 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kknxkdv. l^ut tliey hiul thrown loclvs tlii'ouuli the windows? 

]\Ir. HiKVER. Barrels und tons of rocks. 

Mr. Kennedy. They had thrown tons of locks throu-iii the win- 
dows ? 

Mr. BiEVEK. Yes, sir. Everythintr that was breakable was broken. 

Mr. Kenxeoy. ITad any of them stormed into the phant? 

Mr. BiE\ER. Not to my knowled<re. 

Mr. Kexnedy. They had not gotten into the phmt. Had any of 
them come into any of the homes? 

Mr. Bievi:r. I don't know. I don't remember that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know 

Mr. BiEVER. I know that they attacked two homes that I remember 
that they attacked. One was a slioe store, which is located at the 
upper end of High Street. 

Mr. Kennedy. Bnt liad they actually gotten into any of these stores 
or homes ? 

Mr. Biever. They broke the windows and firing was done at that 
home, pistol firing. 

Mr. Kennedy. Pistol firing was done in that area ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes. And one other home in the village was an a])art- 
ment in the building just south on the map, the long dark building. 
It is an apartment building on the second floor. 

Mr. Kennedy. So there w^ere rocks thrown into the plant, breaking 
the windows there, and there were two homes or stores in which rocks 
were thrown? 

Mr, Biever. Yes. There was also one home on Grafton Court, 
which is the fourth street from the upper highway. The corner house 
had pistol shooting because a slug was dug out of the doorway or 
the door frame. And that was before any shooting took place by 
anybody, any deputy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know who was responsible for that shoot- 
ing? 

Mr. Biever. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any trucks around there to assist 
you? 

Mr. BieVer. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of trucks did you have? 

Mr. Biever. We had 4-ton or ton-and-a-half Chevrolet trucks 
that were ]:)urchased by the village. They were platform trucks with 
stakes on the side, 

Mr, Kennedy. When were they purchased ? 

Mr. Biever. Some time before the strike. I am not sure. I don't 
know the date. 

Mr. Kennedy. In preparation for the strike? 

Mr. Biever. I don't know that. But I doubt it very much. 

Mr. Kenn'edy. For what other reason wonld you need four of these 
kind of trucks? 

Mr. Biever. Well, trucks of that kind can be used for police — for 
city construction work. 

Mr. Kenxedy. Would you need fonr trncks such as you speak of 
for city construction work in the city of Kohler ? 

Mr. Biever. I don't know that. 

Mr. Kennedy. I have been to the town of Kohler, and I can't be- 
lieve that vou would need four trncks. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9463 

Mr. BiEVER. Well, I said there Avere four. I don't remember 
whether they were piircliased before the strike started or after the 
strike started. 

Mr. Kennedy, But they must have been in connection Avith the 
strike; were they not? 

Mr. BiEVER. They could have been. I don't know. I don't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. You assigned your men to these trucks; did you? 

Mr. BiEVER, Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy, And did they drive around and try to keep order? 

"Was that part of their tasks? 

]Mr. BiEVER, The day of the riot, and it was riotous from early 
morning until the following morning, in the afternoon the trucks were 
used by the police to patrol the streets. They drove up and down. 
I recall very well that Mr. Schuelke, who was in charge of that group, 
read the village proclamation by the village president, and also read 
sections of the Wisconsin statutes on riots and mobs. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you were talking about the fact that you fired 
the tear gas projectiles to disperse the mob, disperse this group of 
people, so that thev went to separate sections of the town; is that 
right? 

Mr. Biever. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there more than one gas projectile fired at 
them ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. There were a number of gas projectiles fired 
from in front of the club toward the office, where the largest mass 
of rioters were, and the idea was to break the mob in two and drive 
them north out of the village and south on High Street out of the 
village. 

However, as soon as they started breaking both ways, and they were 
milling and screaming, yelling, part of the group at the north pro- 
ceeded to go into the village, at which time Schuelke was ordered 
by the chief to fire northerly. The three first lots which I have 
marked in a light cross were lawn. They were plotted but they were 
never built on. The mob ran across that grass plot into the village. 

Schuelke then fired directly north from about halfway in front of 
the American Club to the street, and broke that mob and warned them 
not to go into the village. 

Our families were in the village. We were going to keep them out 
of there if we could. 

Mr, Kennedy. Is that when the shooting began? 

Mr. BiEA'ER, Well, do you mean the shotgun shooting? 

Mr, Kennedy, Yes, 

Mr, BiEATBR, No, That took place later. The group that I worked 
with, and it was a very small group, pushed, moved, the crowd to the 
south, toward the lower Falls Road, or the Chicago & North Western 
Railroad track. Just about at the village hall is where we stopped. 
That group was kept in check. They stayed on the lower road, many 
of them, but others also dove in their cars and left. 

Some time at about, I would say, 8 : oO or a quarter to 9, I heard 
gunfire from tlie north, which was definitely not tear gas. The report 
is entirely different. Anyone familiar with shotguns could 

Mr, Kennedy, Anyway, the firing started in the north ? 

Mr, Bie\t:r, At the north end. 



9464 IMPROPER ACnVITIBS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kf:NXEDy. These were some of the people under your dhectioii 
or control i 

Mr. BiEVER. They were under direction of Ernest Schuelke at the 
north. 

Mr. Kennedy. These were people that were working for you? 
These were some of the deputies ? 

Ml-. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kexxkdy. And scjme of them were involved in this firing and 
shooting, is that right, in the northern part of the town? 

Afr. BiEVER, Very likel}'. AMien they were driven north, the wind 
shifted and gas could no longer be used. At that time, apparently the 
mob decided to go back into the village, and there is such testimony, 
stoned and threw bricks and shotguns at the police. 

At that time, there were tw^o of those trucks parked crosswise on the 
highway, trying to use it as a barricade. 

But the crowd came in, firing, and apparently shotgun firing was 
done into the pavement, because the ricochets of the slugs were very 
evident in the tar pavement, or macadam pavement, the following 
day. 

Mr. Kennedy. As I understand, this group of people were firing 
into the deputies, and throwing rocks and bricks at them and the 
deputies Avere firing back into the pavement, is that right? 

Mr. BiEA^ER. I presume so. When I saw the gun flashes from the 
south end of the street, heard the shotgunning and walked north, I 
picked up John Case somewhere along the way, I remember that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you fire any shots yourself ? 

Mr. Biea^er. I fired nothing but gas that night. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just gas ? 

Mr. BiEA^R. Just gas. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody with you lire any shots? 

Mr. Biever. I directed one man to fire a shotgun into the railroad 
bank just east of High Street, as you see on the map. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know August Tasche ? 

Mr. Biever, I do not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever hear of him ? 

Mr. Biever. I may have. I don't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know that he filed an affidavit during that 
]>eriod of tlie inquest, regarding your activities ? 

Mr. Biever. I don't recall it. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is not evidence, but I would like to predicate a 
question on it. 

The Chairman. You may do that. 

Mr. Biever. Is he the man that made the statement that I carried 
a shotgun ? 

Mr, Kennedy (reading) : 

August Tii.stlu' being first duly swoin, on (tath deposes and says that lie 
is a resident of the city of Sheboysan, residing at North ISth Street and 
Wildwood Avenue. That he is married and has 5 children, that he was for- 
merly employed at the Kohler Co. for about 5) years, that he was walking 
north on Industrial Road; that 3 meai jumped out of the bushes from the 
Boulevard, that 1 man named Ed Kiever yelled, "We are sheriff.s men and it's a 
riot;" that bullets followed right after that; that he felt something sting in his 
arm, but didn't realize he was shot; that he looked toward the men that did the 
shooting; that he got his face full of buckshot; that he then realized they were 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9465 

using shotgun shells and shotgun bullets ; that he then ran for the upper road ; 
that while he was then running he realized that he had a bullet through his 
arm. 

Do you remember that incident ? 

Mr. Blbver. No, sir. I think I remember tlie statement that was 
made at the inquest, but I did not fire a shotgun. I didn't handle a 
shotgun. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody with you? I don't think he says that 
you fired it, but he says you were with the gentleman that fired it? 

While you Avere with anyone, did they fire a shotgun ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Nobody fired one ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Nobody on this evening of the riot fired any guns in 
your presence ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Except that one man on the lower road. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the one man on the lower road ^ 

Mr. BiEVER. The one man I told you about before. On the lower 
road, I ordered one of the men with a shotgun to fire into the railway 
embankment, because a group of the rioters were running north to- 
ward the Kohler fence, trying to get behind the deputies. That shot 
into the bank hurt no one, because I saw the shot fired. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Biever, does it appear to you at all peculiar that 
the shooting was in retaliation of this mob, as you called them, slioot- 
ing at you people; that you were behind barricades; that they were 
throwing rocks, and that you were shooting back, but shooting, from 
what you say, into the pavement, and yet all the peoi:)le that were sliot 
and killed were all strikers ? 

Does that strike you as peculiar at all ? 

Mr. Biever. No, sir .; it does not. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what Father Maguire said about this situation : 

I have never seen such needless and ruthless killing by supporters of the law. 
Where it is understood that most of the people were shot in the back last Friday, 
the ruthlessness is evident. You don't have to shoot people in the back when 
they are running away. I examined a score of wounded and all except two were 
shot in the back. 

Mr. Biever. I doubt if Father Maguire was in a position to make a 
statement like that, because he wasn't there that night. 

Mr. Kennedy. He evidently examined the wounded and he found 
out. There was an account that he made after an examination of the 
facts. 

You are certainly not a completely objective person in this account. 
You were in charge of some of these people. I would think that his 
word on this, his account of it, would be fairly accurate and should 
be accepted. 

The Chairman. The Chair will make this observation : 

I don't believe that is sworn evidence as yet. That is a statement he 
is purported to have made. You can confirm it or denj^ it. Counsel 
lias read to you a statement that the Father is purported to have made. 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You may confirm or deny it. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is what he is reported to have stated (reading) : 

I have been in many strikes, but I never saw such needless and ruthless kill- 
ing by supporters of the law. When it is understood that most of the people 



9466 IMPROPF.H ACTIVITIKS IN THE LABOR FIELD 

were shot in the back last Friday, tlie ruthlessness is evident. ^ ou doiit have 
to shoot people in the ha< k when they are running away. 1 exaiuined a scene 
of wounded and all except two were shot in the back. 

Tlieu lie goes on to make some statements about tlie fact that the 
Kohler Co. said that bricks Avere beiii<r thrown througli tlieir wiiuloAvs 
and, therefore, there Avas property damaoe. lie says : 

As a inend)er of the ('hifago Rej;ioiial Labor Board I am not going behind 
fences to say whar 1 have to say. There are human rights and property rights. 
But human lives are more .sacred than property rights. 

Mr. BiKVKK. 1 will certainly agree to the last statement. 

Mr. Kkxnkdy. Do you agree with tlie rest of it ? 

^Ir. l^iEVEK. Xo, sir : I do not. 

Mr. Kkxxp:uy. You are questioning Fathci' Maguire^ 

Mr. BiEVER, I am. 

Mr. KENX?:nY. Yon are challenging Father Maguire^ 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kenxedy. O. K. 

Mr. BiEVEK. Because I was there, and I know about what took 
place. At the north end, when that mob came in, apparenth- 

Mr. Kexxedy. Are yon questioning the ti'uthfulness of Father 
Maguire in this statement? 

Mr. BiEVER. AVell, I wouldn't question any good father at any time. 

Mr. Kexxedy. Do yon question tlie truthfulness in this statement^ 

Mr. BiEVER. 1 think a few of the points he made in there I would 
disagree with. 

^h\ Kennedy. You disagree witli them? 

Mr. BiEVF.R. Yes. In a mob — I would like to explain that in a mol) 
of that kind, a riot, ])eople are not all running in one direction. 

They are milling around. When they came back into the village, it 
is doubtful if all of that shooting or the wounded took place or was 
caused by the deputies. 

There was shooting from the mob. 

Mr. Kennedy. If liiese people were so close that they could throw 
bricks and rocks and hit you people, then certainly they were close 
enough to be able to hit you with a shotgun. It seems to me that you 
can perhaps question Father Maguire, but you can't get away from 
the fact that all the people that were shot were all strikers. 

Mr. BiEVER. And they weren't all shot in (he back. I think, as I 
remember it, there were 7 

Mr. Kennedy, Are you arguing that they all were not shot in the 
back? But at least all that were shot were strikers. You can't get 
away from that. 

Mr. Conger. ^Nlr. Chairman, I think I have a right to object to that 
question. I think it is not based on the record that they were all 
strikers. 

The CiiAiRMAX. ]My recollection is that it was -lo that were shot; 
is that correct; and 41 were strikers and 2 were not. 

Am I correct ? 

Mr. BiFA-ER. I think there were 85. 

Mr. CoNOER. 35. . 

The Chairman. I am talking about testimony that has been intro- 
duced here. 



IMPROPER ACTR'ITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9467 

Mr. Kenxj:dy. We have the dead and injured here, Mr. Chairman. 
Lee Wakefield, age 25. We can put their names in. You can tell us 
about them. A rifle bullet through his chest. 
The CiiAiRMAx. Ask him about them. 
Mr. Kexnedy. Lee Wakefield, did you know him ? 
Mr. BiEVER. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Eifle bullet through chest ; removed from back ; died 
while being brought to St, Nicholas Hospital. 
Henry Engelmann. Did you know him ^ 
Mr. Bip:ver. Xo, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Shot through back and abdomen. 
Died at Memorial Hospital at 4 :15 a. m. 
Henry Nuss, injuries to knee and foot. 
Was Henry Xuss working for you ? 
Mr. BiEVER. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Joe Hehak, gunshot wounds in legs and arms. Do 
you know him ? 

]Mr. BiEVER. I don't know him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Christ Brack, burn on left shoulder. Do you know 
him ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Xo, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Philip Eirich, flesh wounds on head and legs and 
fractured left foot. Do you know him '. 
]Mr. BiEVER. Xo, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Leonard Buss, injured arm. 

Mr. BiEVER. Mr. Kennedy, that was 25 years ago — a quarter of a 
eentiiry ago. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am trying to find out of all of this list, and there 
are about 45 of them, who in the Kohler em})loy or who of your de- 
puties were injured even. Can you name anybody who was shot who 
was one of your deputies I 

Mr. BiEVER. Xo, I don't 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you name anybody who was shot who was within 
the Kohler Co. when this was taking place? 
Mr. Biever. Xo, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think those facts speak for themselves. 
Mr. Biever. I would like to make a statement. When I moved 
from the south, where that gun shooting took place at the north end, 

1 went up with John Case to find out what it was all about, and I met 
with a brick, about — and I am guessing — about a three-quarters size 
brick, which I got on the chest, which completely upended me, and I 
carried the black and blue mark around for about 2 weeks. 

Mr. Kennedy. This man Henry Englemann didn't carry Ids wound 

2 weeks. He was shot through the back and abdomen and died at 
4:15 in the morning. It is a little difl'erent. I would rather be hit 
by a brick than a bullet. 

Mr. Biever. It de})ends u])on where you get it. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think the next step is that in 1935, a year after 
this was over, you then were ])romoted. Evidently the Kohler Co. 
was pleased as to the way you had handled this matter. 

Mr. Biever. Apparently I had done a satisfactory job as an engineer 
in the Kohler Co. I am sure that no one was ever rewarded for any- 
thing that took place at the strike. 



9468 IMPROPER Acrrv^TiES ix the labor field 

Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody ever apologize or make any statement 
that tliey repudiated what had been done that night? 

Mr, BiEVER. Not to my knowledge or memory. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then we go on to 1952 and the UAW starts to come 
into tlie phmt and you are assigned to tlie same task, building up the 
arms and ammunition in the plant. 

Mr. BiEVER. I was not assigned to the same task, Mr. Kennedy. I 
was plant manager of tlie plant. 

Mr. Kennedy. Weren't the arms and ammunition all ordered by 
you in 1952? 

Mr. BiE\T.R. Yes, sir. As part of my job, as I read in the state- 
ment, I am responsible for plant security. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you saw fit, then, in 1952, when the UAW 
came in, to start storing up the arms and ammunition again ; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. I believe that we have every right to protect 
our lives and our property. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, certainly, you talk in this statement about the 
fact that you did this because you knew of the UAW's history of 
violence. 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Certainly, then, the UAW using the same criteria 
could also start storing up arms and ammunition to get ready for 
the Kohler Co., because you had a history of violence. The Kohler 
Co. had a history of violence. 

Mr. BiEVER. I don't know what the union did. 

Mr. Kennedy. But I mean if that is the criterion that everybody 
is going to use, if they are going to make their own judgment on it, 
certainly nobody would have greater reason to start storing up arms 
and ammunition and recruiting a small group of people to get ready 
to fight than the UAW. 

Mr. Biever. We didn't fight. There wasn't a round of ammuni- 
tion that we bought for protection ever used. 

Mr. Kennedy. The reason that you used them in 1934, as I under- 
stand it, is because you sustained some $3,500 worth of damages to the 
plant. People threw bricks through the windows. It happened to 
be that the UAW didn't do that in this case. 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. Neither was any ammunition used. 

Mr. Kennedy. Evidently, the UAW was fortunate enough at that 
time not to throw bricks through the windows, and not to destroy any 
of the property, or possibly all of this ammunition then would have 
been used on them 

Mr. Biever. The strike on the picket lines were the police depart- 
ment problems, the police and the sheriff. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you leave it to the police department 
instead of storing up arms and ammunition ? 

Mr. Biever. We did entirely, but for the protection of the people 
that were to be in the plant and for the plant and the Government 
equipment in there, we were responsible for that. 

We signed a contract with the Government to take care of that 
equipment. That included riots. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you brought these riot guns, I understand ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIEOLD 9469 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were in charge of it as you were in charge 
of it in 1934? 

Mr. BiEVER. I was in charge of plant protection as part of the duties 
of a plant manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you started purchasing the arms and ammuni- 
tion immediately after the people in the plant voted to affiliate with 
the UAW. There hadn't been a strike vote or anything else. All it 
was was that the people in the plant, through their own free choice, 
decided that they wanted to affiliate with the UAW, which is their 
American right. 

Mr. Biever. We bought no equipment until there was a strike vote. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, let me look. Didn't you buy some 38-caliber 
revolvers ? 

Mr. Biever. We bought .38-caliber revolvers, yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you bought six .38-caliber revolvers and 3,000 
rounds of ammunition ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that on May 11, the members, the 
people working in the plant, voted to accept the UAW and affiliate 
with the UAW-CIO, on May 11, 1952, and on May 13, 2 days later, 
you purchased six .38-caliber revolvers and 3,000 rounds of .38-caliber 
ammunition ? 

Mr. Biever. All of that ammunition and all of those firearms were 
not bought for plant protection. Much of that was bought for indi- 
viduals. I personally purchased three of those. I kept two and re- 
sold one. I am sure I bought one for Mr. Conger. 

Mr, Kennedy. It appears to be more than a coincidence that on 
May 11, the employees of the plant voted to affiliate and on May 13 
you start buying guns and ammunition, and that continues through 
1952, through 1953, and 1954? 

Mr. Biever. The guns that were ordered in 1954, the shotguns and 
the buckshot, were ordered because there was a threat that the village 
police were about to be disarmed. 

The union made every attempt to disarm the police. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was that ? 

Mr. Biever. That was about in June of 1956. 

Mr. Kennedy. June of 1956? 

Or 1955? 

Mr. Biever. 1955. Excuse me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is when you bought the 12 riot guns ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. Most of that ammunition was used for police 
training, for recreation purposes, as I read to you out of the statement. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are riot guns recreation for the people at the 
Kohler Co. ? 

Mr. BiEVERS. Riot guns, no, sir, but they could readily be converted. 

Mr. Kennedy. To recreation ? 

Mr. Biever. They could be. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have they been used for recreation ? 

Mr. Bievers. They have not. Not one has been used. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to the pamphlet that comes with them, 
they are to be used against mobs and groups of people. 

Mr. Biever. Not one of them was ever used. 

21243 O— 58— pt. 23 21 



9470 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. I would think tliat that probably was — or at least 
it would appear to be that the UAW, at least on the picket line, be- 
haved better than you expected they would. 

Mr. BiEVER. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You bought these jruns to use agrainst them because 
you thought that they were going to do something, and they didn't do 
it, so, therefore, you didn't use the guns. 

Mr. BiEVER. Only if they came in the plant. If the people in the 
plant were going to be endangered, or if it was to be taken over by the 
union, we were going to resist it, first with gas. I believe that was, 
that gas is the most humane way of stopping riots. 

Mr. Kennedy. Use the gas and then if that doesn't work, use the 
guns, is that right ? 

Mr. BiEVER. "Well, under certain circumstances gas cannot be used. 
But I disagree that there was a peaceful picket line out in front of 
our plant. There was a mass picket line and a riot. We had riots 
for 2 months out there. 

Mr. Ivennedy. I agree that there was mass picketing going on. I 
don't think there is any question of that. And they were keeping the 
people from their work, people who were entitled to go to work. But 
certainly from your testimony, you anticipated all sorts of horrible 
things that the UAW was going to do, and then you stored up with 
these riot guns and these large amounts of ammunition. 

Mr. BiEVER. I always anticipate things in the plant. That is my 
job, protection. I buy more fire hose for the plant and more ex- 
tinguishers than the codes call for. 

I recommended when I came on the job to buy a fire truck for just 
the plant use, and we trained a lire brigade. You don't wait until 
things happen. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Kohler Co. seems to have a great deal of trouble 
and problems Avith the people of Sheboygan or the people of Kohler, 
Wis., or their employees. You had a problem with them in 1934, so 
it was necessary to shoot gas at them and then shoot live bullets at 
them. Then you have the problem in 1954 and you have the same 
kind of difficulty. 

Mr. Biever. Let me straighten that out. The Kohler Co. did no 
sliooting in 1934. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, you were an important figure in the Kohler 
Co. You were the deputy. The Kohler Co. pays some 85 or 90 per- 
cent of the taxes of Kohler Village. The Kohler Co. has an important 
relationship with the Kohler Village. I think they are practically 
one and the same ; certainly at that time. 

Mr. Biever. I was a lowly mechanical engineer at that time and not 
a plant official. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel in 1934 that the matter had been settled 
successfully ? 

Mr. Biever. I can't get your thinking on that. 

(At this point. Senator McNamara entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. What? 

Mr. Biever. I can't get your thinking on that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel that it had been settled satisfactorily? 

Mr. Biever. I had no feelings about it whatsoever. I merely went 
back to work later in the fall when things cleared up. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEtS IN THE LABOR FIELD 9471 

Mr. Kennedy. The Koliler Co. never repudiated what had gone on 
in 1934 that you know of ? 

Mr. BiEVER. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Conger was quoted as saying to Mr. Murphy 
that the 1934 strike brought 20 years of labor peace. 

Do you know anything about that ? 

Mr. Biever. I never heard Mr. Conger make that statement. And 
knowing him as I do, I doubt if he would have. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions by any members of the 
committee? 

Senator Mundt. I would like to ask some question about the clay 
boat incident we have heard so much about. 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt ? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Biever, as plant manager, was it part of your 
duty to supervise the unloading of clay boats ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. I regularly inspect every clay ship when it 
comes in to Sheboygan Harbor since I have become plant manager. 

Senator Mundt. Prior to the strike, did you use to go down to the 
harbor and supervise the unloading of the clay boat, or did you just 
do it when the plant was on strike ? 

Mr. Biever. No, sir. 

I regularly go down for every clay ship and have done so since 
1949 because it is necessary for us to get clay without salt water. 
Some of the steamers often ship water over the top sides, and if any 
salt water is present it is very, very harmful to our product. 

In fact, we can't use it. We have to dump it. 

(At this point, Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing 
room.) 

Senator Mundt. What was the date of this so-called clay-boat 
incident ? 

Mr. Biever. It was July 5, 1955. 

Senator Mundt. How^ often do you ship in clay in a clay boat? 
Every year, every 5 years, or every week? 

Mr. Biever. No, sir. We ship from 5 — we bring in from 5 to 7 
clay ships each year, depending on the cargoes that we can contract 
for ; last year there were 7. 

Senator Mundt. Was any clay delivered to the Sheboygan dock in 
1954? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. And we had no trouble getting it in or out, 
except that during the period 

Senator Mundt. Wasn't the strike on in 1954 ? 

Mr. Biever. The strike was on in 1954. During the period of the 
mass picketing, we stored the clay on the dock. We built a platform 
to keep it off the ground. We loaded the clay on that platform and 
purchased a large tarpaulin to place over the clay to protect it. It 
was about the size of a small circus tent. 

Senator Mundt. Have you any idea why you were permitted to 
unload the clay in 1954 while the strike was on and not permitted to 
unload clay in 1955 while the strike was on ? 

Mr. Biever. I had no reason to believe that we were going to have 
trouble in 1955. 



9472 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. You went down to the dock tliat morning, then, 
just as had been your habit in 1954 and other times, in unloading the 
clay? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. How did you go down ? 

Mr. BiEVF.R. I drove down with — the first trip I made to the dock 
was with Joe Born, a driver; with Thomas Shields, our construction 
superintendent. 

Senator Mundt. What time of the morning was that ? 

Mr. BiEVER. We left Kohler at about 7 o'clock, and I would say it 
was about 7: 15 when we got to the ship. There were four men in 
the car. 

Senator Mundt. When you got down there, what did you find? 
What were conditions like when you arrived there that morning? 

Mr. BiEVER. When we got to the dock area, we noticed that some 
of Buteyn's equipment was in the middle of Pennsylvania Avenue, on 
a public street, and that there was a picket line in front of the main 
gate. 

That picket line had about 15 people in it, but in front of that picket 
line were Don Rand and Ray Majerus, both international representa- 
tives, and they were running the show. 

Senator Mundt. Were they down there before you got there or did 
they arrive after you had gotten there ? 

Mr. BiEV'ER. No, sir. They w^ere there wdien we arrived. In fact, 
they would not permit us to get into the dock, so we drove up to the 
Hildebrant Lumber Co., who owned the property, and procured a key 
for a secondary gate which is south of the main gate and adjacent to 
the Coast Guard station. 

We got in — it is a very narrow gate, just wide enough for a motor- 
car — we drove in and Tom Shields, the construction man, who had 
the keys then for that gate and the main gate, turned the keys over 
to one of the Buteyns. I think it was Cornelius or "Happy'' Buteyn. 

Senator Mundt. It has been testified to before our committee, Mr. 
Biever, that your appearance in the clay boat area in 1955 precipitated 
the riot, because the members had in mind your participation in the 
strike about which Mr. Kennedy was inquiring, which was 20 years 
prior to that. 

What happened in 1954? The strike was on, and you went down 
to the clay boat area. Did you precipitate a riot then? That was 
1 year closer to the 20-year period. 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir, or in and out of the picket lines at the plant 
at any time. I always got in and out and there wasn't any trouble. 

Senator Mundt. Did you have any trouble getting through the 
picket line this time in 1955, getting through the picket line ? 

Mr. Biever. Yes, sir. We couldn't get through the picket line that 
first trip. We drove in to the dock. I conferred with the ship's offi- 
cers, inspected some of the cargo, and proceeded to leave. 

But we had given the key up for the east gate, so we had to drive 
through the main gate. After two of the policemen opened the lines, 
we drove through and came back to Kohler. 

Senator Mundt. Did Donald Rand say anything to you down at 
that picket line? 

Mr. BiEVER. Don Rand said, "You won't get" — that was when we 
first approached the picket line, he said, "You won't get through here." 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIEiLD 9473 

Senator Mundt. You didn't get through there. You had to go 
through some other gate ? 

Mr. BiEVER. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Did you see either of the Buteyn brothers ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. I saw Cornelius the first trip in, and he stated, 
as I remember it, that he thought we were going to have some trouble. 

I would like to also mention, Senator, that that dock is on the She- 
boygan River, or harbor, which is maintained by the Corps of Engi- 
neers, United States Corps of Engineers, and is also public property. 
So I felt we had every right to be down there. 

Senator McNamara. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

So the first time you went down early in the morning, you tried to 
get through the picket line, Don Eand said, "You cannot get through," 
and you went some other place and got through a gate and got on the 
dock. You talked to Mr. Buteyn and he said you were going to have 
difficulty getting this stuff unloaded. 

What did you do then ? Did you drive out ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. We drove through the picket line and drove 
home. I drove back to Kohler. 

Then at about 8 : 30 I picked up Girard Desmond, one of the attor- 
neys, and Paul Jacobi, a cameraman, and Born, and we drove back 
down. 

Senator Mundt. When you drove back a second time, was there still 
a picket line there ? 

Mr. BiEVER. There was a very much larger picket line and there were 
more spectators. I would guess there were 35 to 50 in the picket line. 
It was a close, tight, picket line. It was impossible to get in. 

However, the police again opened the line for us to go through. 

(At this point Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.) 

Senator Mundt. Who seemed to be in charge of the picket line the 
second time you came back ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Don Rand was in charge of the picket line. Ray 
Majerus was there. 

Senator Mundt. Ray Majerus, is he a local No. 833 boy or is he an 
outsider ? 

Mr. BiEVER. He formerly was, but I understand he is an interna- 
tional representative now. That is Ray Majerus and Art Bower, 
the president of the union, was marching in that picket line, and 
Egbert Kohlhagen, who is the recording secretary, I believe, of the 
local, was also right alongside of the line. He was not marching, 
however, when I saw him. 

Senator Mundt. On this second visit to the dock area, did you talk 
to the Buteyn brothers again ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. At that time I talked to Pete Buteyn, Peter 
Buteyn, and he suggested that his men out in the equipment on the 
street were having a very bad time ; that they were being threatened ; 
and that he was afraid for their lives, and asked Desmond and me 
to, as representatives of the company, be relieved of his contract for 
unloading the clay. 

Senator Mundt. What did you tell him ? 

Mr. BiEVER. I told him that I would like — I asked him if we could 
borrow his trailer so that we could move our own equipment in. We 
had a tractor for that low trailer, but we didn't own a trailer. That 



9474 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

was satisfactory with Pete, and we later on moved, after he could get 
his equipment off the street, we moved that trailer to Kohler and put 
our own crane on it and proceeded and sent the crew back down. 

There were three men in the cab. 

Senator Mundt. This time when you went back with your own 
drivers, with your own equipment, were you able to get through the 
picket line again ? 

Mr. BiEVER, I didn't get that, sir. 

Senator Mundt. This time when you came back with Mr. Buteyn's 
equipment, but with your own drivers, were you able to get through 
the picket line then ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. I got down to the dock area on Pennsylvania 
Avenue about a block away from the gate. There was a very much 
larger crowd there. We could see our truck being attacked. They 
were milling around, a large crowd — probably at that time 500 or 
700 — milling around the machine, and we could distinctly see one of the 
men being dragged out of the truck cab. 

That man, we waited for him. He walked up the hill on the north 
sidewalk. We picked him up, and I would say that the man was very 
badly beaten. He was staggering. He was just completely beaten. 
We then took him to the police station. 

Senator Mundt. Did you find out who beat him ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt, You didn't find out who dragged him out of his 
truck and beat him ? 

Mr. BiEVER. We couldn't get close enough. There were so many 
people who were kicking and punching and everything. I re- 
member 

Senator Mundt. When you saw this violence taking place, what 
did you do? 

Mr. BiEVER. We took Shields to the police station, and I talked to 
the chief of police. 

Senator Mundt. Was that Chief Wagner at that time ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Chief Wagner. I talked to the chief because I was 
concerned about those two men of mine who were still in that truck, 
because they were going to be severely beaten, also. 

After quite a long time and much pleading, the chief finally de- 
cided to send Desmond and me down with the city detective named 
Stubbier in his own green, tudor car. 

Again, we couldn't get near the equipment, and someone in the crowd 
that was exciting that mob down there, and it was riotous at that 
time, suggested that they come up and give us a rough time, which 
they did at the car. 

They surrounded the car. They rocked the car and threatened to 
tip it over. One man, Rudolph Gunderson, reached into the front 
seat, where Stubbier had been driving; I sat directly back of that in 
the back seat. He reached in to turn the window down, but I tried 
to turn the window back up. 

He was punching, when he got the window open, punching and 
clawing, trying to get me out of there. 

Senator Mundt. Who was Rudolph Gunderson ? 

Mr. BiEVER. He was one of the strikers. 

Senator Mundt. A member of 833 ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 9475 

Senator Mundt. You say you went up and talked to Chief Wagner. 
Did you ask him for more police protection ? 

Mr. BiEVER. After that, we decided that there wasn't anything more 
that we could do. We finally got out of there. We had to leave the 
equipment out, but I found out from the police department that the 
two men that were still in the truck had been rescued by the police 
and had been taken by the police station. 

Senator Mundt. Did you hear yourself called butcher boy that 
day? 

Mr. BiEVER. I did not. 

Senator Mundt. It was testified here that when you came on the 
scene, somebody yelled, "Here comes butcher boy," and you really had 
a riot on your hands. 

Mr. BiEVER. I did not. The first time that come to my attention was 
last January 1 of the strike bulletins, thanks to Mr. Treuer and Mr. 
Kohlhagen. 

Senator Mundt. You didn't hear anybody call you butcher boy 
down there ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Any time during the day ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. I inquired from these other men that were 
with me and they all stated that they did not hear any such words. 

Senator Mundt. Your testimony is that this rioting, this mass pick- 
eting, was occurring before you got there, and was not a consequence 
of your showing up at the dock ? 

Mr. BiEVER. That is right. They were there when he arrived, and 
they were walking a tight picket line. 

Senator Mundt, How did you finally get the clay from this boat in 
Sheboygan ? How did you finally get a hold of it ? 

Mr. BiEVER. The clay was no unloaded in Sheboygan. I would like 
to mention, too. Senator, that the reason for our trying to get our 
equipment into the plant that day and get that ship unloaded is because 
there was another Norwegian steamer, Divina, that was on the Great 
Lakes and expected to be in Sheboygan within 2 days. That is about 
the normal time for unloading a ship. We just felt we had to get that 
ship unloaded. 

After all, as American citizens, I think we have every right to be on 
streets and on public j^roperty of that kind, and also on the dock area 
which is maintained with Government funds. 

Senator Mundt. Was some of this clay eventually moved by train, 
by railroad ? 

Mr. BiEVER, The ships — one tried to get into Milwaukee and the 
other one stayed offshore, but they finally turned around and went to 
Montreal and were unloaded there. 

We were told that the unions threw up a small picket line there, but 
tlie provincial police stopped it immediately. In fact, the clay broker 
that was there and saw it was quite happy. He said, "If you had had 
police protection like that in Sheboygan, you would have been all 
riglit." 

The cars of clay, and I think there were 60 or 70 boxcars of material, 
were shipped to Sheboygan by rail. Again, the union tried, with a 
picket line, to prevent the cars from moving out of the freight yards 
in Sheboygan, but Captain Heimke, now chief, took some men out there 
and stopped the commotion. The clay came in and was unloaded. 



9476 IMPROPER ACTOVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Mundt. We have had some conflicting testimony about the 
broadcasting which took place by Mr. Treuer and on the union 
program that day. 

Did you hear any of those broadcasts ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir; at that time I listened to every broadcast. I 
feel reasonably sure that the crowd or the mob which developed into 
a riot was caused by those broadcasts. 

Senator Mundt. What was the nature of the broadcasts ? 

Mr. BiEVER. I don't remember the exact wording, but they invited 
people to come down to merely see the clay boat. 

Senator Mundt. Just to see the clay boat ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. Well, that wouldn't cause a riot, would it, to have 
somebody come down and see the clay boat ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Well, I think in the manner, the way, in which he 
said it, I think it was a clear invitation to come down for some trouble. 
Senator. 

Senator Curtis. Will the Senator yield to me right there ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. The other day I placed in the record at least one 
series from their daily strike bulletin, in which, in their strike bul- 
letin, they advised people to listen to these daily broadcasts to get 
their instructions. 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. They used the word "instructions." 

Senator Mundt. Did you have any conversations with Mayor Ploetz 
on this particular day ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, I did not. 

Senator Mundt. Your conversations were all with Chief Wagner ? 

Mr. BiEVER. Yes, sir. We had three meetings with the chief, one 
at the dock, two later in his office, and the chief assured me the last 
time, before I moved the equipment down, he said, "I will do what I 
can," Those were his exact words, "I will do what I can." 

Senator Mundt. Were you on the scene of the riot at the time the 
mayor made his speech over the microphone ? 

Mr. BiEVER, No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. You didn't hear that ? 

Mr. BiEVER. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. That is all. 

The Chairman, Are there any further questions ? 

If there are no further questions, the witness may stand aside. 

Gentlemen, shall we proceed further this afternoon, or shall we 
recess ? 

Senator Mundt, I would prefer a recess. 

The Chairman, The committee will stand in recess until 10 o'clock 
in the morning. 

B)^ the way, the Chair is not too happy, but must announce that the 
meeting tomorrow will be in room 307 instead of this room. 

(Whereupon, at 4 : 45 p. m., the committee recessed to reconvene 
at 10 a. m., Wednesday, March 19, 1958.) 

(Members of the committee present at the taking of the recess were 
Senators McClellan, McNamara, Mundt, and Curtis.) 



APPENDIX 



E^xHiBiT No. 82A 



> 



KANSA* CTTV 
l-O* AN«B_KS 
MILWAUKKS 
MINNCAMUS 



KOHLER CO. 



KOHLER, WISCONSIN 



mWAMK 

Mn» VOUK 

PHILADCL^MIA 

MICHMOMO 

ST. LOUIS 

SAN rWAMCISCO 



Mr. Rudolph J. Ploetz, 

Mayor, City of Sheboygan, 
City Hall, 

Sheboygan, Wisconsin, 



June 28, 1955 

IN RCPLV nsrsR TO 

0. A. Desmond 



Dea;r Sir: 

In our discussion some time ago relative 
to police protection when our clay boats are un- 
loaded at the Hlldebrand dock In Sheboygan, you 
requested that you be advised as soon as we have 
Information conceimlng the date of arrival of 
the vessel. 

We have been Informed that the "S.S. Possum" 
departed Montreal, Canada, on June 26, and Is 
expected to arrive at Sheboygan on the mornlns 
of July 1, 1955. 

Very truly yours. 



KOHLER CO., 



per 




Legal Department 



KOHLER OF KOHLER 

n-UHSHW F1XTU««S. HCATINO COUIPMIMT. SUCTnC PLANTS. Am.«OOt.n> SMVINCS. mccistoN cotrraoLa 



9477 



9478 IMPROPER ACTIVITIE.S IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Exhibit No. 82B 



7 

/ KOHLER CO. 



KAMSAS CiTY 



•MLWAUKJOI 
MIMMCAPOLIS 



rouNDCD \%n 
KOHLER. WISCONSIN 


PMN-AOOLFHIA 

RtCMMOMD 

■T. IjOUIS 

•AN rWANCISCO 

•■ATTLC 




LOMOOM. «N«IJMO 




July 1, 1955 

IN mmm.1 mraii to 




0. A. Desmond 



Mr. Rudolph J. Ploetz, 

Mayor, City of Sheboygan, 
City Hall, 

Sheboygan, Wisconsin. 



Dear Mr. Ploetz: 

Supplementing our letter of June 28, we have been In- 
formed that the"S.S. Foasum" Is expected to arrive at She- 
boygan between 8:00 and 9:00 A.M. on Saturday, July 2. 

Very truly yours, 

C 0., 

Legal Department 



KOHLER OF KOHLER 

PLUMMM* nXTUOtS. MIAT>M« ■OUIPHCMT. BJtCTaiC PUUIT*. Am-COOLXD IMaiNa. »«(CinON COWTWaLS 




10 



IRfPROPEK ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIEiLD 9479 

Exhibit No. 82C 

y KOHLER CO. 

Cl-CVSLANO FOOHO«0 l»7t PMH_ADeLM4IA 

OCTROlT niCHMOND 

SSiKTcrr KOHLER. WISCONSIN Cn^-Tncco 

UlLWAUKn 
MINMCAVOUS 

July 2, 1955 

IN RlPt-V RCFCR TO 

G. A. Desmond 

, Mr. Rudolph Ploetz, 
Mayor, City of Sheboygan, 
City Hall, 
Sheboygan, Wisconsin. 

Dear Sir: 

This is to advise that the S. S. Possum carrying a 
cargo of clay for Kohler Co. will dock at Sheboygan on 
or about July 2, 1955 for unloading and transportation 
of the clay to the Kohler Co. plant. 

Certain statements were made by Local 833 UAW-CIO 
in its broadcast over radio station WHEL at 6:30 P.M. on 
July 1, 1955 > in an obvious attempt to invite a large 
number of their members to be present during the docking 
and unloading of the boat. 

This is notice that we demand adequate police pro- 
tection to prevent any mob or riot interference with the 
unloading of the boat and the transportation of the clay 
and, in case such protection is not provided and damage 
results we intend to hold the City of Sheboygan and you 
personally liable under the provisions of Section 66.01 
of the Wisconsin statutes for any damage, including de- 
murrage, which may result. 

Yours txnily, 

KOHLER CO., 



Legal Department 



leh 



Mr. Walter Wagner 
Chief of Police 
City of Sheboygan 
City Hall 
Sheboygan, Wis. 



KOHLER OF KOHLER 

n-UMMN* nXTVfia, HCATIHS BaUIPMIKT. n-CCTRIC KJUITS. Ain-CeOLSO IMaiMls. PRCCIWOM eoMTI«0(.« 



Ill 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 9999 06352 023 1