The Daily Alaska empire., 1933-08-12

follow with any real comprehen- sion of their economic meaning the development of all these many separate codes. They are being set up nastiiy, anu they will have to be worked out as men learn to understand them. To this proceed urs there need be no fundamental objection. These codes establish kind of constitutional government in industry and all our experience with political constitutions shows that it is vain to seek to make them rigidly perfect at the out set. A good constitution is one which is flexible enough to allow it to be perfected by experience.
 To view the matter in this light does not, however, relieve any one of the duty of examining the main principles and tendencies which actuate those who are working at this momentous and inspiring task It is not merely the privilege of the press and of the public to discuss critically these develop ments. It is their patriotic duty, and it would be mistaken zeal to withhold criticism or to resent it.
 In this spirit I venture to raise a few questions about the proceed ure in adopting the steel code. The only evidence available to me is the text of the code as submitted on July 15 and the newspaper ac- counts of the hearings before Gen. eral Johnson in Washington. AS I read this code it appears to have two main parts. In one part the steel industry agrees to reduce hours and to raise wages some what. In the other part it or ganizes itself to prevent price cut ting. AS I read the testimony of Secretary Perkins and the accounts of the hearings it appears that the is convinced that the steel industry could and should have made very much more favor able terms with labor, and should eliminate many long standing abuses. From other sources it ap- pears that MT Richberg has raised legal questions about the sections of the code which deal with pric- es, but unless I am mistaken the does not seem very greatly concerned about the level of steel prices.
 v Thus in arguing that the pro posed hours are too long and the wages too low Miss Perkins said that it may be necessary to make drastic increases in wages to ac- complish the purposes of the act. But if recovery is to be achieved 3, large portion of the money pro- duct of industry must go to those who constitute the main body of the consumers" In support of her she pointed out that during the prosperous years prior to 1880 a declining share of the value of the products of the iron and steel industry. :. :. went to labor" Miss Perkins's point can not, I think, be disputed. It is clearly established that in the Twenties profits ran way ahead of wages.
 What needs to be discussed, and to be examined with great care, is the apparent assumption which at the moment seems to domin- ate so much of the thinking of the N. R. A. organization, that bet ter distribution of corporate earn ings should be sought solely through the pay envelope. To fix the question clearly it is inter esting to consider a few of the main clements in the policy of the steel industry during the de- pression. If we compare the fi- gures for May 1883, with those for May, 1880, we find that produc- ton fell more than 50 per cent, that employment fell more than 40 per cent, that pay rolls fell nearly 70 per cent. At the same
 Copyright, 1883, Ne