Evening star., 1945-12-06
Mr.. Murruy's Reply

Fnl4lp murray, president OF the
C1O, has put before the American
people his reply to the Presidents
proposal for labor legislation-a
reply which is compounded prin-
cipally of Incorporate language and
fantastic distortion.
1t was not reply which sought
TO deal with Mr.. Truman's proposal
on its merits. Instead, falling back
on technique which is beginning
to wear rather thin, Mr.. Murray
called the roll of the familiar charges
against American business and
sought, for the first time, to cast
doubt on the integrity of the Tru-
man administration.
Business was accused of "arro-
gance," of reaping fantastic profits"
and OF engineering a "diabolical
plot" against the American people.
This is old stuff, and since it has
served labor propagandists well in
the past, it is hardly surprising that
1t should have been invoked again.
But the attack on the President is
another matter. Mr.. Murray would
have the country believe that the
administration has bowed in "abject
cowardice" to the arrogance" of
industry, that the Presidents recent
proposal to Congress was intended
to lay the groundwork of a legisla-
tive design Ito weaken and ulti-
mately destroy labor union organ
izations," and, finally, that the
Truman proposal can be but the
first step for ever more savage
legislative repression" OF unions.
This is nonsense, pure and simple.
and If Mr.. Murray wants the people
OF the country to believe him, which
presumably he does, one can only
conclude that he appraises their
intelligence at close to zero.
What is this monstrous thing that
Mr.. Truman proposes? He wants
Congress to authorize the establish
ment of impartial fact-finding
boards, with authority to unearth
and publicize the real facts involved
in major labor disputes. And he
also wants Congress to forbid strikes
in key industries for a period of
thirty days while the fact-findinp
boards are investigating and putting
the truth before the people.
That is all there is to it. For years
the people of this country have been
subjected to the competing propa-
<ganda barrages of labor and indus
try, with the result that, in many
instances, they have not known what
to believe. Now the President wants
to get the truth before them, hoping
that, with the facts at hand. they
will be able to marshal the force
OF public opinion behind what is
right and against what is wrong in
these disputes.
Why does Mr.. Murray fear this,
and profess to see in so mild a pro-
posal sinister design for the de-
struction of labor unions? If the
demands which labor is making upon
the country are justified, disclosure
OF the truth would bolster labor's
position and should, therefore, be
welcomed by labor. On the other
hand, If labor is trying to secure
a selfish advantage at the expense
OF the country as a whole, a public
understanding of the truth would
stand as barrier to those seeking
selfish advantage. Is it possible that
the president of tho CIO, in saying
that labor has never feared a dis
closure of facts, is talking about the
facts" that are dug up by paid
propagandists, and that he does fear
the consequences OF the factual dis
closures which might come from
impartial fact-finding boards?