Evening star., 1945-10-26

hdfC Pd4O GllCoC tWO ldDOl OlSdlllZd
tions we'll over a million dollars fol
expenses.
The Red Cross reply does not
dispute the facts, which are indispu-
table. 1t does deny that it was
kicking back" to the labor unions
for their aid. 1t uses the word
reimburse" It's contention is that
the arrangement was made in order
better "to reach a sizable group OF
contributors which never before
played major part in our cam
paign."
Figures do show that the Red
Cross in 1941-45 raised $216, ,433 ,5l4
and spent for campaign funds ST.
2e4, 900, of which the CIO and AFL
got $232,737.
Leo Perils, OF the CIO relief COM
mittee, is quoted as saying that
1.-The fundamental issue in wartime
was separatism or unity. CIO pre-
ferred to unity its Embarrassing ef-
forts for war appeals with these
organizations. That is why we en-
tered into the agreement in 1912. u
Taken by Surprise.
The Red Cross reply is more re-
markable for the things it does not
say than for the things it does say
For example, it quotes the 1914
report of Guy Emerson, the official
who conducted the negotiations, as
saying that the suggestion that the
Red Cross reimburse the unions
frankly took us by surprise" but
that if the Red Cross had not
agreed it would have been at dis
advantage in the plant field.
What it does not state is that Mr.
Emerson's report was made at the
request of Chairman Davis to
placate protesting members of the
central committee who regarded
the arrangement as violation of
the Red Cross spirit and in conflict
with what they believed a basic
Red Cross principle. They insisted
that the Red Cross had a record of
never having had to reimburse any
agency for expenses and that to
break this record was a grave
mistake.
The reply does not state that Mr.
Ernerson's report failed to placate
those protesting, who continued to
oppose the arrangement and still
do. It also fails to quote Mr.. Emer-
son as having said that prior to the
arrangement the labor leaders had
been indifferent and unfriendly'
and 1t further failed to state that
neither the United Mine Workers
of America nor the Railroad
Brotherhoods were parties to the
agreement; that both these organi-
cations for years had measured up to
every Red Cross requirement in
every Red Gross campaign without
being reimbursed cent; that both
have written letters of protest and
that John L. Lewis, one of the Red
Cross incorporators, wrote that he
had no knowledge of such an ar
rangement and was "dumbfounded'
when it was disclosed.
Full Picture Delayed.
The reply insists that the arrange
ment was not kept secret" This
is only partially true. 1t is true
that the National War Fund, the
Red Gross and the CIO did send
out in yoluminous detail announce
ment and instructions to officials,
but the full picture was not given.
This is attested by the ignorance
of so large a portion of the Red
Cross officials workers and friends.
1t is attested by correspondence
between Chairman Davis and pro-
testing central committee member
who wrote that this agreement
has not been made public carries its
own condemnation" It is still fur
ther attested by the fact that the
Emerson report was never made
public.
The reply does not state that for
the past two weeks letters of protest
have been pouring in from all parts
Of the country and that opposition
Is due not so much to the sum
reimbursed" but to the conviction
that the Red Cross should not have
TO reimburse any agency; that in
eimbursing these exceedingly rich
agencies a bad precedent has been
established.
There is here no suggestion that
either labor organization has done
anything sinister in this matter or
Is not on the level and well-inten-
toned. A plausible case can be
made out but not proved - that
the arrangement has worked well
all around. But that is not the
point. The point is that in Red
Cross history this is the first time
it has ever. contracted in advance
II