Toledo union journal. [volume] (Toledo, Ohio) 1942-current, 1947-07-11
Not a Comparison

IN commenting Oh viz A~
Hartley bill earlier this week, the Toledo
Blade has attempted to make 1t appear
that the public reaction TO the wagner
Act and the Taft Hartley law "shows a
remarkable similarity"
We agree that "twelve years ago
industry was just as violent in its condem'
nation of the Wagner Act as labor leaders
are in their disapproval of the Taft'hart'
lev amendment" But, the resentment
which the employers felt then has not dis
appeared, as evidenced by the passage of
the Taft-Hartley bill by reactionary Con-
gress.
Those who see any comparison between
conditions as they existed prior to the
passage of the Wagner Act and the situa'
ton as it exists today, either do not know
what they are writing about, or are delib-
erately seeking to stem the resentment of
the organized workers of Toledo who
spend 80 cents each week to perpetuate
newspaper monopoly.
Those who lived through the early days
of labor organization in Toledo will never
forget the violence of some of Toledo's in
dustrialists. They will not forget the fire
hose, labor spies, clubs, guns and tear gas
turned against them because they dared to
exercise the rights guaranteed them under
the Wagner Act.
And all these things, this violent OppO-
sition of employers because of their re-
sentiment and antagonism to the Wagner
Act came at time when the unions were
asking for nothing more than recognition.
1t is passing strange how men and even
newspapers, even clever, subtle men who
run clever, and sometimes subtle news
papers, can show their hand so plainly
when dealing with matter which touches
them very closely.
Isn't the Toledo Blade big business?
Doesn't the Blade employ many workers
who are members of CIO and AFL unions?
Isn't the Blade grinding its own axe when
it takes an editorial position which must
he in harmony with the position its own
erS take toward their own employees?
We accept the position taken by the
Blade, expect it, and respect it the same
as we do the opinion of any other en-
plOyer. On the other hand, we disagree
with its comparison of the Wagner Act
and Taft-Hartley bill and believe that
time and events will prove ii to be wrong.
One thing we have in commOn-al-
though the Blade speaks in a thin, weak
voice-is our common opposition to the po-
litical activities and free speech clause
contained in the Wagner Act Obviously,
the Blade editorial writer remembered
that Hitler's first target was the German
labor unions and after that the German
press. IL the labor movement can be
gagged and Silenced so can the privately
owned and controlled press.
We could point out the lack of logic in
the Blade editorial, but suspect that the
one who wrote it did so with his tongue in
his cheek and was doing his masters bid
ding. We suspect that lot of the Blades
editorials are written that way, and be-
lieve their authors know better, but like
the rest of us workers are in need of job
and steady pay.
Our only reason for writing this was
to point out to the Toledo Blade that there
are thousands of workers in Toledo who
arc not influenced by its opinion of labor
laws, and who clearly recognize that the
Blade, like many other large city news
papers, is big business and just as opposed
TO the unions with which il deals as any
other large employer.
Unlike the Blade we are going to shout
our protests about gagging the press to the
high heavens. Our only regret is that the
Blade doesn't show the same deep concern
for its own welfare as we of labor do for
the continuation of free daily press, even
one which tortures the truth.