Toledo union journal. [volume] (Toledo, Ohio) 1942-current, 1949-06-10

#5# ##MM the common e o pl e of
MNM great new land, then pro-
IN NSM ceeded to "barnStrom" the
@M& %M country with his message. He
M W won The people of America
MM SM won The Biddels of Phila-
H#M ~ #M delphia - leaders in this
gigantic attack against the
Pete Zvara basic rights of the American
people - and the rest of the "blue bloods"
were crushed.
One might say - certainly Mr. Editor of
The Times will - what has all that to do
with the issue between Tommy Burke and Tne
Times? The answer is simple The issue in
volved concerns the basic rights and the vel
fare of the common people of goth Century
America The issue centers around the fight
to repeal the notorious Taft-Hartley Act The
law which was designed by its authors to
shackel the working people of our country
No one can say not even The Times -
that Tommy Burke failed to make himself
crystal clear when he campaigned for the hlgh
office which he now holds He made no bones
about his intense dislike, his abhorance for
the Taft-Hartley Act Time and again he said
that if elected, he would do everything in his
power to remove this law from our statute
books Tom went further He said - and
still saws - that he would like to have the
original Wagner Act back on our books.
And 10 and behold, The Times - fully
acquainted with all this suddenly attempts
to show surprise that Tom refuses to bucket
under and accept re-enactment of the Taft
Hartley Act under another name
Says The Times in their editorial on this
subject which appeared in their June 4th
issue: "Well, anyway, the hon. rep. from Ohio's
Ninth Congressional District DR.. Thomas H.
Burke, is out in the open at last"
What incredible hypocrisy!
From all this so far we can adduce one
10 rka ha N
eyes of The Times If he would only forget
his promises to the people who elected him
Undoubtedly he would be hailed as a great
statesman" il he would only commit fraud
Yes, if he would only deceive the people by
forgetting his campaign platform.
But, much to the horror of Mr.. Editor, Tom
Burke just isn't that kind of a guy
Now, as to the issues involved. The Times
along with the overwhelming majority of the
big money press in the nation, is bitterly OPP
posed to any revision of the Taft Hartley Act,
particularly its anti-labor punative sections.
They especially want TO retain the injunction"
feature of the Act which gives employers -
acting through the us. Government - the
right to use the Courts and all other resources
of the government against strikers. They know
that against such combination of power no
strike no matter how justified, can avail.
They know - just as we know, through many
bitter and even bloody experiences that
once injunctions are permitted the right of
workers to strike is, in actuality, completely
nullified
And that is what they want above every
thing else, The power unhindered from any
source so smash strikes That is the purpose
of Taft Hartley as originally designed. And it
remains such today.
When The Times speaks of past strikes
where government Intervention resulted in
government seizure, 1t only speaks of the So
called rights" of industry. Not once do they
mention that perhaps, there were just causes
for these strikes. Not once do they admit
that in any instance where government seizure
took place, the workers gained their benefits
because they clearly and unmistakably de-
served such gains
The hell with the rights of workers! That's
the motto of The Times. Their sole concern
is to protect at any cost, the vested interests
of Big Business.
Well, gentlemen of The Times we don't
agree with you. Congressman Burke, thank
God, does not agree with you either. We think
that there ought to be justice even for the
lowly workers who man the vast and COM
plicated machinery Of our economic system
And to guarantee that justice we advocate
and fight for the complete notification of the
arbitrary and punatve Taft-Hartley Act Com
mon decency and our inherent faith in our
democratic system, compels us to take this
course.
One final word Under the existence of the
Wagner Act this nation of ours engaged its
limitleSs resources in the greatest war in all
history. Together with our allies, we won
that war, Our enemies were crushed. That
was made possible as even Stain admitted,
by the phenomenal accomplishments of our
economic and industrial system.
And it was all done under the much abused
Wagner Act
Isn't that the truth, Mr.. Editor of The
Times?
And if that is so, isn't it fair to assume that
under such law--even in peace time-we
could anticipate great progress for our people
and our country in the future? Surely the
dark road of reaction and repression that you
are proposing can only result in further re-
PROGRESSION not only for the working people,
but for the nation as whole
In all history 1T has always been so. So it
shall be now, If your reactionary plans sue
ceed.