Evening star., 1950-09-17

FOttOWTLy 10 Tue tC.LC " 1Ioo-
ert N. DenhGnl'S letter of resig-
nation and President Truman'S
letter accepting it:
Mr.. Denham's Letter.
My dear Mr.. President:
When. about three years ago,
your assistant, Mr.. John r. Steel
man, informed me of your inten-
ton to appoint me as general
counsel of the National Labor Re-
lations Board, I stated that was
not a candidate, but would not
refuse any duty to which you. as
President, might see fit to assign
me. On that basis, and with the
understanding that the Office
could be put in good running or
der in year or year and a half.
after which I could expect to be
relieved to less arduous duties, I
agreed to accept the appointment.
When you advised me of my
appointment, in the presence of
the then members of the board,
including the new appointees,
your instruction to me was that,
although you did not like the
Taft Hartley Act and had vetoed
it, Congress had passed it over
your veto and made it the law Of
the land-and that, accordingly.
you would expect me to admins
ter the act. so long as it re-
manned on the books, in accord
ance with its terms. and in the
way Congress intended it to be
administered. You told me you
would not be looking over my
shoulder or breathing down my
neck" to see how was doing my
job and that probably I would
hear nothing further from you
about it. I am proud to record
that at no time during these three
years has any one in, or speaking
for the White House offered any
suggestion as to how any matter
coming before me should be
treated.
At all times since then, I have
made every effort. as a lawyer and
as an administrator, to carry out
your instructions and to apply the
Taft Hartley Act in accordance
with its provisions and the clear
intent of Congress as reflected in
the overall picture of the legisla-
tive history of the law.
1t is well known that have
always subscribed to the basic
fundamentals and the indicated
congressional intendments of the
law and have acted accordingly
when called upon to apply the
law as the prosecutor and the
person responsible for dealing
with it at the threshold of every
case. On the other hand, most
OF the members of the board seem
to have held differing points of
view, when measured by numer-
Gus Of the decisions which I, as
lawyer. found great difficulty in
fitting into your original injunc-
tlon as to how you wanted the
law administered. That my ex-
ceptions to the principles sought
to be applied in such cases were
well taken, is borne out by the
fact that. almost without excep-
ton, the courts have failed to
uphold the decisions of the board
involving those principles where
there have been broad differences
in point of view in our inter-
agency relations.
These conditions, together with
public statements made by those
representing the board before
various congressional committees.
and in some of the boards de-
clsions with reference to its rela.
tions with the general counsel
as well as numerous internal
situations which, from time to
time. I have unsuccessfully tried
70 obtain the cooperation of the
board in remedying. have deprived
the public of that quality of ad-
mlnistration of the law to which
1t is entitled, and have created
a situation that should not be
allowed to exist in a governmental
agency occupying so important a
part in its influence on our indus
trial economy.
The conditions thus created
make 1t practically impossible for
any general counsel who respects
the duties and responsibilities of
his Office and his obligations to
the public and to the courts. ef-
fectively to carry out the instruc-
tions from you under which I
have been operating. A few weeks
ago, I made a final effort to bring
about a readjustment which could
have corrected the entire situa-
ton in the agency. to the advan-
Itage of all concerned, assuming
/ genuine desire by all to accom-