Evening star., 1953-09-12
Mr.. Durkin Bows Out

1t probably was not in the cards that
Martin Durkin should have remained for long
as Secretary of Labor in a Republican ad-
ministration.
He was registered Democrat and union
president. He actively supported Governor
Stevenson in the last presidential election and
had originally advocated repeal-not revision
of the Taft-Hartley Act These were some of
the reasons which prompted the late Senator
Taft to characterize Mr.. Durkin's selection for
the cabinet as incredible" but they were also
circumstances that were fully known to Presi-
dent Eisenhower when he made the selection.
This being the case, the fair inference is
that the appointment was made and accepted
in mutual good faith, and in the hope on the
Presidents part that it would serve to improve
the relationship between his party and union
leadership. That the experiment has failed is
no reflection-Democratic Chairman Mitchell
to the contrary-on any ones sincerity of
purpose.
Mr.. Durkin says the principal reason" for
his resignation was the failure of the lad
miniStration" to live up to what he regarded
as a commitment to recommend certain changes
in the Taft-Hartley law. The precise meaning
of this is not clear. Certainly there was no
such commitment from the President, and Mr.
Durkin says as much. If there was a COM
m1tment from SubordinateS of the President,
Mr.. Durkin should have realized that it could
not be final and binding until General Eisen-
hover himself had Endorsed the proposed
changes.
In any event, when it became clear to Mr..
Durk1n that the President was not going to
recommend certain changes in the law which
the Secretary of Labor wanted, he submitted
his resignation. And he did it with dignity
which tn Eo hoc
not sought to embarrass the President, nor to
squeeze some partisan advantage out of this
break in the top rank of the administration.
There are others, of course, who have shown
less restraint. AFL President George Meany has
charged in with a statement to the effect that
it has long been tradition in the labor move
ment that once an agreement is reached the
parties abide by it, and that of course Mr.
Durkln could not continue to serve on a team
Where agreements are not kept In view Of the
number of agreements that have been preached
by AFL unions, Mr.. Meany must have had his
tongue in both cheeks when he delivered him
self of this observation. CIO President Walter
Reuther was another ready commentator. He
said that every effort on the part of Mr.. Durkin
to strengthen the Labor Department and carry
out the commitments of President Eisenhower
has been frustrated. But Mr.. Durkin, in his
"You have appointed a number of eminently
qualified persons to be of assistance to me in
the Department of Labor" The other adverse
comments have come from professional Demo-
cratic politicians-the tone of these being about
what one would expect.
1t is too early to attempt to measure the
effect of Mr. Durkin'S departure on Republican
political fortunes. Certainly it is not helpful
But the Meany-Reuther type of reaction need
cause no great concern They opposed the
Republican candidate the last time, and they
undoubtedly would have been in the opposition
camp in any event the next time The real
question is whether the millions of workers
who voted for General Eisenhower last year
will follow Mr.. Durkins lead And this, in turn,
probably will be determined-not by politically
inspired statements-but by the manner in
which the President and his administration
handle matters of peculiar interest to labor
between now and 1856