of the fact he is not willing to have an election held and winner take all. He expressed his desire that a hearing be held. To this the N. L. R. B. representative did make the statement that a hearing would be delayed and suggested that the A. F. of L. negotiate a contract for their membership and permit the C. I. O. to do the same for theirs. A proposal of this sort from a representative of the National Labor Board does tend to prove his partiality toward the rival organization and does constitute a violation of the principles of the National Labor Act, inasmuch as the Act specifically states that the organization having the majority shall be the exclusive bargaining agency. The N. L. R. B. representative did remark that great friction does exist that the management of the said I. P. P. M. A. probably would fire members of both organizations because of disruptions. Protesting his attitude and statement of delayed hearing because of the fact that he does know who has the majority in that plant and refrains to take an impartial attitude in the matter. The majority can be officially established by proper action of the Board.

4. Mr. Vogt did inform us that we have some members who are members of the C. I. O. Because that organization might claim this is of no consequence and a Government representative should not take sides in this or other matters. If, by chance, there are some who might have previously belonged to the other organization, they came voluntarily and affixed their signatures upon our membership papers.

5. The said Mr. Vogt did permit the C. I. O. representative to use insulting, intimidating and threatening remarks in his presence and room, not only this, but encouraging him to do so by laughing at him and telling him to “get it off his chest," which attitude is discouraging in his official capacity.

6. The entire attitude, attire and partiality of the Government representative is strongly protested.

7. Mr. Vogt read aloud a copy of letter received by his office from the management of the foregoing industrial plant, in which it was requested that there be action taken by the National Labor Relations Board to settle the controversy at that plant as soon as possible because they are willing to negotiate a contract with whichever union holds a majority, because there is much controversy between the two groups.

8. As local representative of Local Union No. 591, I urgently request the Board to take appropriate steps to have the majority established so there will prevail harmony among these employes.

ILO C. HILL,

R. No. 1, Riverview Add., Ottumwa, Iowa.

Copies to: Rob't J. Weiner, Int. Union, A. M. C. & B. W. File

And I have a communication from the witness to Mr. Wiener, found in the Minneapolis regional office file.

I ask you if you didn't dictate and cause that to be prepared?
Mr. VOGT. This is a copy, isn't it?

Mr. TOLAND. Yes; a copy of the report you prepared; is that right?
Mr. VOGT. I think so.

Mr. TOLAND. Well, now, did you prepare it or did you not? It bears your name, was found in the regional office files.

Mr. VOGT. It might have been so, but my name isn't affixed to it. Mr. TOLAND. Doesn't it say, "From Mr. Vogt to Mr. Wiener"? Now, did you or didn't you prepare it?

Mr. VOGT. I usually sign my communications.

Mr. TOLAND. What does it say on there?

Mr. VOGT. "Received, September 23rd," but that was a copy.

Mr. TOLAND. Isn't that a copy of the original? Do you sign copies? Mr. VOGT. Yes; I do.

Mr. TOLAND. I offer in evidence the communication bearing the witness' name, being a report from him to the regional director, found in the files in Minneapolis.

(Copy of communication to Robert Wiener from H. Vogt, subject: Ilo Hill memorandum, September 16, 1939, dated September 22, 1939, was received in evidence, marked "Exhibit No. 1378," and follows.)

Mr. MURDOCK. Did you identify it, Mr. Vogt?

Mr. VOGT. I think it has substantially the things in it. It is a copy, probably, of what I wrote.

Mr. REILLY. Exhibit 1378 (reading):

To: Robert Wiener, Regional Director
From: H. Vogt

DES MOINES, Iowa, September 22, 1939.

Subject: Ilo Hill memorandum, September 16, 1939

I will answer Mr. Hill's memorandum to you by referring to each paragraph as he has indicated them in his memorandum of September 16, 1939.

(1) It is true that I phoned Mr. Hill's residence on September 14, and asked. him whether or not he could come to my hotel room at 4:30 in the afternoon. It is true that when he entered into my room he found me attired in my underwear. I regret that he protests finding me in this condition, but when I phoned him, I did not expect him to bring up anybody else but himself. Further, people usually, when they call on someone at the hotel, ring the hotel guest's room before coming up and announce their presence in the hotel. Mr. Hill did not ring the room as I recall it, but came directly to the room.

(2) It is true that when Mr. Hill and the other members who accompanied him entered into my room did find one Lawrence Jacobsen present. He, as the others, had just arrived. My past experience has taught me that if I desire to have a joint session between two opposing unions it is better to invite them to the meeting place, and then announce at the beginning of any joint session, a reason for having invited the parties involved. Mr. Hill and his cohorts were given ample time to have refused having a joint session with Mr. Jacobsen, themselves, and the examiner.

(3) It is true that Mr. Jacobsen was not willing to consent to an election because he differed with the A. F. of L. representatives as to the appropriate unit. I told them that if they could not agree on appropriate unit, the only thing that could be done would be to have a hearing. They were advised also that a hearing would take considerable time. Both representatives of the C. I. O. and the A. F. of L. stated that they could not change their views as to the appropriate unit and, therefore, requested a hearing as soon as possible. I did then ask both representatives whether or not there was some way this problem could be worked out. Mr. Ilo Hill immediately said, "Have you any suggestions to make?" and I said, "Yes, I can think of some suggestions, but whether or not you fellows want to do it is up to you." Mr. Hill then said "What is it?" and I then did suggest that since neither party could agree to the unit, that they might approach the company and ask the company whether or not they would negotiate a contract with the respective representatives for the members that they represented. I cannot see why Mr. Hill protests such a suggestion to you or the chairman when he made no protests that day, but just said that he was unauthorized to do such a thing. It is true that I did state to both parties that the friction between the two unions was not a healthy condition for the management to deal with because there was creating a great deal of inefficiency, and that the management had stated to me they would have to release some of the people who had become inefficient because of their enthusiasm for their respective sides.

(4) I took no side whatsoever, but did inform both parties that since I had looked at both of their records I could give them this information that I knew both sides were claiming to represent the same employees, in other words, there was duplication. Therefore, this matter will have to be settled either by a hearing or an election to see who actually does represent the majority of the employees.

(5) It is true, Mr. Jacobsen did use some insulting language, and I immediately told him that that wasn't the thing we had come up to the room for, but if he felt better now that he had it off his chest, we would go on and see what could be accomplished. I recall that I did make the remark “getting things off one's chest lends to calmness."

(6) I do not see on what basis he can claim that Government representative showed any partiality.

(7) It is true that I read aloud a copy of a letter which our office had received from the employer, and after having read the letter, asked the representatives if there wasn't some way to settle their differences because the employer was certainly in a tight spot at this time because he was going into

his busy season and was willing to negotiate with whatever union had the majority in the appropriate unit. The employer agreed to the appropriate unit that has been in existence for the past two years in dealing with the C. I. O. The A. F. of L. representative again said they could not agree to that unit. Again I told them that if they could not agree to the appropriate unit, the only thing I could see was a hearing. Both representatives then asked how long before a hearing could be held, and I informed them that I was in no position to state, but that the hearing would he had as soon as possible and that I hoped they got into no great difficulty awaiting the hearing. With that both parties were dismissed and thanked for responding to my request to come to my room, and I apologized for them having found me in the attire that I was and both parties remarked this is one of the hottest days of the year that we've had, because it had been reported that it was around 111°.

Very truly yours.

Mr. TOLAND. Now, Mr. Chairman, in view of the shortness of time, I have a copy of a communication from Mr. Witt, dated September 25, 1939, to Mr. Robert J. Wiener (reading):

I am sending you herewith a copy of my reply to the above letter, under today's date. Mr. Hill stated that a copy of his letter was sent to you. No doubt you or Vogt should be able to locate the case to which Mr. Hill makes reference. I should appreciate having the comments of yourself and Vogt in this matter immediately.

I offer that in evidence.

(Copy of letter to Mr. Robert J. Wiener from Nathan Witt, dated September 25, 1939, was received in evidence, marked "Exhibit No. 1379," and appears above.)

Mr. TOLAND. I have a communication from Mr. Wiener to Mr. Nathan Witt, dated September 28, 1939, saying (reading):

The case referred to in Mr. Hill's memorandum is the Iowa Poultry Pro ducers Marketing Association, XVIII-RE-2. Vogt is at present preparing an authorization request in the matter which should be in your hands in a very few days.

Following receipt of a copy of Mr. Hill's letter to the Chairman, I forwarded it to Examiner Vogt who sent me the enclosed memorandum, which explains the incident. Please let me know if there is any other information you wish concerning this matter.

Sincerely,

R. J. W.

(Letter to Nathan Witt from Robt. J. Wiener, dated Sept. 28, 1939, was received in evidence, marked "Exhibit No. 1382" and appears above.)

Mr. TOLAND. Then I have the original of a communication from Mr. Hill to Nathan Witt, dated October 4, 1939, found in the informal file of this case.

(Letter to Mr. Nathan Witt from Ilo C. Hill, dated October 4, 1939, on stationery of Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, was received in evidence, marked “Exhibit No. 1380," and is printed in the appendix of this volume.)

Mr. TOLAND. I have a copy of a communication from Mr. Witt to Mr. Hill, dated October 12, 1939, reading as follows:

This will acknowledge your letter of October 4, 1939.

The Board has considered the matter, and regrets any embarrassment you were caused at your conference with Field Examiner Vogt on September 14, in Ottumwa, Iowa. The Board will consider the case on its merits in the normal way when a report on the investigation is received from the Regional Director.

(Copy of letter to Mr. Ilo C. Hill from Nathan Witt, subject, "Iowa Poultry Producers Marketing Association, Case No. XVIIIRE-2," was received in evidence, marked "Exhibit No. 1381," and appears above.)

Mr. TOLAND. Now, Mr. Vogt, I am going to show you a letter addressed to you from Mr. Ballard dated March 17, 1938, and ask you if you received that communication.

Mr. VOGT. I think

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Is that in connection with the same case?

Mr. TOLND. The same Cudahy Packing Co. case, but not that Hill

case.

Mr. MURDOCK. Let us finish with that case before we begin another. Was an election held in that case, Mr. Vogt?

Mr. VOGT. Yes.

Mr. MURDOCK. And what was the result of the election?

Mr. VOGT. I did not hold the election; it was held by another member of our office, and I think the A. F. L. won that election. Mr. MURDOCK. And it was finally certified with the Board as the bargaining agent, was it not, for the plant?

Mr. VOGT. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. When was the election held? Will somebody inform me?

Mr. VOGT. I could not give you the date.

Mr. MURDOCK. But notwithstanding the scene in which you were. in your underwear, and so forth, the A. F. L. was ultimately designated as the representative,

Mr. VoGT. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to put in the certification of representation.

(Certification of representation, headed "United States of America before the National Labor Relations Board," was received in evidence, marked "Exhibit No. 1383," and is printed in the appendix of this volume.)

Mr. MURDOCK. I think it should be in.

Mr. VOGT. The reason I was in such attire was because it was hot, and I wasn't feeling so good, and I was not prepared for them, and the reason Jacobson caught me there was that he knocked on my door, and I got up and said, "Well, I'll get ready," and he had no more than been there when the other boys came up, and asked them if they wanted me to, and if I recall correctly, they said, "No, it's O. K., and it's pretty hot." Even the fan didn't do any good that

day.

Mr. TOLAND. Did you swear witnesses when you interviewed them? Mr. VOGT. I did some; yes.

Mr. TOLAND. I show you a group of papers and ask you if these were not prepared at Mr. Ballard's office, and do not represent an examination by you of some employees of the company.

Mr. VOGT (examining documents). I

Mr. TOLAND (interposing). You received that, didn't you?

Mr. VOGT. Yes.

Mr. TOLAND. I offer that in evidence.

(Thirty-six pages of a report of interviews with employees, identified by the witness, being on yellow paper, were received in evidence,

marked "Exhibit No. 1385," and are printed in the appendix of this volume.)

Mr. VOGT. Well, I don't recall these affidavits taken by me, but I do recall this, where a group of people were in the office and I asked them to swear to what they were going to testify to.

Mr. TOLAND. Are you a notary public?

Mr. VOGT. No. But under the act I understand that the Board agent has the right to take statements under oath.

Mr. TOLAND. Oh, you do? And you did take these statements, and they were written up by Mr. Ballard's secretary?

Mr. VOGT. That is correct.

Mr. TOLAND. And that is paper of Mr. Ballard's, his stationery? Mr. VOGT. That I don't know, because I carried a lot of yellow sheets with me, and some of them might be Mr. Ballard's if I happened to run out.

Mr. TOLAND. These are one exhibit.

Now, didn't you acknowledge receipt of that material?

Mr. VOGT. I probably did.

Mr. TOLAND. This material of Mr. Ballard's?

Mr. VOGT. I probably did.

Mr. TOLAND. I show you a letter of March 28 and ask you if that does not acknowledge receipt of the material that you have just identified.

Mr. VOGT (examining document). I probably did; yes.

Mr. TOLAND. Well, it bears your name, doesn't it?

Mr. VOGT. Yes.

Mr. TOLAND. "Leonard C. Bajork, by Herbert J. Vogt."
Mr. VOGT. Yes.

Mr. TOLAND. Addressed to Mr. H. R. Ballard, regional director, C. I. O., 503 Trimble Building., Sioux City, Iowa.

Mr. VOGT. Yes.

Mr. TOLAND. I offer in evidence the letter of March 17, 1938, and the acknowledgment of March 26, 1938.

(Letter to Mr. Herbert J. Vogt, dated March 17, 1938, "Re: Case XIII-C-649, Cudahy Packing Co.," from H. R. Ballard, was received in evidence and marked "Exhibit No. 1384," and is printed in the appendix of this volume.)

(Copy of reply to Mr. H. R. Ballard, from Mr. Leonard C. Bajork, by Herbert J. Vogt, dated March 26, 1938, was received in evidence, marked "Exhibit No. 1386," and is printed in the appendix of this volume.)

Mr. TOLAND. Now, Mr. Vogt, did you ever designate any officials of the union as your representative and give them letters?

Mr. VOGT. Did I what?

Mr. TOLAND. Did you ever give a letter to any representative of the C. I. O. as your agent to go out and gather evidence? Mr. VOGT. I don't recall.

Mr. TOLAND. Well, would you say you did not?

Mr. VOGT. No; I wouldn't say that, but I don't recall. If you have anything that will refresh my memory, I would be glad to testify. Mr. TOLAND. All right. I show you a copy of a letter from Mr. Wiener to Mr. Witt, dated May 27, 1938, and ask you if you con