THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box 6i«
• 1.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAH
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER.Editor
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoffrr**
at Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Friday, April 25, 1947
A Lesson In Disaster
A HORROR-NUMBED nation gropes for words to ex
press its reaction to the blast which killed uncounted
hundreds of persons in the little Gulf Coast industria1
town of Texas City. We try to look beyond the sensat'or
to find the lesson, for we like to believe there must be
some mite of recompense for this death and suffering.
We have seen, close to home, the type of devastation
which during the war appeared to us only as a remote
statistic counting the dead of London, Rotterdam. War
saw, Berlin. Leingrad or Nagasaki. We shudder for the
hundreds who died in Texas City, where we were aloof
from the thousands who died under the bombs of war
time.
It is the closeness of the Texas City disaster which
shocks us—and perhaps it is a mark, too, of our regain
ing a peacetime sense of the worth of human life.
There are some minor immediate lessons in the cat
tle-dumb curiosity which draws people to danger, like
the 500 Texas City people who were permitted to stand
on docks to watch the burning of an explosiye-lader
ship. It is a warning for city authorities everywhere to
tighten their precautions. Undoubtedly, too, it will lead
cities to re-examine their preparedness for disaster.
Newspaper correspondents like Hal Boyle of Associ
ated Press who have seen the effects of aerial bombard
ment compare the Texas devastation to the scenes of
wartime. Boyle called it a preview of the chaos which
atomic warfare might bring to this country.
We have had a sobering view of what war might do in
industrial America. It should strengthen our will to
peace; but, more, it should lead us to serious planning to
cope with the civil chaos which war could bring.
It Is Strong, Yes—But Not Vicious
(The Denver Post)
LEADERS OF ORGANIZED LABOR are bitter over
the terms of legislation restricting union activities.
Their sentiments were echoed by a minority of Demo
crats in the lower house of Congress, who denounced the
House bill—passed by an overwhelming vote of 308 to
107—as a “hodge-podge,” “viciously anti-labor,” “union
busting” measure that will destroy American living
standards.
It has been called the “most rigid labor control bill in
American history.” That is true to the extent that it
deals with matters never before subject of legislation.
But that does not mean it is a vicious bill.
The bill is not harsh. It is a coherent and comprehen
sive rewriting of the Wagner Act designed to afford the
protection of law to labor, management and the public.
There is nothing in the bill’s sixty-six pages denying the
valid rights of labor; indeed, its “bill of rights” feature
would give the rank-and-file union member protection
he never enjoyed under the loosely written law which
has governed labor relations during the past decade.
For the first time union members would have such
protections, with the solid guarantee of law, as these:
Freedom to express their views on any subject, in or
out of the union, without fear of disciplinary action;
Freedom from excessive initiation fees and dues;
The right to a secret vote and an open count of ballots
on any question inyolving fees, dues, assessments, fines,
strikes, election of officers or the expulsion of a member.
These are rights which many good unions have long
guaranteed members, but the absence of which in other
unions has given rise to tyranny over the livelihood of
workingmen. While many rank-and-file union members
may feel obligated to go along with their leaders in do
nouncin? this bill, most can look upon it as a Magna
Carta of labor. . .
The bill does have strong and much-needed restrictr ^
features. It would forbid such abuses as these:
Jurisdictional strikes—that is, strikes resulting from
a dispute between two unions over which shall do a iob:
Secondary boycotts—in which workers refuse to han
dle goods from, or destined for, an employer not the r
own;
Featherbedding—in which a union seeks to fore** an
employer to hire more men than reasonably necessaw
for a job, or to pay for work not performed: or in which a
union penalizes an employer for use of certain machine^
or materials;
Mas* picketing and violence in picketing.
The b;ll would correct one of the most glaring faulfc
of the Wagner act by giving employers the right to
speak freely to their employees on labor matters.
Most important of all is the recognition which tho
House bill gives to the rights of the public—too long the
’'rnocent victim in many strikes. Bv curbing industrv
wide bargaining, the measure would make unlike1^ *h^
r^f:ona! naralvsis which has been inflicted by rail~o?d.
an^ telephone strikes.
Tn addition, it would establish procedures increasing
+he hone of peaceful settlement in such disputes affect
fhe public health and safety as the present telephone
In these situations, the bill would authorize the
government to seek an injunction delaying the strike for
a period during which:
fa) For thirty days intensive efforts would be madp
to settle the dispute by conciliation;
fb) If agreement was not reached, the secretary of
labor would ask the chief justice of the U. S. circuit
court of appeals for the District of Columbia to convene
a three-man advisory board with himself as chairman
and with members representing labor and management:
fc^ The board would investigate the facts and report
within thirty days;
fd) Fifteen days after the board renders its opinion
the NLRB would take a secret ballot among the employ
ees on whether they would accept the findings;
(e) Neither party would be obligated to accept the
findings;
(f) If at the end of these proceedings, agreement
were not reached, the injunction would he dissolved and
the union could strike.
The merit of this procedure is that it would delav a
i strike while a determined effort is made to settle a dis
pute. Findings of the board would enable the public to
| form intelligent opinions on a case.
Labor politicians naturally oppose this bill, feeling
i with John L. Lewis and his ideological forebear. King
| Louis XIV of France, “L’etat c’est moi”—“I am the
| state.” But for the ordinary workingman, for the now
powerless employer and for the public this bill is a new
bib of rights.
The prediction is made that President Truman, wb^
1 vetoed the less-inclusive Case bill last summer, will kill
: this measure if it reaches his desk. If he does, the coun
• try may undergo another year of unrestrained industrial
warfare—and there will be a reckoning in 1948.
“Boys And Girls Week” In Nome
- H
* "Boys and Girls Week” origin
ated as ‘‘Boys Week” through the
Rotary Club of New York City in
1920. Rotary Clubs in four addi
tional cities sponsored local ob
servances the following year. The
movement spread rapidly—in 1922
over 200 cities reported celebra
tions, in 1923 some 600 cities, and
in 1926 the celebration of the week
had become general throughout
the States and Canada.
Through the influence of Rotary
International, other countries be
came interested in the movement,
so that by 1927 observances were
reported from many parts of the
world. Before the war, participa
tion in the week was practically
world-wide.
Such great public interest was
evidenced in Boys Week in the
United States that a committee,
known as the National Boys and
Girls Week Committee for the
United States, was originated. It is
composed of a number of out
standing American men and wo
men interested in youth. Herbert
J. Taylor of Chicago is chairman;
S. Kendrick Guernsey, of Jackson
ville. Florida, is secretary of this
committee.
In most communities Boys and
Girls Week is not merely an activ
ity of the local Rotary Club, but is
carried through in cooperation
with boys and girls work agencies,
service clubs, women’s 6lubs, pa
triotic and religious organizations,
and others in the community.
Boys and Girls Week offers an
opportunity to bring to the atten
tion of the community the needs of
boys and girls and the work of
youth agencies in meeting those
needs. No better program of com
munity recognition of boys and
girls can be promoted than this an
nual event.
In view of the recently acquired
building for the Boy Scouts, and
the use of the building allowed to
Girl Scouts and other youths of
the community, there is much to
bj done for the boys and girls of
Nome. The building is being read
: :r for occupancy, for meetings of
the Roy Scouts and the Girl Scouts
on their various regular meeting
n jhts and for parties as scheduled
i order to give the youth of Nome
ho lift needed in addition to home
n - school training in becoming,
eventually, the community’s lead
:i ; citizens.
Much work has been done by
scouting committees, scoutmaster ,
istants and others interested in
youth welfare, in obtaining the
necessary facilities to make it pos
,ble to do the job right.
Our future citizens deserve all
he support we can give them.
Public attention must be focused
u on the boys and girls, their po
tentialities and their problems, to
. n end that increasing numbers of
adults, whether in business or pri
vate life, may awaken to the joys
and opportunities of youth service
and be encouraged to cooperate in
programs of character-building ac
tivities for the general welfare of
boys and girls, bringing to each a
realization of his duties and re
sponsibilities as a citizen.
This week, April 26 to May 4,
“Boys and Girls Week,” the theme
is “Youth—The Trustees of Pos
terity.”
Sunday, April 27, the buildings
of the Boy Scout summer camp
will be moved to the Dexter loca
tion. where work will commence
n readying them for occupancy
this season.
“Members of the Rotary Club, the
Scouting Committee, and others
are giving money, time and mate
rials, to renovate and recondition
tie new Scout Headquarters build
ing, and it should be ready for
meetings in the very near future,”
stated John Hudert, chairman of
the Scouting Committee, “and
should be a real asset in providing
a meeting place for youth in the
community.”
It has been pointed out that the
entire program cannot possibly be
carried on without community co
operation. Much help and equip
ment is necessary.
The present staff of Scoutmas
ter, Assistant Scoutmaster, and
Committee is good, but they alone
cUnnot put Scouting across. No
single one of us can accomplish
much* but the combined efforts of
all of us can bring the desired re
sults in developing our future cit
izens.
4
“Newburyport
Plan” Spreading
NEWBURYPORT, Mass. (JP) —
This seaport community’s efforts
to smash the props under high
prices appeared to be spreading
rapidly across the country today.
In response to Newburyport’s
appeal to jojn in a "patriotic” cam
paign to knock down prices 10 per
cent, authorities dotting the nation
from Vermont to California re
ported they would put into effect
or advocate a program similar to
that undertaken here two days ago.
Under the “Newburyport Plan”
nearly 100 per cent of the retail
merchants slashed prices a flat 10
per cent in a 10-day experiment.
In the first two days sales boomed
as high as 60 per cent above nor
“",al, and the major week-end shop
•:n~ days were expected to rocket
the figure.