Mr. DREW. May I ask, in this connection, to complete this point on the record, if you went to the expense of hiring two men who could operate this same tool with equal efficiency, then they were started on the job at the same time, still one man having started on this particular job, you say that it would not be practicable for the other man to step in at the end of eight hours and finish this work, because there is something about the continuous operation that necessitates the same man finishing who started?

Mr. MULL. That is what I wish to convey, exactly.

Mr. DREW. May I go further than that? You look to one man for responsibility for a certain piece of work, if you start him on it? Mr. MULL. Yes, sir.

Mr. DREW. If two men work on it, would there not be a division of responsibility?

Mr. MULL. Yes, sir.

Mr. DREW. And would that not disorganize your working force immediately, to have two working forces on jobs?

Mr. MULL. Absolutely.

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Mull, passing on now to your relations with your subcontractors other than those who are in your own employ and actually engaged in preparing the structural work on vessels that you are working on, that is to say, those who furnish boilers, steel, cranes, and one thing or another of that description, what effect would an eight-hour limitation of the hours of labor such as contemplated by this bill have upon them?

Mr. MULL. I should say that so far as our structural material, such as plates, are concerned, I do not know that we would ever get them. Mr. HAYDEN. That is, the subcontractors would refuse to bid?

Mr. MULL. Yes, sir; they would refuse to bid if they were confined to an eight-hour day. It is hard enough to get that material now on a ten-hour basis on Government work, as they are on a higher quality; they have to make special ingots, and when we are busy there is so much structural work going on that they will not furnish them until they get ready. But I am sure if they were limited to an eight-hour day, restricted by this law, I do not know that they would ever do it. Mr. HAYDEN. You mean you find them unwilling to furnish you with materials when business is active?

Mr. MULL. We certainly do.

Mr. HAYDEN. When there is demand for structural steel?

Mr. MULL. Take the product of the United States company; I do not think the Government work would represent 2 per cent of their entire output; I do not think it will amount to 2 per cent.

Mr. HAYDEN. Everything that you buy from them you buy on special order?

Mr. MULL. Special order, absolutely.

Mr. HAYDEN. Can you find it in stock anywhere?

Mr. MULL. No; not even for merchant work.

Mr. HAYDEN. If you had such materials in your yard, would they be salable for work on merchant ships?

Mr. MULL. Oh, no.

Mr. HAYDEN. Why not?

Mr. MULL. They would not pay the price, and we could not afford to work it in a merchant ship.

Mr. HAYDEN. That is, the Government work is very costly?

Mr. MULL. It is. You take a rivet, they want it nickeled steel. Mr. HAYDEN. You are engaged in building some destroyers? Mr. MULL. Yes; and at the present time we have yet to find a man to furnish rivets to meet the requirements of the Government. Mr. HAYDEN. Would those rivets, when inspected by you, be available for use on other ships?

Mr. MULL. No; they are too costly, too hard, impracticable to use. I will relate an instance that has only happened this week. On the battle ship South Carolina, after her armor plates, that is, her barbette No. 1, was made and delivered, they were put on the ship, and two flaws on the surface were discovered, and we had to take those plates off and ship them back to Bethlehem. We were informed it would take two months to have them replaced. That is not only holding up that particular barbette, but we had calculated to put the first turret track and the first turret in that part of the ship. That delay will mean not only the two months, but the consequential delays on other places, and it will be about five months. We have to make overtime; we could not expect the Government to give us an extension on anything of that kind; they would not, if we asked them; they would say, "Why do you not do this?" or "Why do you not do that?" The result is that we will have to start in when these plates come and work overtime night and day.

Mr. HAYDEN. To avoid a penalty?

Mr. MULL. Yes; to avoid a penalty. When we are restricted to an eight-hour basis, we will have to do something to prevent Providence or inevitable accident from coming to crack our armor plates. Mr. HAYDEN. How many contracts do you let for material outside of your own subcontractors; give us an estimate?

Mr. MULL. I could not say the micellaneous material, such as structural material, carpets, oilcloths, and so forth?

Mr. HAYDEN. Everything; can you estimate it?

Mr. MULL. No.

Mr. HAYDEN. Does it exceed 100?

Mr. MULL. Oh, my, yes.

Mr. HAYDEN. Three?

Mr. MULL. Thousands.

Mr. HAYDEN. For the various minute items?

Mr. MULL. For the various minor items; I could not enumerate them this afternoon.

Mr. HAYDEN. Are any of the things you get under your subcontracts procurable in the open market?

Mr. MULL. Nothing for Government work. Even the linoleum that goes on the floor you can not buy in the open market.

Mr. HAYDEN. Could you sell it, if you had it, in open market? Mr. MULL. At a loss; we have remnants left over at times that we work in on merchant ships which they are very glad to take, but it is at a loss to us. Even paint and rubber. I have seen us wait six months for rubber for sidelights for our ports for Government ships. This rubber is manufactured. It goes to a chemist who takes chemical analyses and treats it physically for its physical test, and I have seen us wait six months for india rubber.

Mr. HAYDEN. For what purpose?

Mr. MULL. For the purpose of side lights for battle ships and inner bottom water manhole plates.

Mr. HAYDEN. Although, in the aggregate, that is a very small item?

Mr. MULL. Very small, yet a ship could not leave without even that, small as it is.

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Mull, at a former hearing Mr. Powell, of your company, was addressing the committee and was asked this question by an advocate of the bill, Mr. Tracy: "Is it not true that when business is normal it is a great deal more difficult for the Cramps Shipbuilding Company to obtain employees, because of the fact that they can obtain better conditions and better wages in other localities, and when there is a depression that they can obtain all the help that they need, because of the fact of the depression?" Will you please tell us what you know of that condition, whether it exists or not? Mr. MULL. Who said that?

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Tracy asked the question, an advocate of this bill.

Mr. MULL. I do not agree with that. I think that we do pay better wages than other places. I am sure that our wages are higher than any other shipyard in this country; that is, the money paid to the workmen is more.

Mr. HAYDEN. Through the medium of the subcontract system? Mr. MULL. Through the medium of the subcontract system. Mr. NICHOLLS. Could you say per hour?

Mr. MULL. More per hour. I do not believe there is a place in the United States that pays the wages we do for ship construction. Mr. HAYDEN. Have you any difficulty in obtaining at all times a sufficient working force?

Mr. MULL. We may have difficulty in getting riveters. Except in that, I do not know of an instance where we have ever had difficulty. Riveters are a floating class of people, and when structural work is at its height around the large cities they pay there high wages, and the riveters go there in preference to coming to the shipyard. Mr. HAYDEN. The work is easier; not so accurate?

Mr. MULL. The work is limited. They only drive a few rivets and only work a few hours; that is the reason. But, as a rule, when we are running at a normal rate we never have any trouble at all; no difficulty whatever.

Mr. DREW. May I ask you just for information what a normal output of a gang of four riveters is during a day?

Mr. MULL. A right and a left hand man, a holder-what is the size of the rivet?

Mr. DREW. A three-quarter rivet.

Mr. MULL. Countersunk or button head?

Mr. DREW. Button head.

Mr. MULL. We will put in 1,400, one man.

Mr. DREW. A day?

Mr. MULL. A day.

Mr. HAYDEN. That is one man?

Mr. MULL. One man, with a pneumatic hammer.

Mr. DREW. Working how many hours.

Mr. MULL. He will start in the morning at 7 and quit at 4.

Mr. HAYDEN. An hour for lunch?

Mr. MULL. Three-quarters of an hour. He gets paid for every rivet he drives, too.

Mr. HAYDEN. That is, paid by piecework?

Mr. DREW. Do you know whether he belongs to a union or not? Mr. MULL. I know he does not, and if he did he would not be driving rivets.

Mr. NICHOLLS. You do not employ any union men?

Mr. MULL. Not if we can get others, and we never have any difficulty in getting others, none whatever. I remember, before coming down here, I stopped in our labor bureau office, and we had 3,000 applicants for work.

Mr. NICHOLLS. At this time?

Mr. MULL. Right now, 3,000 applicants, all of whom are nonunion

men.

Mr. NICHOLLS. Do you claim, on the whole, that it is impossible to build a battle ship under the eight-hour day limitation?

Mr. MULL. I think it is utterly impracticable, almost impossible. Mr. NICHOLLS. Has it not already been done?

Mr. MULL. I think it has never been done.

Mr. NICHOLLS. What is your information in regard to the building of the Connecticut?

Mr. MULL. Well, I do not care to criticise that; but I should think that information could be had from those who are perfectly willing to say. The navy-yard has a record of it; I know they did not do it, I will tell you that.

Mr. NICHOLLS. That they did not build it on an eight-hour basis? Mr. MULL. On an eight-hour basis, no, sir; and I will cite as an instance, if they did, at the same time we were building, under the same appropriation, a ship called the Tennessee. We built her in six and a half months less time than they did the Connecticut.

Mr. HAYDEN. How did the two ships compare in tonnage?

Mr. MULL. About the same; about the same amount of work on each ship.

Mr. NICHOLLS. Have you any definite information to support your statement that they did not comply with the eight-hour law?

Mr. MULL. I do not know what they complied with, but I know, as a matter of fact, that they could not have accomplished that working eight hours a day.

Mr. HAYDEN. Without overtime?

Mr. MULL. Without overtime.

Mr. NICHOLLS. That is a matter of opinion?

Mr. MULL. No, it is not a matter of opinion; it is a matter of personal knowledge, in part.

Mr. NICHOLLS. I am only trying to get down to whether it is part opinion, or whether there are facts connected with it. Can you point out to us any case in the building of that ship, any instance, where they did work more than eight hours, and violated the eighthour law?

Mr. MULL. I do not know what they violated; I did not know that the law existed; I now do not know. I was over there at the launching, preparatory to the launching, and I know they worked right through about twenty-four hours.

Mr. NICHOLLS. In launching the ship?

Mr. MULL. Launching and the preparatory stages of launching that are necessary.

Mr. NICHOLLS. That would be an emergency?

Mr. MULL. No, it would not; I do not consider it would be any more an emergency than would be changing the man on the tool or boring the cylinder.

Mr. NICHOLLS. Is it not so in launching a ship that when they commence to drive their wedges and start to move the ship, if they allow it to set, it goes down in the wedges and gets fixed in the ways?

Mr. MULL. They do set and are wedged and are sometimes fixed. Mr. NICHOLLS. As a matter of practice, is it not an injurious thing to do?

Mr. MULL. It is not a good thing to do.

Mr. HASKINS. Mr. Chairman, I do not think we are here in the consideration of this bill to probe into violations of any present law on the part of anybody.

The CHAIRMAN. The only pertinency it has is this; it has been suggested by gentlemen engaged in this kind of work, and by more than one, that as a matter of fact you can not bore certain cylinders accurately except it is done by the same hand. I do not know the importance of that, really, for I had supposed that would be an emergency. Frankly, my own impression is that two men can not bore a pump log through that part where the box is to play and get it smooth, but that is the only pertinency it has, whether the Connecticut's cylinder, and so forth, were bored by different people, each one working eight hours and changing the tools.

Mr. HASKINS. Mr. Nicholls seemed to be probing to ascertain from this witness if he had any personal knowledge of the violation of the law in the building of the Connecticut.

Mr. NICHOLLS. Here is the point I am trying to satisfy myself on. If a thing has been done, it is within the bounds of possibility, and even probability, to do it again under like circumstances. The witness says that it can not be done; it has been claimed, and it seems to be a matter of record, that the Connecticut was built under the eight-hour day, and if that be true, then all his statements to the contrary saying that it can not be done amount to nothing.

The CHAIRMAN. There has not been any proof offered here, Mr. Nicholls, that the eight-hour system was adhered to in the building of the Connecticut.

Mr. NICHOLLS. And, therefore, if that would be true, it would have a very material effect in this hearing and on the question.

The CHAIRMAN. But you can not rebut that which has not been proven.

Mr. NICHOLLS. The witness made a statement that it was not complied with on that ship. It is possible that those who are defending the bill may bring evidence that it was, later on. I am trying to get the facts as to what he bases his statement on when he says that the eight-hour law was not complied with in the building of the Connecticut.

Mr. MULL. I did not say that it was not; you misunderstand me. I did not tell you that the eight-hour bill was not complied with. Mr. NICHOLLS. No; but the eight-hour day.

Mr. MULL. Or the eight-hour day. I did not know of the existence of an eight-hour law, even at that time.

Mr. NICHOLLS. The question was asked whether or not they built the ship under an eight-hour day, and I understood you to say no.