Senator MORSE. Do you object, Mr. Loomis, to putting this advertisement in the record either as a carrier or committee exhibit?

Mr. LOOMIS. Not in the slightest.

Senator MORSE. Whichever you prefer.

Mr. LOOMIS. It doesn't matter.

Senator MORSE. Due to the fact that I raised it, I think that I had better put it in as a committee exhibit, and it will be marked for purposes of identification as committee exhibit with the appropriate number. It is an advertisement that appeared in the New York Times for Wednesday, January 24, 1950, the large print of which reads, "The railroads respect, the union leaders seek to repudiate, this agreement." Mr. MURDOCK. I am afraid it is No. 13.

(The document referred to was marked "Committee Exhibit No. 13" and is herewith inserted.)

Senator MORSE. There will also be inserted or marked for purposes of identification and inserted in the record at this point as committee exhibit 14, a clipping from the Trainman News, and we will get the exact wording, but the wording was of similar connotations, except in reverse, and reflected on the carriers.

These exhibits show the chain of public statements made by the carriers and the brotherhoods at this time in regard to the dispute that arose as to whether or not this was a firm agreement.

(The document referred to was marked "Committee Exhibit No. 14" and is herewith inserted.)

Mr. LOOMIS. I might make one further reference, Mr. Chairman, to the Trainmen's News. Do you ever read any of Walter Monroe's press releases?

Senator MORSE. I would have to testify that I have read some, but I am sure that I haven't read all of them.

Mr. MURDOCK. Do you have the date of that Trainmen's News?
Senator MORSE. I will get that.

Mr. LOOMIS. I do not have that. I do not know what it is. Is that the one that ran a reprint of the advertisement?

Senator MORSE. Yes; and then they had "The truth is," or something like that on it.

Mr. LOOMIS. I do not recall the date.

Senator MORSE. I thought it was an exchange of pleasantries on both parties' part.

Now, Mr. Loomis, I have before me volume 7, page 602 of the transcript of these hearings, and Mr. O'Neill was on the stand, and Mr. Murdock asked him:

Mr. MURDOCK. What was your understanding as to the extent of the authority of the representatives of the brotherhoods?

Mr. O'NEILL. Very frankly, Mr. Murdock, during hours of that conference I repeatedly heard all four chiefs say that they were going to take this back to their committees for ratification, and at one point Mr. Shields was selected as spokesman for them to say that, and he did so state it at the press conference. Were such statements by the chiefs made in your presence? Mr. LOOMIS. No, sir.

Senator MORSE. Is it your understanding that Mr. O'Neill was testifying about some conference outside of the hearing of the representatives of the carriers and possibly at the conference at the time the agreement was signed, when as you have previously testified, it is your

understanding only the members of the Mediation Board and Mr. Steelman were present?

Mr. LOOMIS. Will you repeat that?

Senator MORSE. Is it your understanding that if this statement was made by the chiefs of the brotherhoods, it was made outside of the presence of the carrier representatives?

Mr. LOOMIS. Oh, definitely.

Senator MORSE. Do you think that if this statement was made, it might have been made at the conference at the time the agreement of December 21 was signed by the chiefs of the brotherhoods, which you have already testified about, which signing you have already testified took place outside of the presence of the representatives of the carriers, and my recollection is that you testified that it was your understanding that it took place in the conference room in the presence of Mr. Steelman and possibly the Mediation Board members?

Mr. LOOMIS. You are referring to the signing, now?
Senator MORSE. Yes, sir; the signing.

Mr. LOOMIS. I don't know that I had any understanding on that one way or the other. That was an assumption that it took place in the conference room in their presence. I think I stated that Mr. Edwards brought the agreement in to us after they had signed it, for us to sign, and I don't recall whether Mr. O'Neill came in with him or not. Somewhere in here there was a statement by Mr. O'Neill that Mr. Shields did say something at the time of signing, but Mr. O'Neill didn't recall whether Dr. Steelman was present at that time, or not.

I could say this, that if any question of ratification had been brought to our attention on the part of all four brotherhoods, we would not have signed the agreement. We would have told them to go get their authority before we accepted any proposition.

Senator MORSE. It is testimony such as that that gives me_cause for concern, and here is a respected member of the Mediation Board who testified that at some conference and I may be wrong in my assumption, but I assume that it must have been when the agreement was being signed, but I am checking it here, if you will give me a minute.

If you will look at page 600, Mr. Murdock says:

Do you recall approximately what time of day on the 20th the conference commenced?

And Mr. O'NEILL says:

I believe it was 11 o'clock in the morning of the 20th.

Mr. Murdock said:

And it was continuous thereafter until the news conference on December 21? Mr. O'NEILL. That is my rest recollection.

Mr. MURDOCK. Who was present at the conference?

And then Mr. O'Neill lists the chiefs, and then he lists you gentlemen representing the carriers. And Mr. Murdock said:

* what was your understanding as to the authority of the representatives of the carriers who were there present?

Mr. O'Neill said:

My understanding of their authority-I didn't inquire into it. I assumed that they were there representing the railroads. As Mr. Scott has told you, starting on Sunday, they were in conference with their committees, and the extent of their authority was never inquired into by me.