Memorandum on Western Cartridge Company, East Alton, Illinois

Following our conversation concerning the above-mentioned company on May 10, I checked with the War Manpower Commission and the National Labor Relations Board concerning the past relationships each agency had with the company. The following items are of importance:

1. “A confidential report prepared by Mr. W. J. Murphy, Area Supervisor, (USES) in re Western Cartridge Company, Alton, Illinois, June 17, 1941, states that, ‘Western Cartridge anticipates hiring no colored people, for the reason, as stated by Mr. Haddleton and Mr. Weiland, (company representatives), that to date it has not been the policy or practice of the firms in East Alton to hire colored people. There is no written law that colored workers cannot be hired; it is just an attitude of the community. I asked Mr. Haddleton what about the five per cent colored population in Alton; would it be possible to take on some of these people in his company? His reply was that they preferred not to do so. His thinking is that as jobs are given to the white people, it is quite possible that the colored workers in Alton could move into the vacancies created (in non-war employment).’”
2. The NLRB’s intermediate report on hearings involving the Western Cartridge Company, Local 22574, Chemical Workers, AF of L, and Local 333, Moulders and Foundry Workers, AF of L, is dated February 25, 1942. The following statements are based on the contents of this report:

a. From 1915 to 1921, the company had individual contracts with its employees. These contracts were discontinued in 1921 but were revived in 1933. No labor organization existed in the plant until spring of 1937 when the company began negotiating with certain workers. On June 25, 1937, an independent union was established. The Trial Examiner for NLRB, Horace A. Ruckel, considered this independent union to be company dominated.

b. On August 2, 1941, the company signed a contract with the Chemical Workers of the AF of L.

The record of this company reveals that its policy of refusing to hire Negroes was enunciated to the Government prior to the time it had a contract with a union other than the independent union. It is difficult to see how the company can avoid the responsibility of discriminatory practices against Negroes seeking employment.