t would appear to be a common trait among so-called

labor “‘historians’’ when writing about important
strike struggles of the past, and especially those struggles in
which Communists have played an active or leading role, to
follow two main lines of approach.

First, to grossly misrepresent, distort, or slander any or
all Communists involved, and second, to apply the ‘‘silent”’
treatment: i.e. to eliminate the ‘‘Reds”’ entirely, an art highly
perfected by the modern media in its “historic” or
contemporary blah-blah.

The January 1971 edition of Canadian Labor official organ
of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), in an article entitled
“The Estevan Story 1931 to 1971”’, illustrates the point on how
easy it is to substitute fiction for fact, half-truths with patent
falsehoods, and palm it off as ‘‘history’’, 40-years after the
event.

The article is unsigned, but it will be obvious to the average
reader of that generation, that the files of the CLC (then the
Trades and Labour Congress) were not very complete on
events surrounding the Estevan miners’ strike of 1931, hence
the author of the “‘story” didn’t have much factual material to
write on or with.

That, of course, is also understandable to anyone who took
part in that historic struggle for unionization in Southern
Saskatchewan. The TLC was not only not interested in this

_ struggle for unionization of the ‘‘gopher-hole’’ miners in

Bienfait, and the horrible working conditions and starvation
wage pittances paid by open shop anti-union operators, but
gave no encouragement to other TLC affiliates to aid the
miners.

..On the contrary, the exhortations of Messrs Tom Moore
and Paddy Draper (top TLC brass) to keep away from
Bienfait, dovetailed nicely with the public pronouncements of
the-J.T.M. (Just Too Much) Anderson tory government of
Saskatchewan, which had declared open war upon the Bienfait
miners and their Workers Unity League affiliate, the Mine
Workers Union of Canada (MWUC).

While a few, pitably few TLC affiliates gave the Bienfait
miners a limited financial and moral support, these were the
exception rather than the rule. TLC and other trade union
brass, having anticipated the coldwar by a decade*or more,
gave full vent to their pathological hatred of anything and
everything remotely associated with “‘communism’’.

To win unionization of the miners in Bienfait, the MWUC
sent its top District Executive from Calgary to Bienfait; Jim
Sloan, John Stockaluk, Pete Barclay and others, all members
then of the Communist Party of Canada. Winnipeg Alderman,
the late Joe Forkin also came to Bienfait, as did the veteran
Communists Annie Buller and Sam Scarlet, both of whom were
sentenced to one year in prison for their part in building the
MWUC in Bienfait.

Other non-communist trade unionists and leaders of TLC
affiliated unions were urgently and repeatedly invited to come
to Bienfait and Estevan to speak on behalf of the miners’
cause. None came..

The author of this column was also’ there, mobilizing relief
for the miners and their families, covering a wide farm area
where the response was always warm and generous — but
costing the taxpayers of Saskatchewan a very heavy outlay for
the number of RCMP carloads to “‘tail’’ where and whom
visited. Needless to say we ran up a good mileage for these
would-be ‘‘Sherlocks”’ soon to turn killers.

To correct a slimy and snide inference by CLC ‘‘historian”’
on the parade from Bienfait to Estevan, that‘. . . there is
some question as to whether the majority of the strikers were
informed’’ that a parade was to take place.

The meeting at which such a parade was approved included
not only all the men on strike, but also many of their wives and
older children, almost the entire community, so there was, and
is no ‘‘question”’, except that of ‘“‘historian’’ himself, and/or his
immediate colleagues who may hold similar ‘‘questions’’.
However, there was no ‘‘disturbance some miles out of town’,
only miners and their families marching in protest against
bitter exploitation.

Nor do miner’s wives, with their babies in prams, or
running at their sides, go armed with “stones” and ‘“‘clubs’’,
but only to add their numbers and strength to protest a great
wrong and to seek redress. Nor is the fact mentioned that upon
arriving in‘Estevan, the parade was herded down a dead-end
street, where escape from the clubs and bullets of a tory-
inspired hysterical police, was deliberately shut off.

On the bulk of his article re today’s situation with
Saskatchewan’s hospital eraployees, I am not conversant with
except in a general way as an interested and sympathetic
Canadian. I can only hope the CLC “‘historian’’ factual
material stands up better than does his ‘‘background” Estevan
narrative — a jumble of half-truths and obvious falsehoods,
leaving much to be desired.

And perhaps a ‘‘court order”’ can efface the identity of the
murderers of three coal miners from a graveyard stone. . .
but not from the hearts and conscience of those who were in
Estevan in 1931.

S

PACIFIC TRIBURE >-FRIDAY) MARCH DS! tort SpAged ip 27

City’s rental board must :

mediate

By ALD. HARRY RANKIN

City Council should instruct
the Rental Accommodation
Grievance Board to mediate the
dispute between Wall & Redekop
Corporation and its 1500
Vancouver tenants. The issue in
dispute is a rent hike of 7 to 12
percent effective April 1, 1971.

Wall & Redekop’s rents are
already very high. The
corporation has shown no
justification why rents should be
again boosted this year by sucha
large amount — about $14 a
month for the average
apartment.

Many of the tenants are people
on fixed, incomes, “or
unemployed. They simply can’t
afford a rent increase of this
magnitude. That’s why they’ve
gone ona rent strike.

All available evidence is that
the rent increase is unjustified.
According to the corporation’s
own financial statement, its
rental income per suite
increased by 32 percent last
year. It seems that the more it
gets the more it wants.

The dispute is now deadlocked
and could lead to trouble. I’m
confident that a reasorable
settlement could be effected if
the Rental Accommodation
Grievance Board would
intervene and bring the two
parties together.

Yet, when I introduced a
motion to this effect in Council,
it met with a stony silence and a
stony wall of opposition. I
couldn’t even get a seconder ‘to
my motion, not from any NPA
alderman nor from TEAM. It
was evident that the real estate
and landlord interests had made
their influence felt. Not a single
NPA or TEAM alderman dared
to take them on.

TENANTS
PLAN ACTION

Block organizers of Wall and
Redekop tenants protesting rent
increases, and a representative
of the Vancouver Tenants
Organization will be present at
meetings organized on a city-
wide scale to carry on the fight
against the rent hikes, it was
announced this week by the
Tenants Council and the Wall
and Redekop Organizing Commi-
ttee.

Tle committee also plans a
mass demonstration picket line
in front of Wall and Redekop
offices, 1070 West Broadway on
Saturday, March 27, from 10
a.m. to 12 noon.

The proposed actions follow a
move by Alderman Harry
Rankin at last city council
meeting to have the Grievance
Board act as a mediator in the
rent dispute. TEAM and NPA
councillors refused to second the
motion.

Stating that during the fiscal
year ending July 31, 1970, Wall
and Redekop increased their
average rental income per suite
by 36.74 percent. Tenants
Council Secretary Bruce Yorke
said this week ‘now is the time
to make a stand. To be effec-
tive, economic action will
require the support of every Wall
and Redekop tenant, no matter
whether the present increase
applies directly of not. Sooner or

tenants dispute!

My motion was Hardly a_ like a dog on a leash. This

radical one. I just asked that landlord’s council, there >”
Council instruct the Rental doubt of that.
Board to intervene. The City of
Halifax has such a board and it
not only intervenes, it makes
binding decisions. And the : ; t bo
Ontario Law Reform Tefuse to pay the big we.
Commission has recommended They want to neg Oral
that Rental Boards should take @™mount with their landl

rie
up rent disputes and mediate Wall & Redekop nae a
them: evict them there could De“ 5

of trouble. The time 7%

But our Vancouver landlord trouble is before it Sq
corporations are so feudal and Council could still reverse :.
arrogant in their attitude to (it wouldn’t be the first
tenants that when they want to and turn the whole issue Bol ;
increase rents they refuse totalk the Rental Grievance ~ |
about it — to tenants or the Let's at least give ita wy de
Rental Board. And City Council If you feel as Ido aboull ag
instead of taking an impartial not phone your aldermen @ t
stand follows right behind them them know.

The refusal of Council 0°
consider my motion d0@
solve anything. The tenants’)

¢

“Dick, I think they're on to us.”

Vietnamese to speak!
at big city rally |

A delegation of six Indochinese women from North & of)
Vietnam and Laos, will be arriving in Vancouver next week” gi
of engagements. They will speak at a public rally in
Elizabeth Theatre, Sun., April 4 at 8 p.m. doy: 4

. The Indochinese guests are expected to arrive Wednes® cy
31 for a round of activities which will include a series of con oy ner
Thursday and Friday, April 1 and 2 they will attend a peace woe
jointly organized by the Vancouver Voice of Women an@ py 4
Strike for Peace of the U.S. It will be held at the Student unicn =
at UBC.

Invitations have been sent out to city organizatio”™®
Friday plenary session will be open to the public.

While here the Indochinese guests will attend a con ;
Women’s Liberation and the Third World Women. will

Admission to the Queen Elizabeth rally on Sunday a
donation of $1.00. ££

BEAT THE WINTER!

fere nt?

Your Choice of:

® Hawaii
@ Mexico

© Cuba

GLOBE TOUR?

2679 E. Hastings St.,

4?
253-1221 Vancotvand Bice 25

+s Hear