Ask the Scholar
Page 4 of 4
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
July 29th,1929.
Julian S. Mason, Editor,
The New York Evening Post,
New York, N.Y.
Dear Mr. Mason:
Mr. Herman Schwab, *phoned me today and suggested that I give
you some information regarding so called "radium poisoning" cases - especially
in view of the article in "The World" of yesterday, July 28th, regarding the re-
commendations by the U. S. Labor Department, which urges that the making and
applying of luminous paint in this country be stopped.
While we were naturally somewhat disappointed in the report by the
Federal Labor Department, nevertheless it was not much different from what we had
expected, since Commissioner Stewart seemed to have a pre-conceived idea regard-
ing the industry before the investigation by his Department was undertaken.
We do not wish to minimize the fact that there undoubtedly was some injury caused
in the industry in the early deys before proper precantionary measures were taken.
We cannot agree, however, that all the mentioned cases in the Labor Department's
report are necessarily "radium poisoning" cases - as a matter of fact, we are
quite positive that some are not.
While the report in many respects is correct it has the weakness of
drawing in unsubstantiated cases in order to make out a general case against the
industry. In other words the Commissioner made up his mind that a case existed
against the industry and, then proceeded to find it. We rather deplore such a
procedure, especially be & governmental Department, whose statements are naturally
looked upon by the general public as correct.
We believe the plea to close the industry is unwarranted by the facts
-2-
presented in the report. Even granting that all cases reported are authentic, the
report states that the injury was caused by the practice of pointing brushes with
the lips. The report further states that this practice was abandoned in 1925, which
we know to be a fact.
For the past two or three years some of the best medical, chemical and
physical brains in the country have been devoting a great deal of time to the study
of this question and, have made numerous recommendations for the elimination of
possible hazards. If certain practices of the past, which may have caused injury,
have been abandoned and new methods adopted under the suggestion of those best
qualified to recommend, it would seem as if an industry as honorable and as important
as that of luminous material should be permitted to live without undue harassing.
There are many materials used in industries in this country that are of a
decidedly injurious nature if not properly handled, such as phosphorous, tetra-ethyl
lead, fire works, cyanide of pottassium, etc.
This question of "radium poisoning" has monopolized the press from time to
time for the past two or three years. The agitation was originally started by a
clever attorney who succeeded in getting the five radium cases on a contingent basis.
Information was very generously distributed and, we are sorry to say that most of
it was misleading and untwre. However, the general subject made a human appeal,
and knowing what we would be up against we could see no advantage in being drawn into
a controversy through the press. Doctors and so called "Radium Experts", vied with
each other in gaining notoriety and, the general public, which is poorly versed in
the knowledge of radium, was mislead. The five "radium victims", so often eferred
to, are still living and will probably continue to do 30 for a good many years, and
this in spite of affidavits and testimony by "Radium Experts" that in all probability
they would be dead by last September.
We expect further publicity on this subject, because the same general group
that had the five original cases titaling $1,350,000 against us - at the present time
have also filed against us three (3) suits waling $1,150,000 and, the article in
-3-
yesterday's World, would seem to be the beginning of such a compaign.
Of course, there is much contained in this letter which may not interest
you, but I have written rather fully with the hope that you will consider as
confidential any information not bearing directly on the editorial which you
have in mind. I would be very glad indeed to give you more facts and details
on this subject if you are interested.
Very truly yours,
President.
CBLes:RH
Note:
The use of luminous material is not a "Fad", as pictured by Commissioner
Stewart, but has many practical uses. Instruments of all types, electrical
fistures, markers, watch and clock dials are produced for night utility.
Certainly no one will pay $5.00 extra for a luminous dialed wrist watch simply
because he considers it a fad. This is especially true when we consider that
the luminous treated dial is not as attractive from an artistic standpoint as
a non-luminous one - be purchases the watch because it serves him for telling
the time when a non-luminous dial would be useless.
Page data
- Page
- 4
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- af62b5fff330c757
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75724449
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75724449",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75724449",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Julian S. Mason, July 29, 1929",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75724449",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001833_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001833_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001833_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 4,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75724449",
"label": "Letters Sent to Julian S. Mason, July 29, 1929",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75724449"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75724449",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75724449",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Julian S. Mason, July 29, 1929",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75724449",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001833_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001833_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001833_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 4,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75724449",
"naId": 75724449,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 4,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001833.pdf",
"mediaId": "af62b5fff330c757",
"ocrText": "July 29th,1929.\nJulian S. Mason, Editor,\nThe New York Evening Post,\nNew York, N.Y.\nDear Mr. Mason:\nMr. Herman Schwab, *phoned me today and suggested that I give\nyou some information regarding so called \"radium poisoning\" cases - especially\nin view of the article in \"The World\" of yesterday, July 28th, regarding the re-\ncommendations by the U. S. Labor Department, which urges that the making and\napplying of luminous paint in this country be stopped.\nWhile we were naturally somewhat disappointed in the report by the\nFederal Labor Department, nevertheless it was not much different from what we had\nexpected, since Commissioner Stewart seemed to have a pre-conceived idea regard-\ning the industry before the investigation by his Department was undertaken.\nWe do not wish to minimize the fact that there undoubtedly was some injury caused\nin the industry in the early deys before proper precantionary measures were taken.\nWe cannot agree, however, that all the mentioned cases in the Labor Department's\nreport are necessarily \"radium poisoning\" cases - as a matter of fact, we are\nquite positive that some are not.\nWhile the report in many respects is correct it has the weakness of\ndrawing in unsubstantiated cases in order to make out a general case against the\nindustry. In other words the Commissioner made up his mind that a case existed\nagainst the industry and, then proceeded to find it. We rather deplore such a\nprocedure, especially be & governmental Department, whose statements are naturally\nlooked upon by the general public as correct.\nWe believe the plea to close the industry is unwarranted by the facts\n-2-\npresented in the report. Even granting that all cases reported are authentic, the\nreport states that the injury was caused by the practice of pointing brushes with\nthe lips. The report further states that this practice was abandoned in 1925, which\nwe know to be a fact.\nFor the past two or three years some of the best medical, chemical and\nphysical brains in the country have been devoting a great deal of time to the study\nof this question and, have made numerous recommendations for the elimination of\npossible hazards. If certain practices of the past, which may have caused injury,\nhave been abandoned and new methods adopted under the suggestion of those best\nqualified to recommend, it would seem as if an industry as honorable and as important\nas that of luminous material should be permitted to live without undue harassing.\nThere are many materials used in industries in this country that are of a\ndecidedly injurious nature if not properly handled, such as phosphorous, tetra-ethyl\nlead, fire works, cyanide of pottassium, etc.\nThis question of \"radium poisoning\" has monopolized the press from time to\ntime for the past two or three years. The agitation was originally started by a\nclever attorney who succeeded in getting the five radium cases on a contingent basis.\nInformation was very generously distributed and, we are sorry to say that most of\nit was misleading and untwre. However, the general subject made a human appeal,\nand knowing what we would be up against we could see no advantage in being drawn into\na controversy through the press. Doctors and so called \"Radium Experts\", vied with\neach other in gaining notoriety and, the general public, which is poorly versed in\nthe knowledge of radium, was mislead. The five \"radium victims\", so often eferred\nto, are still living and will probably continue to do 30 for a good many years, and\nthis in spite of affidavits and testimony by \"Radium Experts\" that in all probability\nthey would be dead by last September.\nWe expect further publicity on this subject, because the same general group\nthat had the five original cases titaling $1,350,000 against us - at the present time\nhave also filed against us three (3) suits waling $1,150,000 and, the article in\n-3-\nyesterday's World, would seem to be the beginning of such a compaign.\nOf course, there is much contained in this letter which may not interest\nyou, but I have written rather fully with the hope that you will consider as\nconfidential any information not bearing directly on the editorial which you\nhave in mind. I would be very glad indeed to give you more facts and details\non this subject if you are interested.\nVery truly yours,\nPresident.\nCBLes:RH\nNote:\nThe use of luminous material is not a \"Fad\", as pictured by Commissioner\nStewart, but has many practical uses. Instruments of all types, electrical\nfistures, markers, watch and clock dials are produced for night utility.\nCertainly no one will pay $5.00 extra for a luminous dialed wrist watch simply\nbecause he considers it a fad. This is especially true when we consider that\nthe luminous treated dial is not as attractive from an artistic standpoint as\na non-luminous one - be purchases the watch because it serves him for telling\nthe time when a non-luminous dial would be useless."
}