REPUBLICANS: The Durkin Tempest

As one appointment after another flashed out of Dwight Eisenhower’s New York headquarters, there was scarcely a sound from Ohio, where Robert A. Taft was sitting out the interregnum. After the last Cabinet post was filled, Senator Taft had something to say. Having slept soundly on his indignation, he wrote out next morning a statement denouncing the appointment of the A.F.L. Plumbers & Pipe Fitters’ President Martin P. Durkin as Secretary of Labor. It was “incredible,” said Taft, that the President-elect should appoint a man who “has always been a partisan Truman Democrat, who fought General Eisenhower’s election and advocated repeal of the Taft-Hartley law.”

More than Durkin. There was more than objection to Durkin behind the statement. Bob Taft was miffed because 1) so many “Dewey Republicans” had advised Ike on appointments, 2) so many Taft Cabinet recommendations had been rejected and 3) the selection of his fellow Ohioan George Humphrey for Secretary of the Treasury had not been checked with him. When Taft’s words hit the press wires, political reporters leaped to conclusions: the big battle in the Republican Party was on, Taft might lead a fight against confirmation of Durkin. This view was based on an underestimation of the power wielded by a President newly elected by a big majority.

Taft understood this power better than most reporters did. Characteristically, he had bluntly said what he thought, but he showed no sign of wanting to start an all-out feud. No one at the Eisenhower headquarters was inclined to get into an argument with him. Contrary to some speculation, there was no oversight and no deliberate affront in the way the Durkin appointment was handled. Taft was asked for recommendations, submitted some (including Connecticut’s former Senator John A. Danaher). His suggestions were considered, and rejected. Ike thought that Durkin would give the Cabinet balance and implement the campaign promise that his administration would be “fair” to labor. The appointment was a characteristic Eisenhower effort to unify all the forces in his theater of operation. At the same time, it was a further demonstration that Ikemen felt no need to clear everything with Bob.

Swing to Bridges. In Washington, hardly anyone thought that Taft would oppose confirmation of Durkin, and no one thought that the Senate would refuse to confirm him.* The Ohio Senator’s colleagues in Congress failed to provide any choral background for his solo. Vermont’s Senator George D. Aiken, who will rank next to Chairman Taft on the Labor Committee, thought it was “wise to recognize organized labor in the Cabinet.” Several Taft-minded Senators, e.g., Kansas’ Andrew Schoeppel, swung behind New Hampshire’s Styles Bridges, rather than Taft, for Majority Leader.

At week’s end, Bridges was the leading prospect for the post. The G.O.P. Senators don’t want an intraparty fight, and many of them fear that Taft, as Majority Leader, might keep one brewing. Said one Senator: “If Senator Taft wants to squabble with General Eisenhower that is his business, but the party can’t afford to have him do that as Senate Majority Leader.”

*In all U.S. history, only seven Cabinet nominees have been rejected by the Senate. The last one: Charles B. Warren, Michigan “sugar trust” lawyer nominated for Attorney General by Calvin Coolidge in 1925. He was turned down by a G.O.P. Senate which feared he would not enforce antitrust laws fairly.