Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T08:31:28.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“On the Dump Heap”: Employee Medical Screening in the Tri-State Zinc-Lead Industry, 1924–1932

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2012

Alan Derickson
Alan Derickson
Affiliation:
Alan Derickson is assistant professor of history atPennsylvania State University.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the following article, Professor Derickson examines the motivation for and the results of employee medical screening of workers in a midwestern mining community. He argues that, contrary to the goals of the associative state as envisioned by Herbert Hoover and others, government and mine operator efforts to determine the extent of respiratory disease among mine workers in the Tri-State were neither impelled by a concern for workers' welfare nor conducive to the amelioration of their problems.

Type
Articles
Information
Business History Review , Volume 62 , Special Issue 4: Resource-Based Industries , Winter 1988 , pp. 656 - 677
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 C. F. Kelley to Van H. Manning, 19 March 1917; D. Harrington to Mr. [George S.] Rice, 16 Feb. 1917, both Bureau of Mines Records, RG 70, General Records, 1910–50, box 290, file 59203, National Archives, Washington National Records Center, Suitland, Md.

2 Manning to Kelley, 24 March 1917; Kelley to Manning, 29 March 1917, ibid.

3 U.S. Department of Commerce, Twelfth Annual Report of the Secretary, 1924 (Washington, D.C., 1924), 23 (quotation), 22–24Google Scholar; Hoover, Herbert C., The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover, vol. 2: The Cabinet and the Presidency, 1920–1933 (New York, 1952), 169–70Google Scholar; Wilson, Joan Hoff, Herbert Hoover: Forgotten Progressive (Boston, 1975), 98–101Google Scholar; Himmelberg, Robert F., The Origins of the National Recovery Administration: Business, Government, and the Trade Association Issue, 1921–1933 (New York, 1976), 10–11Google Scholar.

4 Hawley, Ellis W., “Herbert Hoover, the Commerce Secretariat, and the Vision of an ‘Associative State,’ 1921–1928,” Journal of American History 61 (June 1974):119CrossRefGoogle Scholar (quotation), 116–40; Hawley, , “Three Facets of Hooverian Associationalism: Lumber, Aviation, and Movies, 1921–1930,” in Regulation in Perspective: Historical Essays, ed. McCraw, Thomas K. (Cambridge, Mass., 1981), 95–123Google Scholar; U.S. Department of Commerce, Trade Association Activities, by Paull, Irving S., Millard, J. W., and Taylor, James S. (Washington, D.C., 1927), 126–28, 132Google Scholar, and passim; Galambos, Louis, Competition and Cooperation: The Emergence of a National Trade Association (Baltimore, Md., 1966), 67, 74–75, 93–94, 142–57, 169Google Scholar.

5 Graebner, William, Coal-Mining Safety in the Progressive Period: The Political Economy of Reform (Lexington, Ky., 1976), 64Google Scholar; BOM, Investigations of Toxic Gases from Mexican and Other High-Sulphur Petroleums and Products, by Sayers, R. R. et al. , Bulletin 231 (Washington, D.C., 1925)Google Scholar; BOM, Safety Rules for Installing and Using Electrical Equipment in Coal Mines, Sponsored by U.S. Bureau of Mines and American Mining Congress, Technical Paper 402 (Washington, D.C., 1926)Google Scholar; BOM, Sixteenth Annual Report of the Director… for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1926 (Washington, D.C., 1926), 11–12Google Scholar; BOM, Annual Report of the Director …for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1931 (Washington, D.C., 1931), 41–42Google Scholar, 51; Harry L. Gandy [Executive Secretary, National Coal Association], “Keeping Everlastingly at It,” in National Safety Council, Transactions of the Sixteenth Annual Safety Congress, 1927 (N.p., 1928), 2: 209; U.S. Department of Commerce, Trade Association Activities, 320.

6 BOM, Annual Report of the Director…for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1930 (Washington, D. C., 1930), 60Google Scholar; BOM, The Spring Canyon Mine Rescue Association, by Murray, A. L., Report of Investigation 2361 ([Washington, D.C.], 1922), 1Google Scholar; BOM, The Sand and Gravel Safety Contest of 1929, by Adams, W. W, Report of Investigation 3009 ([Washington, D.C.], 1930), 1Google Scholar and passim; BOM, Bureau of Mines Instruction in First Aid, by Murray, A. L., Information Circular 6217 ([Washington, D.C.], 1930), 17–18Google Scholar; Gandy, , “Keeping Everlastingly at It,” 2: 209Google Scholar; Mining Congress Journal, April 1921, 145, 146, Oct. 1925, 477.

7 H. Foster Bain, “The Bureau of Mines and Private Investigations,” Engineering and Mining Journal, 17 Sept. 1921, 450 (quotation), 450–51; Powell, Fred W., The Bureau of Mines: Its History, Activities and Organization (New York, 1921), 7Google Scholar, 21; BOM, Annual Report, Fiscal 1931, 51.

8 Daniel Harrington, “Comment” on Mitke, Charles A., “Metal-Mine Ventilation in the Southwest,” Transactions of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers 68 (1923); 404Google Scholar; Daniel Harrington, “Efficient Ventilation of Metal Mines,” ibid., 407–8, 413–14.

9 T. T. Read, “Some Problems of Mine Safety,” Mining Congress Journal, Oct. 1924, 474; BOM, Morbidity Studies as an Aid in Preventing Illness among Miners, by Sayers, R. R., Report of Investigation 2453 ([Washington, D.C.], 1923), 1Google Scholar; BOM, The Cost of Accidents to Industry, by Crawford, F. S., Information Circular 6333 ([Washington, D.C.], 1930)Google Scholar.

10 Cf. Williams, William A., The Contours of American History (Cleveland, Ohio, 1961), 427–32Google Scholar; Scheinberg, Stephen J., Employers and Reformers: The Development of Corporation Labor Policy, 1900–1940 (New York, 1986), 198–213Google Scholar; Radosh, Ronald, “Labor and the American Economy: The 1922 Railroad Shop Crafts Strike and the ‘B&O Plan,’” in Building the Organizational Society: Essays on Associational Activities in Modern America, ed. Israel, Jerry (New York, 1972), 73–87Google Scholar. For a more accurate assessment of Hoover's limited interest in bringing organized labor into corporatist arrangements, see Zieger, Robert H., “Labor, Progressivism, and Herbert Hoover in the 1920s,” Wisconsin Magazine of History 58 (Spring 1975): 196–208Google Scholar; Zieger, , “Herbert Hoover, the Wage-earner, and the ‘New Economic System,’ 1919–1929,” Business History Review 51 (Summer 1977): 161–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Hurvitz, Haggai, “The Meaning of Industrial Conflict in Some Ideologies of the Early 1920s” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1971), 242–44, 252–60Google Scholar.

11 Wolman, Leo, Ebb and Flow in Trade Unionism (New York, 1936), 173, 193Google Scholar; Montgomery, David, The Fall of the House of Labor: The Workplace, the State, and Labor Activism, 1865–1925 (New York, 1987), 397–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jensen, Vernon H., Heritage of Conflict: Labor Relations in the Nonferrous Metals Industry up to 1930 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1950), 452–66Google Scholar.

12 Charles Morris Mills, “Joplin Zinc: Industrial Conditions in the World's Greatest Zinc Center,” Survey, 5 Feb. 1921, 659 (quotation), 658–60, 663; BOM, Summarized Statistics of Production of Lead and Zinc in the Tri-State (Missouri-Kansas-Oklahoma) Mining District, by Martin, A. J., Information Circular 7383 ([Washington, D.C.], 1946), 10–11, 15Google Scholar; Gibson, Arrell M., Wilderness Bonanza: The Tri-State District of Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma (Norman, Okla., 1972), 79–80, 170–71Google Scholar.

13 Mills, “Joplin Zinc,” 658; Cassidy, William J., “The Tri-State Zinc Lead Mining Region: Growth, Problems, and Prospects” (Ph.D. diss., University of Pittsburgh, 1955), 242Google Scholar.

14 Daniel Harrington, et al., “Dust-Ventilation Investigation in the Mines of the Picher, Oklahoma District,” Dec. 1923, 6 (quotation), 30–31, BOM Records, RG 70, Health and Safety Branch, Records of the Picher, Oklahoma, Clinic, 1927–1932, [hereafter cited as Picher Clinic Records], box 2, file 082.

15 Mills, “Joplin Zinc,” 657.

16 Ibid., 661 (quotation), 660–62; Harrington, et al., “Dust-Ventilation Investigation,” 15–30; P. R. Coldren, “Joplin-Miami District,” Engineering and Mining Journal, 26 Nov. 1921, 871.

17 BOM, Siliceous Dust in Relation to Pulmonary Disease among Miners in the Joplin District, Missouri, by Higgins, Edwin et al. , Bulletin 132 (Washington, D.C., 1917)Google Scholar; Derickson, Alan, “Federal Intervention in the Joplin Silieosis Epidemic, 1911–1916,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 62 (Summer 1988): 236–51Google ScholarPubMed; Harrington, et al., “Dust-Ventilation Investigation,” 4, 15.

18 Harrington, et al., “Dust-Ventilation Investigation,” 21.

19 Ibid., 8–28.

20 Ibid., 28 (quotation), 29–30.

21 Ibid., 30.

22 Ibid., 32 (quotation), 36–38; [OPA], “Analysis of Mine Safety Rules Presented to Judging Committee of American Mining Congress, Tri-State District,” 1 Aug. 1924, Picher Clinic Records, box 1, file 022.

23 BOM, Prevention of Illness among Miners, by Sayers, R. R., Report of Investigation 2319 ([Washington, D.C.], 1922), 7Google Scholar; BOM, Silicosis among Miners, by Sayers, R. R., Technical Paper 372 (Washington, D.C., 1925), 20–23Google Scholar; Sayers, R. R. and Lanza, A. J., “History of Silicosis and Asbestosis” in Silicosis and Asbestosis, ed. Lanza, A. J. (New York, 1938), 6–7Google Scholar; Union of South Africa, Department of Mines and Industries, Miners' Phthisis Board and Miners' Phthisis Medical Bureau, Interim Reports for the Period 1 August to 31 December 1916 (Cape Town, 1917)Google Scholar; Derickson, Alan, “Industrial Refugees: The Migration of Silicotics from the Mines of North America and South Africa in the Early Twentieth Century,” Labor History 29 (Winter 1988): 85–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Harrington, et al., “Dust-Ventilation Investigation,” 34.

25 “Foreword,” iii; William A. Sawyer [Eastman Kodak], “The Medical Department in Industry,” 18–19; C. H. Watson [American Telephone & Telegraph], “Physical Examinations: A Resume,” 22–26, all in National Industrial Conference Board, ed., The Physician in Industry: A Symposium, Special Report 22 (New York, 1922)Google Scholar; National Industrial Conference Board, Medical Care of Industrial Workers (New York, 1926), 25–38, 65–69Google ScholarPubMed; U.S. Public Health Service, Studies of the Medical and Surgical Care of Industrial Workers, by Selby, C. D., Bulletin 99 (Washington, D.C., 1919)Google Scholar, passim; Nugent, Angela, “Fit for Work: The Introduction of Physical Examinations in Industry,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 57 (Winter 1983): 578–95Google Scholar.

26 Harrington, et al. , “Dust-Ventilation Investigation,” 34; National Industrial Conference Board, Industrial Relations Programs in Small Plants (New York, 1929), 26Google Scholar.

27 E. R. Sayres [sic—R. R. Sayers], Hayhurst, E. R., and Lanza, A. J., “Status of Silicosis,” American Journal of Public Health 19 (June 1929): 637Google Scholar; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis among Miners of the Tri-State District of Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri—1, by Sayers, R. R., Meriwether, F. V., Lanza, A. J., and Adams, W. W., Technical Paper 545 (Washington, D.C., 1933), 2Google Scholar; Richard V. Ageton to J. D. Conover, 12 Oct. 1926, Tri-State Zinc and Lead Ore Producers Association Records (Picher Mining Museum, Picher, Okla.) [hereafter cited as OPA Records], envelope: “Annual Meetings of Association,” folder: “Annual Meeting, 1926.”

28 [OPA], “Analysis of Mine Safety Rules”; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 30.

29 Norris, James D., “The Missouri and Kansas Zinc Miners' Association, 1899–1905,” Business History Review 40 (Autumn 1966): 321–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Engineering and Mining journal, 11 March 1922, 419; OPA, Constitution and By-Laws, 1923 (Miami, Okla., 1923)Google ScholarPubMed; Harrington, et al., “Dust-Ventilation Investigation,” 6; Cassidy, “Tri-State Region,” 257–59.

30 BOM, Production in Tri-State, 15; Cassidy, “Tri-State Region,” 241–42; M. D. Harbaugh, “Labor Relations in the Tri-State Mining District,” Mining Congress Journal, June 1936, 21; Bernstein, Irving, The Lean Years: A History of the American Worker, 1920–1933 ([1960]; Baltimore, Md., 1966), 3–4, 127–28Google Scholar.

31 Ontario, , Statutes, 1926 (Toronto, 1926), 375–76Google Scholar; Harrington, Daniel, “Report of Committee on Metal Mine Ventilation,” in Transactions of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers 75 (1927): 143–44Google Scholar.

32 British policymakers chose not to include silicosis on the initial schedule of compensable diseases because they feared wholesale firings of silica-exposed workers. See Legge, Thomas, Industrial Maladies (London, 1934), 21Google Scholar. South African mine owners discharged suspected silicotics when passage of the Miners' Phthisis Act of 1912 became imminent. See Engineering and Mining Journal, 1 June 1912, 1102. When Illinois enacted silicosis compensation in 1936, one factory owner reportedly terminated 180 employees just before the effective date of the law. See Helbing, Albert T., “Occupational Disease Legislation in Illinois,” Social Service Review 12 (March 1938): 119CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

33 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Workmen's Compensation Legislation of the United States and Canada, by Clark, Lindley D. and Frineke, Martin C. Jr., Bulletin 272 (Washington, D.C., 1921), 308Google Scholar and passim; Derickson, Alan, Workers' Health, Workers' Democracy: The Western Miners' Struggle, 1891–1925 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1988), 180–82Google Scholar; Gibson, Wilderness Bonanza, 229; BOM, Pulmonary Disease among Miners in the Joplin District, Missouri, and Its Relation to Rock Dust in the Mines: A Preliminary Report, by Lanza, A. J. and Higgins, Edwin, Technical Paper 105 (Washington, D.C., 1915), 44Google Scholar; BOM, Development of Workmen's Compensation Insurance for Metal Mines, by Pickard, Byron O., Report of Investigation 2590 ([Washington, D.C.], 1924)Google Scholar, passim.

34 Dublin, Louis I., A Family of Thirty Million: The Story of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (New York, 1943), 167–206Google Scholar; R. A. Stengel to F. V. Meriwether, 11 Jan. 1930, Picher Clinic Records, box 1, file 021; John W. Campbell and E. C. Mabon, “Personnel and Safety,” Engineering and Mining Journal, Nov. 1943, 120.

35 Dublin, Family of Thirty Million, 176–77, 425, 433; Richard Jenkins, “Report of Welfare Department, Year Ending September 30, 1930,” OPA Records, envelope: “Annual Meetings of Association,” folder: “Annual Meeting—October 22, 1930”; R. R. Sayers to L. R. Thompson, 16 March 1933, National Institute of Health Records, RG 443, Records Relating to NIH Divisions, 1930–48, box 182, folder: “Div[ision of] Ind[ustrial] Hyg[iene], 1932–1936,” National Archives; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 2; Department of Commerce and Tri-State Zinc and Lead Ore Producers Association, “Cooperative Agreement,” 24 June 1927, Picher Clinic Records, box 1, file 022.

36 BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 2; Richard V. Ageton to Arthur L. Murray, 9 April 1927, OPA Records, unnamed box, folder: “United States Department of Commerce (Bureau of Mines) Misc. Correspondence”; Department of Commerce and OPA, “Cooperative Agreement.”

37 F. V. Meriwether to R. R. Sayers, 4 Oct. 1927, Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 094; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 4; Bureau of Mines Clinic, “Individual History [Form],” n.d., OPA Records, box: “Weekly, Monthly and Yearly Production, etc., Reports, 1923–1939,” folder: “Clinic—General, July 1, 1930 to July 1, 1931.”

38 Lanza, A. J., “Miners' Consumption in Southwestern Missouri,” Journal of the Missouri State Medical Association 13 (June 1916): 251–54Google Scholar; Legge, Robert T., “Miners' Silicosis: Its Pathology, Symptomatology and Prevention,” Journal of the American Medical Association 81 (Sept. 1923): 809–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pancoast, Henry K. and Pendergrass, Eugene P., “A Review of Our Present Knowledge of Pneumoconiosis, Based upon Roentgenologic Studies, with Notes on the Pathology of the Condition,” American Journal of Roentgenology and Badium Therapy 14 (Nov. 1925): 381–410, 414Google Scholar; BOM, Silicosis among Miners, by Sayers, R. R., Technical Paper 372 (Washington, D.C., 1925)Google Scholar; Sayers and Lanza, “History of Silicosis and Asbestosis,” 5–22; Derickson, Workers' Health, Workers' Democracy, 42–53; Mining Congress Journal, March 1915, 163–64; Engineering and Mining Journal, 11 Dec. 1915, 976.

39 BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 4 (quotation), 26–27; BOM, Siliceous Dust in Joplin, 70.

40 Haller, John S., “The Negro and the Southern Physician: A Study of Medical and Racial Attitudes, 1800–1860,” Medical History 16 (July 1972): 238–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll and Rosenberg, Charles E., “The Female Animal: Medical and Biological Views of Woman and Her Role in Nineteenth-Century America,” Journal of American History 60 (Sept. 1973): 332–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

41 BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 5, 11–13, 16, 21, 23–25; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis among Miners of the Tri-State District of Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri—II, for the Year Ended June 30, 1929, by Meriwether, F. V., Sayers, R. R., and Lanza, A. J., Technical Paper 552 (Washington, D.C., 1933), 16Google Scholar; McTeer, Tony, Statement, in U.S. Division of Labor Standards, Conference on Health and Working Conditions in the Tri-State District, 23 April 1940 (Washington, D.C., n.d. [1940]), 25Google Scholar.

42 F. V. Meriwether to J. D. Conover, 20 Oct. 1928, Picher Clinic Records, box 1, file 022; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—II, 1.

43 Sayres, Hayhurst, and Lanza, “Status of Silicosis,” 639–40; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 4.

44 BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 14.

45 [Meriwether], “Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending [30 June] 1928 of the US Bureau of Mines Health Clinic[,] Picher, Oklahoma,” 9 (quotation), 6 (quotation), Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 091; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 14.

46 Meriwether, “Report for Fiscal 1928”; D. E. Robertson to Lanza, 7 Feb. 1928; Meriwether to Lanza, 22 March 1928, both Picher Clinic Records, box 1, file 02].

47 Meriwether to J. D. Conover, 20 Oct. 1928. Meriwether's concern focused on unorganized discontent: there was no stirring of unionism in the Tri-State in the late 1920s. Further, I have found no evidence that the clinic ferreted out or gave low medical ratings to union sympathizers. In contrast, Arizona copper firms used physical examinations to blacklist unionists. See Derickson, Workers' Health, Workers' Democracy, 207–8.

48 D. Harrington to Richard V. Agetón, 6 Aug. 1927, OPA Records, unnamed box, folder: “United States Department of Commerce (Bureau of Mines) Misc. Correspondence”; Meriwether to Sayers, 2 Feb. 1929, Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 094; Oklahoma, Session Laws, 1929 (Oklahoma City, 1929), 47–48, 51Google ScholarPubMed; Harrington, et al., “Dust-Ventilation Investigation,” 12–19.

49 Meriwether to M. D. Harbaugh [Secretary, OPA], 7 Oct. 1929, OPA Records, envelope: “Annual Meetings of Association,” folder: “Annual Meeting, 1929”; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—II, 2; O. N. Wampler, “Safety and Industrial Relations at Eagle-Picher,” Mining Congress Journal, Nov. 1929, 894.

50 Meriwether to Sayers, 3 Jan. 1930, Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 093; BOM, Production in Tri-State, 15–16; Cassidy, “Tri-State Region,” 18; M. D. Harbaugh, “The Tri-State Zinc and Lead Mining District in 1935,” Mining Congress Journal, Feb. 1936, 30.

51 M. D. Harbaugh, “Labor Relations in the Tri-State Mining District,” Mining Congress Journal, June 1936, 19–21; Meriwether to Sayers, 3 Feb. 1931, Pieher Clinic Records, box 5, file 093; Suggs, George G. Jr., Union Busting in the Tri-State: The Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri Metal Workers' Strike of 1935 (Norman, Okla., 1986), 22–24Google Scholar.

52 Meriwether to Sayers, 3 Jan. 1930; Meriwether to Sayers, 5 May, 4 Dec. 1930, Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 093; Cassidy, “Tri-State Region,” 250–51.

53 A. C. Wallace, quoted in “Silicosis Expose Angers Tri-State Mining Interests,” CIO News—Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Edition, 30 Oct. 1939, 8.

54 Meriwether to Sayers, 4 Dec. 1930; Meriwether to Sayers, 5 Jan. 1931, Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 093; Campbell and Mabon, “Personnel and Safety,” 118–19.

55 Meriwether to Lanza, 10 April 1930, Picher Clinic Records, box 14, file 401.

56 Harbaugh, “Labor Relations,” 21 (quotation), 20–21; Meriwether to Harbaugh, 1 July 1930, Picher Clinic Records, box 14, file 401.

57 Meriwether to Sayers, 6 Aug. 1931, Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 093.

58 Meriwether to Sayers, 4 Jan. 1932, ibid.; Cassidy, “Tri-State Region,” 266; Jenkins, “Report of Welfare Department, Year Ending Sept. 30, 1930,” 3–4.

59 Meriwether to Sayers, 5 May 1930.

60 Harbaugh to Sayers, 16 June 1931, OPA Records, box: “Weekly, Monthly, Yearly Production, etc., Reports, 1923–1939,” folder: “Clinic—General, July 1, 1930 to July 1, 1931.”

61 Meriwether to Harbaugh [Oct. 1930], Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 091; Meriwether to Lanza, 23 May 1930, ibid., file 093; Andrews, John B., “Occupational Disease Compensation,” American Labor Legislation Review 19 (Sept. 1929): 237–40Google Scholar.

62 Meriwether to Sayers, 5 Jan., 3 Feb. 1931; Harbaugh, “Labor Relations,” 21.

63 Meriwether to Lanza, 23 May 1930; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—II, 2; Meriwether, “Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1931,” 3, Picher Clinic Records, box 5, file 091; Meriwether to Sayers, 2 Oct 1931, ibid., file 093.

64 Meriwether, “Annual Report of Clinic Director,” 22 Oct. 1930, 3, 4, 6, OPA Records, envelope: “Annual Meetings of Association,” folder: “Annual Meeting—October 22, 1930.”

65 A. M. Hughes [Personnel Manager, Johns-Manville Corp.] to Meriwether, 17 May 1932; Hughes to Meriwether, 23 May 1932; Meriwether to Hughes, 1 June 1932; Bureau of Mines Cooperative Clinic, “Second Group X-rays for John-Mansville [sic] Co.,” 31 May 1932; BOM Cooperative Clinic, “Third Group, John-Mansville Co. X-rays,” 7 June 1932, all Picher Clinic Records, box 19, file 800.

66 Castleman, Barry I., Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects, 2d ed. (Clifton, N.J., 1986), 137–38, 510Google Scholar; Brodeur, Paul, Outrageous Misconduct: The Asbestos Industry on Trial (New York, 1985), 163–64Google Scholar.

67 Meriwether to Sayers, 6 May 1932; Frances Murdock to Lanza, 2 July 1932, both Picher Clinic Records, box 19, file 800; Kansas, State Board of Health, Industrial Hygiene Section, Preliminary Industrial Hygiene Survey of the Kansas Zinc and Lead Mines (Lawrence, Kans., 1937), 7Google Scholar.

68 U.S., Division of Labor Standards, National Silicosis Conference Report on Medical Control, Bulletin 21, pt. 1 (Washington, D.C., 1938), 6Google Scholar; Harbaugh, “Labor Relations,” 21; Harbaugh, “Report of the Secretary,” 16 Oct. 1934, 7, OPA Records, envelope: “Annual Meetings of Association,” folder: “Annual Reports.” The OPA ran the Tri-State Industrial Examining Bureau until 1939, at which time it contracted with local hospitals to provide diagnostic services. See Evan Just, Statement, in U.S., Department of Labor, Conference on Health in Tri-State, 14.

69 Campbell and Mabon, “Personnel and Safety,” 120 (quotation), 119–20; Tri-State Survey Committee, A Preliminary Report on Living, Working and Health Conditions in the Tri-State Mining Area (New York, 1939), 69Google Scholar; Harbaugh, “Report of the Secretary,” 6 Nov. 1936, OPA Records, envelope: “Annual Meetings of Association,” folder: “Annual Reports.”

70 Nugent, “Fit for Work,” 590; Brodeur, Outrageous Misconduct, 157, 160, 167–68; Castleman, Asbestos, 133, 182; Occupational Safety and Health Administration, “Access to Employee Exposure and Medical Records,” 23 May 1980, in Office of the Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 29, Fart 1910.20 (Washington, D.C., 1985), 85–91Google ScholarPubMed.

71 Cassidy, “Tri-State Region,” 169; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—I, 26; BOM, Silicosis and Tuberculosis—II, 6, 28; Tri-State Survey Committee, Preliminary Report, 71, 77–81; R. L. Hickman to Meriwether, 20 Oct. 1931, Picher Clinic Records, box 4, file 087; Harbaugh, “Report of the Secretary,” 6 Nov. 1936, 3–5.

72 In the autumn of 1933, the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers initiated another militant organizing drive in the district. The medical screening policy of the OPA became a prominent issue in this campaign and in the violent strike in which it culminated. See Suggs, Union Busting in the Tri-State, 29ff.; Harbaugh, “Labor Relations,” 19–24.