Evening star., 1945-06-09
Ward Case Is Headed
For Supreme Court
As U. 5. Wins Appeal.
By the Associated Press.

CHICAGO, June 9.-The Gov
ernment's court battle with Mont
gomery Ward & Co. over seizure of
the mail-order house properties, de-
clared legal by the United States
Court OF Appeals, appeared headed
today to the Supreme Court for final
decision.
1t was the company's next move
In the controversy following yester-
days ruling by the Court of Appeals
upholding the late President Roose-
velt's December % seizure order af-
fecting company properties in seven
cities. The 2-to-1 decision reversed
Federal Judge Philip L. Sullivans
decision which held the seizure un-
constitutional.
Board Chairman Sewell L. Avery,
principal figure in the labor dis
pute, said the company will carry
on its fight to the high court. Mean
while, no immediate change in the
operation of the company is ex-
pected. The Army, under Judge
Sullivan's January 27 ruling. has
been in control pending the appeal
and Is expected to remain in charge
until a final verdict.
Action Seen in Fall.
(The Supreme Court is sched-
uled to recess for the summer
after next Mondays session, and
consideration of the case prob
ably will not be acted on until
fall. The court previously had
rejected the Attorney Generals
Office request to dispose of the is
sue following Judge Sullivan's
. ruling, asserting the case prop
erly belonged in the jurisdiction
OF the Court of Appeals)
Mr.. Avery, who has maintained
that the Governments taking over
the properties was illegal, asserted
that the appeals court decision
means the closed shop. Certainly
Congress has passed no law intended
to impose the closed shop. The
American people may be depended
upon to preserve for every citizen
his individual liberty"
Cites Priority Applications.
Yesterdays majority opinion by
Superior Judge Evan A. Evans and
Judge Otto Kerner stressed that
Wards is engaged in war produc-
ton. In opposing the seizure the
company said it was not engaged in
war production and was not subject
to regulations of the War Labor
Disputes Act, which permits the
seizure Of producers of war mate
rials. It maintained the President
exceeded his authority in issuing
the seizure order.
The appeals court held that the
act applied to Wards and set forth
that the company's own action was
a recognition of the applicability"
OF the act. The opinion said the
company in thousands of applica-
tions for priorities cited its impor-
tance to the war production front.
The decision further held that |
children gathering waste paper are
engaged in production work within |
the meaning of the act, as are the |
thousands of men and women selling
War Bonds.
Four-Line Dissent.
ANY other conclusion would ig-
more the entire congressinal plan
for conduct of this war, which in
cludes participation, sacrifices and
contributions by all citizens the
opinion said
Judge Will M. Sparks dissented
and in four-line opinion said he
agreed with Judge Sullivan.
The seizure and subsequent court
action which stemmed from Wards
refusal to obey War Labor Board
which resulted in strikes.
President Roosevelt said the strikes
endangered the war effort and the
Army took over Wards properties in
Chicago, Detroit. St. Paul, Mimi;
Denver, Portland, Greg; San Rafael,
Calf, and Jamaica, N. Y.