Evening star., 1947-03-09
Court Gives Capitol
Cue for Labor Curb
Ruling in Coal Case Shows Need
For Injunction Law Change
By Gerard d. Reilly

means that Congress must now take the
initiative in dealing with the problem.
An analysis of the decision reveals that
the Governments position was sustained
on the narrowest of grounds The basis
on which 1t rests-the Smith Connally
Act;-is purely temporary. This statute
expires in less than four months.
It will be recalled that Assistant At
torney General Sonnet sought injunc-
tive relief on broad grounds. His petit
tion to the court was based not only
upon the prohibition contained in the
Smith Connally Act against melting
stoppages in plants or mines seized by
the President, but also on the premise
that the Norris-La Guardia Act, which
deprived Federal courts of power to issue
injunctions in labor disputes, had no ap-
plication to suits by the United States.
Consequently, the petition contended,
the Federal Government In its SOVEREIGN
capacity had right to invoke the jur-
isdiction of the court to avert the peril
to the health and safety Of the Nation
arising from the shutdown of an indus
try so essential to transportation and
manufacturing.
This aspect of the Governments case
bore striking parallel to the litigation
against the United Mine Workers in
1919. During the first World War the
mines were not operated by the Govern
ment. There was an agency, called the
United States Fuel Administration. how
ever, whose functions correspond with
those today of the Solid Fuels Division of
the Interior Department. In order to in
crease the output of coal during the
war this agency persuaded the operators
10 grant the mine workers a substantial
wage increase in return for an agree
ment to run until April l, 1920.
x X 4
Nevertheless, in the fall of 1919. the
union decided to call the workers out
OF the coal fields. In appealing to the
miners, Woodrow Wilson used language
resembling President Truman's In similar
circumstances:
This is one. OF the gravest steps ever
'roposed IN this country, affecting the
econcmic welfare and the domestic COM
1T is recognized that the strike would
practically shut off the countrys supply
Of its principal fuel at time when in
reference with that supply Is calculated
to create disastrous fuel famine. -
1t would involve the shutting down OF
countless industries and the throwing
out of employment of large number of
workers OF the country It would involve
stopping the operation Of the railroads,
electric and gas plants, street railway
lines and other public utilities, and the
shipping to and from this country, thus
preventing our giving aid to the Allied
countries with supplies which they so
seriously need. - strike under those
circumstances is not only unjustifiable;
it is unlawful"
AS this solemn plea of the President
went unheeded the Attorney General
nled bill to enjoin the officers of the
Mine Workers Union from keeping the
strike call in effect. The Federal District
Court at Indianapolis (this was before
the headquarters of the union had moved
TO Washington issued a temporary re-
straining order. This was followed by
an injunction ordering the union to
revoke the strike orders already issued
On that occasion the union did not
defy the court.
A reading Of Chief Justice Wilson'S
opinion indicates that he and the four
justices who concurred with him in
holding that the Norris-La Guardia Act
was not applicable to the case relied
heavily upon the Governments anteced-
ent action in taking possession of the
mines. Mr.. Hopkins, counsel for the
union, had argued that this was me1c
token possession. since the private oper-
ators still continued to run their proper
ties and since the miners were never in
corporated into the civil service. Point
ing to provisions in the Smith -Connally
Act for wage adjustments and interfer-
ence with operations when a plant was
seized, the Chief Justice said that it
was the intent to Congress that by virtue
OF government seizure, a mine should
become "for purposes of production and
operation, Government facility in as
complete sense as if the Government.
held full title and ownership" He the,.
disposed of Mr.. Hopkins argument by
noting that it was immaterial whethe,
or not the miners were public servants
in every sense, since the relationship
between them and the Government
was that of employer and employee
The implication of this opinion, there
fore, is that If Congress fails to re-enact
the Smith -Connally Actor something
like 1.-THE judicial remedy successfully
invoked by the Wilson administration
will no longer be available to the Gov
ernment. Even on this limited theory
OF the matter four justices disagreed.
although two of them, Justices Frank
furter and jackson, concurred in the
imposition Of the fine for contempt of
court, stating the defendants were under
a duty to obey Judge Goldsborougl1s
order unless or until it was reversed.
Despite the plain lesson of the de-
cision, 1t is within the realm of prob
ability that Congress will not extend the
Smith -Connally Act. It's provisions are
generally regarded as too drastic to be
palatahle in peacetime. Equally effec-
tive would be simple resolution, max
ing 1t clear that the Government,
whether or not suing in an employer
capacity, is exempt from the Norris
La Guardia Act. For as long as labor
monopoly persists in basic industries
like coal, steel and shipping there are
bound to be crises in which the public
interest requires that the Government
have q summary and effective method of