Evening star., 1952-04-24
Steel Firms Lawyers
Differ on Scope Of
They Seek
'Astonished' Judge Pine
Recesses Hearing, Polls
Attorneys on Intentions

Attorneys for major steel COM
panies differed in District Court
today on the scope of an injunc-
tion they seek in the Government
seizure dispute.
Judge David A. Pine declared
he was "astonished." He called a
sudden recess when Theodore
Kiendl, an attorney for the United
States Steel Corp, disclosed that
his client at this time wanted only
to prevent the Government from
forcing . wage boost on the
industry"
Mr.. Kiendl challenged validity
Of President Truman's order for
seizure of the steel mills April 8.
But. he said. his company partic-
ularly wanted immediate relief
because 1t had good reason to
fear that the Government was at
tempting to impose a wage in
crease, union shop and other en-
ployment condition changes on
the industry.
Attorneys Differ.
Following the recess, Judge
Pine polled attorneys for five
other companies who had joined
United States Steel in a con-
solidated complaint. Most of
them said their clients want to
center arguments on getting an
injunction, today if possible, to
compel the Government to re-
turn the mills.
Several of the attorneys, how
ever, said that if Judge Pine pre-
ferred to hear arguments later
on the ultimate question of
legality of the seizure, they would
confine their arguments at this
time to asking for an injunction
to preserve the status quo"
Judge Pine indicated that he
was willing to hear arguments on
an injunction question consider
ably broader in scope than was
outlined by Mr.. Kiendl.
He noted that petitions filed by
the companies specifically asked
for a preliminary injunction to
prevent Secretary Of Commerce
Sawyer carrying out the seizure
order. He also observed that the
complaints attacked the Presi-
dents action as having no basis
in the Constitution or in specie
statutes.
Might Arise Later.
The judge remarked that. the
matter of issuing a permanent
injunction and declaratory judg-
ment might conceivably have to
be considered at a later hearing,
in the event preliminary injunc-
ton Of any kind were issued now.
AT any hearing later on the
merits of that ISSUE" Judge Pine
asked, what would be argued
then Is not being argued today?"
The judges expression of as
tonishment came after Mr.. Kiendl
had been speaking more than a
half hour. When the judge ques-
toned one of the attorneys state
ments. Mr.. Kiendl contended that
it was consistent because at this
time he was limiting his request
to a preliminary Injunction to
prevent any change in wage or
employment conditions during the
seizure period.
Judge Interrupts.
DO I understand you to say"
Judge Pine interrupted, that all
you are asking for is preservation
Of the status quo"
Exactly" Mr.. Kiendl replied.
THAT is not stated in your COM
the judge said. Il thought
you are asking for a preliminary
injunction to prevent Secretary
Sawyer from carrying out Govern
ment operation Of the companies.
I can't understand your position
in asking me to grant an injunc-
ton preserving the status quoI
while attacking the legality of the
seizure order. That is why I was
aStonished."
Judge Pine asked Mr.. Kiendl
whether such an Injunction should
prevent an increase in the price i
(see SUITS, Page A-26)