Evening star., 1952-10-23
A Law Unto Himself?

It must have required an inordinate amount
Of gall for the President of the United States to
appear before Pennsylvania audience yesterday
and renew his attack on that lawful" Taft
Hartley Act and "the Republican Party that
wants to drive the laborng man back into slav-
cry" But Mr.. Truman proved himself fully equal
to the occasion.
While Mr.. Truman was speaking some 3750O0
coal miners were out on strike. They were strik-
ing against the Government, trying to compel
Government agency to do something its chair
man says would be fraud on the American
people What did Mr. Truman, sef-appointed
failer of the predatory selfish interests, have to
say about this anarchistc defiance of Govern
ment? He had nothing to say He did not utter
one small word of reproach or protest. In the
face of an arrogant attempt to coerce the Gov
ernment he heads, he maintained a discreet
silence-thnking not of his duty as President
but of the miners votes on election day.
The issue which underlies this ugly situation,
however, transcends the question as to whether
q President whose term is over three months
hence will or will not measure up to the respon-
sibilities he assumed when he took his solemn
oath of office. The issue is whether ultimate
authority in this country resides with John L.
Lewis or with the Government.
MIR. Lewis has set this stage carefully. The
miners, he says, are acting as individuals. "They
are exercising their rights as individuals and
free-born Americans. They have not sought nor
been given advice nor suggestions by their union
or this writer
The legal effect and the intent of this, of
course, is to anticipate and defeat any charge
that the UNIV and Mr.. Lewis have taken the
miners out on strike 1t might be possible by
diligent investigation and determined court &C
tion to prove that this Is fiction, not fact. No
such attempt could be made, however, without
first invoking that awful" Taft-Hartley Act,
and the President has done so much to subvert
this law that he is unlikely to fall back on it
now
Even if we had a President who was deter
mined to live up to his obligation to faithfully
enforce the laws, however the efficacy of the
Taft-Hartley law in this situation IS at best
doubtful Mr.. Lewis, with his highly disciplined
union members, may have found way to cir
cumvent It, The most that could be done would
be to secure an injunction requiring Mr. Lewis,
on pain of punishment for contempt to order
his men back to work. If the men should still
refuse to work, which might prove to be the case,
there probably would be no effective legal remedy
under TaftHartley or any other law.
This is subject to one qualification The
sterilization law, under which the Wage Board
held that Mr.. Lewis was not entitled to the full
81 80 wage increase, does not require him or his
union to do anything. The stabilization law does
provide drastic penalties, however, for an en-
ployer If he disobeys board order. So If Mr..
Lewis is guilty of anything at this time in the
legal sense, it is the offense of engaging in
conspiracy to compel the coal operators to violate
the stabilization law by paying the full increase
in the face of the boards disallowance Of It,
This however, is apart from the main thrust
Of the situation The essential question, legal
niceties apart, is whether the Government can
and will defeat this effort by John L. Lewis and
3750OO miners to impose their will on 1856 million
Americans This Is what Mr.. Lewis is really try
ing to do. If he can get away with it, he is liter
ally law unto himself-enjoying and abusing
a degree of power that is far greater and far
more inimical to the public interest than any
thing the "robber barons' and the princes Of
privilege" ever dreamed of. Furthermore both
Governor Stevenson and General Eisenhower,
one of whom will succeed Mr.. Truman as Presi-
dent, seem unwilling to face up to this significant
and 'ominous fact.