Evening star., 1952-05-12
Steel Industry's
Ignored,
High Court Told
John w. Davis Hits
Federal Seizure;
CIO Asks Hearing
By Robert K. Welsh

Supreme Court oral arguments
on the steel seizure opened today
with a declaration by John w.
Davis that the Presidents order
recognized the rights of the work.
erS but not of employers.
The 79-year-old attorney, in a
vigorous voice and rigid bearing,
addressed the court at the start of
six hours Of argument. Tracing
the action that brought about the
April 8 seizure of the steel mills,
Mr.. Davis told the court all COM
panies in the industry march side
by side" in urging that the Presi-
dents action be declared unconsti-
tutional and illegal.
Mr.. Davis, a former Solicitor
General. who was Democratic
nominee for President in 1924,
spoke in a capacity filled court
room. Outside in the corridors
there were long lines of would-be
spectators. attesting to the public
interest in the case.
Solicitor General Philip B. PERL
man, the acting Attorney Cen
eral, was to present the Govern
ment's arguments, probably to-
morrow.
CIO Asks to Join.
Before the court convened it
received a petition from the CIO
Steel Workers Union requesting
an opportunity to take part in
the oral arguments.
The court previously allotted
two and one-half hours each to
the Government and the industry
and another hour to attorneys for
three railroad brotherhoods. The
railroad union lawyers will con-
fine their arguments to the effect
which a Supreme Court ruling in
the steel seizure case might have
on the Governments seizure of the
railroads two years ago.
Union States Case.
Requesting similar time allot-
ment, the steel workers union
declared:
"Our vital interest in this case
is obvious. The first issue, as posed
by the companies in their brief
is that Congress has provided fol
this precise case a remedy which
has not been followed. What they
mean is that the President is
obliged to deal with this precise
case by obtaining a Taft-Hartley
injunction against the union
Surely, the union should be per-
mitted to be heard as to whether
under that law, an injunction
against it is required.
"The companies also argue that
at the very least a preliminary
Injunction should be continued in
the terms prescribed by this court
in issuing its stay against chang
ling wages and working conditions
during seizure). The effect OF
any such action would be to give
the companies the benefit Of un-
interrupted production of steel in
1852 while continuing to pay 1850
wages-a result which they could
not achieve even if they were ulti-
mately to prevail. Certainly the
union should be heard on the is
sue whether it's rights should be
restricted in this manner"
The case is before the Supreme
Court on appeals from q ruling
April 20 by Judge David A. Pine
in the District Court. Judge Pine
held that the seizure order was
unconstitutional and illegal. He
Issued a preliminary Injunction tc
prevent Secretary Of Commerce
Sawyer from carrying out the
Presidents order.
The matter reached the Su-
|preme Court promptly, without
being argued on its merits in the
Court of Appeals. The Supreme
Court, in accepting the case fol
review. stayed the Government
from changing wages or working
|conditions without the companies
consent while the litigation wa!
under way.