The people's voice., 1959-12-25
Strikers EnfifIed--
Continued From Page One)

3. 'It either ignores the statutes
and Constitution or interprets them
in an unconstitutional manner.
A. 'fIt will result in requiring strik-
ing families to become paupers tc
secure aid"
Castles also contended that the
Welfare Boards order of September
% granting strikers half the amount
given other needy persons was pred
icated ON severe lack of funds avail
able . . In the face of this, and be-
ing the order challenged, it became
necessary to allege the availability
of funds to carry out the order -
ANGSTMAN ANSWERS CASTLES
Justice Angstman, stating he con-
CURED with Justice Adair and Bot
tmoly, said he wished ''to make it
clear that l do not say that all en-
ployees on strike are entitled to
relief. Whether any particular appli-
cant is entitled to relief depends upon
the showing of need, and the deter
mination must be made :" by Pub
lie Welfare. (Sec. 71-306).
'Here," he pointed out, ''the state
department has ruled in favor of
relief, and we are not concerned with
its determination on that point. The
only question before us is may the
Board award to recipients in the in
dustry now ON strike, one-half of
the amount awarded to other appli-
cants and nothing to single men. Sec,
71-305 answers that in the negative
by saying:
Persons eligible for and in
need of relief shall be, whether
employable or unemployable, given
equal consideration for public as
sistance as those persons eligible
for assistance under other parts of
this act'.'
Taking each of Justice Castles
main dissenting points, Angstman
aid that even if the high court re-
7ersed Judge Downey, welfare funds
would still be strike funds. The order
# the Welfare Board makes welfare
unds strike funds, and not the order
# the trial court or of this court"
AS for Castles point 2 regarding
nion funds, Angstman said ''this
kewise is not true. 1t is true that
(the union) need not divulge its
esources to the courts, but that is
latter to be considered by the We'll
are Board as bearing upon the need e
applicants The assumption
that such union resources, if any, !
ere given board consideration.
Taking issue with Castles point 8
nat the majority decision ignores e
le statutes and Constitution ;" y
ustice Angstman said such a position
IS not well-taken. The Welfare De- f
itself has ruled that even O
Tough the strike is by voluntary ac- t
ON, that fact does not justify a c
snial of relief. For the same reason c
does not justify a refusal to fol- K
w Sec. 71-305 ;"
OTES CHANGE IN POSITION 5
Judge Castles point a, re making q q
.upers out of strikers families. :,
ought from Angstman the comment - -
at 'Mr. Justice Castles, after COM :"
aiming of the use of welfare funds
r strikers, then proceeds to the e.
posite view, and complains that the sc
ajority opinion is too harsh on
-ikers in that it requires striking
miles to become paupers in order Sc
secure aid. This,' he said, "is not ri
All that is necessary is that they We
wv need"
AS for Castles contention that wi
of funds to carry out a
(court's) order'' is necessary,
gstman said that the district s
rt's "order does not direct the n
yment of any money We have o
been given any facts as to i,