Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1959-11-07

a time production in. industries
vital to the national health or
safety. It makes the United
States the guardian Of these
rights in litigation" e,
The majority opinion said
that the court had concluded
that Taft Hartley "entrusts the
courts only with the determine
ton Of a case or controversy
on which the judicial power can
operate, not containing any ele-
ment capable of only flegisla-
tive or executive determination.
I'VE do not ind that the ter
mination of the Injunction after
a specified time, or the ma
chinery established in an at
tempt to obtain q peaceful set
Element Of the underlying dis
pute during the injunction's
tendency. detracts from this
conclusion" -..
At another point IN the
opinion the majority said it
thought the Judgment OF the
lower courts in upholding the
injunction to stop the strike for
so days is amply supported on
the grounds that the strike
imperils the national safety"
The court said that in making
this finding. it was relying
upon evidence of the effect of
the strike on specific defense
projects.
The opinion said the majority
felt it did not need to pass on
the Governments contention
that national safety in this
context should be given q
broader construction or applt-
cation.
AS to the unions suggestion
that some mills, but not all,
should be reopened because a
few could meet specific defense
needs, the, court said:
1.-THE statute CTaft-Hartley)
was designed to provide apub-
lie remedy in times Of emer-
gency; we cannot construe it to
require that the United States
either formulate a reorgani-
cation of the affected industry
to satisfy its defense needs
without the complete reopen
ing of closed facilities, or
demonstrate in court the I'M
feasibility Of such q reorgani-
cation. q
There is no room in the
statute for this requirement
which the petitioner Omitted
Steelworkers) seeks to impose
on the Government"
Union Arguments Noted
The court took note of the
unions argument questioning
propriety of the Pittsburgh Dis
trict Courts exercising equi-
table jurisdiction to enjoin the
strike once it had made its
findings.
The court said the union ar
guments ranged widely into
broad issues of national labor
policy, the availability of other
remedies available to the Pres
ident, the effect of a labor in
junction on the collective bar
gaining processes. consideration
of the conduct Of the parties to
the labor dispute in their nego-
tiations, and conjecture as to
the course of these negotiations
In the future. 1t added:
eve do not believe that Con-
gress in passing this statute in
tended that the issuance of
injunctions should depend upon
judicial inquiries of this nature.
Congress was not concerned
with the merits of the parties
positions or the conduct of the
negotiations.
Its basic purpose seems to
have been to see that vital
production should. be resumed
or continued for q time while
further efforts were made to
settle the dispute, To carry out
its purposes, Congress carefully
surrounded the injunction pro-
ceedings with detailed pro-
cedural devices and limitations.
"The public report of q
board of inquiry, the exercise
of political and executive re-
sponsibility personally by the
President in directing the COM
mencement of Injunction pro-
ceeding, the statutory provi-