Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

and a half years, ten years public high school teacher, 12 year Business Manager of Tallahassee A and M Hospital, and at the present 2 years and 10 months as Educational Specialist, Federal Correctional Institution, all of Tallahassee, Florida. I reside at 819 Taylor Street, Tallahassee, Florida.

I remember in 1956 deeply resenting the transfer whereby 205 acres of what was formerly municipal property converted to private ownership. At the time, Reverend C. K. Steele, myself, and other members of the local SCLC chapter were disturbed at what was clearly an attempt to bar Black people from using the golf course. It was evident to us that the transaction, that is the leasing of he course to a private group, had but one real intent. Tallahassee was in a racial uproar over the bus boycott and other protests bringing a reaction of fear, to the white community. The word "private" had increasingly become a code name for segregation.

The Capital City Country Club incorporation proceedings were well publicized and the racial overtones were necessarily clear to every knowledgeable citizen in the areas, and it would have been surprising to me if an intelligent man, particularly, an incorporator was not aware of the repeatedly emphasized racial aspects of this case.

We did discuss this corporation widely at the time; had we not been so preoccupied with other protests, we would have undoubtedly moved against the corporation in civil suit.

There is another affidavit here from a gentleman who has played on the golf course, and the burden of that is that he played on it while it was under public auspices, but was barred from playing when it went under private auspices.

We have also here an affidavit from a white citizen. This is from Mrs. Clifton Van Brunt Lewis, and it says:

I am an adult white citizen who has been a life-long resident of Tallahassee and whose family has domiciled in the city for several generations. I am the wife of the Chairman of Florida's oldest nk, The Lewis State Bank of Tallahassee.

My interest in the Tallahassee Golf Course goes back to my early childhood, as my father was one of the early golfers of Tallahassee, and had in fact helped to plan the course itself.

When the original club deeded the course to the City of Tallahassee it was known as the Municipal Golf Course—for some 21 years. The city acquired the splendid 205 acres through an agreement whereby the city paid off a $6,500 note and agreed to obtain funds to improve the property. The agreement stipulated that the funds should be $35,000 of WPA money! The 1935 agreement also gave the club first option to lease the land, which it did in 1956 at the rate of one dollar a year for 99 years!

My husband and I were invited to join the Capital Country Club at its inception. We refused the invitation because we wanted no part in converting public property to private use without just compensation to the public, and because of the obvious racial subterfuge which was evident to the general public.

My husband and I have been members of the interracial Tallahassee Council on Human Relations since its inception several years before the Country Club fiasco. In this Council I knew first-hand from Dr. Charles U. Smith, Professor of Sociology at Florida A.M. University, of the desire of specific Tallahassee black citizens to play on the city golf course.

This discussion' with Mr. Smith was one of many that I had with a variety of parties during that period on the subject of a golf course, the issue being of wide civic concern. I would have been suprised if there was any knowledgeable member of the community who was unaware of the racial aspect of the golf course transaction. The controversy appeared in the local newspaper of the time and a city commissioner was known to have raised questions about the racial implications involved.

At this point, Mr. Chairman, with your permission I would like to offer for the record these affidavits plus a reprint of a story that appeared in the Tallahassee Democrat for February 15, 1956, on page 1. That story is the one to which you referred, Senator Kennedy, yesterday, and I therefore will not read it again, but I would like to offer these for the record.

Senator KENNEDY. They will be received. (The affidavits referred to follow :)

AFFIDAVIT STATE OF FLORIDA

County of Leon, SS: Before me the undersigned authority came and appeared on 1 February 1970, who after being duly sworn, did depose and say that:

I am an adult Black citizen residing in Tallahassee, Florida, who has worked as an Administrative Assistant to the Reserve Officers Training Corps for 512 years, ten years public high school teacher, 12 year Business Manager of Tallahassee A and M Hospital, and at the present 2 years and 10 months as Educational Specialist, Federal Correctional Institution, all of Tallahassee, Florida. (I reside at 819 Taylor Street, Tallahassee, Florida).

I remember in 1956, deeply resenting the transfer whereby 205 acres of what was formerly municipal property converted to private ownership. At the time, Reverend C. K. Steele, myself, and other members of the Local SCLC chapter were disturbed at what was clearly an attempt to bar Black people from using the golf course. It was evident to us that the transaction, that is the leasing of the course, to a private group, had but one real intent. Tallahassee was in a racial uproar over the bus boycott and other protests—bringing a reaction of fear to the white community. The word "private" had increasingly become a code name for segregation.

The Capital City Country Club incorporation proceedings were well publicized and the racial overtones were necessarily clear to every knowledgeable citizen in the area, and it would have been surprising to me if an intelligent man, particularly an incorporator was not aware of the repeatedly emphasized racial aspects of this case.

We did discuss this corporation widely at the time, and had we not been so preoccupied with other protests, we would have undoubtedly moved against the corporation in civil suit.

CHRISTENE FORD KNOWLES. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of February 1970.

DULUTH H. BAKER, Jr.

AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
County of Leon:

Before me the undersigned came and appeared on 1 February, 1970 who after being duly sworn, did depose and say that:

I am an adult White citizen who has been a life-long resident of Tallahassee and whose family has domiciled in the city for several generations. I am the wife of the Chairman of Florida's oldest bank, The Lewis State Bank of Tallahassee.

My interest in the Tallahassee Golf Course goes back to my early childhood, as my father was one of the early golfers of Tallahassee and had, in fact, helped to plan the course itself.

When the original club deeded the course to the City of Tallahassee it was known as the Municipal Golf Course for some 21 years. The city acquired the splendid 205 acres through an agreement whereby the city paid off a 6,500 dollar note and agreed to obtain funds to improve the property. The agreement stipulated that the funds should be 35,000 dollars of WPA money! The 1935 agreement also gave the club first option to lease the land, which it did in 1956 at the rate of one dollar a year for 99 years!

My husband and I were invited to join the Capital City Country Club at its inception. We refused the invitation because we wanted no part in converting public property to private use without just compensation to the public and because of the obvious racial subterfuge which was evident to the general public.

My husband and I have been members of the interracial Tallahassee Council on Human Relations since its inception several years before the Country Club fiasco. In this Council I knew first hand from Dr. Charles U. Smith, Profes

sor of Sociology at Florida A&M University of the desire of specific Tallahassee black citizens to play on the city golf course.

This discussion with Mr. Smith was one of many that I had with a variety of parties during that period on the subject of the golf course, the issue being of wide civic concern. I would have been surprised if there was any knowledgeable member of the community who was unaware of the racial aspect of the golf course transaction. The controversy appeared in the local newspaper of the time, and a city commissioner was known to have raised questions about the racial implications involved.

CLIFTON VAN BRUNT LEWIS. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of February 1970

DULUTH H. BAKER, Jr. Mr. MITCHELL. It is well known that Judge Carswell is listed as one of the incorporators of this private club. If Judge Carswell had been an ordinary citizen unaware of the full implication of signing articles of incorporation or if he had been a lawyer in private practice who wished to be of assistance to his fellow citizen this action would not be important.

I would just like to digress a minute, Senator Kennedy, to point out that I was present when you examined Judge Carswell on that point, and I was struck by his reticence in saying what common sense indicated a lawyer and a judge should say. You asked him whether he was aware of signing this document, and he said it was just for the purpose of repairing some little broken-down clubhouse. Then when you got into the reading of the articles of incorporation, I think the lawyer and the judge in him triumphed, because he had to admit that he was aware of the purposes of this corporation.

This was no ordinary signing of a document that some friends handed to him and he just signed it.

I can well remember once somebody handed me some articles of incorporation to sell something which they said they would not describe to me, but I took the trouble to look at it, and discovered that it was something promoting what they called Civil Rights Whiskey. I think Senator Tydings knows that I would get into much trouble with my mother-in-law, who favors total abstinence, if I had signed that document. I had commonsense enough not to sign it. I certainly think that, given the civil rights issues of the times, one had to read that kind of property transfer document with care. I cannot believe that Judge Carswell did not know what he was doing. He was the U.S. district attorney sworn to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. As such, he had an obligation, not only to avoid participation in efforts to defy the law, but also to avoid the appearance of participation in such efforts.

He did not fulfill this obligation. He signed a document which, whatever may have been its original objective, accomplished the result of banning Negroes from a recreational facility solely because of their race. It is interesting to note that those who defend Judge Carswell first excuse him for his 1948, racist utterances on the grounds of youth, but his 1956 action is somewhat more difficult. Nevertheless, they are inclined to excuse this also because it was a so-called routine signature and he paid a small sum of money to accomplish the noble purpose of repairing a damaged clubhouse located on the golf course property, according to his version.

It may be that the members of this committee can accept this explanation given by Judge Carswell and still be at peace with their own consciences, but it is unlikely that reasonable imen and women outside of the Senate will accept it. Those who favor racial segregation undoubtedly will rejoice if the expanation is accepted because it will be proved that sophisticated methods of evading the law have triumphed, but they most likely, even though segregationists, will know that the explanation is ridiculous on its face. Those who do not favor racial segregation will feel the cold iron pressure of the chains of frustration once again restraining their efforts to achieve a society in which those who deny equal treatment to their fellow citizens are not rewarded with high office and new opportunities to poison the wells of justice, as judges on the bench.

The third opportunity for Judge Carswell to demonstrate by his action that he had repudiated the 1948 speech came after the great decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1954 outlawing racial segregation in the public schools. By that time he was a judge on the bench of the northern district of the State of Florida. Others have dealt more in detail with his record as a judge, and Mr. Rauh will also comment on that point.

I offer one example which indicates how he again became a part of the pattern which is exemplified by the words of his 1948 speech. It is well known that the unthinking and unskilled advocates of segregation resisted the 1954 decision with force, intimidation, violence, economic pressure and even murder. It is also well known that the wiser and more sophisticated forces of resistance resorted to changes in the laws of States, delays through extended litigation and other obstructionist tactics under the color of law. Judge Carswell was a part of this latter strategy. Even if we assume that he was unknowingly a part of it, the end result is the same. He was a force which contributed to the pattern associated with the delay in implementation of the school desegregation decision. The example I offer is Steele v, Board of Public Instruction of Leon County, Fla. This was a suit instituted in 1963 to require desegregation of public schools. Because of delays largely chargeable to Judge Carswell, the case was not settled until 1967. Counsel in the case discussed it yesterday in the hearings before this committee.

In closing this presentation, it should be remembered that in a convention of wolves it is always easy to pass a resolution justifying raids on the sheepfold because the occupants thereof willfully and knowingly stimulate the flow of gastric juices in the digestive system of the predators. This lupine type of reasoning is widely used in our society today—especially in the area of civil rights.

We urge our citizens to rely upon the law, but we appoint prejudiced law officers as enforcers. We breathe a sigh of relief when Negroes go into the courts instead of into the streets, but we then confront them with judges who have decided to deny them relief even before they enter the courthouse door,

The one great exception to all of this has been the U.S. Supreme Court. This Court is under attack and condemnation because it has handed down decisions that destroy longstanding unjust practices. The State legislatures pass unconstitutional restrictions on freedom and the Supreme Court is condemned because it's

"strikes down such monstrous attacks on liberty. Those who vilify the Supreme Court have learned to make use of vague words and phrases that arouse base passions and protests against the most noble tribunal in the civilized world.

One of the phrases current today is strict constructionist.” Onė may very well ask what does that mean? The simple answer is it means everything and it means nothing. Therefore, it is better to speak in plain words when one describes the qualifications that are being sought in a judge who is to be elevated to this high Court. When one makes a plain word substitute for this term it is necessary to look at the policies and practices of this administration, the Nixon administration.

These policies and practices are clearly designed to create further and inexcusable delays in the desegregation of public schools. This is the policy now employed by the U.S. Department of Justice. It was the policy of Judge Haynsworth and it is a clearly discernible thread in the decisions given by Judge Carswell. We believe that if the administration's desire to have a so-called strict constructionist on the Supreme Court has any meaning in the case of the nominee now before this committee, it means that the President wants a judge who will use his office to delay school desegregation in particular and all other civil rights progress in general.

But, let us see what Judge Carswell thought about that term "strict constructionist.” He did not give a clear definition in a reply to a question on that point. Instead, he offered the committee a new phrase by saying that, “I do not think the Supreme Court should be a continuing constitutional convention." The hearer is entitled to ask what does that mean? Does it mean that the Court was sitting as a convention when it upheld the right of Negroes to play on a publicly owned golf course ? Does it mean that the Nation's highest tribunal is no longer acting as a court when it orders implementation of a 15-year-old decree against segregation in the public schools? In the light of his past record, it is fair to conclude in these instances that Judge Carswell would believe that such decisions are the products of a "continuing constitutional convention" rather than the constitutionally sanctioned decisions of a court of law.

We have seen and heard many of the supporters of his nomination. Some of them are reasonable men who have appeared from time to time as champions of civil rights. Their advocacy of approval for this nomination is another indication of the wide gulf that separates the reality faced by the oppressed and the insulated world in which their sympathizers live. As one travels about the country, it is clear that the victims of racial discrimination are not convinced that Judge Carswell has really abandoned his belief in the wisdom of racial segregation and the verity of white supremacy. Perhaps it would be possible for the men of good will, who support Judge Carswell, to understand the feelings of the victims of racial discrimination if those gentlemen would suppose for a moment that they were considering a nominee who in his early adult career had blatantly expounded the doctrines of Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin. We might accept his profession of a change of ways 20 years after the speech was made, but we would not put him on the U.S. Supreme Court or any other Federal court. Most of the black citizens of the United States do not believe there is any difference between European demagoguery and the homegrown variety which, for want of a more odious term, we call racism.

The Negroes of America are waiting to see whether the Senate of the United States will ratify racism by confirming this nominee in spite of

« AnteriorContinuar »