denied that he could identify any of the unmasked murderers. State and Federal grand juries reviewed the evidence in the case, but no person has yet been indicted for the crime. The reaction of the country to the report was, varied. Some viewed it with great acclaim and others denounced it. Most of those who denounced it were in the areas of the most acute racial discrimination, particularly in the State of Georgia. This report and other efforts to liberalize the racial policies of the Democratic Party became a major campaign issue. Some individuals who sought office or were public officials in the South attempted to defend the principle of equal treatment under law. Some left the party to form or participate in other political organizations. Some remained in the Democratic Party but adopted an outright racist stance during their campaigns. Judge Carswell, was in this last group that adopted the outright racist stance in the campaign. His statement while campaigning said: I am a Southerner by ancestry, birth, training, inclination, belief and practice. I believe that segregation of the races is proper and the only and correct way of life in our State. I have always so believed and I shall always so act. I shall be the last to submit to any attempt on the part of anyone to break down and to weaken this firmly established policy of our people. If my own brother were to advocate such a program, I would be compelled to take issue with and to oppose him to the limit of my ability. I yield to no man as a fellow candidate or as a fellow citizen in the firm vigorous belief in the principles of white supremacy and I shall always be so governed. It is interesting to note, this statement did not come to general public attention until 22 years after he made it. The question arises, how can a man be investigated for the office of U.S. attorney, U.S. district judge, U.S. judge on the circut court of appeals, and as a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court without this significant part of his life being weighed in the consideration of his fitness for office? It emphasizes the callous approach to racial matters in our country. There are a great many people who just do not take such statements seriously. We do take them seriously. We do not think they are excused by the youth of those who make them. But, even if youth is a defense, Judge Carswell was a mature adult at the time he made this statement and cannot claim that his tender years provide immunity from the censures that attach to such statements. In addition, there is nothing to show that in the long period of his public life between 1948 and the present that the judge has rejected, retracted or reformed with respect to his 1948 views. Only now, when the prize is a place on the U.S. Supreme Court, does he come forth to acknowledge that such a statement was error. Because this statement was brought to light by a private citizen, it is reasonable to assume that a more careful investigation by the duly authorized government representatives may well reveal other expressions of this kind made at a later date. !!** Indeed Newsweek magazine only this week in the current issue contains a story about the judge's telling of one of the things that in the old days we used to call darkie stories at a meeting of distinguished lawyers in which he said he talked to a black man in IndoChina and asked him whether he was from Indo-China, and the man replied, "No, I'se from Outdo' Georgia." In order to get the point of that joke one must realize that this is a play upon dialect that Negroes are supposed to use as clowns and persons unworthy of recognition as first class citizens. Senator KENNEDY. When was that? Mr. MITCHELL. This according to Newsweek was just 2 months ago. He was the principal speaker at the Georgia State Bar Association meeting in Atlanta, and the story says one of the lawyers indicated "that some of us were really shocked" because this is recognized to be in poor taste now by public officials, and it is really one of the indiciae of an attitude of consigning Negroes to an unimportant status, so that when they get killed it is not very important or when they are subjected to discrimination in jobs, housing, and things of that sort, really you do not take them quite as seriously as you would a normal human who would happen to be white.. It is reasonable to assume, as I said, that a more careful investigation would reveal similar statements, but we contend that standing alone the statement that the judge made in 1948 as an appeal to persons for the vote is sufficient to bar him from the Supreme Court. We do not say you should never forgive anybody for making a mistake, but we do say with the Supreme Court it is a different kind of a situation, and that his 1948 racist statement is enough to bar him from the Court. ! No amount of political expediency, no amount of personal criticism expressed against those who oppose this appointment and no attempts to dismiss the statement as one made in the "heat of the campaign" will ever be accepted by most Negroes in the United States and most civilized people in the world as legitimate excuses for approving this nomination. The stark fact now is this: An advocate of racial segregation has been named by the Nixon administration to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. Now that this fact is known, those who vote for the approval of this nomination will be voting to place a segregationist on the U.S. Supreme Court./ There is a second chapter in Judge Carswell's life which must also be reviewed in the context of the times. It is interesting I had that in the text in my statement and Senator Hruska mentioned yesterday that we have to look at things in the context of the times, and I think it is fair to do that. In the 1940's the Negroes of the United States expanded their legal attacks on segregation to include swimming pools, golf courses, play grounds, parks, and other recreational facilities owned and operated by State, municipal, or other government units. In St. Louis, Mo., a court granted an injunction against the city for its refusal to allow Negroes to use a municipal swimming pool. (Draper v. City of St. Louis, 1950.) I might say, Mr. Chairman, that I have the citations on the cases that I have included here on a separate sheet. I offer that for the record in case anybody wants to check on it. (The document follows:) CASES CITED IN TESTIMONY Lopez v. Seccombe, 71 F. Supp. 769 (S.D. Cal 1944). Holmes v. City of Atlanta, 350 U.S. 879 (1955). Moorehead v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 248 F.2d 544 (1957). Steele v. Board of Public Instruction of Leon County, Fla., 371 F. 2d 395 (1967). Draper v. City of St. Louis, 92 F. Supp. 546 (E.D.Mo., 1950). Mr. MITCHELL. Similar decisions had been given in California (Lopez v. Seccombe, 1944) and in municipally owned golf courses (Law v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 1948). In 1950 a Florida court upheld regulations providing for the use of a municipal golf course by Negroes on Monday only, the claim being that the allocation of time to 1 day was in proportion to the Negro use (Rice v. Arnold, 1950). The Florida Supreme Court upheld this decision on the basis of the "separate but equal" doctrine. Subsequently, the U.S. Supreme Court held that racial segregation on publicly owned gold courses was unconstitutional (Holmes v. City of Atlanta, 1955). To avoid complying with the clear intention of the Supreme Court decision, many public officials either closed the facilities that were available for recreation or transferred them to private ownership. I would just like to backtrack, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, to point out that I said in my statement the Supreme Court had held that racial segregation on golf courses was unconstitutional. Because this is the Judiciary Committee, I think I might indicate what was technically correct: The Law case which I have mentioned in the city of Baltimore went up to the Supreme Court, and the Holmes case of Atlanta also went up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in two memoranda decisions held that these cases had to be reviewed in the light of the Sweatt and McLaurin cases, which had been decided by the Supreme Court. The Florida State supreme court, when the case got back there, interpreted that to mean that separate but equal was permissible. The Florida supreme court held that it was possible to meet the Supreme Court's requirements simply by having 1 day set aside for Negroes on the golf course, because this was all that the traffic seemed to require. To avoid complying with even this limited interpretation of the Supreme Court, many public officials either closed the facilities that were available for recreation or transferred them to private ownership. For example, in 1956, the Georgia State parks director leased nine of the parks to private citizens at an average price of $2.000 per month to preserve segregation. In 1957 the residents of Marshall, Tex., voted to sell their municipal swimming pool after a suit was filed against segregation. The New York Times for July 10, 1957, reported the Fort Lauderdale, Fla., sold its $1 million golf course for $526,400 to private people to evade a Federal court ruling permitting Negroes to use the course. All of these events certainly should have come to the attention of persons in the city of Tallahassee. On April 24, 1956, citizens of Tallahasse, Fla., where Judge Carswell was then residing, changed their golf course from a municipally owned facility where Negroes played on a very restricted basis to a privately owned facility where Negroes could not play at all. They were banned because of race. I understand that some of the citizens down in Tallahassee have submitted affidavits to the committee, and I have copies of those affidavits here with respect to this matter. The first one is from Mrs. Christina Ford Knowles, and it is dated the first day of February 1970. She says: I am an adult black citizen residing in Tallahassee. Florida, who has worked as an Administrative Assistant to the Reserve Officers Training Corps for five and a half years, ten years public high school teacher, 1⁄2 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 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 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 :) STATE OF FLORIDA County of Leon, SS: AFFIDAVIT 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 51⁄2 years, ten years public high school teacher, 1⁄2 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. AFFIDAVIT STATE OF FLORIDA 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 |