criticism of magazines or newspapers, but I once wrote a book on how to go into politics. The essence of one chapter was never quarrel with the press or the clergy, because if you quarrel with the press they will get you either in the headlines or in the editor's postscript; if you quarrel with the clergy, they have a higher court to appeal to than we do. So that Mr. ROOSEVELT. It seems to me I remember a certain President who didn't always agree with the music critics. So I tend to agree with you, Senator, that these two elements politicians should not quarrel with. But I would like to say in passing, if the committee doesn't mind my taking the time, I wish you would send me that book. 1 would like to know how to go into politics. [Laughter.] Senator SCOTT. I would like to add, parenthetically, that I was once told by a Senator of the other party that the party's original interest in national politics came from my book. I don't want to stir up more trouble. Mr. ROOSEVELT. We Democrats are always willing to learn from the Republicans. Senator SCOTT. That in itself brings up this next question. Senator SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, you do well to wait, because I am sure that you will find it almost impossible to avoid comment on the next series. I do congratulate you for having stated that you feel that this legislation should not be voted on as a political matter. I would, with some deference, suggest that to keep this nonpartisan, nonpolitical, it would be most helpful if the administration would be careful to recognize the efforts of the Members of Congress of both parties, as I have not yet heard any testimony or seen any administration statements which recognize the long-existing efforts on the part of Members of my party in both Houses to secure not only this civil rights legislation but legislation in some cases which would go beyond it. I myself have been advocating this legislation now for 21 years, various forms of it. I do think with a little more generosity on the part of the administration, in other words, the frequent statements referred to by Senator Cotton that the support of the Members of my party is indeed important and essential, that this support might be aided by a little more generosity, a little more willingness to recognize that indeed there are many people, such as Senator Prouty, if he doesn't mind my saving that, such as Members of my party on this side of the committee, and we would like to see more of that. You are well known for your persuasive talents, and I would suggest that it could be helpful if you would pass the word. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Senator, I know that I can speak for the administration in saying that we welcome your support and Senator Cotton's support, and that of many other Members of your party, both in the Senate and in the House, of this particular legislation. But now, speaking for myself personally, I am a bit confused by the introduction of the bill by the minority leader of the Senate, Senator Dirksen. In the first instance he eliminates from the package legislation the section dealing with public accommodations; then he replaces, by an amendment to this bill, the proposal for public accommodations and substitutes for it, as I read his proposal, what is really a voluntary program. I would say it is a watering down of the principles which you have so eloquently just expressed. I would pass your word on to the leader of my party in the administration, the President, but I would also like you to pass on to your minority leader a suggestion that perhaps he withdraw his amendment and his bill and come out flatfootedly in support of this legislation, as I understand you and Senator Cotton have. Senator SCOTT. Mr. Secretary, I think it is first obvious that I do not support the Mansfield-Dirksen bill. I have read so much in the paper about this being the bill of Senator Dirksen, and so little in the paper about this bill having been introduced by the leader of the Democratic Party in the Senate, and having been joined in, with appropriate rhetoric, by the minority leader, and I wish to make it quite clear that I think it is unfortunate that the leader of the Democratic Party and the leader of the Republic Party would join in such a bill. And I know this would not be their intention, to create an impression that the administration supported it and members of the loyal opposition have joined in an attempt to prevent a comprehensive and desirable piece of civil rights legislation. I am not criticizing either one of them. They have the right to do whatever they want. But I wish that in referring to this legislation the press would be good enough to take notice and I say it again in loud and clear tonesthat the press would be good enough to take notice and to repeat in the areas where it will do some good, that this is the MansfieldDirksen bill. Mr. ROOSEVELT. I had hoped that you had forgotten the joint sponsorship of that bill, but knowing you as I do, that was a forlorn hope. I would like to commend the press on their negligence in pointing out this unfortunate situation. [Laughter.] Senator Scort. I speak as a member of a minority group, as you well understand. And as a group occasionally subject to persecution and oppression. As a member of this group dedicated to the overthrow of the Government as we are Mr. ROOSEVELT. By peaceful means. Senator Scorr. By peaceful means, I do hope we can get some better coverage of that. I thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I would like to address two statements to the committee, to the chairman of the committee. First, to underscore what Senator Cotton has said, that we are a committee which suddenly finds ourselves attempting to handle all of the legislation now seriously pending before the Congress of the United States, to wit, the civil rights bill and the railroad strike. And I don't see, as able as the members of this committee are, how we are going to be able to solve all the Nation's current problems unless we can at least have a little meeting and try to work out some situation regarding the time, and so forth. The chairman has very kindly agreed to hold such a meeting. Secondly, I would like to address this question to the committee and to the Chair: I would like them to recall either Governor Barnett or Governor Wallace, or any other Governor who so voted at the Governors' Conference, to explain why the Governors abolished the resolutions committee in order to avoid the passage of any resolution on civil rights, having in mind that the President urged the civil rights declaration on the mayors of this country at Honolulu. I am not aware that any similar concern has been expressed on a civil rights declaration by the Governor's conference at Miami Beach. I wonder why the mayors are regarded as more important than the Governors as opinion makers in this country. I would ask that some Governor who so voted be requested to appear, and I will settle for any old Governor, Mr. Chairman, who will come up. Senator PASTORE. With due deference to my good friend Senator SCOTT. I assure you it is political, but I assure you it is political in the high sense of the word. If the Governors of this country are going to duck, run, and scatter in the face of civil rights. legislation and their own responsibilities, let's find out. Let's ask them. Senator PASTORE. Well, I don't know if my good friend from Pennsylvania has been a Governor. Am I right or wrong? Senator SCOTT. I thank heaven that I have not been a Governor, for the good of the people of my State. Senator PASTORE. I think that we as a committee have a definite responsibility to the President of the United States, who has recommended, on behalf of his administration, this legislation. We have had the highest level representatives come here and not only endorse it but urge upon this committee its passage. We are proficient enough in our own right. We have the availability, we have the authority, we have the jurisdiction to inquire into matters. I don't think we can fuss around to find out how Governors feel in order to do our own duty. I think our duty is clear and I think we can assume it. On this question of whether or not the President of the United States should address himself to the Governors, maybe he thought that after he did it with the mayors he would leave that up to Mr. Rockefeller to see how successful he would be. Senator Scort. Now you have really gotten political. Senator PASTORE. I intended to be. I mean if we are all going to begin making whistlestop speeches here I don't think we will ever get to the bill. Senator SCOTT. I am glad to see that politics is a two-headed monster. I renew my request to the full committee that they give serious consideration to my own request that some Governor who voted as I have referred to, to abolish the resolutions committee and evade action on civil rights, be invited to appear. Again I say I will settle for any old Governor you can get-old or young. I didn't mean it in that sense. Senator PASTORE. If the Senator will make his motion in executive session, the committee will entertain it. Senator HART. Mr. Chairman, could I intrude with a statistic? If the press is going to carry Senator Scott's petition for an accurate report, they might also include, because we do want to pay tribute where it is due: We are grateful that 8 Republicans, less than a quarter of the membership, sponsored the package bill, and I am proud that of the 37 Democrats more than half were on the bill. Those are cold facts. I think those of us who really believe the time has come when we have to produce a bill here serve our own cause poorly by this bickering. I think we will serve the cause of the Senator from South Carolina by doing it, not our own. Senator THURMOND. That is a very worthy cause you are asserting there. Senator HART. Those are the statistics. Senator SCOTT. I would say the Senator from Michigan is entitled to his own opinion obviously. He is entitled to serve any cause he wishes. He is not entitled to impute that any other Senator serves any other cause than that for which he was elected. I would say if we are going into statistics the record should also show that the Civil Rights Act of 1957, so far as I recall, and in the Civil Rights Act of 1960, no Republican voted against the civil rights acts. This compares to the statement as to the eight. I rather think more of the majority of the Republicans in the Senate will support this civil rights legislation, if it is reported, by the majority party having control of the committee and having control of the Senate. Senator PASTORE. Gentlemen, don't you see what you are doing? Don't you really see what you are doing? As reasonable men we have a responsibility here; we have all the tools at our disposal. Let's get on with the job and meet our own responsibilities. Are there any further questions from this witness? Senator Prouty? Senator PROUTY. I have no questions. Senator HART. Mr. Chairman, I haven't any questions. I was able to be here all morning and I listened to the Secretary, as most of us did, and I listened to the exchange with Senator Thurmond. I want once again, if I can, to help nail down this business about us making a whipping boy of the South. This just isn't true. As a northerner I know perfectly well and publicly have acknowledged that discrimintion exists all over. I have tried to suggest that in the North it was sort of a sophisticated kind. It was a person-toperson thing, unlike the hard-nosed discrimination of the South. I admit I wasn't sure which was the more offensive to the person discriminated against. The point that we ought to understand is that as a matter of public policy in the North we say it is wrong; and we don't trot around with a bunch of statistics to prove that it is good. But admittedly this is a problem that affects all corners of this Nation, and that heightens the urgency of responsible conduct by this committee. Parenthetically I don't think anybody in this room feels that the Secretary has to make a trip to find out whether there is a problem. Nobody has pointed the finger any place, except at all of us. Nobody is being fooled by it. Mr. ROOSEVELT. May I just say, Senator, that I wholeheartedly agree with everything you have said, and I tried to emphasize in not only my prepared text but also my answers to various members of the committee that I concur with you that this is not a regional or local problem. It occurs in every corner of our Nation. I referred to some specific situations in my own State, specific situations involving discrimination, of which I am very unhappy. I think that the uncertainty with which a Negro undertakes to go around the corner and get a milkshake, whether he will be welcome or whether he will be thrown out of that eating facility, that uncertainty exists in his heart whether he lives in New York City or he lives in Birmingham, Ala. And it is this uncertainty that this bill aims to remove. Senator PASTORE. Are there any further questions? (No response). Senator PASTORE. It is now 12 o'clock. We will recess on civil rights until 9:15 tomorrow morning in this room. We will hold an executive session of the members of this committee in room 5112 to discuss the matter of the procedure with reference to the legislation that was referred to this committee yesterday, with reference to the broadening of the powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission. In this room at 2 o'clock we will commence the hearings by having before us Secretary Wirtz. (At 12 noon the committee adjourned.) |