Senator WATKINS. We have some well-educated farmers. I was quite sure, from the way you spoke, you must be a college graduate. Mr. WARR. I farm because I like a peaceful and quiet life. I never have been to Washington before, and I sometimes wonder why I came today.

Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Senator O'MAHONEY. Thank you, Mr. Warr.

Mrs. Peder Schmidt. Mrs. Schmidt?

STATEMENT OF MRS. PEDER P. SCHMIDT, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Yes.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Will you give your name to the reporter, please, Mrs. Schmidt?

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mrs. Peder P. Schmidt. My Washington address is 144 Constitution Avenue NE. Minnesota address, 5804 Lyndall Avenue, North Minneapolis 12, Minn.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Are you a citizen of Minnesota?

Mrs. SCHMIDT. I am a citizen of the United States, sir.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Well, does that mean that you are a voteless citizen of the District of Columbia?

Mrs. SCHMIDT. I am a voter of Minnesota. I have been a citizen of the United States for 30 years this summer. I am a native of Denmark.

I have known since I was a child 8 years old about world government and its purpose in even taking over the United States, which I wrote up in a paper that I sent to the United States Senators when I opposed Youngdahl getting the Federal judgeship.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Well, now, that is all past. Let's come to the present now.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. To the present. That is all past.

I came to Washington and had a bill introduced 3 years ago in opposition to fluoride. This is my work. In this work I have contact with people

Senator O'MAHONEY. Pardon me. That is not the issue before us. Mrs. SCHMIDT. I am speaking for the people who

Senator O'MAHONEY. You will pardon me, won't you, Mrs. Schmidt, if I try to keep this meeting on the line of its jurisdiction?

Now, it does not involve this question of fluoridation. That goes to some other committee. The Judiciary Committee has no jurisdiction over it. So I want you to talk about the question before us. Mrs. SCHMIDT. All right, honorable Senator, I intend to do so. Senator O'MAHONEY. All right; let's get to that, shall we? Mrs. SCHMIDT. But, in speaking on my own behalf, I am also speaking for the people who have similar ideas, ideals, as I have across the United States, whom I am in contact with, on this issue. That is why I brought this up.

At this time I would like to also bring us on record as commending the last speaker, and I think God sent him to Washington today. He wondered why he came. I think God sent him to help our Nation to stay free.

I would also like to, for the group I represent and myself, to go on record favoring commending, complimenting William Stephenson who here spoke as president of the Virginia League. I am very glad

to see that we are getting the young people of America into taking an interest in it.

I turned over to you this morning a prepared statement.

Senator O'MAHONEY. We have that statement. It is already in the record.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Already in the record?

Senator O'MAHONEY. In the files of the committee, I mean.
Mrs. SCHMIDT. Will it be printed in the record?

Senator O'MAHONEY. That will depend upon the bulk of the material that we have.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. It is four pages, and then a few excerpts mentioned there.

Senator O'MAHONEY. It will be received and made a part of the file.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Then in regards to desegregation

Senator O'MAHONEY. Now, let's not talk about that. That has been covered.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Yes; but I would just like to make one comment, may I, please?

Senator O'MAHONEY. Yes; surely.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. That the people I find who are for desegregation would never have a mongrel dog in their house, would only have purebred cattle and purebred horses, and I don't mind the two agreeing. I think the human race

Senator O'MAHONEY. Now, that matter is not before us here.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. No; but that is why I am opposing, one of the points why I am opposing Simon E. Sobeloff.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Well, you are opposing his nomination upon the same grounds that have just been expressed by Mr. Warr; are you not?

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Yes; and also William Stephenson.

Senator O'MAHONEY. And Mr. Stephenson, yes.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. Yes.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Then, with your written statement in the file, your point of view has been pretty well expressed; has it not? Mrs. SCHMIDT. I think so, sir.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Thank you.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. And I beg your pardon if I don't always choose my words right, but my English is what I pick up in this country, but may I say this: I was on the Republican ticket for Governor of Minnesota as an Independent in 1952, and for the last 13 years I have tried to clean up in politics, tried to make this and keep this a free nation. I took a pledge to that effect when I became a citizen.

Senator O'MAHONEY. I think that is a very noble pledge to have taken.

We are very grateful to you for your presentation.
Mrs. SCHMIDT. Thank you, sir.

Senator O'MAHONEY. The next witness will be Mr. Maxey, William E. Maxey, Jr.

Mrs. SCHMIDT. I did have immense material to prove my point, but I don't think it is necessary.

Senator O'MAHONEY. It is all covered. Thank you very much.

The name of William E. Maxey, Jr., ex-director, Defender of State Sovereignty of Individual Liberties, of Richmond, Va., is on my list here. Is he in the room?

STATEMENT OF DR. HARRISON PARKER, MINISTER OF THE PURITAN CHURCH, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Dr. PARKER. My name is the Reverend Harrison Parker. I am a minister of the Puritan Church. I dwell at 820 Connecticut Avenue, Washington.

Our church is opposed to the elevation

Senator O'MAHONEY. May I get your qualifications in the record? Dr. PARKER. What is that, sir?

Senator O'MAHONEY. We would like to get your qualifications in the record.

Dr. PARKER. Yes.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Mr. Parker, where is your church established? Dr. PARKER. We are established here in Washington.

Senator O'MAHONEY. How many members do you have?

Dr. PARKER. We have 30,000 communicants throughout the country. Senator O'MAHONEY. But in Washington?

Dr. PARKER. Very few. We are building a church here; we are just organizing here.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Who is the head of the church?

Dr. PARKER. I am.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Have you testified before this committee before?

Dr. PARKER. Yes; I did.

Senator O'MAHONEY. With respect to judicial nominations?

Dr. PARKER. It was opposing the elevation of Mr. Danaher to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Senator O'MAHONEY. Any others? Any Illinois judges?

Dr. PARKER. I opposed the nomination of Judge Harrington to the United States district court in Chicago.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Did you oppose these others generally upon the experiences that you had with the Chicago Tribune which are set forth in your letter to this committee dated March 5, 1956?

Dr. PARKER. Yes; yes.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Of course, those matters really are not relevant to the issue here.

Dr. PARKER. I am not going to refer to them. I am here to oppose the nomination of Mr. Sobeloff.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Very good.

Dr. PARKER. And I will confine myself entirely to that, and will not wander.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Thank you very much, sir.

Dr. PARKER. Our charge against

Senator O'MAHONEY. You may proceed.

Dr. PARKER. Our charge against Mr. Sobeloff is that he introduced shysterism into the Office of Solicitor General of the United States. I have here a brief over Mr. Sobeloff's name which proves that he introduced shysterism into

Senator O'MAHONEY. May I ask you to avoid the use of derogatory terms. It is not becoming for a man

Dr. PARKER. It is in the dictionary, I don't know how to describe it, it is the misconduct of a lawyer. Now, lawyers misconduct themselves, and I don't want to be disrespectful. I don't know Mr. Sobeloff

Senator O'MAHONEY. Your appearance makes it clear that you understand the use of the words.

Dr. PARKER. I understand it.

Senator O'MAHONEY. And you understand good behavior and polite address.

Dr. PARKER. Yes, sir.

Senator O'MAHONEY. You can say the most severe things in the world without using derogatory language.

Dr. PARKER. All right.

There is not here is a brief by Mr. Sobeloff of 16 pages. There is not in 13 pages of it, except an extract from the bylaws of our church, a single word of truth.

Senator O'MAHONEY. What is that brief?

Dr. PARKER. It is a brief that he filed in the Supreme Court of the United States.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Did the Supreme Court strike it?

Dr. PARKER. Sir?

Senator O'MAHONEY. Did the Supreme Court strike it from the record?

Dr. PARKER. No; I didn't ask them to. I thought it better to let them remain. I just thought it would be a good thing. I didn't expect to use it here, but it comes in very handy.

There is not a single word of truth, there is not a scintilla of evidence in the entire record to bear out Mr. Sobeloff's allegations here. Senator O'MAHONEY. What is the name of the case?

Dr. PARKER. The name of the case is the Puritan Church, the Church of America, the Puritan Church Building Fund v. the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

Now, these words in Mr. Sobeloff's brief were written in the office of Kirkland, Fleming, Green, Martin & Ellis, in Chicago, and planted in his office for his signature. He does not know, he has not a bit of evidence to back up a single allegation in that brief.

Now, we claim that a man who is that careless has no right to be on the court of appeals of the United States Government.

Senator O'MAHONEY. May I see the brief, please? What happened to the case?

Dr. PARKER. Sir?

Senator O'MAHONEY. What happened to the case?

Dr. PARKER. The Supreme Court, by reason of that brief, assessed us $50,000 in cash on a loss of $37,500. We had a loss of $37,500, and the Supreme Court confirmed that and assessed us $50,000, which we paid.

Senator O'MAHONEY. That was the decision of the Supreme Court? Dr. PARKER. Of the Supreme Court. If you want to go into that, I will go into that.

Senator O'MAHONEY. The Supreme Court is not on trial today. Dr. PARKER. No, sir. If-I will take that on when the proper timecomes. I am here on Mr. Sobeloff.

I will prove everything I have stated right now.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Well, the Supreme Court, I think, has acted in this case, and we cannot

Dr. PARKER. Oh, no. We have paid the money. We paid the money. It is O. K.

Senator O'MAHONEY (continuing). We cannot entertain any appeal from the Supreme Court today.

Dr. PARKER. No, sir. I agree with you, and I am not appealing. Senator O'MAHONEY. Very good, sir.

Dr. PARKER. I want to keep the court of appeals is the last bulwark of our liberties. The Supreme Court is the court of privilege, and when the United States court of appeals is tainted, neither life, liberty, nor property is any longer safe in the United States, and we will oppose Mr. Sobeloff's entrance into that court on the ground that he is not qualified to sit there by the reason of that brief.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Well, you made your point, Mr. Parker, and the committee is very much indebted to you for coming. You are excused, with the gratitude of the committee, sir.

Dr. PARKER. Thank you.

May I have that?

Senator O'MAHONEY. You may, indeed.

Is there any other witness? Like an auctioneer, I will say, "Is there any other witness?"

Senator BEALL. I would like to call upon Mr. Lindsay, the Assistant Attorney General, Executive Assistant Attorney General, to speak in behalf of Mr. Brownell, perhaps, in answer to the Peters case. Mr. Lindsay is here.

Mr. LINDSAY. Mr. Chairman.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Will you give the reporter your full name,. Mr. Lindsay?

STATEMENT OF JOHN V. LINDSAY, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES

Mr. LINDSAY. My name is John V. Lindsay. I am the executive assistant to the Attorney General of the United States.

Senator O'MAHONEY. How long have you held that position?
Mr. LINDSAY. A year and a half, approximately.

Senator O'MAHONEY. Good.

Mr. LINDSAY. I should like to say that the Attorney General is in Ohio, and it is regrettable that he could not be here today.

I am authorized to say on his behalf that he considers that the conduct of the Solicitor General in all matters in that high office has been in the best traditions of the law, and at all times lawyerlike in the highest standards of the legal profession.

As to the Peters case, I should like to say, also, that the action taken by the Solicitor General was with the knowledge and consent of the Attorney General; and I should like, with the chairman's permission,.