the individual rights of the American people that are being destroyed and annihilated by the so-called necessary civil-rights legislation, is something that everybody ought to be conscious of.

We are not here just as southerners, as Mr. Spruill said, and Mr. McLeod, we are here as Americans who believe in our constitutional rights.

And someone mentioned the Supreme Court and the consistency of its decisions, or the inconsistency. Mr. Celler and I discussed that very briefly in the House hearing, the consistency of the professional football and the baseball decisions. We finally came to the conclusion the only way to differentiate those decisions was to consider the size and shape of the ball. And we go back to the Supreme Court decisions on your segregation where they completely upset all precedent. And that is something that we had lived with, we had built schools based upon it, we have spent millions and millions of dollars to provide equal facilities and provide for all races a good education, good teachers drawing the same pay based on their grades, certificates they hold, good schools, good facilities, good transportation.

We do not know, as Mr. Spruill said, what South Carolina will do. We do feel that we know the thinking of the people of South Carolina, and we do not think they will accept this legislation. And those very same people who come in the form of Santa Claus to a small group, as they say, are going to take from those people all that we have given them in the past 50 years. They are going to deny them the right of a public-school education, and they are going to deny to them the right of free transportation, they are going to deny to them all of the rights that they have had.

If the people of South Carolina stand firm, their thinking is along that line, and there is no point for us, no use for us, to deny the real thinking of the people of our State.

Now, my last point is this: So many people take the position that the courts have ordered integration. I do not read the decision that way. And if the people of South Carolina and the South want segregation, if the two races want it, and I say, in South Carolina not a single child, a Negro child, has applied for admission to a single white school, and not a single white child has applied for admission to a Negro school since the Supreme Court decision in 1954. If they want to maintain segregation in the schools, then why should anyone from anywhere else want to set themselves up as the judge and say "Whether you want it or not, we are going to force it down your throat"?

Senator JOHNSTON. And a good many of our counties serve notice if anyone wants to transfer from one school district to another, to do so on or by a certain date, just before school opens.

Mr. MCNAIR. On or by a certain date. We have the procedure set up, and if they are denied we have an appeal set up for them. We have adequate procedural remedies for them. We have that with respect to the schools, we have it with respect to the right to vote.

Mr. Pope, who is a leader in our party, can tell you, we have alsoI might point out, Senator, as you are aware, one thing we do not have the right to do in South Carolina is to require everybody to vote in our primary to be a member of our party and of our thinking, where they can in other States deny them the right to vote in a primary unless they belong to the political party. But we say, we open our primaries

up. We let everybody vote in them. Other sections are not denied that privilege.

Forced integration is something that is not going to work. We cannot legislate the social habits of a people, we cannot legislate the social trends of a people. And any attempt to do so is going to bring a rebellion from those people who are involved and affected.

And it is our earnest plea that this committee, certainly this Congress, be very careful and deliberate in its consideration of this legislation, thinking not only of the political implications involved, but of the practical problems that are going to arise, the damage that is going to be caused, the ill will that is going to breed among the peoples of the South, and the rights of the American people that it is going to destroy in order to satisfy a few so-called social reformists who have alined themselves with leftwing groups to form a great conspiracy to force upon the people something they do not want.

Thank you.

Senator JOHNSTON. I notice it is 10 minute to 1, and the next witness that we have here is Mr. Thomas Pope, attorney, representing the South Carolina Bar Association.

How long would you take?

Mr. POPE. I would think about 20 minutes, Senator.

Senator JOHNSTON. We can wait until after lunch if you desire. Mr. POPE. If it suits the chairman, I would as soon go ahead now, Senator.

Senator JOHNSTON. Come around, then, and we will proceed.

Mr. POPE. If you think there is any likelihood of any other Senators being present here this afternoon, I would like to speak before some of the antagonists as well as the friendly members.

Senator JOHNSTON. I notice we have two members of the legislature here, the Honorable Joseph O. Rogers and the Honorable John West. Mr. MCNAIR. They are observing the proceedings.

Senator JOHNSTON. They have the right to testify, and we would be glad to have them do so. I just wanted to identify them for the record.

If you want to put in statements later, they may do so.

Mr. MCNAIR. Fine. We would like to have their presence noted. Senator JOHNSTON. I have one letter here from Solomon Blatt, a Member of the House. He writes me a letter stating:

On yesterday my doctor advised me that I could not make the trip to Washington to represent South Carolina at the civil-rights hearing on March 4.

In that the doctor recommended that he not come, he asked that I put this letter into the record.

Therefore, it will be put into the record as part of the testimony. (The letter referred to is as follows.)

Hon. Olin D. JOHNSTON,

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
March 1, 1957.

United States Senator from South Carolina,

Washington, D. C.

Dear OLIN. On yesterday my doctor advised me that I could not make the trip to Washington to represent South Carolina at the civil-rights hearing on March 4.

I had planned to leave here Sunday and be present for the hearings on Monday. I have not been well and have been considerably worried about myself. I am

feeling some better at the moment. It is impossible for me to get away within the next 2 weeks and I think it is a crime that the Senate committee will close these hearings without giving all of us an opportunity to appear. I know that you have done everything within your power to keep these hearings open and I commend you for the stand that you have taken.

I want you to tell the Senate committee for me that the people of South Carolina are a tolerant people and I believe that my political life is the finest example of the tolerance of South Carolinians. While I belong to a minority faith, the people of my State paid for the painting of my portrait and it now hangs in the hall of the House of Representatives. This is the finest example of the tolerant attitude of the people to all of our citizens. If these civil-rights bills pass there will be a general breaking down of law enforcement and jurors sitting in the Federal courts will not convict citizens charged with crime. There has been splendid cooperation between the law-enforcement officers of South Carolina and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The passage of these bills will mean that the State law-enforcement officers will no longer cooperate with the Federal officers. Federal courts will stand in bad repute and our people will show their resentment toward all Federal officials by failing to cooperate with any of them.

There is no need for the passage of these unconstitutional bills. Our people are law-abiding citizens and we do not need this type of legislation. Let alone, South Carolinians will attend to the needs of all of our citizens and we do not need any outside help. I hope that you will get enough help to defeat these bills. I regret my inability to appear and I want you to know that you have the support of all of us in your efforts to defeat this legislation. Keep up the good work and with kindest regards.

Sincerely

SOLOMAN BLATT, Speaker.

Mr. MCNAIR. He requested that we also express his regret for not being able to appear because of his health, and he would have liked very much to have the privilege of appearing, sir.

Senator JOHNSTON. We will recess now and come back at 2:30. (Whereupon, at 12:50 p. m., the hearing was recessed until 2:30 p. m., of the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Senator JOHNSTON. The committee will come to order.

I believe we have two witnesses here who are members of the house, Joseph O. Rogers, Jr., and Mr. John West.

Both of them are members of the legislature in South Carolina and I would like to have one of you or both of you come around and testify.

What about you, Mr. West?

STATEMENT OF JOHN WEST, MEMBER OF THE STATE SENATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Mr. WEST. I am John West, a member of the State senate from South Carolina.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity of making a few extemporaneous remarks to the committee. I do not feel that I can add any substantial argument to the very able and eloquent statements which have been made by my friends and colleagues this morning and which I feel sure the chairman and the attending committee member this morning heartily concur in. I do, simply by the weight of numbers or by the bulk that I can add, express my deep concern about the continued encroachment through the medium of Federal legislation upon the rights of the States, and the effect that it is having upon the attitudes of the people of the State.

In the first place, the race relations between white and colored have deteriorated as much since May 17, 1954, as the good that had been accomplished over the preceding half century.

Nowadays there is a feeling of distrust, a feeling of suspicion, where before there was a feeling of friendliness. I feel that that atmosphere was created by the unwarranted decision or by the unjustified decision which this legislation proposed to continue to implement.

Secondly, I as a person vitally concerned and extremely interested in the education of our youth am afraid that one of the announced purposes of this legislation being to enforce the segregation decision by the power of injunction will result in the closing of the public schools if this weapon is given to the Attorney General and he insists. upon using it, as some of the proponents of its announce.

It will mean the end of the public-school system in my State. I think I can say safely that if this legislation passes and is used to end segregation in the public schools of South Carolina, the general assembly will, by unanimous vote, close those public schools. That would be a tragedy, Mr. Chairman, which would have its greatest destructive effects upon our succeeding generation, and from which it would take many, many years, and possibly generations, to recover. The third and final point that I might briefly make is that in the passage of this legislation it is the initial step in the destruction of basic civil liberties which we have heretofore held and cherished and fought for. I see this as the initial step in the breakdown of our jury system because, Mr. Chairman, as has been so ably pointed out here, particularly and as I say concurred in by the distinguished Senator from North Carolina whom I am glad to see has joined us, this Government of law by injunction is the first step in the destruction of the jury trial.

It will soon become apparent to persons in the Federal court that juries will not convict if violations of law such as these are tried.

Senator ERVIN. I might also add that in any case the jury will not convict unless they are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of the truth of the charge against the defendant.

Mr. WEST. That is right.

Senator ERVIN. And some prosecuting attorneys like to get convictions regardless of whether the evidence is sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

Mr. WEST. Unfortunately many prosecuting attorneys feel it is their duty to get a conviction, once a case is brought into court, and this type of legislation will give rise to charges based on hearsay, without the right of being confronted by the accuser.

Before long, if the Federal juries refuse to convict in cases covered by this type of statute, then there will be a proposal to extend and to further eliminate the right of trial by jury.

I think, Mr. Chairman, I can safely say that if there are any cases which this legislation might be designed to cure, that the cure is much worse than the disease.

Thank you, sir.

Senator ERVIN. Can you think of any valid reason why we should abolish jury trials in cases of this character and not abolish them in all cases?

Mr. WEST. No, sir, and as I say, Senator, I believe that this is the initial step, and before long, if this is allowed to become law, then the jury trials will continue to be whittled away until we have nothing left. We will have the star chamber proceedings that our ancestors successfully threw off in establishing the basic liberties of our Constitution.

Senator JOHNSTON. It happens that I am a member of the Internal Security Subcommittee and we have been investigating and we find now that we have people in this Nation of ours that want to overthrow our Government.

Do you think they should be treated better than people in this category?

Mr. WEST. No, sir, but this is class legislation designed primarily at the South, and there is no basic need for it. I might say, Mr. Chairman, in my county I have never seen nor heard of any complaint of any person being denied the right to register or vote on account of race, color, or anything of that nature.

Senator JOHNSTON. I agree with the Senator from North Carolina, too, that in some cases the district attorneys are overanxious to convict everybody that comes into court.

Well, do I remember back before the Republicans came in, my junior law partner happened to be the district attorney. The first court that he held he called me immediately and said, "You know, I held court today and we convicted everybody that came in the court this week."

I told him I did not want to hear him make any such statement in the future. I did not want him to get into the category where he thought everybody ought to be convicted who came into the courtroom. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen.

Senator JOHNSTON. By the way, we have Senator Hruska here with us this afternoon. Glad to have you here.

Senator HRUSKA. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH O. ROGERS, JR., MEMBER, STATE
LEGISLATURE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I am J. O. Rogers, member of the legislature from South Carolina.

As my friend, John West, said, we did not come here prepared to make a statement today, but we feel very strongly about the matter, and we are delighted to add our wee small voice for whatever weight it may carry to what has already been said here today.

One of the gentlemen at the luncheon table today commented that perhaps all of the wisdom of mankind could be found in the study of history, and I think that that is eminently true, and I wondered as just as a brief general observation on this subject that we are talking about here today if we might not look at some of the history of our country.

In the early days, a man's personal integrity as well as his basic honesty and his ability, were considered the standards by which he attained or got some sort of recognition.

In those days I am happy and proud, as I know you are, that many men from the South attained positions of trust and honor in our Government. It has been a cause of some concern to me, as I am

89777-57- 46