down as unconstitutional the State laws and city ordinances requiring segregation of races in public transportation, golf courses, swimming pools, parks, and beaches and other action taken by the Federal Government to force integration of the races in public schools, race relations have deteriorated to a sad state. Trust has been replaced with distrust and understanding with suspicion. The relations between the races in Alabama today are worse than at any other time in my lifetime. The breach between the races is widening every day and there no longer is any common ground upon which the leaders of the races can meet and work out their difficulties.

This unhappy state of affairs has been brought about by the questionable decisions of the Federal courts and other actions of the Federal Government. The Federal Government obviously encourages the activities of race agitators and such organizations as the NAACP, who have done nothing for the Negro in the South, but, in fact, have seriously damaged his cause. Good race relations can be brought about only by local people working together in a spirit of cooperation and good will without outside interference and agitation. The customs, mores, and traditions of the people cannot be swept away overnight by legislation, court decrees, and Federal troops. The instruments to force integration of the races upon us, which are embodied in these so-called civil rights bills pending now in Congress, will be as ineffectual as trying to sweep the ocean back with a broom. The people will not do that which their conscience tells them not to do. In the final analysis that which the overwhelming majority of the people want will be the law of the land.

No one can question the fact that the people of the South have dealt with the race problem with more patience and tolerance and good will than any other people on earth who have had a similar problem. The people of the South should be commended for the manner in which they have handled this problem. We should not be condemned by those who attempt to sit in judgment over us who know nothing of our problems and who have far more serious race problems in their own localities which they have not attempted to solve. I do not feel qualified to sit in judgment over the citizens of the State of New York or Illinois. They have far greater race problems, in my own opinion, than we do in Alabama. I feel that they are better qualified to handle their own affairs without interference by me.

If the Federal Government continues its present course of trying to force integration of the races in public schools in Alabama and in other States of the South, the relations between the races will grow worse and our public school system will be destroyed. The citizens of my State will not tolerate or support an integrated school system. If the Federal Government attempts to integrate our schools by force, we will have chaos, disorder, possible violence, and we will be forced to close our schools. If such occurs it will be a calamity. Our Nation will lose in the long run because our children will suffer the consequences. The people of Alabama will turn to private schools. In fact, moves are underway already to do so, and if such occurs the Negro will find himself in a very bad position. The overwhelming majority of the Negro citizens are opposed to the integration of the public schools in our State, and they realize better than anyone else that their schools will be destroyed if the Federal Government continues to press for integration. Most white citizens could afford a private education, but few Negroes could do so. In spite of this threat of destruction of our schools, we are going ahead in Alabama and embarking upon a new and progressive school program for the coming 4 years, trusting that our national leaders will see the error of their ways before it is too late, and not destroy our school system. However, I want to make this clear: The citizens of Alabama will scrap their public school system rather than submit to integration of the

races.

The operation of public schools is purely a local function. The Federal Government has no authority to interfere with the State and local governments in the operation of their public schools. Our schools are financed chiefly by State and local funds, and no school can survive and carry out its proper function of giving the students the best education possible without the support and good will of the citizens in the community where the school is situated. The proposals set forth in H.R. 3147 and S. 810 constitute an unwarranted interference by the Federal Government in the domestic affairs of the States. Such interference can only lead to disorder, chaos, distrust, and disintegration of the school systems. This is just another example of the unlawful encroachment of the Federal Government into a field reserved exclusively to the States.

Even though these bills are aimed at the South today, every person in the United States should be worried and concerned, for there is no end to these types of force measures once the barrier is let down. The proponents of these bills are today trying to ram integration of the races down the throats of the southern people, but tomorrow they will be trying to use the same devices to ram something else down the throats of citizens of other sections of the Nation. When the Federal Government arrogates unto itself powers such as are proposed in these bills and attempts to take away the right of the citizens to manage their own local schools, every individual in the Nation suffers and loses a little more of his freedom.

No school could possibly operate and benefit the students with such interference as is proposed in S. 810, H.R. 3147 and related bills. H.R. 3147 and S. 810 attempt to give the U.S. Attorney General power to force integration of the races in the public schools through the courts. If you pass this bill and the Attorney General attempts to carry out its provisions, public education in Alabama will come to an end. You will destroy our public schools. You must bear the responsibility. The power which H.R. 3147 and S. 810 attempt to give the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare constitutes an unwarranted meddling in our domestic affairs. We do not want or need his help in operating our schools. The bill seems to be an attempt to pay us to integrate. We cannot be bought. There is not enough money in the world to get us to integrate our public schools. Surely the Federal Government does not intend to operate and finance our schools. It has no authority to do so, and in any case such a plan would result in utter failure.

The constitutionality of section VI of said bills which authorizes the U.S. Attorney General to institute legal action to vindicate rights of individuals or legal action against individuals to redess alleged wrongs is questionable. Similar provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 were struck down as unconstitutional by a Federal court in Georgia last week. In any case, this attempt to give the Attorney General such broad and sweeping powers is contrary to our laws and borders on "socialized law." This provision attempts to put the Attorney General in the position of practicing law on behalf of individuals and is another example of the encroachment of the Federal Government onto the rights of the citizens.

It is fundamental in our law that every individual who wishes to accuse his neighbor must stand up and make his accusations publicly. Every accused has a right to be confronted by his accuser. One reason for this is that a person is

less likely to bring false or malicious charges against another if he must make his charges openly and in the eyes of the public; however, this bill is designed to make it possible for individuals to bring their charges and not disclose their identity and not have to account to the community for their conduct. Such a law would not be in the best interest of the people of this Nation and is contrary to the principles of American jurisprudence. It smells of a secret police force where the citizens inform on each other to the Government and where the citizen accused may never know who his accusers are nor even what he has been accused of. This portion of the act comes very close to creating a gestapo system.

I am opposed to the passage of S. 810, H.R. 3147, H.R. 3148, H.R. 4457, S. 955, and other similar and related bills, and I urge this committee not to give these measures favorable consideration.

I am absolutely opposed to the extension of the life of the Civil Rights Commission created under the Civil Rights Act of 1957 or the establishment of any new Civil Rights Commission. S. 960, S. 435, and H.R. 4457 provide for the extension of the life of the Civil Rights Commission. The recent actions of the Civil Rights Commission seriously damaged race relations in the South and further injured the already strained relations between the Federal and State Governments. The Commission failed to do anything constructive, but, on the contrary, further widened the breach between the races. The action of the Commission in Montgomery, Ala., was reprehensible. It harassed and intimidated our State and local officials. It attempted to sit in judgment over the manner in which our officials conducted their offices. It interfered with the operation of our courts and our judicial officers. The actions of the Commission have made it difficult to get people to want to serve in public office. In fact, due to the actions of the Commission we do not have a board of registrars in one county and are finding it difficult to get responsible people to want to serve on this board and on boards in other counties.

The Commission attempted to arrogate unto itself powers which it did not and could not constitutionally possess. It claimed to be a "roving grand jury” with the powers of a common law grand jury-a position absolutely untenable. We all know that the grand juries came from the English common law and belonged to the people. Historically the grand jury has served two purposes— first, to investigate and indiet for crimes, and second, to protect the people from tyrannical actions of the government. The Commission attempted to go on "fishing expeditions" in the records of judicial officers, and it subpenad our State officials to hearings in Montgomery, Ala., and put them on the witness stand under spotlights and before batteries of nationwide television cameras. No room or seats was provided in the hearing room for counsel of the public officials and the Commission would not even allow attorneys for the officials to make objections. In effect, the State officials were placed on trial and publicly harassed and intimidated. The Commission attempted to go far beyond its fact-finding powers, and the hearings were conducted in a "circus-like" arena, and no semblance of due process was accorded our State officials.

I want to make it clear that our officials have done nothing wrong and have carried out their duties in a legal and proper manner. I know this to be a fact. They have treated both white and Negro equally, fairly, and impartially. They have nothing to hide. They resented the unwarranted and unlawful actions of the Civil Rights Commission. They felt, as I felt, that we could not as citizens of this country sworn to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this Nation, stand idly by and allow the Civil Rights Commission to trample on our rights and attempt to exercise power not granted to it by the Constitution or any law.

I wish to point out that members of the board of registrars in Alabama are judicial officers and constitute a part of the judicial branch of the government. The attempt on the part of the Civil Rights Commission, an agency of the executive branch of the Government, to seize the voting registration records and interfere with these judicial officers was an unconstitutional encroachment by the executive branch on the judicial branch. Under the laws of Alabama, as in most States, if a person is refused the right to register to vote by the board of registrars upon proper application, he can appeal to the circuit or district court, where he will receive a trial. In Alabama he can appeal within 30 days and is entitled to a jury trial. If he loses in circuit court he can appeal to the State supreme court. If he loses there, he can appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. In all cases the rights of the individual are protected, and through the courts, and that is as it should be. I know of only one such case during the last 5 years in the whole State of Alabama where a person has appealed the decision of a board of registrars and that was a white person. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that class actions cannot be brought to vindicate voting rights and that each individual case must stand on its own facts.

In view of these decisions, the purpose of the civil rights legislation becomes obvious. It is to use the injunctive device to force the boards of registrars to register large groups of Negroes whether they are qualified or not. This use of the injunction to force registration of Negroes is designed o get around the prohibition of class actions in voting cases. Congress and the Federal Government is trying to do in this manner what the courts have held cannot be done. This action on the part of the Federal Government in interfering with our registration machinery is nothing more than an indirect attempt to force integration of the races upon us. In bringing actions to force county boards of registrars to place the names of Negroes on the voting lists, the U.S. Attorney General is attempting to substitute his judgment for that of our State officials charged with the duty of passing on the registration of voters.

If the Federal Government continues its present course, a breakdown in our whole election machinery might result. The actions of the Federal Government in this field are only creating a feeling of bitterness and hostility between the State and Federal Governments. I can see no useful purpose to be served by the continuance of the Civil Rights Commission, and I strongly urge the committee not to give favorable consideration to the extension of the life of the Commission.

I am strongly opposed to the passage of the pending measure designed to prohibit any opposition to Federal court decrees pertaining to school integration. Adequate laws are now on the books for courts to enforce their decrees. It is obvious that these measures are aimed at ramming integration down our throats and gagging us so that we go to jail if we raise our voices in protest. I doubt

the constitutionality of these bills, and if anyone thinks that such measures would bring about integration of the schools of Alabama, they are sadly mistaken. It seems strange to me that anyone would advocate such a measure and not include prohibitions against obstruction of all types of court decrees, including labor decrees. The fact that these measures are restricted just to integration decrees shows that it is punitive legislation, political in nature, malicious and aimed at destroying the customs and traditions of the people of the South. The manner in which the bills are drawn shows that it is just another crude attempt to use the South as a whipping post for political reasons.

Alabama, as well as all States, has strong laws punishing persons convicted of willful destruction of public and private property. Any person apprehended for committing such an offense in Alabama will be prosecuted and punished to the full extent of the law. There is no necessity for additional Federal laws in this area. It should always be remembered that law enforcement is a local problem and is largely a matter of local responsibility. We are carrying out our duty in reference to enforcing the law and we do not need any more Federal interference.

Under Alabama law, any person who willfully sets off or explodes dynamite or other explosives in, under, or near any public or private building which is inhabited or occupied by another person shall, on conviction, be punished at the discretion of the jury by death or imprisonment in the penitentiary for not less than 10 years (title 14, sec. 123, Code of Alabama, 140). If the public or private building is not occupied by another person, upon conviction the accused would be subject to imprisonment in the penitentiary for not less than 2 years nor more than 10 years. These laws are adequate to protect the lives and property of the citizens in this State, and I assure you they will be strictly enforced. Title 18, section 1073 U.S.C.A. as amended April 6, 1956, chapter 177, section 1, 70th Statutes at Large, page 100, provides as follows:

"1073. Flight to avoid prosecution or giving testimony. Whoever moves or travels in interstate or foreign commerce with intent either (1) to avoid prosecution, or custody or confinement after conviction, under the laws of the place from which he flees, for murder, kidnaping, burglary, robbery, mayhem, rape, assault with a dangerous weapon, arson punishable as a felony, or extortion accompanied by threats of violence, or attempts to commit any of the foregoing offenses as they are defined either at common law or by the laws of the place from which the fugitive flees, or (2) to avoid giving testimony in any criminal proceedings in such place in which the commission of an offense punishable by imprisonment in a penitentiary is charged, shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

"Violations of this section may be prosecuted only in the Federal judicial district in which the original crime was alleged to have been committed or in which the person was held in custody or confinement. As amended April 6, 1956, chapter 177, section 1, 70th Statutes at Large, page 100."

This statute has proven very helpful to us in apprehending felons who commit crimes in one State and flee to another to avoid prosecution. This statute enables the FBI to enter a case when the felon has fled from the State where the crime was committed and assist in apprehending the felon, who is usually returned to the State where the crime was committed for prosecution.

There is pending at the present time before the Committee on the Judiciary in the Senate, bill S. 124, which is designed to amend title 18, section 1073, supra, so as to include within said section crimes involving the "willful destruction or damaging of any building or structure." I do not know what the attitude of the U.S. Department of Justice will be toward this amendment; however, I feel that S. 124 should be given favorable consideration. Such an amendment would be helpful to us in bringing persons to trial in the State courts who might unlawfully destroy or damage public or private buildings and flee from the State to avoid prosecution. Such an amendment will enable the FBI to assist us in tracking down the guilty parties and returning them to the State for prosecution.

In conclusion, I wish to state that I do not think that the aforementioned so-called civil rights bills are in the interest of the citizens of this Nation. They will certainly do nothing to better the lot of the Negro citizens in the South. They are not in the interest of national unity or solidarity. They are not in the interest of eliminating crime. They will bring further chaos and disorder and possible violence to the South. They will destroy our public school system. The brief history of the operations of the Civil Rights Commission in the South has proven that it has utterly failed.

I urge that these so-called civil rights measures be given unfavorable consideration by your committee.

In 1957 I testified before the House Judiciary Committee in opposition to the so-called civil rights bills pending at that time and many of them were similar to the bills before us today, and I stated at that time:

"It is my opinion that if these so-called civil rights bills are passed and the Attorney General of the United States proceeds to enforce them in the terms that they are written he will meet with failure. There will be considerable discord and unrest. We will have a reluctance on the part of the State, municipal, and county officials to want to serve in office if all of their actions are reviewed by the Attorney General of the United States and by the Federal district courts. I doubt the wisdom of giving the Attorney General of the United States and the district courts this tremendous supervisory power over our State and county officials."

What I had to say then in reference to the creation of a Civil Rights Commission came to pass. I reiterate and reaffirm that statement again today. I do not claim to be a prophet; however, I do feel that I know the feelings of the overwhelming majority of the people of my State, and I have tried today to convey to you their feelings and the facts as I believe them to exist. I believe that it is my duty to speak to you truthfully and frankly and that I have done to the best of my ability.

Thank you.

Mr. SLAYMAN. Mr. George Hunton, executive secretary of the National Catholic Interracial Council.

STATEMENT OF GEORGE K. HUNTON, SECRETARY, CATHOLIC INTERRACIAL COUNCIL

Mr. HUNTON. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am George K. Hunton, secretary of the Catholic Interracial Council and editor of its monthly magazine, the Interracial Review.

I am also a member of the board of directors of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. At this time I would like to express my gratitude for this opportunity to express my views on the civil rights bills now under consideration.

As a bit of background I would say that for more than 25 years I have been interested in intergroup relations and the cause of interracial justice. I am a member of the New York bar, and for 3 years I was an attorney with the Legal Aid Society where I acquired an understanding of the problems confronting minority groups in American life.

In 1934 I was one of the founders of the Catholic Interracial Council in New York which was organized to combat prejudice and discrimination and dedicated to work for equal social justice for all, regardless of race, and to promote better understanding between white and Negro Americans.

Today we have 35 Catholic Interracial Councils in different parts of the country. Eight of these are located in the South and border States.

I am glad to state that all of our interracial councils are working to promote desegregation in education. We have been very much encouraged to observe that both the Catholic press as a whole and leading Catholic organizations and committees, such as the National Council of Catholic Men and the National Council of Catholic Women, have taken forthright positions in favor of desegregation in education.