racism in one part of our country and threatened the welfare and security of our country and the world. Communism is far more ruthless, more cunning, more opportunistic, more successful than fascism ever was. And as racism was the chief weapon of the Nazi. so it may well be for the Communists. More than a decade ago, the President's Committee on Civil Rights issued a most perceptive report. What it gave at that time as "the international reason" for securing meaningful civil rights in the United States is worth repeating now, because, while true then, it is even more applicable today with the passage of 12 years in which the Communist challenge has become more formidable and more menacing. "THE INTERNATIONAL REASON "Our position in the postwar world is so vital to the future that our smallest actions have far-reaching effects. We have come to know that our own security in a highly interdependent world is inextricably tied to the security and well-being of all people and all countries. Our foreign policy is designed to make the United States an enormous, positive influence for peace and progress through out the world. We have tried to let nothing, not even extreme political differences between ourselves and foreign nations, stand in the way of this goal. But our domestic civil-rights shortcomings are a serious obstacle. "In a letter to the Fair Employment Practice Committee on May 8, 1946, the Honorable Dean Acheson, then Acting Secretary of State, stated that: ""***The existence of discrimination against minority groups in this country has an adverse effect upon our relations with other countries. We are reminded over and over by some foreign newspapers and spokesmen that our treatment of various minorities leaves much to be desired. While sometimes these pronouncements are exaggerated and unjustified, they all too frequently point with accuracy to some form of discrimination because of race, creed, color, or national origin. Frequently we find it next to impossible to formulate a satisfactory answer to our critics in other countries; the gap between the things we stand for in principle and the facts of a particular situation may be too wide to be bridged. An atmosphere of suspicion and resentment in a country over the way a minority is being treated in the United States is a formidable obstacle to the development of mutual understanding and trust between the two countries. We will have better international relations when these reasons for suspicion and resentment have been removed. "I think it is quite obvious * * * that the existence of discriminations against minority groups in the United States is a handicap in our relations with other countries. The Department of State, therefore, has good reason to hope for the continued and increased effectiveness of public and private efforts to do away with these discriminations.' "The people of the United States stem from many lands. Other nations and their citizens are naturally intrigued by what has happened to their American 'relatives.' Discrimination against, or mistreatment of, any racial, religious, or national group in the United States is not only seen as our internal problem. The dignity of a country, a continent, or even a major portion of the world's population, may be outraged by it. A relatively few individuals here may be identified with millions of people elsewhere, and the way in which they are treated may have worldwide repercussions. We have fewer than half a million American Indians; there are 30 million more in the Western Hemisphere. Our Mexican American and Hispano groups are not large; millions in Central and South America consider them kin. We number our citizens of oriental descent in the hundreds of thousands; their counterparts overseas are numbered in hundreds of millions. Throughout the Pacific, Latin America, Africa, the Near, Middle, and Far East, the treatment which our Negroes receive is taken as a reflection of our attitudes toward all dark-skinned peoples. "In the recent war, citizens of a dozen European nations were happy to meet Smiths, Cartiers, O'Haras, Schultzes, Di Salvos, Cohens, and Sklodowskas and all the others in our armies. Each nation could share in our victories because its 'sons' had helped win them. How much of this good feeling was dissipated when they found virulent prejudice among some of our troops is impossible to say. "We cannot escape the fact that our civil rights record has been an issue in world politics. The world's press and radio are full of it. This committee has seen a multitude of samples. We and our friends have been, and are, stressing our achievements. Those with competing philosophies have stressed— and are shamelessly distorting-our shortcomings. They have not only tried to create hostility toward us among specific nations, races, and religious groups. They have tried to prove our democracy an empty fraud, and our Nation a consistent oppressor of underprivileged people. This may seem ludicrous to Americans, but it is sufficiently important to worry our friends. The following United Press dispatch from London proves that (Washington Post, May 25, 1947): ''Although the Foreign Office reserved comment on recent lynch activities in the Carolinas, British diplomatic circles said privately today that they have played into the hands of Communist propagandists in Europe *** 66 "Diplomatic circles said the two incidents of mob violence would provide excellent propaganda ammunition for Communist agents who have been decrying America's brand of "freedom" and "democracy." "News of the North Carolina kidnaping was prominently displayed by London papers * * *'. "The international reason for acting to secure our civil rights now is not to win the approval of our totalitarian critics. We would not expect it if our record were spotless; to them our civil rights record is only a convenient weapon with which to attack us. Certainly we would like to deprive them of that weapon. But we are more concerned with the good opinion of the peoples of the world. Our achievements in building and maintaining a state dedicated to the fundamentals of freedom have already served as a guide for those seeking the best road from chaos to liberty and prosperity. But it is not indelibly written that democracy will encompass the world. We are convinced that our way of life-the free way of life-holds a promise of hope for all people. We have what is perhaps the greatest responsibility ever placed upon a people to keep this promise alive. Only still greater achievements will do it. "The United States is not so strong, the final triumph of the democratic ideal is not so inevitable, that we can ignore what the world thinks of our record." Respectfully submitted. MIKE M. MASAOKA, Washington Representative, Japanese American Citizens League. Mr. SLAYMAN. Mr. Chairman, there is a Judiciary Committee meeting scheduled for Monday morning; our next hearing is 2:30 p.m., in room 457, in the Old Senate Office Building, Monday, May 18. Senator ERVIN. All right. We will recess until that time. (Whereupon, at 1:15 p.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 2:30 p.m. Monday, May 18, 1959.) CIVIL RIGHTS-1959 MONDAY, MAY 18, 1959 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D.U. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 2:30 p.m., in room 457, Senate Office Building, Senator Sam J. Érvin, Jr., acting chairman, presiding. Present: Senator Ervin. Also present: Charles H. Slayman, Jr., chief counsel and staff director. Senator ERVIN. The subcommittee will come to order. The chairman of this subcommittee, Senator Hennings, is chairman of the Rules Committee and also chairman of another subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, and he is detained elsewhere on other matters today. For that reason I am presiding at his request. Are there any announcements? Mr. SLAYMAN We may have more than one witness, but the one witness I have scheduled is John Bradley Minnick. Senator ERVIN. Yes; he is present. Mr. Minnick, if you will present yourself at the table and take a seat, you may proceed in testifying in your own way. If you have a written statement you may use the statement, or if you prefer to make a statement orally, or partly in writing or partly orally, you can just use your own method and discretion as to how you present your testimony.. The committee is highly pleased to have you present to express your views on these bills. STATEMENT OF JOHN BRADLEY MINNICK, ARLINGTON, VA. Mr. MINNICK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights. I am John Bradley Minnick, of Arlington, Va., I have filed the written statement of my testimony. I propose to summarize briefly that testimony. Senator IRVIN. You may stand or sit. Mr. MINNICK. If it please the committee, because of the religious issue involved, I should like to open with a prayer. Let us pray. Send, we beseech Thee, Almighty God, Thy Holy Spirit into our hearts that He may direct and rule us according to Thy will; comfort us in all afflictions, defend us from all error and lead us into all truth, through Jesus Christ, our Lord, who with Thee and the same Holy Spirit liveth and reigneth one God, world without end, Amen. Heavenly Father, Almighty and ever-living God who, in Thy infinite wisdom and out of Thy divine providence, hast given us the power of self-control, grant, we pray Thee, that we may keep our hearts and minds-that is to say our thoughts and thinking-centered on Thee, that we may know and do Thy will and ever more worthily magnify Thy glorious name through the love and self-sacrifice of Thine only begotten Son, our Lord, who, with Thee and the Holy Ghost together, is worshiped and glorified, one God, world without end, Amen. Because of the moral issue involved, I should like to say a few words about the Code of Ethics for the Government Service which was agreed to by the Senate on July 11, 1958. Any person in Government service should Put loyalty to the highest principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government Department. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion. Expose corruption wherever discovered. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust. I should like to put this in evidence with my remarks. Senator IRVIN. Give it to the reporter. It will be inserted at this point in the record. (The full Code of Ethics for Government Service follows:) To All National Office Employees: U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, The Congress of the United States has established "a charter of conduct against which those in public service may measure their own actions and upon which they may be judged by those whom they serve." The quotation is from the committee report which brought the charter of conduct to the attention of the Senate. The charter, entitled "Code of Ethics for Government Service," was stated in House Concurrent Resolution 175 agreed to on July 11, 1958. This code has been reproduced on the back of this page. It is expected that this code will be included in a rules of conduct section in the Internal Revenue Manual which is now in preparation. You should make this memorandum a part of your personal file. GERALD H. FINN, Chief, National Office Branch, Personnel Division. CODE OF ETHICS FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICE Any Person In Government Service Should: Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion. Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept, for himself or his family, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties. Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty. |