Senator ELLENDER. Do you know of any group in Illinois wherein the Catholics were predominant and they refused to employ Protestants? Father CARDINAL. No; I don't. Of course, in our private schools, where we have our own faculties, we do employ a Protestant at times, but the general pattern is to employ Catholics. Senator ELLENDER. What kind is that private school? Father CARDINAL. Our own parochial schools, for instance. Senator ELLENDER. How many such schools do you have in Illinois? Father CARDINAL. You mean private Catholic schools? Senator ELLENDER. Yes. Father CARDINAL. Four hundred and fifty. Senator ELLENDER. Do you know of any who employ a Protestant to teach? Father CARDINAL. Yes; large numbers. Senator ELLENDER. To what extent? Father CARDINAL. I was dean of the Catholic College in Illinois and I remember one time we had in the school of commerce four out of five people who were Protestants, and one was a Mormon. Senator ELLENDER. Out of how many? Father CARDINAL. Four out of five. It happened to be in a field. where there wasn't opportunity for a philosophy of life to be presented. Senator ELLENDER. Now of the cases that you mentioned, will you tell us something about the cases where employers who were engaged in manufacturing turned down applicants because of their religion? Father CARDINAL. Well, it is quite well known in Chicago that on State Street, employers are very, very slow to hire colored people. That is probably the great outstanding prejudice in the city, the State Street merchants who refuse to hire colored people as clerks. Senator ELLENDER. Did you interrogate them? Father CARDINAL. You mean the employers? Senator ELLENDER. Yes. Father CARDINAL. No; I did not. Senator ELLENDER. You simply heard. Was that in department stores? Father CARDINAL. Yes. Many of these people came to our organization because they know what we represent so that we would be aware of this discrimination. Senator DONNELL. That is, they know you represent a view favorable to the abolition of discrimination to which you refer. Father CARDINAL. Yes. Senator ELLENDER. Did you have occasion to investigate the attitude of employers in the manufacturing line wherein discrimination took place not only as to religion, but as to color, creed, and so forth? Father CARDINAL. I don't recall from memory any such discrimination in manufacturing. This was mostly retail. Senator ELLENDER. Well, the interviews with the employers had to do with the religious aspect and Father CARDINAL. And racial aspect. I would say on State Street, the racial issue was more predominant than the religious isue. Senator ELLENDER. That is all the questions I have, Senator. Senator DONNELL. Have you any questions, Senator? Senator SMITH. No, sir. Senator DONNELL. Thank you very much, Father, for your testi mony. Our next witness is Mr. A. Philip Randolph, cochairman, National Council for a Permanent FEPC. Mr. Randolph, will you please state your full name, your address, your present occupation, and something of your background, particularly bearing on the matter of social studies and your knowledge of the problems relating to fair employment? (Father Cardinal submitted the following brief:) STATEMENT OF BISHOP BERNARD SHEIL, AUXILIARY OF CHICAGO The present debate around the question of fair employment practices has been unfortunately and probably deliberately confused. The issues underlying this essential legislation are far clearer than many of its opponents would have us believe. The issue is simply one of economic rights. Such legislation merely guarantees that when men seek a job, or deserve higher pay, or merit promotion, their applications will be judged solely on qualifications, not on the basis of race, color, or national origin. It is false to speak of such legislation as interference in business; it is the Government's business to eliminate injustice in any field at any time. A fair employment practice law is an attempt to make the equality of man more than a phrase in the Declaration of Independence. It would give legal recognition to that God-given dignity which every human being possesses. If we are truly Christian we cannot preach one thing and practice another. If we are truly democratic we cannot speak of "equality" and then deny it to millions of our fellow citizens. We constantly and proudly repeat that all men are created equal, with equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But, no matter how often we pronounce our devotion to these ideals, they will mean little unless we implement them by effective action so that they will be fruitful realities for everyone in every sphere. The people who will benefit by fair employment practices plead only for their rights as American citizens. They ask only for the opportunity to better themselves economically on the basis of ability rather than on the color of their skin or the form of their worship. America is still a long way from giving justice to countless Americans. This law will be an important and long-delayed step in guaranteeing justice in the economic sphere. No one can reasonably oppose this. In expressing my opinions concerning the fair employment practices legislation, I am representing the position of my church. The Roman Catholic Church in the United States, through its official body, the National Catholic Welfare Conference, has spoken unequivocally in favor of fair employment practices legislation. In July 1946 the social action department of the National Catholic Welfare Conference issued a statement which reads in part: "Christian moral teaching requires every employer to maintain and enforce nondiscriminatory policies in hiring, ungrading, and discharge. In addition, it requires each employer not only to cease opposition to the enactment of Federal and State FEPC laws, but to use his influence in his association and with his fellow employers to secure the passage and assist in the enforcement of such statutes." The first national director of FEPC is today a bishop of the Roman Catholic Church. I am proud of the fact that my fellow members of the Catholic hierarchy are outspokenly active on behalf of fair employment practices legislation. In view of the unmistakable Catholic support for such legislation the charge of Communist inspiration is ridiculous. As a bishop of the Catholic Church, my prime concern is leading men to God. We all know only too well how difficult it is to live in accord with the voice of conscience. The church knows very well that it is difficult at best to preach justice and charity and purity to men who are subjected to an endless round of frustrations. The path of eternal salvation is not easy; but how much more difficult is the way of those disenfranchised citizens whose struggle for salvation must be made against almost insuperable obstacles? As a member of a minority group, I have come face to face with the ugly specter of bigotry and discrimination. Over the course of years, the Catholic youth organization has received innumerable reports from Catholics and others of job discrimination based solely on the fact that the applicant belonged to a certain religion, race, or national group. Such economical discrimination is immoral; it is clearly sinful. How long are we expected to sit by while these children of God find their paths blocked at every point by the forces of bigotry and discrimination? We Americans cannot afford discrimination of any kind. There is no place for it in our way of life. And there is little time for legal disputes, when rampant injustice makes a mockery of the purpose of our Government: "To promote the general welfare." And, most certainly, there is no place in these august halls for the petty princes of privilege, the sleazy hirelings of unscrupulous pressure groups who by their threats and promises attempt to influence the votes of our legislators against fair-employment laws. This despicable crowd with all its loathsome baggage should, like the money changers in the temple, be driven from your midst. It is the solemn duty of our legislators to consider first the true issues involved in fair-employment practices. In so doing, each of them will realize that the human issues, the denial of full citizenship to millions of our people, far outweigh the selfish interests of pressure groups. I hope this bill will become law with the greatest possible speed. STATEMENT OF A. PHILIP RANDOLPH, COCHAIRMAN, NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR A PERMANENT FEPC, WASHINGTON, D. C. Mr. RANDOLPH. I am A. Philip Randolph, cochairman of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC and international president of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters. I was a member of the mayor's committee under the administration of Mayor LaGuardia, a committee for the purpose of investigating social and racial conditions in New York. That was in his first term, and I have devoted considerable time to the study of general social and racial problems. Senator DONNELL. What is the National Council for a Permanent FEPC? Mr. RANDOLPH. The National Council for a Permanent FEPC is a group of cooperating organizations that are committed to the plan. to secure the enactment of fair employment practice legislation and specifically the bills that are now before the Senate and the House. Senator DONNELL. How many such cooperating organizations constitute the group? Mr. RANDOLPH. Fifty or more. Senator DONNELL. Could you tell us a few of the best known of those organizations? Mr. RANDOLPH. Yes. There is the American Federation of Labor; the Congress of Industrial Organization; the B'nai B'rith; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; National Urban League; the American Jewish Committee; the Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority; Catholic Interracial Council; Common Council for American Unity; Congregational Christian Churches; and so forth. Senator DONNELL. I observe you are reading from a piece of literaIs that issued by your organization? ture. Mr. RANDOLPH. Yes. Senator DONNELL. Would you be kind enough to furnish to the committee I wonder if you have an extra copy or two or three of them with you? Mr. RANDOLPH. I don't have an extra copy. Senator DONNELL. Could the committee have the benefit of looking at this for a moment? Senator ELLENDER. What is the membership of that council? Mr. RANDOLPH. We have about 2,000 members; that is, persons who are a part of our local councils in different cities. Senator ELLENDER. How do you maintain yourself? Mr. RANDOLPH. By contributions from various organizations, tradeunions, individuals, and the local councils raise funds for the national council. Senator ELLENDER. I sent for an article in which I think you were quoted as saying, or you made a march on Washington. Are you the man? Mr. RANDOLPH. Yes, I was the head of the movement. Senator ELLENDER. That you would get fair employment practice legislation through Executive order by force or otherwise? Mr. RANDOLPH. The purpose of the movement was to impress upon Congress and the President the importance of the elimination of discrimination in employment relations and the securing of an Executive order. Senator ELLENDER. You are familiar with the language you used; aren't you? to. Mr. RANDOLPH. Oh, yes. Senator DONNELL. What was the language you used? Mr. RANDOLPH. I don't recall the specific statement that he refers Senator DONNELL. Well, the substance of it? Mr. RANDOLPH. I don't know really the specific statement he is referring to. Senator DONNELL. You don't remember the statement? Senator ELLENDER. The import of it all, as I recall it-I will try to get the details for the record-was he headed a march on Washington and he, I believe, took credit for forcing the President to write out the Executive order under which FEPC was established. The article is going to be here in a minute; I have sent for it. Senator DONNELL. Did you say in substance, Mr. Randolph, that you are going to get this legislation by force if necessary? Mr. RANDOLPH. Well, the march on Washington movement was a pressure technique. Senator DONNELL. No; that wasn't what I asked. Did you say that you were going to get this relief by force if necessary? Mr. RANDOLPH. I don't recall the particular statement, but when he brings it in, why, if I said it- Senator ELLENDER. I don't want it understood that I quoted him verbatim, but the point is clear that he headed the march on Washington which, in effect, would force the President-he didn't use force himself but his presence indicated his intentions that his march would have the effect of causing the President to execute this order under which FEPC was established. Mr. RANDOLPH. That was the purpose of the march. Senator DONNELL. That is the march that was called in June of 1941, and it is referred to in this literature that I am looking at, the paragraph or two referring thereto reading as follows: Sensing the frustration of minority groups denied the opportunity to help America in the all-out war effort, A. Philip Randolph, international president of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, called a conference of Negro leadership to work constructively on the problem. Having exhausted all other democratic means of obtaining action from Government and industry, the leaders decided to call a march on Washington as a dramatic means of presenting discrimination in employment. Negroes all over the country prepared for this demonstration. However, there was no need to march, for after a historic conference at the White House, President Roosevelt on June 25, 1941, issued Executive Order No. 8802, establishing the President's Committee on Fair Employment Practice to eliminate discrimination in war employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, or ancestry. Thus, although Negroes initiated the movement which resulted in the FEPC, all minorities and the whole Nation benefited. Now is that the march to which you were referring? Mr. RANDOLPH. That is right. Senator DONNELL. I wanted to ask you this. I asked a little while ago- or intended to; perhaps I didn't make it clear or perhaps I didn't understand your answer. I asked you what is the National Council for Permanent FEPC, and I understood you to say that it is a group of cooperating organizations. Mr. RANDOLPH. Yes; that is right. Senator DONNELL. And then, in response to a question from Senator Ellender, I think you said that the membership of those cooperative organizations-am I right in that-is about 2,000? Mr. RANDOLPH. No. Senator DONNELL. What did you mean by 2,000? Mr. RANDOLPH. This National Council for Permanent FEPC has local councils in addition to these cooperating organizations. Now these local councils are composed of the local branches of these national organizations that cooperate in the securing of the advancement of the program of the movement. Senator DONNELL. Now the cooperating organizations that you speak of, are those members also of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC? Mr. RANDOLPH. They cooperate. In other words, they send representatives to a national board of directors and they develop the policy of the national council. We also have what is known as a policy committee on which representatives of these organizations sit. Then we have an administrative committee which deals with the dayto-day problem, such as the making of findings, decisions, and things of that sort. Senator DONNELL. Take, for instance, the Anierican Federation of Labor. Is it a member of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC? Mr. RANDOLPH. It is a cooperating organization. Senator DONNELL. That is, it cooperates with your organization but is not a member of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC. Mr. RANDOLPH. Yes; it is a member. It is a cooperating member. We use that term because of the fact that this is a temporary movement; it is not a permanent movement, and, consequently, we use the term "cooperating members," calling these national organizations co operating members of the national council. Senator DONNELL. Does the American Federation of Labor contribute to the expenses of the National Council for a Permanent FEPC? Mr. RANDOLPH. Various international unions of the American Federation of Labor contribute to the national council. Senator DONNELL. But does the American Federation of Labor itself? |