most severe cut-backs shipbuilding, aircraft, munitions. Consequently, their rate of displacement was higher than the rate for other workers; secondly, the end of manpower controls, including the wartime FEPC, opened the door for the revival of discriminatory employment practices; thirdly, the employment fields which absorbed a substantial proportion of displaced war workers (trade and commerce) have been traditionally closed to Negroes except in certain low-paid job categories. This combination of unfavorable circumstances has produced an increasing surplus of Negro workers out of proportion to the total number of unemployed persons.

Unemployment among Negroes in some sections of the country is two to three times the rate for other workers. On the west coast, 30 percent of the Negro population are unemployed-three times the rate of unemployment among other workers. In New York City, it is reliably estimated that 15 percent of the 500,000 workers now seeking jobs are Negroes. In most of our larger industrial centers, the number of Negro job seekers is steadily increasing despite the fact that we have the largest peacetime work force in the Nation's history.

The crux of the problem is not so much the difficulty in obtaining employment when times are good as it is the refusal of employers to employ Negroes for the jobs they are qualified by training and experience to fill. This exclusion from certain fields of employment and certain types of jobs has become so widely accepted that it is not uncommon to find racial labels on jobs. One purpose of the proposed legislation is to eliminate this unfair labor practice by limiting job specifications to skill, experience, and ability to do the job.

To illustrate how this custom has influenced employment policies in industry and business, I want to call attention to a series of labor market reports prepared and distributed regularly by the Department of Labor through the United States Employment Service.

From the report for April 1947 on agricultural machinery and tractors, page 22: "The industry offers few job opportunities to nonwhites. They constituted but 5.4 percent of total employment in March, substantially the same proportion reported since October 1946. They are employed chiefly in unskilled jobs. One State, Illinois, accounted for almost three-fourths of the industry's reported nonwhite employment."

From the same report, pulp, paper, and paperboard mills, page 12:

"The number of nonwhite workers in the industry has kept pace with the increase in over-all employment. Nonwhites constituted but 6.5 percent of total employment in March, the same proportion reported in the two preceding months. Only in the Southern States, where about five-sixths of the industry's nonwhite workers are employed, do they constitute a large proportion of the labor force. In South Carolina, two out of every five workers in the industry are nonwhite. They are employed chiefly in unskilled jobs."

The September 1946 report on the hosiery industry, page 14, states:

"Few opportunities exist for nonwhites who constituted only 2 percent of employment. Except for a very few establishments in Tennessee which reported nonwhites in production jobs, the vast majority of nonwhites were used as maintenance workers."

In the same report on banking and trust companies, page 36:

"The proportion of nonwhites probably will not rise above 2 percent. Restrictions against the employment of nonwhites are frequent in the banking industry, and there is no indication of any change in policy. With the exception of banks serving predominantly nonwhite communities, the use of nonwhites is limited to custodial and other service occupations."

The October 1946 report, series 15-2, on prefabricated housing, page 2, includes the following statement:

"So far as can be determined, nonwhites are hired almost exclusively for unskilled and maintenance jobs. In August and September, nonwhites comprised 9 percent of total employment."

The same report on the telephone communications industry, page 25, says: "The number of nonwhites employed in the industry is insignificant, and they are almost always assigned to work as janitors, porters, and food handlers." The April 1946 report on railroad equipment, page 5, states:

"Nonwhite workers employed in the industry are usually restricted to the heavy work in the foundry or to unskilled laborers' tasks and constitute about 10 percent of the total employment. In some of the larger plants, a few such workers are utilized in semiskilled occupations such as bulldozer operator, riveter, bolter-up, and acetylene burner."

The November 1946 report on bakery products, page 11, says:

"Employment of nonwhites remained stable between August and October at 6,300. A number of employers indicated that separations of workers in this group were unusually high and replacement needs considerable. Nonwhites constitute 8.2 percent of the work force in bread and cake bakeries and 7.7 percent in cracker and biscuit firms. They are usually employed, however, only as porters, janitors, dishwashers, and pan greasers."

I have gone into some detail to define the problem which this legislation proposes to resolve because I believe the members of this committee and a negligible minority of the American people appreciate fully the difficulties faced by Negroes in their efforts to obtain employment. I want you to know that we do not believe the systematic discrimination against these workers must forever be the rule in American industry and business. Nor do we believe that the American people approve the arbitrary exclusion of American workers from decent jobs merely because of their race or religious beliefs.

Antidiscrimination laws now in force

It is known to this committee, I am sure, that four States (New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Connecticut) have recently enacted legislation very similar to the measure now under consideration. Since the Urban League is actively engaged in the work of directing job seekers to job openings, and because members of our board and staff are frequently requested to advise and counsel employers and labor-union officials regarding the operations of the law, I believe our observations on the desirability and effectiveness of these measures will be helpful to this committee. It is a fair statement, I think, to say that the majority of reasonable employers and union officials are making sincere efforts to comply with the law. It can be said also that in the scores of industrial and commercial establishments which have changed their employment policies since these laws became operative, the employment of qualified Negroes, Jews, and other groups formerly excluded from their work forces has not adversely affected either the morale of their workers, the productivity of their enterprises, or the attitudes of their customers. These are the criteria by which the average employer determines whether or not his industry or business is functioning at top capacity. These are the assurances most employers demand when we discuss the question with them.

The problem that confronts us now is not one of deciding whether or not we want to eliminate unfair discrimination in employment, but one of choosing the most effective means of accomplishing it. It is our considered judgment that the enactment of Senate bill 984 is a step in the right direction. We believe that the provisions of this bill are reasonable and fair to employers, labor unions, and job seekers alike. We believe this because the measure recognizes that the practice of discriminating in employment against properly qualified persons because of their race, religion, color, national origin, or ancestry is contrary to the American principles of liberty and equality of opportunity, section 2 (a); it recognizes and declares the right to employment without discrimination because of race, religion, color, national origin, or ancestry to be a civil right of all the people of the United States, section 2 (b); it clearly defines unlawful employment practices, section 5; it establishes proper and effective machinery for fairly administering the law, section 6; it provides for reasonable and workable procedures for preventing unlawful employment practices, section 7; and, finally, it sets up the necessary guaranties against abuses by establishing fair and impartial methods for review of the Commission's findings and decisions, section 8. We appreciate the opportunity to present our views and opinions on this important measure. On behalf of the executive board and officers of the National Urban League and of its 56 local branches throughout the country, let me say again that we endorse without reservations Senate bill 984. We urge this committee to report favorably on it.

Senator DONNELL. Thank you very much, Mr. Thomas. We greatly appreciate your testimony.

Our next witness is Rev. Robert W. Searle, executive secretary of the Protestant Council of the City of New York. Do you have a statement, Mr. Searle?

65936-47-18

STATEMENT OF THE REVEREND ROBERT W. SEARLE, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION, PROTESTANT COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, N. Y. Reverend SEARLE. I have filed a brief with the clerk, Senator. Senator DONNELL. Mr. Searle, will you please state your full name and address and something of your background educationally and by way of experience?

Reverend SEARLE. I am Rev. Robert W. Searle, director of humanity relations of the Protestant Council of the City of New York, which is a representative body of all Protestant Churches in the five boroughs of the city, and I am executive secretary of the human-relations commission, which is a body especially set up by the council to deal with problems of human relations in the general field.

I am an ordained Presbyterian clergyman, having been in the ministry since 1923. I graduated from Oxford University and from Union Theological Seminary.

Senator DONNELL. Has your organization, the Protestant Council, had some type of formal meeting at which it considered the bill now before us?

Reverend SEARLE. This commission, the human relations commission, has regular stated meetings. At its April meeting it took up the bill, considered it very carefully, and unanimously endorsed it.

I have appended to my statement a list of members of the commission, which I think is a rather important document, to show the caliber of the minds that have considered this thing. They are such men as a former president of the National Manufacturers Association, the president emeritus of Union Theological Seminary, the eastern commissioner of the Salvation Army, the president of Brooklyn College, a former commissioner of welfare of the city of New York, a former lieutenant governor of New York State-people of that caliber.

Senator ELLENDER. May I ask a question there, Reverend Searle? Is your council associated with the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America?

Reverend SEARLE. There is no actual connection, Senator Ellender. There is a cooperative connection. I understand that Dr. Boyd is here and will testify. I have submitted this document and I will simply highlight certain things that I say in it, if I may.

Senator DONNELL. That is Dr. Beverley Boyd!?

Reverend SEARLE. Beverley M. Boyd; yes.

I wish to point out that the commission took its stand on three main bases.

First, the commission supports this act with deep conviction on the grounds of Christian principles. It is the teaching of Jesus Christ and of the New Testament that "God has made of one blood all men who dwell upon the face of the earth," that to every individual human being there is due the dignity which belongs to him as a child of God, that to every man there must be accorded justice and brotherhood.

Senator DONNELL. But, for my own information, is the quotation that you have read from the Scripture?

Reverend SEARLE. That quotation is from one of the Epistles of Paul.

The conscience of non-Roman Christendom around the world, of Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy, was clearly expressed by the following declaration unanimously adopted at the most representative ecumenical conference in the history of the church held at Oxford, England, in 1937:

The existence of black races, white races, yellow races is to be accepted gladly and reverently as full of posibilities under God's purpose for the enrichment of human life, and there is no room for any differentiation between races as to their intrinsic value. All share alike in the concern of God, being created by Him to bring their unique and distinctive contribution to His service in the world.

The commission supports this act in the second place, and again with deep sincerity, on the ground of American principle. We believe that the fundamental premise upon which the whole theory of American political, social, and economic structure rests is contained in the words of the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

We believe, therefore, that we have also a clear mandate from American principle to advocate all measures which seek to accord their equal and unalienable rights to men.

We further believe that present circumstances demand unprecedented effort to vindicate our professed loyalty to the principles of American democracy by realizing these principles in our political, social, and economic life.

Democracy today is challenged on a world scale by a contrary way of life. Hundreds of millions of people in many nations are watching America and passing judgment on it as we live it-not as we profess it. They are judging us by our actions and our attitudes, not by our words and our documents. Our failures and our violations of professed principle are enlarged and bruited before these observing people as a condemnation, not of our human weakness but of democracy itself. I need not remind you, I am sure, that a majority of those who in these next years will be choosing between democracy and some form of totalitarianism are not members of the white race. We should constantly remind ourselves that it is reported by observers that Russia has made real progress in eliminating racial prejudice in a nation of many races. Whatever the truth of this report, it furnishes a challenge to American democracy.

May I add to that, on that very point. I am constantly contacting men coming back from all over the world from great mission stations of the church, and almost the first word that everyone says when he lands in the United States is that we must face this issue of race relations in America. Whether they are in the Philippines, whether they are in China, whether they are India, whether they are in Africa, wherever they are, they are hearing constantly the publicity by those who want to undermine the belief in America, publicizing any little thing, any little deviation that takes place in American life from its professed standards of justice and brotherhood.

Senator ELLENDER. Don't you think a lot of that is exaggerated for the purpose of propagandizing the countries?

Reverend SEARLE. Of course, it is exaggerated, Senator Ellender, but always behind exaggeration there is enough basis of fact for the case to be made. Of course, the whole basis of propaganda is exaggeration. It is on specific issues that we prove the reality of our belief in principles and ideals. I think one of our troubles has been in this western world that we profess greater ideals but want to keep them in the abstract.

As a Christian, I believe that the law of God is absolute.
Senator ELLENDER. What do you mean by that?

Would you say we have not looked forward in expressing our views? I think America has grown to the heights that it has without such laws as you are now proposing.

Reverend SEARLE. I think America has grown toward heights.

Senator ELLENDER. The whole world is looking to America for assistance today, and why an American should criticize its standards I cannot understand.

Reverend SEARLE. Well, we criticize it, not in comparison with other nations, but in comparison with the ideas that it professes.

Senator ELLENDER. But America is so far superior to all of the others in every respect.

Reverend SEARLE. But we are still inferior to our own standards. Senator ELLENDER. We have made tremendous progress, in a short period of time, and it hurts my pride when I hear one of your education come here and in a measure criticize our methods, when admittedly we are the greatest Nation in the world. We are feeding the whole world and the whole world is looking to us now for sustenance, and why any American should criticize such benevolence is beyond me. I can't follow your conception on the grounds of Christianity or anything else. I just can't follow it.

Reverend SEARLE. Don't you think, though, that healthy criticism is the best means for progress?

Senator ELLENDER. Yes; I think so.

Reverend SEARLE. Don't you think that where one professes to be a Christian and accepts certain ideals, one has to constantly subject himself to self-criticism in order to reach those ideals? So must we in our church, and so must we in our collective thought.

Senator ELLENDER. Let me say this off the record.

(Off the record.)

Senator DONNELL. Now, we will continue on the record.
Mr. Searle has a question I believe.

Reverend SEARLE. As a Christian, I believe that the law of God is absolute-that it is immutable and inexorable and that therefore whenever we violate it, we bring trouble upon ourselves and our children. The sins of our ancestors who kidnaped men, women, and children and sold them into slavery have already demonstrated that under the law of the universe the sins of the fathers are visited upon their children unto the third and fourth generation and beyond. That process will only stop when justice begins.

As to the specific-who can challenge the statement that the right of a man to seek work for which he is qualified is an unalienable human right which must, where men love justice, be established? It is essen