race, color, religious creed, national origin, or ancestry. We feel that these concerns are glad to do this, and do not regard complying with the act as a hardship.

You gather that we feel that on the whole the atmosphere throughout Massachusetts has been cooperative which must be so if the act is to succeed. Public opinion can make or break any law because law in a democracy depends in the last instance on the support of the people. This is hardly news to a group of legislators.

MILDRED H. MAHONEY,
Mrs. John J. Mahoney,

Chairman, Massachusetts Fair Employment Practice Commission.

STATEMENT OF HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, MAYOR,

MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.

Senator IVES. We will start you off right. What is your background?

Mayor HUMPHREY. My immediate background? I am mayor of Minneapolis, Minn., recently elected. I am appearing here in that capacity and as vice chairman of Americans for Democratic Action.

Senator IVES. What is back of that? What is your education? How did you get interested in this thing?

Mayor HUMPHREY. I am a graduate of the University of Minnesota and I have my master's degree from the University of Louisiana. Senator ELLENDER. You don't say.

Mayor HUMPHREY. A very wonderful school.

I remember you, Senator, too.

Senator ELLENDER. How long did you stay?

Mayor HUMPHREY. From 1939 to the fall of 1940.

Senator ELLENDER. It is not so bad down there.

Mayor HUMPHREY. I enjoyed it very much. In fact, I have many friends down there.

Then I did additional graduate work in the University of Minnesota toward my doctor's degree and following that I was with the War Manpower Commission, Federal Government. I was an instructor at the University of Minnesota in political science, professor of political science at a college in St. Paul and from there I became mayor of Minneapolis, and this is the beginning of my second term. I have just finished an arduous campaign.

Senator IVES. How do you like being mayor?
Mayor HUMPHREY. I like it. I like politics.
Senator IVES. That is good.
Go ahead.

People like you ought to be in it.

Mayor HUMPHREY. Well, my interest in the proposal that you have, Senate bill 984, comes from my particular concern and interest in the whole field of intercultural relations and fair employment practices, and just the fulfillment of the development of what we call our democratic ideals into democratic realities.

I am familiar with the book, American Dilemma, and I agree with you it is one of the outstanding treatises upon that particular subject and I think it proposes a big challenge to American people.

Senator IVES. It does.

Mayor HUMPHREY. And has very full ramifications.

Senator IVES. Very thought-provoking.

Mayor HUMPHREY. Yes; it is. We had to wait for a good Swede to do it, but we have a lot of those out in Minnesota, and we are pretty proud of the fact that a Swede wrote it.

When I became mayor of Mineapolis, one of the first commissions I established was one known as the mayor's council on human relations, and the mayor's council on human relations was the product of a good deal of thinking and study in this field of employment and general intercultural relationships and group relationships in our community; and if I may take the liberty, I would just like to say a few words about that particular council because from its work we were able to pass an ordinance in the city known as the fair employment practices ordinance. We also established a fair employment practices commission and by the way, all of that is included in my testimony, gentlemen, that I presented to your subcommittee and I trust will be in the record, and I am not going to take the time today to read that.

Senator IVES. Is that a written statement?

Mayor HUMPHREY. Yes; it is.

Senator IVES. Without objection, that will be inserted in the record, to follow your testimony.

Mayor HUMPHREY. It is chaired by one of our leading young men in Minneapolis, the son of the Governor-rather, the brother of the Governor of the State of Minnesota. The gentleman's name is Ruben K. Youngdahl, very prominent in the Lutheran clergy. Other members are Vice Chairman Theodore Bramwell, College of Education, University of Minnesota, one of our distinguished educators at the university. Other members are the editor in chief of the Minneapolis Daily Times, an outstanding newspaper, an outstanding citizen, Mr. Bradley Morse. We have had the assistant superintendent of the schools, Mr. Walter Anderson who, by the way, is going to your State; you are doing quite well, you took Theodore Bramwell and you are taking Walter Anderson.

Senator IVES. We have some pretty good educators in

Mayor HUMPHREY. Are you taking some of ours away? The attorney for General Mills, Edward E. Balch; R. R. Bragg, who was of the Unitarian Church-he went to Boston; we lost him. But we have a replacement, a very fine lady of the Catholic faith who is taking his place.

We have attorneys from the CIO and representatives from the AFL. We have representatives of the Jewish people, the Negro people. One of our leading businessmen, Mr. George M. Jensen, director of Nash-Kelvinator Corp.; and then there is Stuart Lake, of a large construction company. We have Judge Edward F. Waite, a retired district court judge, one of our distinguished citizens. We have members of the city council, Mrs. Emma J. O'Brien, fine businesswomen of Minneapolis; we also have Mr. Cecil Newman, editor of the Minneapolis Spokesman, a Negro publication, who is a very distinguished citizen of our community; and we have 16 members in all.

Now, this group has been setting itself to the job of doing an honest and sincere program of analysis and study of our city. Minneapolis has said, gentlemen, that we are taking a look into the mirror. We want to see our own reflection; we know that we have things in

the community in all aspects of our life that are not beyond reproach, and we would like to improve it a little bit, and we feel the only way to do it is to make an analysis of our own particular problem.

I surely concur with what Senator Ellender says. Those of us from Northern States take a view of the problem of racial discrimination just a little bit different than our friends in the Southern States. Our problem is not as intense. We recognize that.

Senator ELLENDER. You were in Louisiana for 2 years?
Mayor HUMPHREY. A year and a half.

Senator ELLENDER. Well, the people of both races lived together pretty well, and agree amicably, do they not.

Mayor HUMPHREY. Yes; the people seem to get along very nicely. I have some comment about that. I will be very frank about that, Senator. I have a great admiration for the people of Louisiana. I just think that they are actually injuring themselves by not permit ting, to let all people regardless of their race, their color, national origin, or ancestry to fullest participation in the civic life of this community. The only people that suffer from this-in terms of our colored people-it is not the colored people that are suffering; it is the white people.

Senator ELLENDER. You would advocate that there be social equality?. Mayor HUMPHREY. I am, Senator, and I am not going to be taken off the track one single minute. I am not a psychologist, not an anthropologist. If I have any background at all, it is in political science and social studies.

I am here to discuss Senate bill 984, and that bill says to prevent discrimination in employment because of race, religion, color, ancestry, and I am going to stick to that.

Senator ELLENDER. If you care to express your view

Mayor HUMPHREY. I will if they have another Senate committee to discuss social equality.

Senator ELLENDER. You do not want to do it before this committee. Mayor HUMPHREY. I want to direct my effort to this particular bill. You know, I think this bill is well drawn; I think it is an expression of real study on this problem. I think it is beneficial. I think it shows the benefits and our experience of background with the old FEPC Commission; I think it also takes into its confines or its language the experience of other States and municipalities, and the authors of this bill are to be highly congratulated. This is exemplary pending legislation, and I think we ought to stick right to it, because I have read the bill very carefully and I have read about its court procedure; I have read, for example, about the regionalization of its examiners; of the references to the district courts.

It seems to me that every point has been given very fine consideration, and it is on that basis that I want to talk about employment. I think this is part of our full employment program.

Senator ELLENDER. Of course, I do not care to discuss it with you if you do not want to, but the point I have made on many occasions here is that although this is labeled an employment bill, that it is going to be utilized to the same extent as the FEPC has been to break the barriers of segregation in the South.

Mayor HUMPHREY. I do not see very many ghosts under the bed and I think we have got to accept men at face value.

Senator ELLENDER. I know you do not. Nobody said that was the intention of the FEPC but its interpretation is what gave rise to opposition. When the FEPC was first organized by Presidential order, there was some opposition but not as grave as it grew as later when its opponents found out that it was being used to break down barriers which some sections of the country thought necessary for the best welfare of all.

Mayor HUMPHREY. Senator, I want to say I am not a prophet and I cannot look into the crystal ball and see what may be the innuendoes and undertones of this pending legislation.

All I want to say is that in looking over the bill and studying its provisions and its articles, that I think I have information which will fortify the authors of this bill and will make a plea for enactment of it on a Nation-wide basis.

Senator ELLENDER. Do you think that the bill, or the FEPC as it was operated back in 1941, should have been administered so as to break down legal barriers of segregation that some States have on the statute books?

Mayor HUMPHREY. Senator, I am going to be very concise. I do not think there ought to be any barriers in employment. That is the issue today. We are not discussing the whole program, the whole ramifications of the social structure of America. I would be glad to appear on that.

Senator ELLENDER. How many colored people are there in your area? Mayor HUMPHREY. There are 16,000 in Minneapolis and in St. Paul. Senator ELLENDER. And about how many people, 800,000 population?

That is about 2 percent. What if you had a 50-50 ratio?

Mayor HUMPHREY. Discrimination for one or a hundred is just as bad.

Senator ELLENDER. Would you be as vociferous about it?

Mayor HUMPHREY. If I were a good politician, I would be. I do not have to say such things in Minneapolis because the people there believe these things.

Senator ELLENDER. I believe you that it is political. You may have greener fields than Minneapolis.

Mayor HUMPHREY. All I am running for is mayor.

Senator IVES. Just one point before you proceed, Mayor Humphrey. Were you here when I raised this question about the former FEPC set-up as compared to the provisions of this bill?

Mayor HUMPHREY. Yes.

Senator IVES. Did you hear the questions that I raised on the difference between them?

The FEPC, as I recall, had no provision for mandatory conciliation and persuasion, and so forth, no educational program indicated in it as such; there is a vast and fundamental difference between the FEPC approach and the approach in this bill; do you not agree?

Mayor HUMPHREY. I agree with you very much.

In fact, the mandatory conciliation feature of this with the ultimate of enforcement as the final weapon is the exemplary part of the proposed legislation, and it takes-as mayor, as a public official, I am a law-enforcement agent, too; I appoint our chief of police, and so on, and I know that in the field of law enforcement today it is not

force that counts. Force is the ultimate weapon, just as it is in diplomacy, and what we must work for is law observance and understanding. In fact, the knowledge of the community, the psychology, knowing the psychological relationships, are as important as knowledge of the law itself.

And in this legislation I see, with the mandatory features of conciliation and persuasion and your educational programs, not only enforcement which could, if it were just slap-back enforcement, defeat its own purpose.

This is a type of legislation which paces itself automatically. It is so flexible that it can be used in one area in one manner and in another area in another, and, at the same time, it has the obligation of enforcing the law-every one of us.

Senator IVES. That is very well expressed.

Mayor HUMPHREY. Well, I have the situations in labor disputes and others. It is all a matter of being able to work things out, to talk things out, but also recognizing that you have the responsibility, ultimately, as the law-enforcing agent, of doing your job and fulfilling your obligation.

Any dummy can go out and enforce a law, but it takes someone of intelligence and patience and understanding to get law observance and to have people who will do the thing because they begin to understand, and most of our problem today is lack of understanding. It comes from innate prejudice that we have had bred along with us; and if we break that down through this type of legislation which is just another block, you may say, or pile or pillar in what we are trying to build in this country which is a democracy-I mean that is a challenge. Our democratic ideals are challenged. But we have not lived up to them as yet, but I like it that way. It just gives us something to work for.

I do not think this legislation is going to eliminate discrimination overnight, but I think it gives the means and the weapon and the avenue and the mechanics to do the job of eliminating the discrimination in employment, and I think that is going to make America richer. Senator ELLENDER. Richer than she has already grown? Mayor HUMPHREY. Definitely.

Senator ELLENDER. Is it your contention that we would have come along much better had we accepted this idea long ago? I think if the South had not practiced segregation as it did, and had had more or less social equality between the races, that we would not have grown to the extent we have.

Mayor HUMPHREY. I am not discussing the question of social equality. I am saying that if the South had never or America had never-let us not regionalize or sectionalize.

If the United States of America had at no time practiced discrimination in the employment of its people, our productivity would have been greater today, the general welfare of our people would be better, the standards of living would be better, higher, our technology would be further advanced, and our country as a whole would be better off.

Senator IVES. Well, in our spiritual and moral tone we would be better off.

Mayor HUMPHREY. Right; much better off. We have had problems of unemployment, but the problems of frustration in employment are as bad as unemployment.