[From New Orleans States, June 9, 1947] FEPC IS A THREAT TO WORKERS A subcommittee of the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee will begin hearings tomorrow in Washington on the latest version of the annual fair employment practices committee bill. The members are Senators Donnell, Missouri; Ives (the author of the measure), New York; Smith, New Jersey; Pepper, Florida; and Ellender, Louisiana. The bill this year would set up what is called a National Commission Against Discrimination in Employment, and aims to prohibit such discrimination because of race, religion, color, national origin, or ancestry. It doesn't say anything about the color of an applicant's eyes. The measure, Senate bill 984, is just about the same as that of last year which was filibustered to death on the Senate floor. The main changes are that it applies now to employers in interstate commerce with 50 or more employees, and unions with 50 or more members. Last year it was six. But good times and employment being what they are, they upped it. Another change is that instead of a $5,000 fine or 1 year in the jug for interfering with a member of the Gestapo which would be set up to enforce this thing if it became law, the fine now would be only $500. You can still get the year. There is no trial by jury. If an employer were to violate this contemplated law, he could be found guilty after due process of contempt of Federal court. There is also the little matter of a $500 to $1,000 fine for willfully failing to post or keep posted in a conspicuous place on the premises of the employer notices which the "commission" deems necessary to effectuate the purposes of the act. And a fine for each separate offense. Who will do all this? A commission of seven men, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, will head the Gestapo. This commission shall have the powers, among others, to appoint such agents and employees as it deems necessary to assist it in the performance of its functions, and to issue, amend or rescind suitable regulations to carry out the provisions of this act. If it goes too far in these new regulations, the Congress is granted the right to nullify them by concurrent resolution. The trouble with this is that it will not work. The historic answer is still that you cannot legislate a state of mind, or prejudice. And if it isn't prejudice to attempt to tell an employer whom he can hire or fire any more than you can tell an employee he has to work there we don't know what the word means. Proof that this daydream is no more workable than prohibition is found in section 6g of the act, subsection 5 of which says: "Upon the request of any employer, whose employees or some of them refuse or threaten to refuse to cooperate in effectuating the provisions of this act, (the commission shall have the power) to assist in such effectuation by conciliation or other remedial action." ployees. Or other remedial action." Therein lies the threat to all em And that threat is bland confession that the authors of this unfair, prejudicial and inflammatory legislation know themselves it will not work. Senator DONNELL. Is there anything further, Senator Ellender? Senator ELLENDER. I have a telegram from Gov. Millard F. Caldwell, of Florida, which is dated July 3, and I would like to have that incorporated into the record at this point. Senator DONNELL. It will be incorporated into the record. (The telegram is as follows:) Hon. ALLEN J. ELLENDER, TALLAHASSEE, FLA., July 3, 1947. United States Senator, Labor and Public Welfare Committee, Washington, D. C. Retel. Because Governors' conference conflicts with FEPC hearing dates, will not be able to appear but would like the record to show that, in my opinion, the proposed legislation, when viewed from a Nation-wide standpoint, is unwise. Florida and the South generally are making real progress toward more amicable relationship between the races and better living, educational, and health standards. Intermeddling in the form of FEPC can only engender ill feel ings and retard development. Sincerely hope this important question may be divorced from politics and the good of the country as a whole served by its early defeat. MILLARD F. CALDWELL, Governor. Senator ELLENDER. Mr. Chairman, I have many other exhibits that might be pertinent, but it is not my desire to clutter the record with them. I will be content to place certain selected articles into the record with a few more added tomorrow. Senator DONNELL. You say that you have quite a number of exhibits and various items for submission for the record, also, which you will endeavor to bring tomorrow? Senator ELLENDER. Yes, sir. Senator DONNELL. So far as practicable, the committee will endeavor to place the exhibits now at its disposal into the record and have them incorporated as a part of the record. Senator ELLENDER. It has been the custom to present them for the record, and the clerk under the supervision of the committee, would incorporate such exhibits as in the committee's opinion should be put into the record. Senator DONNELL. That is right. Mr. Looney, will you please come forward? STATEMENT OF FRANK J. LOONEY, ATTORNEY, SHREVEPORT, LA. Senator DONNELL. Will you please state your name and address? Senator DONNELL. What is your profession, Mr. Looney? Senator DONNELL. In order that we may have an adequate description of factual data in the record as to your background, you do not mind if I ask you a few questions, do you? Mr. LOONEY. Not at all. Senator DONNELL. Where were you born, Mr. Looney? Mr. LOONEY. Shreveport, La. Senator DONNELL. What year was that? Mr. LOONEY. 1873. Senator DONNELL. Can you tell us something about your education? Mr. LOONEY. I graduated from military school in Shreveport, and then I went to Tulane, studied law, and also Washington and Lee, where I graduated in 1894. Senator DONNELL. Where did you take your degree in law. Senator DONNELL. You had previously studied law at Tulane University? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir; and part in the office of a lawyer. Senator DONNELL. After graduation in law work, what did you do? Mr. LOONEY. I tried to practice law at first, you might say, and then I went into service in the Spanish-American War. I was occupied at that for a while, and after a time I came back to the practice of law and I have been practicing law ever since. Senator DONNELL. Would you tell us something of your experience in the Spanish-American War? Also, your rank in the Army? Mr. LOONEY. I was a captain in the Infantry. I was a part of the Second United States Volunteer Infantry. Senator DONNELL. Where did Mr. LOONEY. Santiago, Cuba. you serve? Senator DONNELL. After you came back from the war, did you resume law practice? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Senator DONNELL. Tell us, if you will, whether you have been continuously in the practice of law from that time until now? Mr. LOONEY. I was in New York City a little while during the campaign of 1900. I was very much interested in Mr. Bryan. At that time I went to New York City where I stayed 6 months. I did not do much in the way of practicing law. It was mostly political speaking done at that time. The balance of the time has been spent in the practice of law. Senator DONNELL. You have been engaged in the practice of law for nearly 50 years? Mr. LOONEY. Over 50 years. Senator DONNELL. Since the Spanish-American War? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Senator DONNELL. You practiced law before that. So the aggregate is over 50 years? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Senator DONNELL. Mr. Looney, would you tell us something of the nature of your practice? Mr. LOONEY. It has been general practice; that is, both civil and criminal. Senator DONNELL. Have you practiced in the courts as well as in the office? Mr. LOONEY. Mainly in the courts. Senator DONNELL. You have tried many cases both in the trial courts, and on appeal, I take it? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Also in the State and the Federal courts. Senator DONNELL. Of what courts are you a member of the bar? Mr. LOONEY. Well, the Supreme Court of the United States and the courts of Louisiana and the Federal Circuit Courts of the Eighth and the Fifth Circuits, and several District Federal courts. Senator DONNELL. I am interested to note that you are a member of the bar of the Eighth Circuit Court. That happens to be the circuit in which I live. Have you practiced or argued cases in that circuit? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir; both in St. Louis and in St. Paul. Senator DONNELL. Have you had occasion to file briefs and argue cases in the Supreme Court of the United States? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Senator DONNELL. Mr. Looney, I presume that in your long period of living in Louisiana that you have frequently come in contact with the problems attendant upon the relations of white and colored people? Mr. LOONEY. We have not had many problems. We have had, of course, certain situations, and conditions arise sometimes, but I have not known of any time in the whole of my career, and I might say that I am a link between the old South and the present conditions, as you can see from my age, but I have not known of any serious trouble, or problems that have arisen. Senator DONNELL. I did not mean to imply trouble by the word "problem." I refer to educational problems, and like subjects. I take it that you are familiar with these. Mr. LOONEY. I might say that I was practically raised as a child by one of my grandmother's slaves. Since then, we have always had colored help, and still have, although it is hard to get colored help now. Senator DONNELL. Have you held public office at any time? Mr. LOONEY. I was in the Constitutional Convention of Louisiana. Senator DONNELL. What year was that? Mr. LOONEY. That was in 1921. Senator Ellender was an associate of mine. Again, the nearest that I came to public office was as a candidate for the United States Senate when Senator Ellender was elected, but that was not as his opponent. Senator DONNELL. Then you know Senator Ellender quite well? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Senator DONNELL. Mr. Looney, have you served at times upon the bench either as an elective official, or by designation in trial on some particular cases? Mr. LOONEY. No, sir. Senator DONNELL. You have not? Mr. LOONEY. No, sir. Senator DONNELL. Are there any other questions that you can think of, Senator? Senator ELLENDER. Have you ever represented any colored people in lawsuits that you have conducted in Louisiana, or outside of Louisiana? Mr. LOONEY. In Louisiana, very frequently. I have not had any colored cases outside of Louisiana. Senator ELLENDER. I think that you were in one of the most celebrated cases respecting the oil rates, and the case in which you were engaged established jurisprudence in Louisiana, did it not? Mr. LOONEY. Do you mean the Lilly Taylor case? Senator ELLENDER. Exactly. Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir.. Senator ELLENDER. The Lilly Taylor of that case is a colored person? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Senator ELLENDER. That was one of the big lawsuits at the time, was it not? Mr. LOONEY. Yes. Senator ELLENDER. Mr. Looney, have you made a study as to the right of Congress to enact the sort of legislation that is included in the FEPC bill, so-called? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. As you know, Senator, I have taken a great deal of interest in a lot of these questions, such as poll tax and the white primaries. I was State chairman of the State senate committee from 1920 to 1944. Senator DONNELL. That is the democratic State senate committee? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. I could not go on with the chairmanship because I had a difference of opinion with the national party. Senator ELLENDER. In that connection, I recall very vividly the splendid brief that you sent here. I think it was in 1944. That was when the poll-tax issue was being debated by Congress. I had occasion to put that brief into the record and I distributed many copies of it throughout the country. It had good effect. Mr. Looney, what have you to say as to the constitutionality of the bill that we are now considering? Mr. LOONEY. I think that you might say the bill is even ultraunconstitutional, because in my opinion the right of hiring and the right of being hired are both natural rights. Senator DONNELL. Do you have a prepared statement with you, Mr. Looney? Mr. LOONEY. Yes, sir. Senator DONNELL. Would you be kind enough to proceed with that statement? The members of the committee will feel at liberty to interrogate, if you so desire. Would you prefer to complete your statement, or would you welcome interruptions? Mr. LOONEY. It is perfectly all right with me whatever the chairman desires. Senator DONNELL. You may read from your statement, or otherwise. If you want to, I might say that we will be pleased to incorporate your entire statement into the record, whether you read it or not. If that is agreeable to you, that may be done. Mr. LOONEY. That is all right with me, Mr. Chairman. Senator ELLENDER. Mr. Looney, a moment ago you mentioned "natural rights." What do you mean by that? Mr. LOONEY. I mean the same thing that Thomas Jefferson meant when he wrote what is referred to in the Constitution as "certain unalienable rights." Upon those rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and the natural rights are the rights that the Creator has given us. They are inherent. Sometimes they are called by the courts "fundamental rights," and they are also called "basic rights," but the real title is "natural rights." Senator DONNELL. Before you proceed further, Mr. Looney, I neglected to ask if you are a member of any bar association, and if so, which bar? Mr. LOONEY. I was, but I dropped out of all of them. I do not take any more interest in bar associations. Senator DONNELL. You were a member of an association? Senator DONNELL. Continue, Mr. Looney. Senator ELLENDER. If I may interrupt, Mr. Looney, I would like to ask if you are still a member of the bar of Louisiana? Mr. LOONEY. I am still a member of the bar of Louisiana. That is an integrated bar. Senator ELLENDER. Which of those rights which you have just mentioned would you say, the FEPC bill violates? Mr. LOONEY. Natural rights? Senator ELLENDER. Yes. Mr. LOONEY. Both the liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Senator ELLENDER. Which of all of these rights would you consider the more essential, natural rights, or inalienable rights? Mr. LOONEY. Undoubtedly, liberty is the most essential of all of those rights. Senator ELLENDER. How about freedom of choice? Mr. LOONEY. Freedom of choice is the first freedom. It is the freedom on which everything is based, you might say. |