THE WAR IN VIETNAM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP66B00403R000200140047-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 2, 2005
• Sequence Number: 47
• Publication Date: April 29, 1964
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For fease 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R400200140047-2
1964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
and in many other areas. They began new
trends in art.
Despite their treatment in this country,
they brought up their children to be good
and loyal citizens. There has, for instance,
been almost no juvenile delinquency among
Nisei.
In World War H and the Korean war the
Nisei, encouraged by the Issei, won propor-
tionately more battlefront decorations than
any other major ethnic group.
Since World War II, the JACL points out,
widespread acceptance of Japanese Ameri-
cans and their rapid advances in profes-
sions, the arts, industry, and Government
service has proved that American democracy
does not limit full citizenship to Caucasians.
OBJECTIVES OF PROJECT
The project staff is gathering information
on the Issei's reasons for coining to the
United States, their occupations, motivations,
and achievements here, their relations with
the Nisei, and the relations of both groups
with the larger society. Analyzing this in-
formation will, they believe, help explain the
Japanese American's acculturation and)
achievements in the United States.
Upon completion of the study, a perma-
nent collection of Japanese American and
related documentary materials and inter-
views will be established at UCLA.
T. Scott Miyakawa, visiting associate pro-
fessor of sociology at UCLA on leave from
Boston University, is directing the study.
The JACL, which has national headquar-
ters in San Francisco and a Pacific South-
west office in Los Angeles, is helping the
project locate documents, the names and
addresses of Issei, and other information.
According to the JACL, 31 percent of the
Japanese Americans in mainland America
live in the Los Angeles area.
Carnegie Corp. of New York was founded
by Andrew Carnegie in 1911 for the advance-
ment and diffusion of knowledge and under-
standing among the peoples of the United
States and certain Commonwealth areas. Its
assets now total approximately $232 million
at book value. Grants are made from in-
come only.
DEATH OF J. HYDE SWEET
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, Ne-
braska is mourning the passing of a
prominent' citizen, one who served his
community, his State, and his Nation,
with distinction.
Mr. J. Hyde Sweet, longtime pub-
lisher of the Nebraska City News-Press,
died on April 4, 1964, at Wickenburg,
following a stroke. His death
leaves a void not only among Nebraska
newspapermen but also among a wide
circle of friends and acquaintances en-'
gaged in other civic undertakings.
Hyde Sweet was recognized as one of
the State's most vigorous newspaper
editors. His column, "Kick Kolumn,"
was probably the most widely quoted in
Nebraska.
Beginning as a printer's devil, type-
setter, and janitor when he was 13 years
old, Hyde Sweet began a family tradi-
tion of newspapering now carried on by
his son, Arthur, who is managing editor
of the News-Press. He joined the Press,
predecessor of the News-Press, in 1909.
The News and Press were merged in 1926,
and the News-Press marked its 100th
anniversary on November 14, 1954.
No. 84-19
Always active in bettering his com-
munity and his State, Hyde Sweet served
briefly in the U.S. Congress as well. He
came to Washington in 1939 as secretary
?to First District Congressman George
Heinke. When Congressman Heinke was
killed in an auto accident in December
of that year, Hyde Sweet was elected to
complete the term. He did not seek re-
election. As a freshman Congressman
at the time, I recall with great respect
that year we served together in the
House. He was a great American in
its finest sense.
It will be a long, long time, Mr. Pres-
ident, before the void left by J. Hyde
Sweet's passing can be filled completely.
CONSTRUCTION OF REHABILITA-
TION CENTER FOR HANDICAPPED
CHILDREN AND ADULTS BY WY-
OMING FRATERNAL ORDER OF
EAGLES
Mr. McGEE. Mr. President, a fine ex-
ample of what can be done by an orga-
nization dedicated to service and to help-
ing those less fortunate than themselves
is the drive now underway by Wyoming
Fraternal Order of Eagles to construct
a rehabilitation center for handicapped
children and adults near Thermopolis.
An article describing this center and
the drive to make it a reality was pub-
lished in the May issue of the Eagles
magazine. I ask unanimous consent
that the article be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
A SHELTERED WORKSHOP IN WYOMING?WHEN
THE JOB IS DONE WE CAN RIGHTFULLY BE
CALLED FRATERNALISTS
(By Jack Williams)
The dream conceived at the 1960 State
convention in Powell is nearing fulfillment
for physically handicapped children and
adults.
Because Wyoming Eagles, with compas-
sion and unsurpassed love for their fellow
man, determined to help crippled children
and adults learn a new way of life?learn
again to play, to be a useful force in their
own communities, the Eagles Sheltered Work-
shop, nestled near the foothills of the Rocky
Mountains in Hot Springs State Park near
Thermopolis, will soon become a reality.
Here a man can learn a new way of life, a
new way to earn a living not only for himself
but, through gainful employment will be
able once more to provide for his loved ones.
Here a child, suddenly faced with the stark
reality that he is "different" from his play-
mates can learn that life is not ended?a new
door will be opened. That child can learn
to play, that child can learn a trade and a
hobby. But more important, the young-
ster?or adult?will know that even With a
crippling handicap much is worthwhile,
much can be done. A rich and full life lies
ahead with all the dreams and desires with-
in reach.
_ Through the untiring efforts of Wyoming
Eagles, headed by Dr. H. L. Pieters and other
dedicated leaders, the State donated about
one and one-half acres of land in Hot Springs
State Park where the Eagles Sheltered Work-
shop will soon be erected.
Already more than $22,000 of the $70,000
goal has been raised by Eagle aeries and aux-
iliaries in the State.
To help the program along, Gov. Clif-
ford Hansen recently signed an official proc-
lamation designating the week beginning
April 26 through May 2, 1964, as Sheltered
Workshop Week in Wyoming. This permits
the committee to solicit funds over the en-
tire State, with the proceeds earmarked for
the Sheltered Workshop Fund for the Handi-
capped.
In signing the proclamation, Governor
Hansen praised Wyoming Eagles for their
sincere concern of the multiple problems
facing children and adults who must sud-
denly adjust their lives because of crippling
handicaps.
In urging widespread support for this
great humanitarian program, Dr. Pieters and
his committee emphasize that the workshop
Is not only for the handicapped in Wyoming
but for the handicapped throughout the Na-
tion.
The committee stated that membership in
the Eagles is not a requirement for help
through this program. Anyone is eligible,
man, woman, boy or girl. The leaders in
this project said: "Please do not sit back
and say 'let Joe do it.' We all have a stake
in this job until it is done. Please help."
Tentative plans call for the construction
of the building, across the street from the
noted Gottche Rehabilitation Center where
the crippled in the State now are physically
rehabilitated.
The Eagles Sheltered Workshop will com-
plete the rehabilitation process by prepar-
ing the handicapped to hold down a job.
Any trade or craft which an individual is
capable of learning will be taught him at
the Eagles Sheltered Workshop.
Any aerie or auxiliary wishing to be a part
of this program can send donations to John
Williams, Secretary of Aerie 2350, Green
River, Wyo.
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1963
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair lays before the Senate the unfin-
ished business.
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (H.R. '7152) to enforce the
constitutional right to vote, to confer
jurisdiction upon the district courts of
the United States to provide injunctive
relief against discrimination to. public
accommodations, to authorize the Attor-
ney General to institute suits to protect
constitutional rights in public facilities
and public education, to extend the
Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent
discrimination in federally assisted pro-
grams, to establish a Commission on
Equal Employment Opportunity, and for
other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to amendment
No. 516, as modified, proposed by the
Senator from Illinois [Mr. DIRKSEN] for
himself and the Senator from Montana
[Mr. MANSFIELD] as a substitute for
amendment No. 513, proposed by the
Senator from Georgia [Mr. TALlYLADGE]
for himself and other Senators, inserting
a new title at page 54, after line 7, relat-
ing to criminal contempt.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll, and
the following Senators answered to their
names:
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200140047-2
- 9?72-
Aiken
Bayh
Beall
Burdick
Cannon
Carlson
Case
Church
Clark
Cooper
Curtis
Dodd
Dominick
Douglas
Eastland
Ellender
Fong
Gore
Gruening
Hart
Hartke
Holland
ale%
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66600403R000200140047-2
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE April 29
INo. 178 Leg.]
Humphrey Moss
Inouye Mundt
Jackson Neuberger
Javits Pastore
Johnston Pearson
Jordan, Idaho Pell
Keating Prouty
Proxmire
Ribicoff
Robertson
Saltonstall
Scott
Simpson
Smith
Sparkman
Symington
Walters
Williams. N.J.
Williams, Del.
Young N.Dak.
Young, Ohio
Kennedy
Kuchel
Lausche
Long. La.
Mansfield
McCarthy
McGee
McGovern
McIntyre
McNamara
Metcalf
Miller
Monroney
Morse
Morton
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
WALTERS in the ch ir). A quorum IS
present.
THE WAR IN VIETNAM
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, the dis-
interest of Pakistan in the Vietnam war
should be a warning to the American
people that the United States is pursu-
ing a futile and hopeless war in South
Vietnam known as "McNamara's War."
The Secretary of Defense has approved
the term "McNamara's War" as a proper
label for the war?a label which the
senior Senator from Oregon has attached
to it for many weeks. The Senator from
Alaska [Mr. GRUENING] discussed it at
some length yesterday afternoon.
I congratulate the Senator from
Alaska again for his courage and his
statesmanship. He pointed out how un-
reliable are not only Pakistan. but our
other alleged allies in the SEATO
treaty?New Zealand. Australia. Thai-
land, the Philippines, Great Britain; and
France. I wish to pursue the point of
view expressed by the Senator from
Alaska for a few moments at this time.
Few nations in the world have received
as much money from the United States
as has Pakistan, When the foreign aid
bill is reached this year. Pakistan will
be included in the amendment that I
shall offer seeking to bring to an end all
foreign aid to alleged allies that are
perfectly willing to take our money and
then walk out on us.
We have extended this money to
Pakistan on the theory that Pakistan
was an ally against communistic expan-
sion in Asia. We could not have been
more wrong. After the statements of
April 27 by her foreign minister, we
know that Pakistan is no such thing.
Least of all has she any intention of
drawing upon herself the disapproval
of Communist China by supporting a
U.S. war effort in Vietnam.
The painful truth is that not one of
our alleged allies has been willing to do
so. They include the Philippines, Thai-
land, and Pakistan?all huge beneficiar-
ies of our financial support. They have
turned their backs upon involvement in
Vietnam. The most that they have been
willing to do is to encourage the United
States to continue the struggle alone.
The abandonment of Vietnam to its
fate by those countries is in keeping
with the indifference of the Vietnamese
people themselves. This is not a Paki-
stani war, a Thai war. a Philippine
war, nor a war of the people of South
Vietnam. It is McNamara's war. It is
a war financed, directed, and largely
fought by the United States for itself
and for its stooge, General Khanh.
It is a war that we are conducting hi
behalf of a puppet government that we
set up starting in 1954, and have now
taken through three puppet dictators?
Diem first, then Minh, and now our latest
puppet, Khanh. No one else in Asia
wants any part of it. Pakistan has made
that crystal clear. They wit take our
money; but they will never stick their
necks out for an American interest.
They are more interested in entering in-
to further treaty arrangements with Red
China. 'rhe people of South Vietnam
have been notably lacking in support of
the war. The announcement of a new
election in South Vietnam is the latest
"gimmick" in the propaganda job that is
being done on the American people. The
Senator from Alaska [Mr. GROSSING],
the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. ELLEN-
DER1, and I, have been pointing out for
weeks in the Senate that we are not. sup-
porting freedom in South Vietnam. This
Is not a government of freedom. It is a
military dictatorship controlled by an
American puppet. We are not support-
ing freedom in South Vietnam. We have
been pointing out the lack of institutions
of freedom in that country. Now we
have seen the propaganda "gimmick" in
the newspapers in the past, few days, to
the effect that there are to be elections.
That sounds good, but do not forget
that Diem had elections too?the same
kind of elections there are in Russia.
The people vote for a ticket put up by
the government, and the vote is "Yes."
So the announcement of new elections
does not indicate that they will be any
different from those staged by the Diem
government when the only candidates
that could be voted on were those chosen
and placed on the ballot by the govern-
ment itself.
These elections in South Vietnam have
no more meaning than Communist e:ec-
Lions, because in both cases the public
can only vote "Yes."
Sooner or later the United States is
going to have to give up this kind of pro-
tectorate in Vietnam. The only question
Is how much American blood and tufts-
ure will be spent before we do give it up.
It continues to be my fervent hope
that my Government will recognize its
legal and moral obligation to turn this
matter over to the United Nations be-
fore the casualty lists really mount.
I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RECORD two letters I have
received on this subject, one from a ser-
geant stationed in South Vietnam, and
another from a civilian who was associ-
ated with our aid program to South
Vietnam, with their names deleted.
There being no objection, the letters
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
RS follows:
APRIL 20. 190-1.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have long ap-
plauded your forthright, independent stands
on many issues and particularly your recent
statements on the Vietnam situation,
I recently returned from Vietnam where I
served for over a year as an adviser to the
Vietnamese military construciton program
(under contract to an American architec-
tural-engineering firm).
As a taxpayer and citizen I am concerned
about the way our tax money is spent and
submit the following random comments
based on my experience in Vietnam to
bolster, and encourage, your fight on behalf
of the American taxpayer.
1. There are more than enough American
military personnel there to adequately ad-
minister the military program. The reason
that the program has been and is poorly ad-
ministered stems from top echelon policies
established by the Pentagon and/or the
civilian foreign aid bureaucracy in Washing-
ton. For example, I found that the Ameri-
can military advisers dared not inquire too
closely about known misappropriation of
funds. The reason could be that they as
individuals are operating a high school pop-
ularity contest or, they have had orders
from their superiors to turn their backs to
the graft and corruption.
2. On two or three occasions I reported to
military advisers the theft or misappropria-
tion of building materials but as far as I
could determine the information was never
passed on to higher echelons. Much of this
material was going to the Catholic Church
(during the Diem regime) and political of-
ficials?rather than to hospitals and living
quarters for enlisted personnel.
3. Enlisted personnel and the people gen-
erally have no more respect for the military
officer corp than they had for Diem and his
cronies?which probably accounts for the
lack of enthusiasm in carrying on the war.
4. Civilian contracts, many of which had
at least some merit, were canceled to create
slots for more American military advisers
who either from lack of the proper training,
or tradition, accomplished little or provided
no concrete help to the Vietnam military
or to the civilian economy.
ft. Heavy construction equipment costing
millions of dollars was sitting idle in ware-
houses and compounds?while thousands of
our military sat around shuffling paper or
did nothing. I would suggest that if the
military must be in these areas that a "Sea-
bee" type of corp be organized and utilized
to provide some real help to the civilian
economy.
8. Far too many radio and communications
contracts have been let?these- people are
falling all over one another and creating
nothing but confusion.
As I see it, there are four "vested Inter-
est" groups who are largely responsible for
continuing the program in Vietnam?and
other like areas. They are: the American
military, the foreign aid bureaucracy, Amer-
ican industry (particularly the war indus-
try), and the private capital boys. I do not
suggest that the voices of these American
citizens not be heard or considered but I do
say that their present voices are being con-
sidered out of proportion to their numbers
and against the present and long-range in-
terests of the American people.
have long been of the opinion that na-
tionalism is a stronger force than ideology
and I have little fear that simply because
these countries adopt a "leftist" type of
government that they will combine against
us. History makes clear that Catholics have
fought Catholics. Protestants have fought
Protestants, republics have fought repub-
lics, and kingdoms have fought kingdoms?
and witness the present difficulties between
Russia anti China.
The Honorable WAYNE Moils's,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DIA& SNA.Toit MORSE: Speaking for myself
and other GI's, we take our hate off to you
Approved For Release 2005/02/10 : CIA-RDP66600403R000200140047-2
For R 2/10 'CIA RDP66B00403R
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 9273
47-2
Mir stand coninfl tl Vietrain
-
--Aqu seem to be f1?)Ply_ ne that is mak
fat any sense on thiSlisue;-afid-cannof Un-"
clerstand why ofhers,
oppose your auggeAlloriS. "Probahrk they are
the conservative, quiet type'ivlib dare- fint
,speak up against the war in Vietnain: To
rsay anything against it seems to be inviting
belieVe that you have '-aile'SUppert of
.MAPTenthusiastic ,AncriCans liT your ern-
public office.
Admiringly yours,
. ? . . ' . , ,
, Mr. rei nal1 he
.placed In the coan, from
rfpr..7taVia6Utn_ of any
a,ny??epaticE.,_ and
:?Ae V-PitPct-,,art: 77
t
'
for tli_O inspect-Jen 49 15i.6i144 Of
of t
Sathe,ni4 14:9?'- ? -4-e- _t4-1.114- tlave
-T_ 4/44,? of fe't'te_rs
a large number in ,the i P-94 1_0*, 4.4s.,_
4-41ii.plif PPP:1.P 50
1.r.14-Q1'0,3.0?,ne.?.I3,Few,,,yesterclaz., in the
47. th0
.If I_ do to
,,,,,itaiaU put A
l, niaunnlis
eon:01'4 ;to place them in, the_13.gcoaa,? I
Snail he delighted te reAd:_tem, because
Senator sh-Ould. 114 that
hpyS, are net for the war j,rl, Squth
Vietnam. pur,,,boys are not being pro-
tOt_e4 y the; V":*,
lives. PO-t-VAIIK-P,KPAPcIPS1by..the,e2-
-:erktions, .t4e governinentja, cend,uptiAg
r there, r
eaq ie letters. 11,76t- Oa,o pro-
tectiofi
is given to 4rrAericap pilot hi
Et nelteOp_kr sent out eVer_the hattlefines
frI ti:ie jungles of vietnam _with no more
protection than the heReePter.?
:=Tha,t,is,vihy these officers pixie to me.
-I;,m1S11 the_ administration conicl have
the hent ef, what ?the(40.gory. It is
Itat ,a forniaj.,, wa_lca.rt _Nye a,m ?engaged
In a Uliltry operation in ,South yfet-
ig TWA/get:fob 119Xinwil We
conducting a _mllktary operation in
_4.neKtcf(41_,_ koYa
the protection they would have if we
--lkerq ;TAY formal war._ _Ifoohnot
- be justified. It p the unjustifiahk kill-
ing of Americanr boys. ,Every American
by who _41_, the war in
- South ,Vietnam lia?_heen_unjuatifiably
'''killed; And his blo(ul Is on tnA_Iiargla 01
to hie Co, have, to
'speak in such critircisn;t ok,r),:ty Govern-
net, but I will net be silenced for I
know my Government is wrong.
"? ,Close by Calling, the attention_ot_tho
?.--PrOictea of thk
section ,8_ (i_f_ the C-9h?441.1...., of the
? United Slates, _setting ferth_the _powers
, arid_ ant119TAY .CPligreSS of the
*United States In regard to _ It fLeacIP
in part as foliOvvs:
pjiage'sa shall have -pAer-'7.
declare, war, gran/ letters of ,nierque and
? reprisal7 and make rules concemjng captures
-
on
t.
land?an,,,wa
'Djiiere i 111:4-4,4P-P in, tTie,,?itimtion
the,TY:httecl st-ate??,,that Authurizes any
? Tresidentjaf the Vnited,,Statea, at any
to, send the gag standing, behind
- ,,t1.1e,Xe,5413)114, Pf4or into Dattleirent,
? ',followed by American joys, to die under
that flag, without first decia4ng war.
The operation of the United gates ill threat to the peace, the United Nations
_South Vietnam is an illegal, unconstitu- Charter ought to be put to work, and the
tional operation. It cannot be justified United States ought to be before the
by the President of the United States. United Nations with a resolution asking
I call on him again, from the floor of the United Nations to take jurisdiction
the U.S. Senate, to send to Congress a and set up a peacekeeping corps in South
declaration of war resolution, and let it Vietnam, separating the two sides that
be debated in Congress. fet, Mernibre:rs are making war, serving notice in that
, of Congress be counted, as to whether or part of Asia that the United Nations is
,not they want to declare war in South going to maintain the peace.
Vietnam, to officially and legally send The President of the United States is
boys to their death in that war, and let calling for the flags of other nations. I
the American people make their account- say to the President that there is only
lng_of that kind, of; vote,
- ? Mr. President, the Constitution can-
not be torn. One cannot ignore the Con-
stitution, even if he sits in the White
House. The Commander in Chief is as
liable under that Constitution as is any-
one else.
I will not countenance the war in
South Vietnam by remaining silent in
the Senate. There has been too much si-
lence in the Congress on the unconstitu-
tional war in South Vietnam. There has
been too much silence in the Congress
about the unjustified slaughtering of
American boys in South Vietnam.
? We hear talk to the effect that this
part of the world will go down to com-
munism if we do not kill some more
American boys in South Vietnam. Tell
it to the American people. If the Amer-
ican people were allowed to vote in a
referendum on this issue, the vote
against the unjustifiable killing of Amer-
ican boys in South Vietnam would be, at
a minimum, 5 to 1 against it. I believe
- the vote against it would be larger than
that.
I repeat what I have said before. I
have never made a criticism of American
foreign policy, and I never will, without
offering what I think is a more acceptable
substitute. I repeat?and we shall have
to repeat these elementary truths and
facts?that the Government of he United
States stands at this hour outside the
framework of international law in South
Vietnam. We cannot point to a single
principle of international law that justi-
fies American intervention in South Viet-
nam, but we have some international law
obligations. We signed the United Na-
tions Charter. We have a clear obliga-
tion to file a complaint with the United
one flag call he ought to be uttering. He
ought to be calling for having the United
Nations flag go to South Vietnam and
have us support the maintenance of a
peacekeeping corps in South Vietnam?
for the maintenance of peace, not for
the maintenance of war, but for bring-
ing peace to bear in South Vietnam, as
we support the United Nations operation
in the Congo, as we support the United
Nations operation in the Middle East,
and as we support the United Nations
operation in Cyprus?three other places
where the peace of the world has been
threatened. We are following a proper
course in those places, because we are
acting within the framework of inter-
national law. In South Vietnam, by uni-
lateral military action, without authority
from the United Nations, without any
right under international law, the United
States is making war. Secretary Mc-
Namara admits it. Secretary McNamara
admitted the other day that he was per-
fectly willing to accept the situation as
McNamara's war. He is perfectly willing
to accept it as a war involving the United
States, but it is an illegal war.
Until the President of the United
States sends to Congress a declaration
of war resolution, and that resolution
or declaration is passed by Congress, in
keeping with the Constitution, there is
no justification, legally, or morally, for
allowing a single American boy to be
killed in South Vietnam.
I say to the American people: "Give
this administration your answer.?
I say to the American people, "Make
clear to this administration that you
want to stop the killing of American boys
in an unnecessary and unjustifiable in-
volvement of the Government of the
Nations if any country, or any group of United States in an illegal war."
countries, is violating international law I say to the American people, "Tell this
and threatening the peace of the world. _Government to get back within the
The alibi of the Secretary of State, and framework of international law, and stop
the alibi of McNamara in defense of Mc- a course of conduct that amounts to in-
Namara's war, is that the Geneva agree7_,...ternational outlawry." For that is the
ment of In4 is being violated. The _present program of the United States
United States did not even sign it., The in South Vietnam.
United states is not even a signatory to
the Geneva agreement. South Vie_tn_arn_
did not sign theni. South Vietnam_inot MESSAGE FROI4 'ZEE HOUSE
signatory to it-, A, message from the House of Repre-
I will tell the Senate What_ our inter- sentatives, by Mr. Hackney, one of its
national law obligation is. We said, as reading clerks, announced that the House
observers at Geneva, that we would had agreed to the amendment of the
.XPePPlize the principles of the Geneva Senate to the amendment of the House
a_ccOrd as setting out principles of inter- to the bill (S. 1605) to amend the Fed-
national law. So we are now saying that eral Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenti-
North Vietnam, possibly Cambodia, and cide Act, as amended, to provide for
Possibly Red China, are violating the labeling of economic poisons with regis-
Geneva accord. South Vietnam is, too, tration numbers, to eliminate registra-
With our help If that is true, the viola- tion under protest, and for other pur-
tion is a threat .to the peace. If therpis poses.
ApprovedlPOr Release 2005/02/10: CIA-RDP664:1103R000200140047-2
9274 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE Aprit.-29.
ENROLLED BILL SIGNED
The message also announced that the
Speaker had affixed his signature to the
enrolled bill (S. 1341) for the relief of
Gabriel Kerenyi, and it was signed by the
Acting President pro tempore.
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1963
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (H.R. '1152) to enforce the con-
stitutional right to vote, to confer juris-
diction upon the district cdurts of the
United States to provide injunctive relief
against discrimination in public accom-
modations, to authorize the Attorney
-
General to institute suits to protect con-
stitutional rights in public facilities and
public education, to extend the Commis-
sion on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimi-
nation in federally assisted programs, to
establish a Commission on Equal Em-
ployment Opportunity, and for other
purposes.
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, twice
before I have stood in the U.S. Senate
to oppose attempts to abolish the right
of trial by jury in criminal cases. Each
time I have spoken on this subject I have
thought of the terrible sacrifices and
hardships that people went through over
Many hundreds of years to achieve this
almost God-given right. The very
thought of abolishing the right of trial
by jury frightens the minds of those who
Understand the legal processes and the
Constitution of the United States.
Mr. President, we are being asked in
the U.S. Senate to compromise the Amer-
ican citizen's constitutional right of
trial lay jury and welii the U.S. Senate
have no right to even consider such a
compromise. We swore to uphold and
defend the Constitution of the UB. Gov-
ernment and those who seek to abolish or
weaken the guarantee of trial by jury in
all criminal actions seek to tear up a part
Of this Constitution and are not, in my
opinion, upholding their sworn duty.
First the writers, whoever they were,
of the civil rights bill before us sought to
Completely eliminate trial by jury in
-erirainal contempt proceedings. Now
spontors of the amendment before us are
attempting to compromise the previously
held position by stating that we shall
guarantee trial by jury to everyone in
Criminal contempt proceedings except
where the fine is 30 days or $300 or less.
Mr. President, the Constitution itself
says in as plain language as can be writ-
ten in English that all criminal prose-
cutions shall be tried by a jury, as pointed
out by Mr. Justice Goldberg and Mr.
Justice Douglas in their dissenting opin-
ion as recently as April 6 of this year in
the case of United States against Ross R.
Barnett.
The Constitution, for those who may
not have read it recently, states in ar-
ticle III, section 2, clause 3:
The trial of all crimes, except in cases of
Impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial
shall be held In the State where the said
crimes shall have been committed; but when
not committed within any State, the trial
shall be at such place or places as the Con-
gress may by law have directed.
Mr. President, how clearer can the
English language be than It appears in
our Constitution when it says, "shall be
by Jury"? This seems to be as explicit
and as final as even death Itself. There
Is no possible means to get around this
language without utterly disregarding
the Constitution The practice of fining
a man for contempt of court without a
trial by jury is a judge-instituted, a
judge-invoked, and a Judge-enforced
abridgement of the Constitution of the
United States, and the U.S. Senate has
no business fostering and furthering such
practice in our halls of justice.
It is obvious that the Supreme Court
will, as Justice Black has urged, throw
this practice out "root and branch." In
the meantime, the Senate of the United
States should not allow this unfortunate
and unconstitutional practice to be
spread.
I said before, and I say again, that this
is eating away at the Constitution and
is a taking over by the Federal Govern-
ment of certain rights which belong to
the people and to the States. It is like
termites eating away the foundation of a
house. If this process continues, we
shall find, in the not-too-distant future,
all the privileges and rights given to the
American people eaten away, by act after
act of Congress.
I want to go into the case of the United
States against Ross B. Barnett. In the
footnote of the majority opinion delivered
by Mr. Justice Clark, it is stated:
Some members of the Court are of the view
that, without regard to the seriousness of the
offense, punishment by summary trial with-
out a Jury would be constitutionally limited
to that penalty provided for petty offenses.
This dictum by the Court simply means
that the judge is placed in the ludicrous
position of having to guess, first of all,
whether a person has been guilty of a
petty offense or not before he can deter-
mine whether or not to give the individ-
ual a trial by Jury, all of which means
the man Is going to be tried in the mind
of the judge before he is even offered a
right of trial by jury. There is no speci-
fication as to what a petty offense is in
criminal contempt, and we therefore
leave our judges and the justice of the
people at best in the middle of a great
Penalty guessing game. It is ridiculous,
absurd, and again I say, unconstitutional
to the core.
Getting back to the amendment be-
fore us, why?I ask why should a man
tined 31 days for criminal contempt get
the constitutional right of trial by Jury
while a second man, fined 30 days for
the same offense, be deprived of this con-
stitutional guarantee? Because of 1
day's difference in the fine we are going
to give one man what the Constitution
says is rightfully his and take away what
is rightfully another man's. This is the
worst form of discrimination in the
world.
I ask any Senator, if he were a Judge,
to imagine someone coming before WM
under such a contempt charge. Would
he not, as a judge, if he wished to dispose
of a case quickly, decide in his mind
that he would give the defendant 30
days, and in that way deprive him of the
right of trial by jury? Sponsors of such
proposals are taking away the most pre-
cious constitutional right an American
citizen has in order to pacify the thun-
dering mob in the street. Who would be
advocating it if that were not so? Ro-
man civilization fell because leaders
turned a deaf ear to right, to law, to
order, and listened to the thundering
mob. In this instance, the U.S. Senate,
If it compromises the smallest, minute
part of this constitutional right of trial
by jury, will be removing a foundation
stone upon which this Nation was built.
One compromise leads to another, and
once the process is started no one in this
Hall of Congress can say when or where
It will stop, until some day Congress has
turned over to the judges all of its au-
thority and all of the rights of the people,
Mr. President, at this point in my
speech I wish to read to the Senate the
dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Gold-
berg, in which the Chief Justice and Mr.
Justice Douglas joined, in the case of the
United States against Ross R. Barnett,
and the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice
Black, with whom Mr. Justice Douglas
joined.
Before reading the opinion by these
members of the Supreme Court, mem-
bers of the Supreme Court-were so di-
vided in regard to a matter so sacred to
the people of the United States, do not
Senators believe that we should at least
not go forward with the taking away of
the rights of the people?
Mr, Justice Goldberg, with whom Chief
Justice Warren and Mr. Douglas joined
In the dissenting opinion, wrote these
words. They are the words, actually, of
these three Justices of the Supreme
Court, speaking to the people?not only
speaking to the Senate, but to all 190
million people in the United States.
In response to the certified question, I
wouisi answer that defendants have both a
statutory and a constitutional right to have
their case tried by a jury.
A. THE STATUTORY RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL
Defendants claim that 62 Stat. 844, 18
U.S.C. 3691, entitles them to a jury trial
In this case. That statute provides in
relevant part that "the accused, upon de-
mand therefor, shall be entitled to trial by a
jury" whenever the alleged contempt "shall
consist in willful disobedience of any lawful
writ, process, order, decree, or command of
any district court of the United States by do-
ing or omitting any act or thing in violation
thereof, and the act or thing done or omitted
also constitutos a criminal offense under any
act of Congress ? ? *," except if the alleged
contempt is "committed in disobedience of
any lawful writ, process, order, rule, ?decree,
or command entered in any suit or action
brought or prosecuted In the name of, or on
behalf of, the United States." The statutory
right to a jury trial thus turns on three es-
sential factors; (I) the source of the order;
(2) the nature of the alleged violation; and
(3) the character of the party that "brought
or prosecuted" the "suit or action." I con-
clude for the reasons stated below that the
district court was the source of the basic
order in this case; that the nature of the al-
leged violation would make it a criminal of-
fense viler 74 Stat. 86, 18 U.S.C. 1599;
and that the "suit or action" in the Cithe
was brought and prosecuted not by the Unit-
ed States, but by James Meredith, a private
party. It follows that defendants have a
statutory right to be tried for their alleged
contempt by a jury of their peers.
I. The source of the order
The show-cause order entered by the court
of appeals on January 4, 1963, specified three
Approved For Release 2005/02/10: CIA-RDP66B0040314000200140047-2