PAGE TWO
THE CAROLINA TIMES SATUBDAY. JUNE 2t. 1957
The Choice Facing Legionnaires
Those who may still be debating within
their souls whether to convict the North
Carolina American Legion of discrimination
for assigning its Negro units to the tail end
of its state convention parade in Durham last
Saturday and thereby forcing the Negro units
to withdraw from participation may be aided
in reaching some decision by the following
facts culled from recent World Almanacs
describing the general outlook of the Legion.
“Sept. 11 (1955) — Seaborn P. Collins,
national commander of the American Legion,
urged members to boycott the Fund for the
Republic set up, 1952, by the Ford Foun
dation. He said the Fund was telling the
American people communism was nothing to
worry about. Collins considered Robert M.
M. Hutchins (former University of Chicago
president), fund director, unsuited to direct
the project to mold public opinion.”
In another place is the following entry
which is more revealing of the Legion’s at
titude toward the world and humanity:
“American Legion Convention Rejects
Own Report Clearing UNESCO.
“The 37th national convention of the
American Legion in Miami, October 10-13,
1955, elected J. Addington Wagner, 41, a
Battle Creek, Michigan lawyer national
commander to succeed Seabon P. Collins of
Las Cruces, N. M. Wagner served as a naval
officer in World War II and was wounded at
Okinawa...
“The principal debate centered on the
Legion’s investigation of UNESCO The
convention voted birthday greetings to Pres
ident Eisenhower, ‘our No. 1 Legionnaire’;
opposed continued economic aid to India be
cause India ‘actually is giving material aid to
Communist Russia’. . . endorsed the Bricker
amendment to limit treaty-making powers
of the Executive; opposed U. S. participation
in world government' projects; asked U. S.
withdrawal from the Korean Armistice
Comm, (ission).”
(As a national group, the Legion should be
uniquely and first hand familiar with the
bloodiness and horror of war since its mem
bers are all ex-servicemen, who have parti
cipated in every major war of the pas.t half
century).
“ ... It defeated a demand that Congress
give $100 a mo. (rfth) to every living World
War I veteran over 60 ..
(The Legion was organized from a group
of World War I soldiers in France in 1919,
following the Armstice).
' "Continued attacks in Legion meetings
against UNESCO (United National Educa
tional, Scientific and Cultural Org.) over
several years led the Legion to appoint a
committee to investigate charges that
UNESCO was (1) athetistic, (2) communis
tic or subversive, (3) favorable and tending
toward world goven^mt.
The committse worked 18 mos. and early
in September, i955, presented a report com
pletely exonerating UNESCO and asserting
that ail ctiarges rested on misinformation and
misinterpretation. It said that accusations
made in Los Angeles m 1951 had been found
baseless by the Los Angeles Board of Educa
tion and by the New York board, that allega-
had been circulated by pressure groups and
individuals whose aim was to discredit the
U. N. The committee was disturbed by an
intolerance and implacability of attitude.’ It
warned against namecalling because honest
men differed with one another. It told the
Legion that communism remains a deadly
danger as an idea, but it ‘must be met with an
idea of greater validity, the idea of the free
man deriving his individual rights from
God.’
"The convention rejected the report.”
Finally, the Legion decided that the lay
Commission appointed by the Congress to ad
vise U. S. participation in theAJNESCO
should be abolished, urged Congress to keep
a watch over any UNESCO activities and re-
IHE KI6UI OF DISSENT
Editor's Note: Last May, 1956,
Jack O’Dewd, jormer editor of
the Florence, S. C. Morning
News delivered a speech before
the HarUville, S. C. Rotary
club. Since that address, Ur. O’-
Dowd was forced by local ad-
vertisers to leave the Morning
News ami is currently with the
Chicago Sun Times. Because of
the profound insights into pre^
vailing spirit of our tim«s in the
South, the TIMES i« reprinti>i0
in two installments Mr. O''
Dowd's speech. Herewith begins
the first installment in the se
ries. The second will appear
next week.
I am not here to discuss seg
regation vs desegregation, im
portant as that is. Something ol
even greater importance is
what the sentiment concomitant
to the Supreme Court’s decision
is doing to the Southland.
My comments wUi concern
what is happening to our sec
tion ,our people, our ideals and
the Ireedoms the more ardent
pro-segregationists say they are
defending.
I, personally, think segrega
tion is morally indelensible. If
the honest, the sincere, the just
and the public spirited want to
debate this great issue on the
City Council Mentality Demands Superior Humanity
It is to be wondered how anyone can main
tain a faith in the ultimate triumph of democ
racy, freedom, justice and human decency in
the South in the face of such long and adam
ant opposition by this section to the laws of
the country which would proclaim freedom
and equal treatment for all its citizens. This
opposition was displayed in classic form to
us in Durham by Monday night’s drama at
the City Council chamber.
For the past two years since segregation in
public facilities has been declared illegal and
the injunction upon exercise of governmental
powers imposed by the ruling made abund
antly clear in a number of decisions by sev
eral branches of federal court, the Durham
City Council has chosen to ignore the mand
ate of the court and continues to pursue its
traditional course of segregation. In two
years time, it has not even given the glimmer
of a hint that it would even try gradually to
bring its policies in line with those of the
national government.
Monday night, it was told by one of its
own, the City Attorney, that it can no longer
segregate legally in the use of public facili
ties. In spite of the abundant testimony of
federal courts and now that of one of its own,
the Council, according to the report of daily
newspaper, “made no move to indicate it will
soon abandon” segregation. In effect, the ac-
aifirmed the Legion position ol “opposition to
any UNESCO interference in U. S. Schools or I expediency, then there
“world government propagandizing” in the J J"
U. S-., and described UNESCO as dissemina
ting educational materiais.” I ^ here as a pro-inte-
, Igrationist. You can say that I
It IS difficult to see how any sensiUve, fair-; j,ere as an anti-pro-segrega-
minded and honest person can remain a part | tionist. I am here to say that
of an organization which has displayed such, the nature of the opposition to
obvious neurotic tendencies as those ilius-' Supreme Court has almost
. » j • ii. i j reached the tenor that charac-
trated ui the foregomg documentary. With southern thinking and
acting just before the cadets
from the Citadel fired on the
ship, the Star of the
Last June 17, the Morning
News ran an editorial entitled
"We Can’t Win”. U expressed
the opinion that eventually the
Supreme Court’s decision would
be law in South Carolina. It
said that the South is a minori
ty section and will receive mi
nority consideration. It said the
decision to be made was not if
we will yield but when. The de
cision, it said, is to be limited
to cost and time. We can't de
termine the eventual outcome
—we can only set the price to
be paid.
This, I believe, is true.
But whether it Is true or not,
whether opposition is to be a
delaying action or a march to
ward victory isn’t as jnuch at
issue as is the nature ol the op
position. For the sake of argu
ment, let's aysume thM. tb«
South’s oppoaition galn« the vic
tory. If everything fine In the
South is to be destroyed in the
name of segregation, what has
been won? If we must destroy
exerting positive leadership in
the South in order to preserve
a social pattern of no positive
value, 'What has been- «ccom-
plished7
My hope in this matter is that
the argument is not an absolute
and that there Is still room for
debate. The South is not weld
ed into a cry, a cause, a flaming
... * i-. 1, 1 „ sword that will destroy itself
tion or inaction of the Council says to all modiflca-
who would hear; ^on.
“We know that we can’t segregate legally. ^ Which ever way the South
We have heard the voice of the federal and 8°®® the difficult tomorrows
Supreme Courts, and now we hear the voice
. 1 X *11 xi . ed properly if it Is determined
of our own lawyer. But we will continue to people such as you. The
disobey, to remain outside of the law until.leadership of the South is being
we are forced to comply." j placed in new—and untested—
^ i J . khands bccause the historic
Most people who are interested in the ex- ig^^g^ship of our section has
tension of democracy to all the people have I done nothing of positive value
such a retrograde view of the world and
humanity^ a view point which is all the more
illogical because of the circumstances imder
which the Legion was founded and the ex>
periences which its members have been put
through, the Legion imposes a rather sad
alternative upon its Negro members, who as
a minority must share in the one-world and
one-brotherhood concept. It seems to us tiiat
they must decide either to withdraw and
form an organization of their own or remain
with the hope of someday and somehow per
suading their brothers to a more tolerant ac
ceptance of things which are not native-born
white American products. This is, admitted
ly, a tough job, but it is no more than Ne
groes are daily called upon to do. Along
With the inevitable humiliation which ac
companies the latter choice is the danger that
Negro legionnaires may become so engrossed
in the details of running their own organi-
.zations that they will forget the great gulf
*which separatei Legion ideals and those of
democracy and, consequently, cease to con
tend for human dipiity. It is therefore im
perative that Negro legion members look
upon themselves as more than a fun-loving
organization and examine their very souls to
make certain they can measure up to the task
—J— xl i
wfucii II Timrv;
long since read the mind of southern official
dom. Negroes who are tired of bearing the
enslavement of segreatlon know that to win
full freedom for themselves they must take
the initative, since their elected officials
have proven all too long and too well that
they intend to default on this issue. But
when they do take the initiative, they are
persecuted; their organizations, like the
NAACP, are harmstrqng with a bunch of
police restrictions, they are denied credit,
jobs, their places of business are boycotted,
they afre dismissed from their jobs, their
their homes and churches are bombed, and
often they are subjected to physical violence.
Lately, in Durham, they have been accused
of acting in “bad faith.”
It requires superior humanity to deal with
the kind of thinking that is in evidence in
Durham’s City Council.
CAROLINA TIMES
MAIN OFFICE — 431 EAST PETTIGREW STREET
Phones 5-0671 and 2-2S13 — Durham, North Carolina
Published At Durham, North Carolina Every Saturdou Bu
THE UNITED PUBLISHERS, Inc.
Entered as second clau matter at th» Pott Ofjice at Durham, North Carolina u
der the Act 0/ March 3,1879.
~ ~ L. E. AUSTIN, Publisher '
CLATHAN ROSS, Editor JESSE GRAY, Advertitina Mar
M E. JOHNSON. ComtroUar
WINSTON-SALEM OFFICE — 3M N. CHUBCH ST. — PHONE S-OMf
Mrs. Dorothy M. Robinsom, Mawamii
SUBSCBIPTION BATES
I3.M One Ymr Tan Canta Slagk Copy
$2.00 SIk Meatts |4.M — PorelgB Conntriea.
in the present crisis.
Becausc the traditional lead
ership of our section has allow
ed itself to become intimidated,
the new “leaders” have led us
into strange paths. Paths that
are dangerous and path" that—
again—threaten to destroy the
Ireedoms these latter day “lead
ers” say they are lighting to
preserve.
Let’s look at the nature ol
the opposition; the dangers ol
the opposition; and wiiat should
be done. The suggestions lor re
medial action should be el spe
cial interest to you. You luiow
whether or, not you have been
exerting positive leadership in
this grave crisis. II you haven’t,
the suggested remedies will at
least remind you that there is
a need for honest leadership.
The nature ol the opposition
has been absolute. A lew tiours
after the Supreme Court an
nounced its decision on that
May 17, the cry went up Irom
South Carolina and the Georgia
capitol, and Irom Southern Sen
ate and Congressional olllces in
Washington—“We will never
consent. We will resist to the
end. We will never mix. The
Supreme Court cannot force us
to desegregate.”
The nature ol the opposition
has centered around the theme
of State Rights. States Rights is
a good cry. And, as G. B. Shaw
says, “A good cry is hall the
battle.”' Everyone Interested in
the preservation ol the Consti
tution is interested in States
Rights. The rights ol the sever
al states must remain Inviolate
il the republic is to remain
strong and to operate within the
framework ol the Constitution.
But loyalty to the Idea ol States
Rights does not demand a loyal
ty to the abuses ol the cry or
to the sins committed in its
name. To say that the South is
defending segregation because
the South is interested in States
Rights is to construct a defense
and opposition on a framework
of lies. The South is defending
segregation because the South
lilces segregation. The defense
is not properly made in the
name of States Rights.
T. S. Eliot had a line in his
play, “Murder in the Cathe
dral,” that would best describe
this attitude — “The last temp
tation is the greatest treason,
to do the right deed for the
wrong reason.” “A battle for
States Rights is proper, but seg
regation isn’t a good battle
ground for a holy crusade.
Southerners can’t expect the
idea of states rights to be an ac
ceptable battle cry, or legal de
fense, when they equate states
rights with segregation. Ask
the average — or superior —'
Southerner the meaning ol the
term “States Ri{|hts” and be
will give you a pro-segregatlon
answer.
Even the magical cry ol
States Rights is not enough to
convince many ol us in the
South that law and eqxiality un
der law can mean one thing in
one section ol the country and
something qutte-dtfterent in an-
other section. Any political de
vice that can serve to make one
man less a citizen than another,
give him less opportimity
than another is, or should be,
considered politically inunoral.
With our Interpretation ol
States Rights, we are trying to
tell the world our Constitution
al Democracy means—All men
are equal; but, some are less
equal than others.
And the nature ol this oppo
sition Is less a matter ol states
rights than an attempted return
toward state sovereignty. It was
established In the 1860’s that
the states did not h^ve negative
powers. Calhoim’s beautilul
theories ol legal rejection
through non-concurrence were
demonstrated to be unaccept
able to the nation.
They are no less unacceptable
today.
(To be continued)
INVITING THE UNDBRTAKER--
Col.
you from m
j busin«4J o-f drivin^-
bftrhdH
I ' am
L—
C. r. C.oJnch lofe Drlw»r l»ogu»
s
eJ
“HIS DAY IS COMING TO AND END - THE
COURTS HAVE SPOKEN”
“HE FORGIVES OUR SINS”
By REVEREISD HAROLD ROLAND
Peutorf MottrU GUead Baptist Church
“My son, your sins are forgiv
en. .. . ” Mark 2:5.
Man needs the assurance of
the forgiveness ol sins. Man, so
prone to sin, needs to know ttiat
God forgives sins. To us we
need to be aware ol the great
spiritual lact ol the forgiveness
ol our sins. We know that v/e
sin. We need also to know and
be assured ol the fact that God
will forgive our sins. Our sins
can become an awful. Inward
and painful burden to us. We
can become very burdened by
11 inner sense ol guilt. Yes, sin
savM 'an inner uneasiiteas in
the inind and the soul of man.
The after eHects ol our sins can
become very painlul and bur
densome; this is what we call
guilt leelings. Why would you
struggle on with tliat painlul,
uneasy feeling ol guilt which
follows oiu: sins? Every sin
leaves Its mark In the body, the
mind or the soul. What shall I
do? Conless your sins and God
Is ready to forgive your sins.
God In Christ is ever ready to
say to you as he did to the man
bearing the burden of guilt and
sin a long time ago . . . “YOUR
SINS ARE FORGIVEN. . . .”
God’s forgiveness for our sins
means healing in our souls. For
giveness is soul healing. For
giveness brings relief from the
burdens of our sins. Forgive
ness brings quietness to the dis
turbed and burdened souls ol
men. Why go on with the soul
sickness ol sin when you can
)}e healed? Your soul sickness
may lead to the sickness ol your
body. And the soul sickness of
sin leads to the sickfiess ol the
mind. Many ol our body and
mind sicknesses are due to the
sins we have not conlessed. All
we have to do is conless our
sins and God will heal our
souls.
God’s forgiveness of sins
brings peace to our souls. Many
a strife -~Hdden ~ eihd turbulent
soul is due to some hidden and
unlorglven sin we have com
mitted. Be honest and lace your
sins. Confess your sins belore
God and man and you will find
the rich Irults of inward peace.
And inward or soul peace is the'
only true peace. We seek In
vain for real peace until we
make peace with God and man.
When we lace and conless our
sins then we are ready to re
ceive the wonderful, matchless
peace of God. Confess yoUf sins
and God will give you his
peace. Is not this the heart ol
. . . “The peace ol God which
passeth all human understand
ing?"
The joy ol salvation
the mi^ty burden of
sin has been taken away,
our sius^^re forgiven by God^
we can say with the poet. . . .
“O happy day that fixed my
choice on Thee my Savior and
my God. . . ” What a joyous
blessing to know that God is
ever ready to forgive all ol our
sins. Let us be honeit and con-
less our sins that we may find
the rich spiritual Irults of God’s
forgiveness.
Watch on the
Poto]
THE VNTIMID TEXAN
WASHINGTON
Ralph W. Yarl>orough, the
new Senator from Texas, is get
ting the “let’s look him over”
treatment from friend and loe
alike as he settles doW to his
new role as a legislator. As his
colleagues. Sens. Kefauver,
Douglas, .and Hcmphrey well
know, b^g a liberal anywhere
Is tough enoui^ these days. But
being a “liberal” in oil-rich
Texas is probably as tough an
assignment as any man can im
pose upon himsell.
In his first eight weeks In the
Capitol, Yarborough has acquit
ted himsell on several scores
but still has to prove himsell
on others.
You get some idea ol the
problems lacing a man like
Yarborough in examining a
speech he made here recently
before the Woman’s National
Democratic Club. It might have
made headlines but lor some
reason many Capitol corre
spondents did not know about
it jmtiV several days alter de
livery. ,
“Coming, as I do, Irom five
years ol contlq^ political
warfare in Texas where every
force ol greed and avarice In
that state were aligned against
... 1 have been stunned
almost to silence by the kind
ness and generosity ol the treat
ment accorded us in Washing
ton,” Yarborough said, qpeak-
ing lor hfanaeU and his family.
His remarks were Interspers
ed with ccMnments that Indicate
he spoke
feeling.
with
Yarborough’s topic was “The
Democratic Future”. The text,
we understand. Is now being
studied carefully by his lellow-
Texans, Senate Democratic
Leader Lyndon Johnson and
Speaker Sam Rayburn. There
are many who think tils re
marks were aimed primarily at
them.
“When the Democratic Party
quits tiptoeing down timidity
street, and, boldly, as Roose
velt, proclaims Its lalth and be-
liel in men over money and ma
chines, then will . America again
place her lalth in the Party ol
Jellerson and Jackson and ol
Wilson, ol Roosevelt and Tru
man.
“I fervently pray lor that
day,” Yarboough said. “I want
my children and their children
to live in the same pure air that
was on this earth the days ol
man's first creation.’’
•*••*•••*•*
THE YARDS’nCKS OF A
TEXAS LIBERAL — Yarbor
ough then did what lew Demo
cratic senators do these days.
He listed the “Issues” which,
in his judgment, indict the El
senhower administration aa*the
“cult. ol the dollar worship
pers”.
First, he^ spoke ol huge tax
wrlte-olls t;^the^«iant utilities.
They total, ne jiud, $788 mil
lions or “ten dollars a person
Irom every wage earner In
America. ...” Next, he men
tioned the high intaest and
“hard money*’ poUcy. This lifts
between |10 bUlUm and 918 bil-
>n \
ray. Wh^K
I bv GodN
By Robert Spivack
considerable lion Irom the taxpayers annual
ly.
Other Items Included the
“discount rate” ’ in homebuUd-
ing, which rockets the cost ol
many mortgages to 15 per eent
Interest per year. The “larm
decline”, he continued, has
driven 300,000 larm lollies
toward the cities since the Re
publicans took over.
Finally he praised Sen. Ke-
lauver, who is particularly un
popular with the Johnson-Ray-
bum combine and he had nice
things also to say about Adlai
Stevenson.
To any Northern Liberal,
though, there were two obvious
gaps in Yarborough’s political
mdnilesto. There was not a
word on civil rights. Ros^as
there any mention ol the nfew—>
elforts to put across a Natural
Gas bill.
Political realities being what
they are in Dixie it is probably
asking too much for any Texas
officeholder to speak up on
these Issues. Yarborough’s talk
would probably have had great
er impact if he had, at least,
acluiowledged that the prob
lems exist.
Sen. Douglas said recently
that no one expects a man in
political life to “commit sui
cide”. But there are others ^u>
will await with interest some
comments from Yarborough,
they will want to hear 'nhat
suggestions an intelligent
Southern “moderate” has for
solving these perplexing prob
lems.