Mr. Nixon has recklessly charged me with failing
to discuss civil rights in the South. He makes this charge in spite of
the fact that in our first debate on nationwide television before the American
people, which was broadcast to the South, the North, the East and the West,
I said that I would not he satisfied "until every American enjoys his full
constitutional rights" and I went into detail on the inequality of opportunities
Negroes face in education, in housing and in employment. Mr. Nixon did
not choose to take up this problem at all.
The charges were made by Mr. Nixon in spite
of the fact that I have affirmed my support of the Democratic platform
and my concern that every American, regardless of race, be assured his
full constitutional rights, in every southern and every border State I
have visited: North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Texas.
Mr. Nixon makes this charge in spite of my
record for dealing frankly with this problem in both the North and in the
South prior to the time I became a candidate for the Presidency.
Mr. Nixon makes this charge despite his own
failure to state his position. Each time the press has forecast a significant
civil rights statement by Mr. Nixon in the South what has come out has
been States rights.
Mr. Nixon likes to repeat that "everybody
is aware of the strong convictions" he has on this issue. But I have been
unable to find a statement of those convictions in any of his southern
speeches. Instead he tells his southern - not his northern - audiences
that he does not "believe in coming into the South and speaking in a way
that will make the issue more difficult to solve" - that he favors "an
honest program" and that the proposals in the Democratic civil rights platform
"promise far more than they could possibly produce," and would "set the
cause back" since any "law that we pass in this field will only be effective
as public support for that law is developed."
Certainly this does not imply support for
the full constitutional rights of every American citizen. Certainly there
is nothing in this statement on the inequality of opportunity which Negroes
face in education, in housing and in employment. Nor do we know what Mr.
Nixon thinks about the peaceful student sit-in demonstrations, a historic
application in our country of the principles of nonviolence through which
Mahatma Gandhi won freedom in India. In North Carolina Mr Nixon did say
that sit-ins must not violate local law. The student sit-in leaders themselves
protested this statement. Will Mr. Nixon modify it when he speaks in New
York?
Although Mr. Nixon is critical of the Democratic
program as set forth in the platform, he does not say which part of the
program he dislikes. I can only assume that he opposes equal opportunity
in housing and jobs, in view of his repeated votes against an effective
FEPC bill, in view of his failure to use the committee which he heads to
end discrimination in Government contracts and in view of his failure to
support action on an Executive order ending discrimination in Federal housing
programs.
One of the Nation's great newspapers, the
Louisville Courier-Journal, yesterday called attention to the performance
by Mr. Nixon in the South, stating: "He is clearly trying to make southern
segregationists believe that he and the Republicans offer them a haven."
I challenge Mr. Nixon to state where he stands
on sit-ins, to say whether he has modified his position and today favors
a Fair Employment Practices Commission, to specify what portion of the
Democratic platform he finds promises too much, to discuss whether he has
any plans to end segregation in housing, and to tell us where he stands
- with egard to the effort to grant the Attorney General additional powers
in civil rights litigation as set forth in title III of the 1957 civil
rights bill.
A presidential campaign in 1960 is too important
and too critical to permit confusion concerning the record or the views
of the candidates. I hope Mr. Nixon will set forth his views clearly and
then stay with the facts.