Southern Regional Council debated the adoption of an anti-segregation statement
The Southern Regional Council members argued over the merits of a proposed statement against segregation. The decision did not hinge on racial identity but rather on concern for an organizational stance with mass appeal.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Guy B. Johnson, December 16, 1974. Interview B-0006. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- JACQUELYN HALL:
-
Was there much overlap between the CIC members and the the new SRC board
members?
Dr. GUY B. JOHNSON:
Well, that . . . yes, there was some overlap, but I'm not sure how much.
I would guess that around a third were CIC carry-overs. Well, then
another thing that happened, another highlight of the meeting, was the
afternoon discussion of policies. Here, they got into the controversy
over segregation. Should this Council come out right now with some
strong declaration against segregation, or should
it not? Well, there were good arguments on both sides and some very good
talks made. And you could see some of the white members, of a moderate
stripe, getting a little worried about having so much discussion over
this question. And some of the more militant black members getting a
little disgusted, you know, that this thing wasn't something that you
could vote on at once and declare yourself against segregation and all
that. The prevailing view was that, first, there is not a damn thing
that this organization itself can do to stop segregation, because this
is in the law and there is no hope of changing these laws anytime soon.
The nearest hope is from the courts, who might change the interpretation
of the Constitution, which of course, is what eventually happened . . .
but that as an organization, you could do no more than individuals could
and had been doing for a long, long time in their personal relations,
you know. In other words, having equal personal relations, having Negro
guests in your home and all this sort of thing. But that the main
bulwark of segregation was the laws and if you made some declaration
against segregation, you weren't going to do any good, and if you hoped
to have some kind of a mass support, mass membership, you would probably
frighten off any chance of this, you see, if you said that the main
thing was segregation and "we're going to
be fighting that." Well, interestingly enough, some of the
whites were for the anti-segregation statement and some of the blacks
were against it.
- JACQUELYN HALL:
-
Oh, really?
Dr. GUY B. JOHNSON:
Yes.
- JACQUELYN HALL:
-
Who were the whites who were for it?
Dr. GUY B. JOHNSON:
Oh, I couldn't attempt to recall now, exactly who was . . . oh, for the
statement. Well, as I recall, Clark Foreman was one and several other
people, white and black, who were in his Southern Conference for Human
Welfare.
- JACQUELYN HALL:
-
Do you remember who the major proponents of both sides were?
Dr. GUY B. JOHNSON:
I think that Benjamin Mays spoke in favor of a statement and certainly
Clark Foreman. Beyond that, I'm afraid that I couldn't recall, but one
thing I do recall, is that the Negro editor, Carter Wesley, from
Houston, who of course, was a very militant man, and very
anti-segregation personally, said, "My position is wellknown. I
don't have to tell you that I despise segregation and I think that the
laws are unfair and unconstitutional. But, after all, we have got to
consider what will be our best strategy here in trying to make some
appeal to the people of the South, trying to get some support, trying to
get people to work with us. And I am quite willing
to forego the pleasure of sponsoring a statement against segregation for
the sake of what I hope will be some better response among the southern
people . . . a stronger organization, you know, to work on the things
that we know we can do." Well, it was just purely a matter of
the best tactics to use, you see. And this was the prevailing view, and
so, they decided not to issue any statement against segregation. But
that was the highlight in terms of policy. It took up quite a bit of
time.