Research Material for Speech- "The Broken Promise of 'Brown v Board of Education' ", 2004

6425 Cedar Drive Falls Church, Va. December 4, 1953

M. Joseph Bradley Algona, Iowa

Dear Joe:

It's a long time since I wrote you; but for a long time, I didn't write anybody, partly because we were too busy, and partly because I was having one hell of a time keeping my mouth shut. Now, however, the project has been released, and I have more time to think.

Right in the middle of my preparations to come out and visit Iowa with a view to staying, I got an offer to work on the Government's brief in the school segregation cases. Why I got it is a long story, and mostly irrelevant. But I got it. And I took it, of course, because all things considered, it is the most important case on the docket this term. It had originally been briefed and argued in the fall of 1952, under Attorney General McGranery---having typed the name I spit.

In the earlier argument, an unequivocal stand against segregation had been taken; the Court, unable to make up its own mind, had set the case down in June for reargument, principally on five questions which it asked. Two of the questions, and part of a third, concerned the legislative history of the Fourteenth Amendment, and legislative history has been my hobby for a few years.

This was, of course, the first time that the new Administration had been put on the spot on the race question; and it was quite a spot, as you can guess. One of the reasons the South had liked Eisenhower was because they thought he would equivocate on the racial question. True, he had expressed himself strongly on the racial issue generally, and in the District of Columbia; but he had also taken a strong stand on states' rights. Now, this is true, that to the rest of the Union, states' rights means an awful lot of diverse things, but to the South, it means the right of the states to continue racial inequalities if they so desire.

The historical job, principally the legislative history of the Congress from 1863 to 1875, turns out so far as the brief itself is concerned, to be mainly negative in its importance. By a thorough job, and while it may not be very brilliant, it is sure as hell thorough, we kept the parties to the case, colored and Southern, honest in their claims of what the Congress intended. As we conclude, restrainedly, the legislative history is not conclusive; but it is highly suggestive. And the suggestion is against segregation.

Where the historical reasoning was important, and so important as to me at least to be crucial, was to remind this Administration of the beginnings of the party to which they adhere. It is one thing to state

as an academic truism, that the Republican Party was founded to free the slaves. It is quite another, and more important, to remind representatives of that party, time and again as they attempt to work out this brief that they had to file, that their party creed has pretty much foreclosed how they must stand. You may recall, also, that right in the middle of this project, the President in his Boston speech recalled the eqal rights beginnings of his party, a preliminary payoff from our first researches.

So, with historical research, working something like 12 to 15 hours a day, Saturdays, Sundays, holidays, with no time off, we kept them honest. Watching the brass as it handled its great temptation was worth a nervous breakdown, which I didn't get anyway.

Three weeks ago last Friday, we finished the brief; the Appendix, longer still, we finished two weeks later. Both projects were cleared, in page proof, at least twice in echelons considerably higher than is given to even the most unusual cases. And the position was adopted.

Then, as one of the letters we got from the South immediately afterwards stated, then the "fiery hell of Southern oratory broke loose", and our sober, restrained little brief was characterized as an "inflammatory political document", designed to "stab the South in the back". The Atlanta Constitution, a notably liberal Southern newspaper, liberal that is by Southern standards, then went on to say that you should not blame the President, for when he spoke of states' rights, he obviously was merely confused, but you should point the finger at those who sang a siren song that good Democrats should follow the Republicans for they would end that miserable Truman civil rights program, naming Byrnes, Shivers, and Byrd.

You see, Joe, this was a wonderful opportunity. First, to get my name on an important brief; second, to work on the most complicated legislative history problem that has come along in some decades; third, to contribute something of importance to the history of these years; but most importantly, to do a non-political professional job and to enjoy the consequences, even though those consequences were purely irrelevant to the work at hand.

Now I'm done, and I'm tired. As a result of our efforts, and the compliments paid our brief by professionals whose praise is praise indeed, we, and me included, are to be kept on the Department's rolls. For awhile at least, probably permanently.

Perhaps I'm too tired of it, or perhaps I have the glimmerings of good sense, but the more I think of it, the more the idea of a practice in Iowa becomes attractive. Just to think, to be unhatched, free to say and do what I'd like to say and do, that is most attractive. And as for a living, I should be able to make a living there, and that is all I've ever been able to do here.

The financial end is still a rub; I can't just quit until I have something to quit to, and quite apparently I can't do that until I can go out there and look over the country. So, I shall stay here for the next couple of months at least, until I work up a week's leave. Then I'll take that leave for a trip to the plains, and be seeing you.

In the meanwhile, if something occurs to you as to a good place to look, let me know. I have also been corresponding with Ladd, who thinks I might well find something reasonable.

On this story, which is a capsule resume of how the South was restored to its proper loyalty, most of it has become public information one way or another. In the event I slipped, and said more than I ought, don't quote me on anything. But watch your newspaper next week, for Dixiecrat quotes. There should be some lulu's.

By the way, the assignment to the permanent staff I spoke of may involve writing speeches for the Attorney General. Won't you help to rescue an old friend from a life of prostitution?

Sincerely,

John Lamont