ustxtxb_obs_1956_05_30_50_00001-00000_000.pdf

Tice one great rule’ of composition is to speak the truth. Thoreau O’rxas 011,6rrurr . An Independent Liberal Weekly Newspaper We will Nerve *0 group or party but will hew hard to the truth as we find it and the right as we see it. :Vol. 48 TEXAS, MAY 30,11956 10c per copy ..o. 5 A. Fight Over a Delegate i . Fght Develops % AUSTIN State President of Electricians on the delegation.” Fath called Lof Over July BaliQt . 7 A formal protest will be filed with tis’s replacement “a straight-out case the Democratic Rational Comfnittee Will Contest His Ouster of anti-labor reaction.” Interposition, Intermarriage Nash, informed of this, told the Ob over the action of the Johnson: lead off if that’s the way they felt about it. ‘server : “I . don’t remember anything Possible Referendum Topics ership at die state Democratic con off the delegation Mrs. Bentsen was Johnson’s candiabout it.” ,. vention in booting . , AUSTIN against Mrs. R. D. Randolph of Houslike other committees at the conven A legal battle is on the way: over date’ for. national committeewoman –. The delegates committee, which, to Chicago the president of the Texas :State Association of Electri-7, ton, who was elected. ‘ tion, were firmly under the senior whether racial issues can be posed on Cal ‘Workers. , Loftis has designated Creekmore senator’s control, replaced Loftis with a primary ballot asurged by the Marcus Loftis, who is also business. Fath, Austin attorney and leader of Robert K. McKinney. Texas Referendum Committee with Manager of Local 520 of the Interna-: the Travis County liberals at the ton -Loftis told the Observer: petitions presented to the State lion -al Brotherhood o f Electrical vention, to file . a protest on his behalf Democratic Executive Committee at Ork …. Workersin Austin, was elected a delwith the national committee. I did go all out in precinct w I worked in at least half the precincts in the state convention ‘in Dallas. egate ‘to Chicago by his congressional Fath says that the Democratic Party Austin to swing this thing for Lyndon , Some loyalist attorneys, after. pre caucus at the state convention and rein convention in Nev Orleans in 1954, Johnson as favorite son and chairman of Jiminary .study of the questions, are-of, placed by the convention committee on adopted a rule that required state the delegation. I was floor manager at the opinion that despite the petitions delegates. Democratic .conventions to honor del= our precinct convention. We’ve never signed ..by 141;149 voters, the ques Loftis told the Observer that :he egate. selections of congresSional dislost it, and we didn’t need Lyndon John tions proposed cannot be placed on the c h not .know why he was knocked trict caucuses. . son to win, but I got the people to go primary ballot. off the delegation, but, he said, “I , Fath said that James Nash, Austin along. In good faith I went ‘all the way They believe the section of the elec with the manand there were a lot of think it’s more than anything else beoil operator who was working for the tion code under which the petitions b had t that h th le a a to be convinced to go cause I’m a labor representative.” Johnson forces at Dallas and who was our people were filed is unconstitutional because He added : secured an appointment as an Amerialong with liim. it fails to set forth any standard for -Loftis said he supported Johnson as determining ‘ whether signers of the and said they were’. gonna. take us off tions by Senator Johnson; told Fath, “favorite son,” but .”he led a lot of petitions are qUalified voters. ‘ One attorney pointed out : “One of Bentsen \(for national ,committee’can’t make this a labor delegation,” after he got it, he definitely threw his ’em these petitions was sent to my office. I could have put 20 signatures on it if I had wished, either the names of Campaign Expense Reports. mittee to verify any of the sigma my friends or my enemies. The law does not set out any way for,the coma ., tit way-as saying the Man gave ‘him the are saying -is. pure fabrication,” he de Another attorney cited a 1906 statkey to. a safety box in a local bank–7a Glared: Johnson hotly denied it. In a surprising round of testimo-… ate which he said required that be box containing $25,000 in cash ‘ from nv C. T.’ Johnson of Austin has dis hi wch he was to take his for the Two earlier witnesses, ‘Mrs. Betty fore the questions could be placed on printing. pay Closed that he spent $1200 ion travel Byer and E. B. Fuller, had given the ballot, every signature would have expenses during his 1954 campaign ! StAternents which partially corroborto _lac verified . by affidavita proced for Lieutenant governor, although Gannaway, at . filing of ‘the suit, tire which obviously could not be- made a deposition firmly denying that . ate& Johnson’s charge that Gannaway, he had reported only $125 of such had indicated he did printing for completed. he had been -involved in any such Ramsey in 1954. The petition asked the, executive expenditues. _ transaction. committee to subinit to the direct Johnson who. recently filed a $65, Tenor of testimony by Johnson was Fuller testified he had talked to. vote of the people of Texas at the 000 suit for alleged unreported callathat the suit had been . filed on .the Gannaway three , times while helping Democratic primary election on July paign expenditures against Lt. Gov. . basis of statements allegedly made to Johnson secure an affidavit. He 28, 1956, the .following -questions: Ben Ramsey, Brawn & Root, Inc., and him by Gannaway, despite the fact charged that Gannaway had said in 1. Mixing white and Negro children in Austin .: printer David Gannaway, was that Gannaway later repeatedly .re_ his presence that his printing firm had public. schools: giving a deposition in that action when _fused to sign an affidavit on quesprinted campaign literature for Ram For specific legislation exempting any he confirmed his $1200 expenditure. tion. He refused to identify persons at a cost of $12,000 Which was order child from comilulsory attendance at iri 7 who he ‘said he suspected of giving ed by a man who said he was repre tegrated ‘schools attended by white per Under a . h.ammerNig examinat ion the alleged key to Gannaway on sentative of Brown & Root. i sons and . Negroes; Against specific legislation exempting by ,Everett Looney, attorney for grounds he “didn’t know Which one.” Thenotary public described himself any child from . -compulsory attendance at Brown & Root, Inc., and Ramsey, He said he had been given the list. as “shocked and amazed” when Gan integrated schools attended by white Johnson said he had filled out his of names of “suspects” by a Houston naway gave him a deposition denying persons and Negroes. campaign expenditure statement in acnewspaperman he didn’t know. ” I the alleged transaction: 2. Intermarriage between Negroes and cordance with ‘instructions from the don’t recall the boy’s name. Heput Saying that some of the testi white persons: >, Secretary of State. He said .it was the list in my hand and -said they’d be mony of Fuller and Gannaway was For specific legislation perfecting state laws i s understanding that candidates of interest in the Gannaway suit,” contradictory, L o o n e y declared laws against intermarriage between need itemize ohnson said. or report only expendiJ ‘ . there’s perjury someplace and it ap his p white perSons and Negroes. .. tures of $10 or more. ‘ Looney charged that Johnson was pears to me that it ought to be submitstate laws against intermarriage between Against specific legislation perfecting “In other words,” roared Looney, saying the names were given him “af-ted to the grand jury.” Yelderman white persons and Negroes. “you think it is all right for a candi ter this law suit was filed. ”What you . date to spend a million dollars so long as he never spends over $10 at one time ?” . How -Oil Is Not Produced Johnson insisted that was what, he had been told by the secretary of state. \(Resum;.ng a series on various field in the state. Bottornhole presbasis of 75 percent for acreage and aspects. of the Texas Railroad sures in the wells, gas-oil ratios, and 25 percent for. each well. In other Looney produced a deposition made Commission.Ed. by Johnson on Oct. 1 1955 in John other factors are considered to deterwords, if a field’s maximum efficient , , AUSTIN mine the maximum rate at which prodaily .production is 100,000 barrels, Son’s suit against Vern Sanford, ‘ in Texas wells daily produce 2,750,duction can be permitted in each field 25,000 barrels are divided among the which the Austin contractor tesfified 000barrels of oilarid cotildp round. the state during his 1954 cam rowith a view . to obtaining. the greatest welts on an equal basis, and 75,000 to spending only $125 in traveling .a duce another 1,500,000 barrels if practicable total production in the long barrels are assigned to wells on an paign. . . they were permitted to do so. run: acreage basis., , . Johnson said he testified that $125 Underproduction is maintained as Next the commission has to allocate i’*” . Few critics of the commission’s pol -was all he reported; that all the other . an official policy, not only of the oil the maximum efficient production ides. would -argue with the soundness expenditures were under $10. industry, but of the State of. Texas. among the various wells in a field. of the MER basis for defining daily That rang down the curtain on a Obviously the industry doesn’t want Complicated problems .of equity arise. allowable production. When` the tornsession which had seen’ heated .verbal a glut. of oil on the market; that would For instance, a small producer might mission goes further, hoWever.,and clashes beteween Looney and Johnson reduce the price. have his small tract dense with Wells; limits production to roughly half of and his attorneys, Bill Yelderman and Nit the underproduction is maina larger producer, on the other .hand, the days of a month on the basis of Roy Martin. what the oil companies say is the mar tained -through an enforcement partmight choose to space a much larger Johnson testified he had become nership between the state and the intract with the same number of wells ket demand,. the allegation is made acquainted with Gallaway early this dusky, in the name of conservation. the smaller producer has:Should both that this amounts to prodtiction con-. year when he took him some printing And there is no doubt, that conservaproducers be allowed to produCe .the trol and, therefore, price-fixing.-. business. He swore Gannaway. told tion is achieved by at least some of same amount, or should the producer The proponents of proration also him of printing . 250,000. pieces of the Texas Railroad Commission’s acwith the most land be given more conassert that the second stage of the campaign literature for Ben Ramsey tivities. ‘ sideration ? production controlthe gearing of upon the order of an unidentified The first step is taken by the corn Bill Murray, chairman of the rail production limitations to the market man who said he was a representative mission when it defines the “MER” road commission, says that the most demand that is defined, for all practiof Brown & Root., maximum efficient rate for a field. requent solution of this problem is al. cal purposes, by the oil industryis Johnson, under oath, d G quote; GannaRearings-.4re -held on every substantial location of allowables per *ell on the .