ustxtxb_obs_1960_06_17_50_00002-00000_000.pdf

Page 5

by

Daniel, Rayburn, and Johnson: A High Ride Governor Called’ 2,252-40 Roll Call ‘Amazing’ Triumph Loyalty Promised, Pledge Bolt Collapses is before the convention, gave him full power to appoint the Texas members on the national convention’s committees, sought to extend the unit rule to Mrs. Randolph’s half-vote in Los Angeles, and finally tumultuously received Johnson with a shouting, singing, banner-bearing demonstration. Johnson said the delegates to Los Angeles were loyal Democrats, promised to go all the way with them, rejoiced in his victory of the day, and made it perfectly clear that although he is an underdog candidate, he thinks he has a fighting chance to win the nomination. Supposing the liberals had won their county contests, which would ha ve required decisions for Travis County on grounds of convention theft and other counties on grounds of irregularities or party disloyalty among the majority delegations, the liberals could have approached but not reached a majority. Instead they were down to 315 votes to 2,000. Then the 315 were cut to 40 by the developments before the convention and the San Antonio decision on the floor. The Liberals’ Situation Mrs. Randolph, whom the convention replaced as national committeewoman from Texas by selecting Mrs. H. H. Weinert, Seguin, for the post, will hold her office during the Los Angeles convention July 11th. It has been her understanding that the Democratic national committee last September awarded national committee members half a vote each outside of the state delegate allocations, not bound by the unit rule. Mrs. Randolph has not said NV. hich candidate for the nomination she will vote for, if she has a half-vote, but if anyone believed it would be Sen. Johnson, he had not been heard from. Most conspicuous ‘absentee from the convention was Sen. Ralph Yarborough, who has pointedly refused to endorse Johnson. Yarborough is not a delegate to Los Angeles, but will be present to present a study committee’s report to the platform committee. He is regarded by his associates and supporters in Washington, as well as by some independent observers, as a possible candidate for vice-president, although his receiving support from the Texas delegation, if and when Johnson falls by the wayside, is not likely. The bloodshed was profuse for the liberal Democratic organization in the state. There was speculation whether DOTC leaders would be able to re-shape their forces back into a virile organization. In the dazed aftermath of the debacle many re-evaluations , were proceeding within the liberal movement. Whatever the elements of the situation were, the disastrous spectacle of a projected bolt left dangling outside the convention, and then straggling up a hillside, led by only a few DOTC leaders Mrs. Randolph, Fath, Allen Maley of Dallas, Harris County Chairman Woodrow Seals, Mrs. Jean Lee of Austinwould be a source of gall and bitterness, in many directions, for some time. “I intend to continue working for the liberal cause,” Mrs. Randolph said, “and the liberals will continue to work to make this a truly Democratic state.” She knew the defeat she had sustained was decisive. “We’ve been clobbered before,” the said. “Democrats of Texas will go right on working for what we’ve always worked for. “I still think if we could just get the Republican’s out of the Democratic Party and establish a true two-party state, it would be the most constructive thing we could do.” Convention Scene Scene of the convention was the new oval auditorium by the Colorado River. Swinging across an expanse of windows perhaps 100 yards were the words, “AlMhe Way with LBJ.” The Bexar County delegation had not ‘been called into pre-convention caucus by its pro-Johnson chairman, James Knight, and a table was set up outside the entrance for the issuance of credentials to the Bexar delegates. Emmett Tuggle, a San Antonio delegate, asked G. J. Sutton, Negro leader, “Are we gonna bolt or not?” “No, I don’t think so,” Sutton said. Albert Pena, a leader in the delegation, said opinion was “about split.” Mrs. Randolph and Fath had set up a sound wagon already on a hill above Barton Springs. They were ready to bolt. Whether delegates would come from the convention to join them, however, turned on what San Antonio decided. As the convention opened, J. Ed Connally, the state chairman, was presiding with Jake Jacobsen, the temporary secretary, reading the motions, and Austin Mayor Tom Miller, Lt. Gov. Ben Ramsey, House parliamentarian Read Granbery, and Rep. Dick Cory, Victoria, at the platform. Austin and Tarrant delegations were seated toward the front of the spreading convention floor; Dallas, about the middle; and, at the far rear, side-by-side, Bexar, the liberal delegation, and Harris, the conservative. A large Confederate flag was affixed to one of the Harris County standards, and a number of photographers took pictures of it. For a CBS network cameraman, a Houston conservative, Gordon Jackson, declared: “Texas is not 100 per cent behind Lyndon B. Johnson.” The Floor Debate The issue of the convention, Dickie began, was party loyalty. “I believe that anybody who wants to represent this party as a delegate, as an official, ought to take an unequivocal position to ‘support the nominees, or he ought not to want to represent the party.” ‘ “For a man. to want, to help nominate the candidate and then not support him, there must be something wrong with him,” Dickie said. Dickie told of an event in his county in 1956, when a resolution was advanced which proposed hewing to the welfare of the “Democratic Party of the South.” He said he spoke for Democrats who are not for the party of the north, east, south, or west, but “for the national Democratic Party.” He would support the nominees, whoever they are, he said. “If you want moderation and harmony, if you want a united delegation to Los Angeles, I think you will buy this loyalty pledge. If you’re not that kind of Democrat, I don’t have any business being associated with you,” Dickie said to loud applause, a good part of it ironic. Dickie closed saying that party loyalty will be the issue “for the next generation.” “If you ca’t support the pledge, then you ought to find another party,” he said. Jack Lee, Mason County, seconded Dickle’s motion. He said most of the delegates were there to further the nomination of Johnson. “That is my purpose,” he said. Out in the Hill Country, the people wanted the delegation to be effective in Los Angeles on Johnson’s behalf, and “we cannot be effective for our candidate where there is a shadow of doubt cast upon our loyalty to the party we purport to represent,” he said. He urged a vote for the resolution so that “no one from New York, Chicago, or St. Louis can say that ‘it’s a bunch of soreheads telling us in Los Angeles that either we get our way or we pick up our marbles and go home.” He called on the state delegates to “sign our names for all the world to see and dtermine that we will support the nominees.” Leading off against the motion was Cecil Burney of Corpus Christi. “In your own neighborhood you voted for the Democratic nominees and had your poll tax stamped ‘Democrat,’ he said. “Your precinct selected the persons you thought most representative of your Democratic neighborhood.” The law specified that the temporary roll of the convention would be those delegations certified by the convention chairmen, he said. “For us to impose different qualifications would be a clear violation of the statutes of this state. The legislature has spoken and we are bound to follow that mandate here.” The amendment for loyalty rosters, Burney argued, was a “holier than thou” proposition. “Whenever a man proclaims his honor and dignity too much, you better put your hands on your pocketbook.” For his part, Burney said, he had supported all Democratic nominees since he voted for Roosevelt in 1936, and “I don’t intend for you’ to tell me to sign in blood.” The state committee had proposed “maximum requirements of the national Democratic convention,” and “if it’s good enough for the party of Jefferson and Jackson, it’s good enough for me and this delegation.” The oath bound the delegation to back the nominees and the electors to vote for them if they win, he said. Byron Skelton, the Democratic national committeeman who was renominated by the convention, said he has always supported the Democratic nominees. The rostertest proposal, he said, was “impossible of application,” and ‘because of the law cited by Burney, would make the delegation to Los Angeles “an illegal delegation.” Skelton then tagged the amendinent as a Democrats of Texas move. Dickie is vice president of DOT, he said, and his amendment could be ‘assumed to be “an amendment of the DOT.” Its purpose was “confusing and dividing and causing trouble” in the convention. “It is for one one purpose only. It is to embarass our great leader, Lyndon Johnson, and hurt his candidacy for the presidency of the United States,” Skelton said. The oath adopted “is more than sufficient. It is adequate,” Skelton said. ‘The Democrats of this state are sick and tired of all this fighting and bickering.” He moved to table. The Bexar Caucus As the voting commenced clearly, from the beginning, an overwhelming vote to ‘tablethe San Antonio delegation at the far Shouting over the din of the convention and the droning of the roll call, which was going monotonously “aye,” Maverick quoted from a letter he received from the late Franklin Delano Roosevelt, saying: ” ‘When the people of Texas are told the truth often enough, they will do the right thing . . . Temoprary defeat means nothing as long , as our side wins the last battle’.” Maverick asked the caucus to vote for the Dickie motion and to stay on the floor if they lost. Trent Cheyney, school ‘teacher and union official, said the amendment was not a repudiation of Johnson but of anyone who “masquerades as a Democrat” and votes Republican. “There comes a time when compromise becomes appeasement and appeasement becomes betrayal,” Cheyney said. Pena then rose to speak against the Dickie motion. This was a decisive event. Knight and Pena were believed to have about twothirds of the delegation. Pena, a DOT leader, was a key man. Furthermore, as a Latin-American leader, he influenced many dele. gates concerned about Sen. Henry Gonzalez’s election in November against Republican opposition. All present were good Democrats; no one doubted he was ‘a good Democrat, Pena began. “I am concerned especially for those people running for the legislature,” Pena said. “I have promises from Gov. Daniel and Senator Johnson to put in money and work physically for their nominations. In the interest of harmony, in the interest of electing our people next November, I ask you to vote aye.” Mrs. Mae Tuggle asked Pena, “Price Daniel promised you a committeeman remember that?” \(She was referring to Daniel’s rejection of the Bexar choice for the state Democratic committee, On the roll call vote, most of the Latins voted to table the Dickie motion. The George Lamberts, Hank Brown of the building trade, and Rex Ballard of ‘the brewery workers voted for Dickie; Jack Martin of the ironworkers, George Eichler of the brewery workers \(saying “Aye against Dickie. Seeing the roll call going against him, Maverick laughed and said, “This is like a Jesuit running out on the Catholic Church.” G. J. Sutton, the Negro leader, voted to table the Dickie motion. The final vote was 114-38 to table. The news was the same from the other caucuses with liberal1 a b o r membership: Jefferson County voted to table; the vote in the Galveston caucus led by Walter Hall, Dickinson, was 34-13 to table. When the San Antonio vote was cast before the convention, there was a loud cheer. From that point it was apparent that the projected bolt had flopped. Introduced as permanent convention chairman, Gov. Daniel said briefly that anyone who would bolt that convention “certainly must be out of their minds.” The waiting rompers outside started getting concerned when no one came out of the hall. A few got into the convention somehow were asking, “Is anybody coming out?” “It’s shot to hell,” said Allen Maley, head of the Dallas AFL-CIO and a member of the Dallas rumpers. The Waiting Outside Outside the convention hall, the members of the contested delegations who had come to Austin they seemed to number about 200 THE TEXAS OBSERVER Page 2 June 17, 1960 rear of the main ‘floor began caucusing on what to do. Delegation chairman James Knight stated his case against the amendment. “This is an attempt,” he told the Bexar caucus, “by some forces in and out of the convention to hurt Johnson. It’s going to embarass Johnson if we pass this resolution.” He told of Gov. Daniel’s and Sen. Johnson’s promises, if the Bexar delegation would not bolt. “They’ve agreed to back our legislative candidateswith money, marbles, and chalk, and personal letters. In other words, they’ll come down and campaign with us.” “If you’re for Lyndon Johnson and for Price Daniel, you will vote aye. If you want to create dissension in this convention that will hurt Lyndon Johnson, vote no.” George Lambert, official of the San Antonio textile workers’ union, shouted, “Jimmy, that’s not the issue and you knoW it’s not the issue.” Maury Maverick, Jr., had offered to make the seconding -speech for the Dickie motion to the entire convention, specifying his continuing support of Johnson, but said that “neither the people who hate Johnson or love Johnson seem to be able to agree on that compromise, so I don’ know what I’m going to do now.” He now made his speech to the caucus. He told them he was not going to leave the floor, and “I am going to stick with my pledge to support Lyndon Johnson.” “But when you vote for this amendment you are not doing anything against Lyndon Johnson, you’re standing up for the party of Franklin D. Roosevelt,” Maverick exclaimed. “How can I in the name of God vote against a motion that says I will support the nominees of the Democratic Party?”