Page 2


Religion He The one great rule of composition is to speak the truth. Thoreau The Tex Observer We will serve no group or party but will hew hard to the truth as we find it and the right as we see it. \(v An 7 Gy “C \(-\(c. e -G:ek/ y Newspaper the South \\ 9 Q JVEMBER 11, 1960 ,ed, Not Hurt Kennedy 15c per copy No. 32 He Gained in Baptist Counties And Swept Big Catholic Areas AUSTIN John Kennedy’s religion not only failed to hurt him in the Texas Bible Belt, it distinctly helped him in some cities and the counties along the Mexican border. Republican majorities for Eisenhower in 1956 were reduced in Harris, Tarrant, and percentage-wise even in Dallas counties. Bexar County, which went for Eisenhower both times before, was settled in Kennedy’s favor by a 17,000to-3,000 Kennedy victory on San Antonio’s Latin-American and Catholic west side. In 1956 Harris, Dallas, and Tarrant gave Eisenhower a majority of 143,000 votes, but in 1960 this v Tas down to 87,000. This year in nine other urban areasBexar, Galveston, T r a vi s, McLennan, Wichita, Nueces, Hidalgo, Webb, and El Paso countiesthe Democrats scored a net gain of 77,000 votes over the 1956 returns. Considering the South Texasborder counties of the cities of San Antonio, Corpus Christi, Laredo, McAllen, and El Paso, Kennedy gained a net of 66,000 votes over Eisenhower’s 1956 showing. In the Polish-Catholic community of Cestahowa, in Karnes County, Kennedy won 213-0. Brass-collar Democratic areas generally kept their collars locked, the 1928 anti-Catholic bolt failing to materialize in 1960. Then the Catholic counties which form a kind of cradle for the lone star along the Mexican border and upward along the Gulf Coast came in so solid for Kennedy, it is evident that many Catholic Republicans must have crossed lines to vote for their brother in religion. Figures based on county-bycounty study must be tentative, since the last county totals tabulated by the Texas Election Bureau are complete for 106 of 252 reporting. Nevertheless, using figures provided by the Texas Council of Churches on religious population by county exclusive of Church of Gov. Price Daniel said in a press handout Friday that his first choice for interim senator if an appointment is necessary would be former Senator William Blakley. AUSTIN Much speculation has risen on Sen. Lyndon Johnson’s successor as senator from Texas. Just before his national television broadcast Wednesday Johnson had an exchange with wireservice reporters who had mentioned in dispatches that Johnson had said this summer he would not resign his seat until after the next Congress was organized. Johnson said he has reached no decision as. to when he will resign. Arguing that he has made no definite statement on the question, he said, “We record everything I say. I have the tapes.” During the telecast Johnson told national TV reporters “I haven’t made a determination” on the Christ membership, there are unmistakable patterns which will not be reversed by minor late returns. The Catholic Counties There are 39 counties in Texas in which Catholics have a clear majority of the population. In 1952 Eisenhower carried 27 of these; Stevenson, 12. In 1956 there was not much change, Eisenhower carrying. 28, Stevenson 11. This year, however, Kennedy carried 35 of these Catholic-majority counties and Nixon only four. The Democratic candidate not only reversed Eisenhower’s majorities, he all but shut out the Vice-President. . ‘HOLDOUTS’ By Cartoonist Here Ficklen in the Dallas Morning News Twenty-five of the 39 Catholicmajority counties went for Eisenhower both times, in ’52 and ’56. Of these, 21 went for Kennedy this year. The only counties Nixon carried ambng the 39 were four of the 25 which went for Eisenhower both times before, Brewster, Medina, Zavala, and Comal. Kennedy held every one of these counties Stevenson won both times before. In El Paso, which Eisenhower won by 5,000 in 1952 and 3,000 in 1956, Kennedy won by 5,000 \(inmatter. He said he would have to confer with Governor Price Daniel. His successor, he said, “is up to the people of this state.” The new Congress convenes January 3, and Johnson will not be inaugurated vice-president until January 20. By remaining as senator and majority leader until inauguration day, Johnson would be in the. unique position of organizing the new Senate and then approving the decisions the next day. If Johnson resigns while Congress is in session, Gov. Daniel will name a temporary successor until a special election is called. The election must be held within 60 to 90 days. Under the Pool Law there will have to be a run-off if no candidate gets a clear majority. Cong. Jim Wright of Fort Worth is considered an almost certain candidate.. enson won by 3,000 each time before. Kennedy won by an amazing 10-to-1 ratio in final returns of 10,059 to 1,082. In Nueces County, which Stevenson carried by 1,000 in 1952 and then lost in 1956 73 votes, Kennedy had an 11,000-vote lead. Hidalgo, down in the lower Valley, favored. Eisenhower 13-10 in 1956 but Kennedy 3-2 this year. Galveston, 9-8 for Eisenhower in 1956, was 3-2 for Kennedy. Bexar County provided Eisenhower with 15,000 and then 19,000 majorities, but Kennedy ended that area’s hospitability for Republicans, winning Bexar by 11,000. The Baptist Counties On the other hand, there are 111 counties in the state in which there are Baptist majorities. This is where the anti-Catholic factor was supposed to play havoc with Democratic chances. Instead, this is what happened: In 1952 in these 111 Baptist-majority counties, Eisenhower won 48 counties and Stevenson 63. This result varied little in 1956, when Eisenhower won 45 counties and Stevenson 66. Not only did Kennedy hold the Baptist counties Stevenson had; he increased them, from Stevenson’s 1956 total, by ten. In the still not-final returns, Nixon won only 33 of the 111 counties this year, while Kennedy got 76 \(two Only two of the Baptist counties ‘which voted for Stevenson twice switched to Nixon; but 16 counties which had given majorities to Eisenhower twice voted this time for Kennedy. Obviously, there was much more in the voters’ minds than Catholicism. Eighteen of the Baptist-majority counties which supported Eisenhower both times once again voted for Nixon, but by the same token, 47 counties which were for Stevenson both time stayed with Kennedy and the Democrats this year. If the anti-Catholic factor could have been expected substantially to increase Republican performance anywhere, it would have done so in Dallas. In 1956, Dallas County, the state’s most formidable Republican bastion, gave Eisenhower a 59,889 majority and 67% of its vote. The 1960 majority for Nixon in Dallas County was slightly larger numerically, 60,459, but in percentages was only 63% of the vote. Evidently the hostility of Dallas conservatives toward a Catholic liberal was not as severe as toward a Unitarian egghead. The possibility suggests itself that many of the ministers and lay leaders who vigorously opposed Kennedy on grounds of his Catholicism were also opposed to Stevenson in 1956 and 1952 on grounds that he was too liberal. Another explanation for the failuse of anti-Catholicism as an anti-Democratic force is the theory that the issue had “played out” by election timethat it got started too soon with Rev. W. A. Criswell’s potent salvos last July, and the counter-currents became stronger than the current by Nov. 8. This theory could not be tested by any set of facts but the election returns, however, and evidently large numbers of Catholics believed that they could reasonably take into account the widespread opinion that many fundamentalist Protestants would vote against Catholic Kennedy on religious grounds. Reasons for Result So much for why the Democrats did not lose Texas. Why did they win? Kennedy himself aroused considerable enthusiasm among liberal Democrats. Ex-Gov. Allan Shivers’ entry on Nixon’s side stirred many of them to determined activity. Kennedy was able to carry dominantly Negro precincts by large marginsas much at 10-to-i. On San Antonio’s mostly-Negro east side his margin was 3-to-1. During the last week of the campaign, a variety of anti-Kennedy newspaper advertisements appeared, drumming on the themes that Walter Reuther would dictate to Kennedy, that Nixon favored the Texas closed-shop law, and that “the radical liberals” and “national labor bosses” The ads may have turned out more conservatives; they also provided the final prod for an all-out effort for Kennedy by organized labor. Results of this effort are hard to gauge. Kennedy lost Jefferson County, a strong union area, by 9,000 votes, a heavier defeat than either of Stevenson’s two there. There seemed little doubt, however, that labor efforts in Harris County cut down Kennedy losses there. Senator Lyndon Johnson and Governor Price Daniel brought to the Democratic cause in Texas this year a respectability it has not often enjoyed. If Johnson’s presence on the ticket goaded conservatives, it did not, in the final analysis, reduce the enthusiasm of many liberals for Kennedy. It also attracted many moderates and conservatives to the Kennedy cause. Urban Patterns On a map of urban areas, Nixon carried Dallas, Harris, and Tarrant; Jefferson; Lubbock and Potter in the Panhandle; and the East Texas and Midland in West Texas. But Kennedy carried oil-conscious, loyalist Democratic Wichita Falls; Bexar; Travis; Galveston; Nueces, Hidalgo, Webb, and El Paso; and the normally Democratic McLennan. Harris County gave Eisenhower a 61,000 margin out of 250,000 votes in 1956, but this year, with 315,000 votes cast in a turnout that had waiting voters lined up for blocks, Nixon won by only 20,000 and lost the heavily Democratic north and east boxes. This relative setback for Nixon in Houston caused the Texas Election Bureau to concede Texas to Kennedy early election evening. This was widely thought to be premature as the Kennedy-Johnson margin dropped to less than 51%, but it was justified in the end. Kennedy carried 91 Bexar County boxes to Nixon’s 77. On the conservative north side, Nixon won only 3-2; on the Negro east side, Kennedy won 3-1; on the usually Democratic south side, Kennedy won 3-2. Thus the 6-to-1 returns from the Latin-American west side \(one box went for KenBexar County total vote increased from 103,000 in 1956 to 142,000 this year. Tarrant County gave Eisenhower majorities of 18,000 in 1952 and 22,000 in 1956. Although Nixon carried Tarrant this year, he did so in returns to press time with only 7,000 votes to spare. San Antonio and the smaller cities thus cancelling out the continuing GOP majorities in Dallas, Harris, and Tarrant, the country boys and the Catholic counties were heard from with a vengeance. A majority of Texas farmers evidently were madder at Ezra Taft Benson than they were concerned about Pope John; East Texans showed they are more loyal to the Democratic Party than they are afraid of Walter Reuther. Thus did Texas, which gave Eisenhower solid majorities over Stevenson in ’52 and ’56, return to the Democratic fold by giving Kennedy and Johnson a majority last reported at 50.71%, .1,103,617 to 1,053,469. R.D. `Irregularities’ Are Charged HOUSTON “There is goo -d faith cause for the concern of any citizen” about reports of irregularities in the general election in Texas, state Republican chairman Thad Hutcheson told the Observer in an interview Thursday. “A’ number of election judges attempted to influence the elections,” he said flatly. In Fort Worth, he stated, vote counting stopped while -still incomplete at 8:30 p.m. Tuesday night in some precincts, and ballots from about 50 precincts were evidently in the hands of individuals before the counting was concluded. In Bexar County, Hutcheson stated, 16 voting machines broke down, and “it’s remarkable that they were all in our area,” that is, in Re-” publican strongholds. As of Wednesday morning, Hutcheson stated, 250,000 Texas votes had been still uncounted, 30,000 in Tarrant County. “Nobody knew” where_ about 50 precincts’ boxes were in Fort Worth, and Hutcheson presumed they \(Continued on LBJ’s Successor A New Question