{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"auu_auc-047_auc-047-0051","title":"Contact Sheets of C. Eric Lincoln, circa 1985","collection_id":"auu_auc-047","collection_title":"C. Eric Lincoln Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985"],"dcterms_description":["Contact sheets of C. Eric Lincoln."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["C. Eric Lincoln Collection||http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12322/fa:047"],"dcterms_subject":["African American authors","African American scholars","Portraits"],"dcterms_title":["Contact Sheets of C. Eric Lincoln, circa 1985"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12322/auc.047:0051"],"dcterms_temporal":["1980/1989"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["photographs"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"gych_rbrl214droh_rusk-ee","title":"Dean Rusk interviewed by Richard Rusk and Ralph Beaird. ca. 1985","collection_id":"gych_rbrl214droh","collection_title":"Dean Rusk oral history collection, 1984-1989","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Rusk, Dean, 1909-1994","Beaird, Ralph","Rusk, Richard"],"dc_date":["1985"],"dcterms_description":["Dean Rusk (1909-1994), attorney and U.S. Secretary of State, was born in Cherokee County, Georgia. Rusk joined the Department of State from 1947-1952 and Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs and for Far Eastern Affairs. From 1952-1960, he was president of the Rockefeller Foundation. In 1961, President Kennedy appointed Rusk to the office of Secretary of State. He remained in this position until 1969. In 1970, he became the Samuel H. Sibley Professor of International Law at the University of Georgia, a position he held until his death in 1994.","Related collections in this repository: Dean Rusk Personal Papers, D.W. Brooks Oral History Collection, Martin Hillenbrand Papers. This interview is a continuation of Rusk P.","Interviewed by Richard Rusk and Ralph Beaird.","Dean Rusk discusses Civil Rights movement in the United States during the 1960s, the Civil Rights movement in South Africa, and problems in government dealings with foreign countries over civil rights. This interview is continued on Rusk FF."],"dc_format":["audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Dean Rusk Oral History Collection","http://russelldoc.galib.uga.edu/russell/view?docId=ead/RBRL214DROH-ead.xml"],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--South Africa","Civil rights movements","South Africa","Civil rights movements--United States","Civil rights--Government","United States"],"dcterms_title":["Dean Rusk interviewed by Richard Rusk and Ralph Beaird. ca. 1985"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://purl.libs.uga.edu/russell/RBRL214DROH-RuskEE/ohms"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Dean Rusk Oral History Collection, OH Rusk EE, Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies, University of Georgia Libraries, Athens, Georgia, 30602-1641."],"dlg_local_right":["Resources may be used under the guidelines described by the U.S. Copyright Office in Section 107, Title 17, United States Code (Fair use). Parties interested in production or commercial use of the resources should contact the Russell Library for a fee schedule."],"dcterms_medium":["interviews","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["1 interview (62.0 min.) : digital, stereo"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Rusk, Dean, 1909-1994"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"RICHARD RUSK:  The question is civil rights. Rich Rusk [speaking]. Tom will likely be here. Dean Ralph Beaird of the University of Georgia School of Law will also be doing the interviewing. Ralph, maybe we can start with you. Anyone interested in this tape can be referred to other sections and other tapes dealing with my dad's boyhood, growing up in the South, and material of that nature. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  I might start by commenting briefly on where I was in the 1960's, early 1960's. I was serving as Associate General Council to the National Labor Relations Board during the early part of the Kennedy Administration and then as Associate Solicitor to the Department of Labor during the latter part and some part of the Johnson Administration. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Was Arthur Goldberg Secretary of Labor? \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Arthur Goldberg was Secretary of Labor during part of the time that I was there, and [William] Willard Wirtz was Secretary during part of the time. One of the things, Mr. Rusk, that always intrigued me, based on my years of service in government, was the role that the various officers play in developing domestic legislation. I'm very familiar with the OMB [Office of Management and Budget] role, clearing for the President legislation in determining whether or not it was consistent with the program of the President, and so forth. I was wondering, since you were Secretary of State during a period when the major civil rights legislation of the twentieth century was passed--I'm speaking primarily now of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 dealing with public accommodations, employment, and so forth--what position did the Secretary of State or the State Department take on this domestic legislation and how active were you in connection with it? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  When I became President Kennedy's Secretary of State, it was very clear that we had problems of almost crisis proportions on these civil rights matters, as it affected our relations with other nations. It's hard now to remember, but in the early sixties, a black ambassador coming to Washington to represent his country, did not know where he could have lunch or dinner, except in another embassy. The best restaurants and hotels were closed to him. The principal private club, the Metropolitan Club, did not admit black guests. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  That's a social club? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Private, city social club. Even the more liberal Cosmos Club did not have black members at that time. Such a black ambassador had great difficulty in finding office space or living accommodations for himself and his staff. He would drive his family down to a Maryland beach on a Saturday afternoon, and be turned away. His wife would frequently ask a State Department wife to go to the supermarket with her to avoid incidents. When such an ambassador wanted to visit other parts of the country, very often we would send a State Department officer on ahead of time to make all the arrangements to try to avoid incidents of one kind or another. I had one of these ambassadors sit in my office once and ask, \"Mr. Secretary, where can I get a haircut?\" And it was painful for me not to be able to tell him. I did tell him that he could have his hair cut where I had mine cut; a little room just beyond the door there. And anytime he wanted to come in, there would be a barber there within sixty seconds. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did he take advantage of your offer? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. This was a critically important matter to us. The State Department began to work on this from the very beginning in the sixties. We got hold of the real estate board there in Washington, D.C. and we got hold of the hotel association, things like that, and tried to move. But we soon learned what we really knew to begin with, and that is you cannot handle these civil rights issues on the basis of diplomatic passports. You can't extend them just to those with diplomatic passports, and that the entire community and nation had to straighten these things out if diplomatic representation was to be conducted in the proper fashion. So these considerations put the State Department into a very active role in support of the Civil Rights Acts of the sixties, beginning with'64, which dealt with public accommodations, then the Voting Rights Act and other bills which were introduced from time to time. Apart from these public issues, we had to give some thought to our own situation in the Department of State. We had relatively few blacks in the foreign service. We had very few black ambassadors. I'm not sure that we had any at the beginning of the sixties. I would have to check that. It was clear that looking at the State Department as a whole, the positions in the State Department for blacks were relatively junior in character, even menial, such as messengers. And we had a job to do within our own building. We appointed [G.] Mennen Williams, who was then assistant secretary of African affairs, as the Equal Opportunity Officer for the Department. He was very energetic in trying to open up these things in the Department. Now, there were some problems-- \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Pop, you've had more people working with Mennen Williams, I think Carl [Thomas] Rowan was one. Was that a regular group or committee that you created back in those years? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  There was a little group put together. I wouldn't call it officially a task force or thing of that sort. But Mennen Williams had someone in each bureau that was his contact point/liaison on these equal opportunity possibilities. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you remember who the other members were? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No, I don't. We also tried to upgrade the blacks in the Department. When I got there, there had been a messenger who had been there for many years in the Secretary's office, and he had reached his limit as far as pay was concerned. But he had been unable to pass a Civil Service examination for a higher rating. I urged him to consider going to night school to prepare himself for that. But he didn't want to do that. He had a family. So finally I cheated on the Civil Service Commission a little bit by simply appointing him a personal assistant to me. And that opened up the possibility for an increase in pay. But his duties remained the same. But that didn't work out too well because after a few months with his new rank, he came in to see me one day in a considerable state of agitation. He said, \"Isn't Mr. So-and-So out there a personal assistant to you?\" I said, \"Yes, Mr. So-and-So being a foreign service officer.\" \"Isn't Mr. So-and-So a personal assistant?\" \"Yes.\" \"Am I your personal assistant?\" \"Yes.\" He said, \"Well, then why is it that you take them on your foreign trips and you never take me?\" Well, I needed a messenger on my foreign trips not at all. But he became so agitated about this that we had to transfer him to the protocol office, where ever since he has been handling the baggage for visiting dignitaries coming to the United States. Then I tried to break through this idea that the menial jobs were reserved for blacks by appointing a white messenger in the Department. But that didn't work because the black messengers just froze him out. Like the pullman porters; they just wouldn't have it. And that experiment didn't work very well. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You had limited success with your-- \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  So there are always problems connected with trying to move forward on some of these issues. We did notice, to our pain, that almost none of the black graduates of predominantly black institutions passed the Foreign Service Exam. There were blacks from Berkeley, and Harvard, and other places who passed it, but not from the predominantly black institutions. So I asked a group to study the Foreign Service Exam to see if it was culturally biased to produce that result. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Was this back in the days before that question was raised about American educational testing? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, this group concluded that it was not a question of cultural bias so much as the lack of practice which these blacks from predominantly black institutions had in taking such examinations. That it was simply a lack of skill in going through that particular kind of exercise. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  The Foreign Service Exam is a real-- \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  --It's a tough exam, a tough exam. Because sixteen thousand will take it and about three thousand will pass it. It's tough because one of the purposes of the exam is to reduce the number from sixteen thousand to three thousand. Ralph, I forget, maybe you will remember since you were very much involved in Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of '64. I forget what kind of interdepartmental machinery we had at that time to take a look at this. Do you recall? \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Yes. I can tell you what the Labor Department did, and I think this was pervasive throughout the federal establishment. We had task forces working on collecting information data, a factual base to support the Title 7 provisions. We had to take a look to see in each department how effective the secretary or the department head had been in bringing about equal opportunity. The story was much the same as it was in the State Department, even in the Labor Department, which had been viewed by some as sort of a settlement house or a community house environment. I remember Secretary Wirtz at that time, since Secretary Goldberg had just been appointed to the Supreme Court and had taken a position there, asked a group of us to quietly try to determine the extent to which discrimination was practiced by unions in the south; particularly in the construction industry. We came up with a report, and it was a very delicate operation which showed that there was probably as much discrimination in the building trades in the north and the west as there was in the South. Black journeymen had pretty well established a niche for themselves in such trades as brick trades, cement trades, and so forth. But it showed that in many areas of the country, there were separate and locals for blacks and whites. And in Washington, D.C., for example, we discovered the black locals did the residential and small work and the major white construction companies did the commercial, lucrative work, so to speak. But a product of all of that, I think, was first the executive order applying to government contracting, setting conditions under which the government would do business. And, then, the foundation for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which President Johnson got through. But, as one who lived in Washington for many years, it's hard to think back that only twenty-five years ago everything was segregated. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. In our national capital particularly. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  But some of the problems that you mentioned, how to make that adjustment, how to do it in a humane, constructive way, was really a difficult thing. It's amazing looking back at the progress that has been made in just twenty-five years. I can't imagine any other period in history when so much social change took place in a relatively peaceful way. That's one of the great things. But I know you testified considerably before, particularly I think, the Senate-- \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  The Senate Judiciary Committee. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  On these matters. Did it give you any problem with the members of the Senate taking this position on domestic legislation with the tradition of nonpolitical activity on the part of the State Department? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  In my testimony on the Civil Rights Act, I tried to point out that the passage of such an act would have a very good and important effect on our foreign relations. I said that was the secondary reason that we should move ahead because that was the right thing to do in terms of the nature of our own society and what we ourselves ought to do. I had an altercation with Senator Strom Thurmond at that time during that testimony. As a matter of fact, many of us did not look upon the Civil Rights Act as being a partisan matter. Indeed, we had support from people across the aisle: Senator Jacob Javits, for example, people like that. There were Republicans who gave us some strong help. As a matter of fact, if one looks back on it, it was old, conservative Republican Everett Dirksen of Illinois, the Minority Leader in the Senate, who finally turned the key which unlocked the passage to those Civil Rights acts. He played a key role there because he could come up with fifteen or twenty votes in the Senate on whatever. \r\n \r\nThere are two or three little anecdotes which throw some light on this. We sent Carl Rowan to Finland, one of our first black appointments. And I remember talking to a couple of African foreign ministers who advised us not to concentrate on sending black ambassadors to black Africa. He said you ought to send black ambassadors to other parts of the world and send to Africa a considerable mixture of white and black. I think what he had in mind was he felt that the blacks were still second-class citizens in the United States. And they did not want second-class ambassadors, signifying that we looked upon them as a second-class country. We had that same problem with Chiang Kai-shek during World War II when we found it very difficult to get him to accept black soldiers in the American forces in China. \r\n \r\nThen, a little later in the sixties, I remember talking to two or three black foreign ministers about why it was that the United States had not been called before the United Nations to have our ears soundly boxed for these problems we were having in our country. They gave me almost the same answer. They said, \"The United States has no monopoly on such problems. Wherever you find different races and religions and cultural backgrounds, you have problems. We have them in our countries. But is stimulating to us is to see that the President, the Congress, and the people of the United States are now moving to find better answers in these matters than they had found before.\" They said this is very important, not just because of what happens in the United States, but because of the light that it might throw upon some of their own problems. Given the circumstances in Washington in the early sixties, it's amazing that we did not run into more difficulty in the United Nations. \r\n \r\nNow we also had a similar problem as the host country to the United Nations in New York. There were delegates coming in from all over the world, of every race, religion, color, and so forth. The city of New York appointed a committee of hospitality to work on the reception of the United Nations delegates of New York and the treatment they were to be given while there. But there were a number of incidents involving race in New York City, involving U.N. delegates. The situation in New York itself was pretty highly segregated at that time. I remember in the early sixties when the General Assembly of the U.N. opened, a number of people in Harlem would put on Arab robes and come downtown and go to all the best restaurants. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  I think I've heard you tell a story two or three times which I think probably typifies the situation in the early sixties. I understand Carl Rowan lived not too far from you and your neighborhood, and he was out mowing his lawn one day without a shirt. How about telling the story? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  He was out there mowing his lawn one Saturday morning. A big Cadillac drove up to the curb and a dignified lady let her window down and put her head out the window and said, \"Oh, boy? Boy? What are they paying you to mow this grass?\" He turned to her and said, \"Well, as a matter of fact, the lady of the house here lets me sleep with her.\" Off drove the Cadillac! \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Hey, Pop, for the benefit of those interested in Dean Rusk and civil rights, there is an oral history tape with Carl Rowan. And [they] should be referred to that, and also the Senate testimony that my dad gave for the Senate Judiciary Committee, 88th Congress, Senate Bill 1732. The date of that testimony was July 10, 1963. That is a very necessary piece of documentation to deal with this. Pop, getting back, if you will, to that hearing just for a moment. I dug this copy of the hearing out, the testimony out, and Dean Beaird has a copy of it. Warren Cohen calls it one of your finest moments, the testimony you gave before that Senate Committee. the New York Times editorialized about you and your testimony the very next day. Other newspaper articles, which we have copies of, say to the effect that that was really a major piece of testimony on your part. Do you care to go back and just describe the setting? We know what you said; we have a copy of that. But just the environment, the atmosphere in that committee room: the reaction to your remarks from say people, like Lyndon Johnson, your colleagues. Evidently that was really a dramatic piece of work. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Let me say that in the State Department it was well understood by everybody that the time had come to make something happen in this field, that we just could not go on as we were. So we had no problem with wrestling with each other in the State Department over these matters. And since I was the senior cabinet officer, they asked me to lead off the cabinet testimony. I think [Robert] Bobby [Francis] Kennedy, the Attorney General, came in later. But I led off the cabinet testimony. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  At the President's suggestion? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. That was the plan that had been worked out. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you get any coaching from him on what it was that he wanted you to say? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. Let me say that as far as John F. Kennedy was concerned, his concern for civil rights came out of his intellect. He simply understood with his mind that these things had to be done. Remember that there were these major problems around the country: admissions to state universities, for example. I won't go over all of those. There was that very dramatic march on Washington with 200,000 people there at the Lincoln Memorial to hear Martin Luther King Jr. I was not directly involved. As a matter of fact, I think it's important for me to say that, although I'm sure Kennedy had meetings with others where I was not present about that, I was present when he decided that he, himself, would not go down to the Lincoln Memorial to take part in that demonstration. I had the impression at the time that he made that decision because he did not feel that he should horn in on their show and try to seem to capture it or diminish it in any way by his presence. I think he felt that they should have a chance to express themselves fully. My son, David [Patrick Rusk], came back from California and was one of the ushers at that demonstration, helping maintain order and providing facilities and things of that sort. He was so impressed by the experience that he remained on to take a job in the Office of the National Urban League there in Washington, D.C. I think there was a pretty strong feeling in the Congress, other than from some of the key southerners, that we just had to move. We had some bold and daring editors in the south who were moving opinion on this matter. People like [Ralph Emerson] McGill of the Atlanta Constitution. There were others. So the time had simply come. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you recall the congressional vote on the Civil Rights Bill of '64? Was it a close thing? \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  The important thing at the time on that was invoking cloture. My recollection is in the Senate, in order to end debate, I think you had to have at that time two-thirds. It's now been dropped to less than that. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Sixty percent. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  But the role that Everett Dirksen played, as your dad pointed out, was a very key role. He engineered the vote on cloture. And the vote on cloture though came only after extended debate. No one can say that they were cut off. I guess it was probably one of the most debated bills in the history. One thing that I recall about it: we had to go up to the labor board to get supplemental appropriation, or to request supplemental appropriation, during the time this bill was being considered. The rule in the Congress is while there is debate of this nature, no committee can hold a hearing without the committee chairman being present. And it just happened that the chairman of this particular committee was Senator Carl [Trumbull] Hayden of Arizona. And [Joseph] Lister Hill was the subcommittee chairman. But at that time Senator Hayden was well up in years and Senator Hill almost had to lead him in. And the fact ran [through] the hearing that Senator Hayden was there and we got our supplemental. There was (an) air of electricity that prevailed. Everyone knew that something dramatic and historic was taking place in the Capitol. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  One of the opponents on that bill was Senator Richard [Brevard] Russell of Georgia. I, myself, believe that his opposition was based, not just on the traditional notions of prejudice that we were familiar with in the south, but that he was strongly motivated by a constitutional point. He did not really believe that this was something that the federal government ought to get into. Anyhow, with Senator Russell in opposition you had a formidable opponent. He was one of the most skillful parliamentarians the Senate has ever seen. And he had a backlog of eighteen or twenty votes or so on this matter that he could deliver just by calling for them, among other southern senators primarily. It was not easy to get that Voting Rights Bill through. We worked on it very hard. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Again, do you recall the circumstances of the hearing itself--immediate reaction to your testimony? What did Lyndon Johnson tell you, for example? What about your colleagues unfamiliar with some of the editorial comment? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Lyndon Johnson knew the Senate better than the Senate knew itself. He knew more about individual senators and what made them tick, and what their sources of support were back home, and so forth, than almost anybody else. So he was an expert at counting noses in the Senate on a matter of this sort. He did throw himself into the parliamentary process--the parliamentary maneuverings--that went on to get this Civil Rights Bill through. He once said, \"I never knew a senator who was trying to do the wrong thing.\" Well now, that was probably a little generous on his part, but nevertheless he respected the Senate as an institution. He understood its workings and he understood individual senators. He knew exactly where his problems were. But his expertise on the Senate was a very handy thing for us at that time. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  One of the questions that Strom Thurmond asked you, which I thought was an interesting one, in essence it was this: How can you support antidiscrimination domestically and not be willing to attach such a proviso to the Foreign Aid Bill? I thought you handled that rather well. Do you recall what it was that you said? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I don't remember any detail, but these two things were very different in terms of our objectives and our own responsibilities. The principal point on which I had a brush with him was over his protests of these civil rights demonstrations. I told him that if I were a black I would be demonstrating, and he was horrified at that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Was it after this hearing that you had your little exchange with Strom Thurmond? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  On the way out of the hearing room that day, Strom Thurmond came up to me and said, \"Mr. Secretary, I'm not sure that you understood my questions. I'm from South Carolina.\" I said, \"Senator, I understood your questions. I'm from Georgia.\" The interesting thing is that Senator Strom Thurmond and a lot of these other senators, Governor George [Corley] Wallace also, have changed their minds since those days. The mood of the country, the politics of the problem, changed dramatically. Martin Luther King, with whom I have had some differences on other matters, rendered a great service in keeping the civil rights movement largely peaceful in method. Had that movement turned violent, there would have been all hell to pay in this country. You probably would have wound up with martial law and all sorts of things had the blacks really turned violent at that time. It was very important for the blacks to know that things were on the move, that changes were being made, that the promised land was indeed over the hill or around the corner. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  What do you think the role of the State Department and the Secretaries of State should be with respect to-- \r\n \r\n \r\nEND OF SIDE 1 \r\n \r\n \r\nBEGINNING OF SIDE 2 \r\n \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I think it's appropriate for the United States to put forward its deepest commitments as a nation in this field of individual liberty. It is the basis on which we were founded, and for us to use our influence quietly, with compassion in trying to help improve the civil rights situation in other countries. I have some problem about how far one goes in linking civil rights questions to the rest of the world's agenda. Because if you look around the world you will find only thirty or so constitutional democracies where civil rights are in pretty good shape. There are 130 other nations out there which have varying degrees of dictatorship where many civil rights are in disrepair. If we conditioned the rest of our foreign policy business on civil rights issues, that could be a self-selected path to isolation. We would steadily draw into this world of thirty constitutional democracies, but those other 130 nations are still out there. They are part of the world scene. They are part of the world in which we have to live. So I personally have preferred the use of persuasion and other diplomatic devices behind the scenes rather than public confrontation. On South Africa, for example, we came to a point very close to breaking relations with them when they became stubborn about receiving a black Foreign Service officer in our embassy in Pretoria. We just couldn't have that, and we pressed the matter and they relented. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Were you the one who assigned the black Foreign Service officer? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I knew it was being done. I don't know whether I personally made that assignment myself. It was a normal and natural assignment. It was not something that was picked up to make a demonstration out of. But then, during the Vietnam war for a time we--Of course we had a lot of ships going around the Cape on the way to Vietnam, and for a time ships stopped off in Capetown for refueling and a bit of shore leave. But the South Africans would not accord to our black sailors, marines, the kind of treatment that we insisted Americans be given. So we moved to stop those port calls in Capetown and sent tankers along to refuel our ships at sea. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  That was largely at the instigation of Carl Rowan, I think, who really brought that thing to a head within the Department. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It's possible. It's possible. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Carl remembers that. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Normally it would not come to my attention as a part of routine, what was happening then. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  He remembers you backed him up substantially on that one. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Right. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  What do you recall about the State Department's or the government's position on ratification of the Human Rights Convention? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It's an irony that the United States, which puts itself forward as the citadel of freedom in the world, has ratified so few conventions in the field of human rights. We have not ratified even the Genocide Convention, which I, along with the then Solicitor General, presented to the Senate on behalf of Harry Truman in 1949. It still has not been given advice and consent by the Senate, even though every administration has asked for it and every few years the Senate Foreign Relations Committee sends the bill out to the floor with the recommendation that it be given advice and consent. But, almost every year they count noses behind the scenes and find they do not have the two-thirds vote necessary for advice and consent and they don't want to bring it up and have it voted down. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Do you think part of that could be the operation of that Convention constitutionally throughout the country or do you think people have some concern about the impact of a Convention such as that becoming domestic law? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well I think that there were several reasons for opposition to these various--The United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United Nations Covenant on Economic and Social Rights not ratified; the Inter-American Treaty on Civil Rights not ratified by the United States. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Incidentally, Ralph, could you identify that Human Rights Convention? Do you remember the year it was put forth and exactly what was--? \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  I don't remember the year, but it's been ratified by about eighty countries, I think. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  '63 or '64, I think. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  It simply provides--guarantees--basic human rights to citizens or to individuals. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  You see, Eleanor Roosevelt had served for a number of years as head of the U.N.'s Human Rights Commission. In that role she became the grandmother of the United Nations. She was really quite a person. She did that in the Truman administration. And she was the principal author of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights passed by the United Nations back during the Truman administration. At the time it was very clear in everyone's mind that that declaration was not to operate as law. It wasn't a treaty. It was not law. It would not be put to the Senate, and so forth. Since this was to be a declaration and not law, President Truman more or less gave Eleanor Roosevelt the lead. He more or less delegated the whole thing to her. \r\n \r\nI remember at one time while they were still drafting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights a senator came in to complain to the President about some of the things Eleanor Roosevelt was doing. Truman looked at him and said, \"Senator, how would you like to try to give an instruction to Eleanor Roosevelt?\" \r\n \r\nBut anyhow, that was a far-ranging and ringing declaration of basic human rights. Yet we ourselves have not ratified these conventions. I think there is, Ralph, a constitutional point in the Genocide Convention because under it we would be expected, apparently, to make propaganda for genocide a prohibited act. Well that might bump into the First Amendment of our Constitution. I see no problem whatever in the Senate's giving advice and consent with a reservation simply saying that if there is any conflict between this treaty and the United States Constitution, the Constitution will prevail, just to clarify that point. When Jimmy Carter put these U.N. Covenants to the Senate, he sent them down there recommending about twenty-seven reservations, declarations, understandings, statements--just a hodgepodge of things. I personally would have had a preference for simply sending it down and suggesting two, well one reservation and one statement: the statement being that this Treaty undertakes the international obligations of the United States, but its operation as law within the United States would be in accordance with appropriate legislation adopted by the national and state legislatures--something of that sort. Then secondly, the reservation that if there are any conflicts between these treaties in the American Constitution, the Constitution would prevail--and just let it go at that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you advise Jimmy Carter on that move of his? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I advised some of his people, but he had negotiated out with the senators all these picky, picky kind of problems they found with these U.N. Covenants. In order to eliminate as much opposition as possible in the Senate he had picked up points from different senators and included them in his list of reservations and statements and whatever--a rather messy way to do it. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  If I could follow that up with just a question on Jimmy Carter's emphasis on human rights with regard to foreign affairs: Did you approve of the degree of enthusiasm with which he personally tried to tie human rights with these-- \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well I have already commented a bit on the subject of linking human rights matters with the rest of the world's business. Also, because of what I said earlier on this tape about the situation in our own national capital in the early sixties, I felt very strongly that we should avoid sanctimony in this field because we, ourselves, had not earned the right to be sanctimonious. There were times when I did not like our sending a twenty-seven-year-old Assistant Secretary of State, a young woman, around to other countries lecturing them on human rights when our own record is so recent and we still have a lot of unfinished business here. So a lot of it turns on style and so forth. I know that there are countries in which human rights are in a better position because of the continuous and steady influence of the United States. I prefer not to name them publicly, but for the moment I will just mention Brazil, South Korea, Republic of China, and Taiwan: a number of places where human rights matters were taken more seriously because of us. I would hope that we would continue to work at it that way. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Do you think the black and some white leaders in the civil rights movement today that are attempting to bring about change in South Africa through protests at the South African Embassy in Washington, whether they are taking the right tack? Are they using the right technique, in your opinion, to accomplish that? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I offer the back of my hand to people who try to stage sit-ins in the South African Embassy in Washington, and I very much regret that they have been members of Congress--at least Senator [Lowell Palmer] Weicker [Jr.] of Connecticut, who participated in that. It has taken us many centuries to establish the laws with respect to the protection of embassies and the immunity of diplomatic personnel. As the host government to the South African Embassy in Washington, we have a duty to protect that embassy. As a matter of fact, the District of Columbia has a municipal ordinance which keeps demonstrators at least five hundred feet away from foreign embassies as a part of the reciprocal protection of embassies that makes international life possible. Breaking relations with the Soviet Union is one thing. One could do that if one wanted to. But abusing their embassy is another. \r\n \r\nAs a matter of fact, this sounds harsh, but there's only a difference of degree that separates these sit-ins in Washington from these Iranians who abused our embassy in Tehran. We have to watch that. Go back and remember that the ancient city-states could send off an ambassador and have his dead body thrown back over the wall the next day. When nations declare war on each other they protect each other's embassies and diplomatic personnel and usually exchange them at the earliest convenient times through neutrals of some sort or another. I think there's another element in the South African problem that bothers me and I haven't been able to get very good answers on it. It's very easy for people outside of South Africa, including black leaders, to call for all sorts of drastic remedies against South Africa over apartheid. I would like to know more about what the blacks who live in South Africa think about these matters. I know that some of the black leaders in South Africa are opposed to economic boycotts on South Africa on the grounds that it would be the blacks who would suffer most and first and that maintaining these open channels of communications with the rest of the world is a contribution toward the improvement of the situation in South Africa. I'm very dubious about economic sanctions on South Africa other than with respect to arms, which could be used for the suppression of local people. I think we need to be a little careful about this. \r\n \r\nThere is also another matter for which I will be criticized by some people. There are times when this problem seems to be more at the rhetorical level than at the action level; it is a problem of words more than it is action. For example, the overwhelming majority of blacks on the continent of Africa could force change in this situation if they were prepared to do it. Now a lot of their heads would get bashed because the white South Africans have a lot of power. But I remember having lunch once during the sixties with about a dozen black African foreign ministers. They were pressing me for American economic sanctions on South Africa. I said, \"Well let's think about that. Under the U.N. Charter it is clear that it is contemplated that if economic sanctions were imposed that steps would be taken to alleviate the harshness of the impact of these sanctions on any particular country. So let's think of a United Nations sanctions fund. Let's start with $100 million. Now the proportionate share of each of your countries sitting around this table would be the price of a Ford automobile. Would you people be prepared to make that contribution?\" They just laughed at me. I negotiated for a while during the sixties between a group of black African foreign ministers and the South Africans on the basis of a formula which might be agreeable to both sides: Where the South Africans would acknowledge certain principles with which the blacks could live even though it would be recognized that the implementation of those principles would take considerable time. Well we got a formula that the black foreign ministers were willing to agree to, but at that point the white South Africans wouldn't even give them the words to work with and to live on. So nothing came of that. We've always known that during this enormous decolonization movement that followed World War II that the most difficult problems would remain for the end: Such things as Zimbabwe, former Rhodesia, the Portuguese territories, South Africa. We've not only seen this enormous transfer of power from colonial powers to independent nations, but we have seen the solution, such as it is, in Zimbabwe and in the Portuguese territories. In a sense, South Africa is a kind of remaining remnant of a process that's been going on all over the world since 1945. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Can you really fault the South African regime, in view of the fact that white folks there are a very distinct minority from refusing to make further progress toward racial integration, and in view of the fact that the rest of the African nations themselves have done such a poor job in general of adhering to democratic principles and respecting the rights of their own minority groups? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, many wrongs don't make a right. I think there are some special complications about the South African problem. For example, I think historically the whites were the ones who really settled southern Africa and the blacks there moved in later from the north to take up jobs and settle down and so forth. Another thing is that the white South Africans do not have a mother country to which to return. Many people think of the Boers as Dutch. Well the Boers came from all over Europe, so there's no sense of a homeland there as it was true in, say, Rhodesia, or even Kenya. You can understand to an extent why the whites there circle the wagons and adopt this logger mentality and become very resistant to change. I think there are a lot of things they could do that would improve the situation. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  They have a, probably a, good prototype right next door in Zimbabwe. Five years after the establishment of black majority rule there--I think there are something like 300,000-plus whites and seven or eight million blacks. How would you assess the situation there now as compared to, say, six or seven years ago, or eight or ten years ago, and as a prototype for South Africa? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I think the situation in Zimbabwe has deteriorated significantly since independence. There is no longer a two- or multi-party system there in politics. It's a one-party system. For all practical purposes it's a dictatorship. And there is continuing pressure on the whites. Kenya came as close to a reconciliation between whites and blacks when Kenya became independent, largely through the leadership of President [Jomo] Kenyatta who has once been a Mau Mau. But he thought this ought to be effected in behalf of Kenya. There are tensions, and they will continue so long as different races are in direct contact with each other. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  As Secretary of State, how were you called upon to deal with the problems of Ian Smith and U.D.I. [Unilateral Declaration of Independence] in Rhodesia and, for that matter, any other independence issues that came up? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  The British came to us and asked for our active help on the Rhodesian question when Ian Smith began to act up with U.D.I. and so forth. We said to the British, \"Now look, this is still another one of those problems that emerged from the breakup of the British empire. Now our basket is full. You folks in London handle this problem. If you reach a point where you think there is something on which we might be helpful, come to see us and we will try to see what we can do.\" Well, the British themselves reached a point where they thought it might be helpful to go to the U.N. Security Council and ask for economic sanctions on Ian Smith's government. And because of what I just said we voted for that resolution in the Security Council, which passed with the necessary votes. That was a Chapter 7 resolution which was binding upon the members. So President Johnson, under the United Nations Participation Act, issued the executive order giving effect to the economic sanctions imposed on Ian Smith by the U.N. Security Council. That created some resistance in our own Congress and for a brief period they passed legislation overriding that executive order, particularly with regard to the trade in chrome because rumors were circulating that the Russians were buying chrome from Rhodesia during this period of sanctions and then selling it to the rest of us at a much higher price. That kind of thing sort of angered the Congress, so at that time they overrode it. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Were the British generally satisfied with the cooperation of the United States or did you find yourself not being able to fulfill the obligation--? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Oh, I think the British would have been glad to see us out front more than we were willing to become. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Was this a conversation directly with the Prime Minister or with a foreign minister? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No, diplomatic level. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Let's go back to 1963 and '64 for a few moments. I know from being in Washington at the time most of the people thought it was the leadership, the single-focused leadership, of President Johnson that secured the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. Was there any group in the executive branch that had primary responsibility for dealing with the Congress on that piece of legislation? Was there a task force? What was the role of the cabinet? I know you testified and so forth. Was that the top priority piece of legislation for that year? What was the atmosphere in the White House? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  The primary responsibility among the cabinet departments was the Justice Department, but they called freely on the rest of us for any help and the, of course LBJ threw himself into it. I mentioned earlier that President Kennedy's approach to these civil rights matters came out of his intellect, out of his mind. In the case of Lyndon Johnson, when it was no longer necessary for him to be elected as senator from Texas, all these civil rights views that had been in his guts and in his glands all of his life simply erupted like a volcano. His approach to civil rights came out of his deep feelings. He was a little bit like Justice [Hugo LaFayette] Black of the Supreme Court, who in an hour-long interview once said, \"I didn't have to have lawyers tell me that separate was not equal in our school system. I've known that all my life. I grew up with it.\" Well Lyndon Johnson had grown up with that all of his life. He knew what the situation was. It may be that his attitude was shaped in part by the fact that he was born and grew up in a section of Texas which was settled by many of the refugees from the German Revolution of 1836--was it? \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  1830 and 1848. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  The liberal view of these German refugees made its imprint there. There was a little town in Texas called Comfort, where at the time of the Civil War all of the able-bodied men set out for the North to join the Union army and they were all killed on their way. I myself am convinced that the civil rights attitudes of Lyndon Johnson came out of some very deep personal commitments on his part and were not just a question of political maneuver. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  In that sense Johnson himself had a more sincere commitment. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  A deeper commitment. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Did he discuss his views specifically with you? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Oh yes, a number of times, and we discussed them in cabinet. But the principle legislative responsibility lay with the Justice Department. The rest of us were all on call for any help we could be. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you remember any of the specifics of that counsel you may have given Lyndon Johnson on civil rights matters, either personally between the two of you or at the cabinet table? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Not any specifics, but I was strongly in favor of further action. I was in favor of as much action as the traffic would bear at any given time. I didn't think that we should--by the way, remember that along with these so-called Civil Rights Bills, we made some fundamental revisions in our immigration laws to eliminate elements of racial discrimination from our immigration laws. That occurred during this same period. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Do you think that the emotional involvement of the President is probably the key factor in getting that piece of legislation passed. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. I think one of the most dramatic evenings I ever spent in my life was at that joint session of Congress which he addressed on behalf of the Voting Rights Bill. One interesting thing that might seem indiscreet to put on the record, but at those joint sessions the Supreme Court comes in and sits on the front row of one section of the House. The Cabinet comes in and sits on the front row of another section. Normally on one of those joint sessions when the President is speaking, the Supreme Court Justices just sit there and listen. But that evening when he was speaking on voting rights I could peep out of my eye and see these Supreme Court Justices applauding and clapping their hands, which was very untypical of the conduct of the Supreme Court in those joint sessions of Congress. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Was that the speech that he ended with, \"We shall overcome?\" \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Maybe so. He recounted some of the civil rights issues in his own experience, such as the problems his own chauffer had in driving from Texas to Washington or back--where to stay, where to go to the bathroom, where to eat, and that kind of thing. He said in practically so many words to the Congress, \"Now I have known about these problems all my life, but now I can do something about it.\" And he looked at the Congress and he said, \"And you're going to help me.\" (laughter) \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Vintage LBJ. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yeah! \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Arthur Goldberg came out of the labor movement and the labor movement had always been, at least in terms of rhetoric, a strong point of civil rights and so forth. Did he play a major role, do you recall, before going on to the Supreme Court, in these civil rights efforts? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. He was what I would call an \"old school liberal\", more or less as I was. He was one of those who remembered that the word liberal is associated with the concept of human freedom. He was very strong in support of these civil rights matters and he helped to mobilize some of the congressmen, senators with whom he was in closest touch, in support of the effort. It wasn't just enough to have a senator or congressman say that he would vote for it. You needed those senators and congressmen out there in their own houses working on their colleagues, persuading them to come along and make such legislation possible. Arthur Goldberg was very good at mobilizing that kind of help. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  I think it's interesting that for a good part of that legislation the Commerce Clause was used as the constitutional base for the legislation. Later on there was an effort to use the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 5, and so forth. The Supreme Court, while agreeing primarily on the Commerce Clause, has since backed away from some of the provisions and the positions on Section 5 and also today have taken a narrow view with respect to intergovernmental relations and with respect to the Commerce Clause, The [National] League of Cities [v.] the Usery case [426 U.S. 833 (1976)]. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  If it's appropriate, maybe we could switch to the period after you ended your Secretary of State two terms and get into the problems you had with the University of Georgia and the Regents. As I understand it--and I, of course, wasn't here and I had third-- \r\n \r\n \r\nEND OF SIDE 2 "},{"id":"gych_rbrl214droh_rusk-ff","title":"Dean Rusk interviewed by Richard Rusk, Thomas Schoenbaum, and Ralph Beaird. ca. 1985","collection_id":"gych_rbrl214droh","collection_title":"Dean Rusk oral history collection, 1984-1989","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Schoenbaum, Thomas","Rusk, Dean, 1909-1994","Beaird, Ralph","Rusk, Richard"],"dc_date":["1985"],"dcterms_description":["Dean Rusk  discusses the Civil Rights movements, including the involvement of the State Department in integration, the effects on immigration and foreign policy, the government agencies' attitudes toward integration, integration and segregation in Rusk’s background at Oxford, and Davidson and Mills College. This interview is a continuation of Rusk EE and is continued on Rusk GG.","Dean Rusk (1909-1994), attorney and U.S. Secretary of State, was born in Cherokee County, Georgia. Rusk joined the Department of State from 1947-1952 and Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs and for Far Eastern Affairs. From 1952-1960, he was president of the Rockefeller Foundation. In 1961, President Kennedy appointed Rusk to the office of Secretary of State. He remained in this position until 1969. In 1970, he became the Samuel H. Sibley Professor of International Law at the University of Georgia, a position he held until his death in 1994.","Related collections in this repository: Dean Rusk Personal Papers, D.W. Brooks Oral History Collection, Martin Hillenbrand Papers. This interview is a continuation of Rusk P.","Interviewed by Richard Rusk, Thomas Schoenbaum, and Ralph Beaird."],"dc_format":["audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Dean Rusk Oral History Collection","http://russelldoc.galib.uga.edu/russell/view?docId=ead/RBRL214DROH-ead.xml"],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements","Civil rights movements--United States","United States"],"dcterms_title":["Dean Rusk interviewed by Richard Rusk, Thomas Schoenbaum, and Ralph Beaird. ca. 1985"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://purl.libs.uga.edu/russell/RBRL214DROH-RuskFF/ohms"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Dean Rusk Oral History Collection, OH Rusk FF, Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies, University of Georgia Libraries, Athens, Georgia, 30602-1641."],"dlg_local_right":["Resources may be used under the guidelines described by the U.S. Copyright Office in Section 107, Title 17, United States Code (Fair use). Parties interested in production or commercial use of the resources should contact the Russell Library for a fee schedule."],"dcterms_medium":["interviews","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["1 interview (62.0 min.) : digital, stereo"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Rusk, Dean, 1909-1994"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"BEAIRD:  Some interesting events occurred just at the end of Dean's term of Secretary of State--second term--that impact on Georgia and immediately after. I think it's rather interesting that when Dean [Rusk] was invited to come and give the Law Day speech in 1968 that he confronted, upon arriving at the Fine Arts auditorium, a group of pickets across the street. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Milner [S.] Ball! (laughter) \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  They were demonstrating against his participation or involvement in the Vietnam conflict. One of those picketers, maybe the one leading the group, is now a member of the Law faculty and at the time was a law student. He had formerly been a Presbyterian chaplain on campus. Do you recall that, Dean? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I recall it very well. Of course, by that time I had become somewhat accustomed to these things and these pickets bothered people here locally much more than they bothered me. One thing leading up to the Georgia end of it, back in 1961 [E.] Smythe Gambrell, then president of the Atlanta Bar Association, one of our very distinguished lawyers here in Georgia called me on the phone and asked if I would come down to speak to the annual meeting of the Atlanta Bar Association. We had a policy in those days, so I asked Smythe, \"Well is the Atlanta Bar integrated or segregated?\" And there was a pause on the end of the line, and then came back his reply. He said, \"We are not integrated now, but we will be by the time you get here.\" That was the first time that blacks had had dinner in the Biltmore Hotel in Atlanta. I occasionally meet some of those black lawyers who were there that evening and we kind of laugh about it. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you recall any of the names of those fellows, Pop? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You say you had a policy about that. Do you mean an understanding among the higher level officials in the government? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Within our administration we did not want to cater to segregated situations. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Or accept any speaking engagements for groups that were not integrated? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, we didn't make it a flat rule, but that was our general approach. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You talked about it during the cabinet? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Sure. That prompted my question. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  That was the general rule throughout the executive branch beginning in the 1960s. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Then when we were coming up on the end of service in Washington, Lindsey Cowen, Dean of the Law School here, talked to me about coming here as a professor of international law. That was really quite attractive because Virginia [Foisie Rusk] and I had long since decided that we did not want to live any longer on the Northeastern Seaboard: that urban complex reaching from Washington up to Boston. We had had a lot of experience with that and felt we would either go west, which was her home, or go south, which was my home. Then when I was a young man studying law at Berkeley before World War II, my secret ambition then was to be a university professor of international law. So this combination of doing what I had originally wanted to do as a young man and coming home to Georgia, where I have hundreds of cousins and many, many friends, was very attractive. Now, I could only tell this story as I knew it from my end; but I was told that there had been a telephone poll taken of the Regents, and that telephone poll turned out to be unanimous. But then Mr. Roy [Vincent] Harris of Augusta, a former Regent who was at that time George [Corley] Wallace's campaign manager in Georgia, apparently decided that he had an issue here. I think it was related in part to our daughter Peggy's [Margaret Elizabeth Rusk Smith] marriage. So he called for a special meeting of the Regents and that set off a lot of controversy--the fact that it was coming up. During that period before the Regents made their final decision the president of the Student Bar here at Georgia and the president of the student body in the University generally, both called me and urged me to forget about all of this controversy, to come on down. All sorts of other messages from people down here. The Regents final vote was about--what?--eleven to three or something like that. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Eleven to four: fifteen Regents. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, the closing chapter of that was a bill that was introduced into the State Legislature to reduce the appropriation to the University of Georgia by the amount of my salary. I think that was defeated by a vote of something like 114 to 13, or something like that. And that, literally, is the last I ever heard of that. Since actually coming to Georgia, I haven't had a post card, letter, telephone call, or anything else raising issues of that sort. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Did that delay your appointment at all, as a university professor here? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I don't think it delayed it. It just meant a special meeting of the Regents, I think. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Ralph, do you remember any of the details? (everyone speaking at same time) \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Now that I am a member of this faculty and see how we make appointments and things like that, someday I'm going to get three or four of my colleagues aside over some highballs and ask them to explain to me how in the world I ever got offered this post as a full professor at the University of Georgia. (laughter) \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Well, you've got one of them right here. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Probably the most difficult position to achieve in the civilized world. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, the President of the University of California once, when I was at the Rockefeller Foundation, offered me a post as a full professor on the faculty out there. And when he did so, he smiled and said, \"Now, I'll have to bring you in as full professor, because since you don't have a Ph.D. you would never get to be one if I didn't start you off this way.\" (laughter) So maybe there was something to that in this appointment here. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Did you ever seriously consider that? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Well, the faculty here, of course, voted unanimously. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  You know, that's the first time I've ever heard that. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  To extend the invitation. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  A unanimous vote? \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Oh, yes, a unanimous vote. During the discussion with the faculty, there was probably some concern raised about the fact that Dean had only attended two years of law school, but Lindsey was very persuasive. The central theme of the meeting was, you know if we look ahead fifteen, twenty years, international law is going to play a major role in this region and we need to take steps now to build a good base in the Law School. Well, the teaching and instruction of international law really was not a subject that was even dealt with. I recall the anecdote that many years ago they wanted to offer international law into the curriculum of the Law School and they looked around for somebody to teach it and the only one that they considered qualified was former All American football player [Robert] McWhorter, who was then on the faculty. His credentials included the fact that he had worked one summer for International Harvester and that's the closest we came. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  This sounds self-serving, but it would be hard to find anyone who has practiced more international law over a longer period than I have: In three administrations, every day. There's a cute little story that may be on another tape, Rich. But when I got down to Georgia a friend of mine on the Harvard law faculty sent me a very warm letter of welcome into the profession. Then he passed along a story about Harry Truman which he said that I could use if I needed it. After he left office, Harry Truman went up to the Harvard Law School to talk about constitutional law. During the discussion period one of the Harvard students stood up and said, \"Mr. President, do you know anything about constitutional law?\" And he said, \"Hell yes, I made a lot of it.\" (laughter) So that might have been an appropriate story here. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  I remember in the discussions, not only during the meetings dealing with the appointment of Dean to the faculty, but after in the coffee lounge and so forth, a lot of people started inquiring, \"What is international law?\", you know. \"How do you teach it?\" You hear people talk of teaching torts, teaching criminal law, and this and that and the other. The point you just made was made, you know, no one practiced more international law than the Secretary of State. That's like getting a Supreme Court Justice to teach constitutional law. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, on every working day, as I pointed out before, three thousand cables would go out of the State Department to our posts and to governments all over the world. I think you'll find that spot checks of that daily output would show that about twenty percent of those involved important points of international law. So, it's a continuing process. It goes on all the time. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Pop, do you care to read your comment into this record that LBJ at one time considered offering you the Supreme Court position and you, yourself, raised the point that you didn't have a law degree? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I don't know to what extent this should be used. But he called me in in 1968 and told me that he was going to nominate me to the Supreme Court. Well, this was typical of his generosity toward his colleagues that he wanted to \"take care of,\" just as he sent Bob McNamara to the World Bank, for example. And I told him, \"Mr. President, World War II kept me from finishing my law degree. I've never practiced law. I've never been on the bench.\" He said, \"The Constitution doesn't require that for the Supreme Court,\" which is true. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  It's true. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  And I said, \"I think it's most unlikely that I would be confirmed by the Senate.\" He said, \"Oh, no. I've taken care of that. I talked to Dick [Richard Brevard] Russell [Jr.] about it and he said you'd be confirmed very easily.\" \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Why did you turn that one down? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  So I said, \"Mr. President, I very much appreciate your generosity of your thought in this matter, but as your adviser, I must advise you strongly against it. And as the person under consideration, I will have to tell you that I would not permit my name to go forward.\" \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Was there a vacancy at the time? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, yes. As a matter of fact, had my name gone forward in 1968 it would not have gotten anywhere because it would have gone out with the nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice. As a matter of fact, he then nominated former Congressman [Homer] Thornberry of Texas to the bench and both of those nominations failed in the Senate and simply weren't acted on. Abe Fortas resigned and then Nixon made those appointments. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Why did you turn it down? That's quite a position. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Although the Constitution does not require that justices of the Supreme Court be accomplished lawyers, I personally think that they ought to be. I'm not keen about amateur lawyers sitting on the Supreme Court. I'm not sure that they could carry their load as justices of the court. But in any event, I was not prepared to be the guinea pig to test out that idea. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  This is a little afield from the subject, but I'm just curious, do you think Arthur [Joseph] Goldberg regretted leaving the Supreme Court to be U.N. Ambassador? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, LBJ talked to me about that before the appointment was made. Whatever Arthur says about it, and he has strongly denied this, LBJ was convinced that Arthur was getting bored on the Supreme Court and wanted a more active political life. This was one way to open that up to him, you see. From the point of view of our representation at the U.N., it was a very good appointment. Arthur Goldberg is one of the finest negotiators that ever came down the track. He was a much better negotiator than Adlai [Ewing] Stevenson [III], although his speeches were relatively dull compared to Adlai Stevenson's. For example, we were very hesitant to give Adlai Stevenson a fallback position in the negotiation because he would be at the fallback position in five minutes. (laughter) Whereas, Arthur Goldberg, who had long experience in labor negotiations, would take your opening position and he would gnaw at it and he would press, and he would fuss and he drained every drop out of it before any question came up of falling back to another position. He was a great negotiator. And incidentally, he played the crucial role in negotiating Resolution 242 following the June '67 war; and the fact that he was Jewish did not get in the way of his effective communication with-- \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  What was Resolution 242? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  That was the resolution of the Security Council setting out the bases for peace in the Middle East. And it's still the fundamental document on the subject. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  We in the Labor Department had the distinct impression that he was bored on the Court. As a matter of fact, the Chief Press Officer for the Labor Department was called up to the court every day to brief Justice Goldberg on what was going on. One time he invited several of us on the legal staff up for lunch. He wanted to keep in contact with what was going on. He invited us up for lunch and we had lunch in this special room and he served wine with the meal. He said that was the first time wine had ever been served in the Supreme Court building and he had to get the Chief's permission to do it--Chief Justice Earl Warren. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  And this was what, '63, '64, somewhere along in there? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  The Supreme Court justices live a pretty antiseptic life there around Washington. Most of the time they are very careful not to let themselves be drawn into things which might later come before the court. For example, there were times at Embassy dinners when Chief Justice Warren would be there and as the Senior American it was up to him to return the toasts offered to the President by offering a toast to the Chief of State of the Embassy country. He would rise and offer his toast and then he would say, \"And now I will call on my friend, the Secretary of State to make some remarks.\" He would never let himself be drawn into any comments on the relations between our two countries and things of that sort. Some of the Supreme Court Justices, like [Hugo LaFayette] Black and some others, took very little part in the social life of Washington. You never saw them turn up at these parties and things. Once in a while one would. So it was very unusual when, in Johnson's time he would call a meeting to talk about Vietnam or some other issue and he would ask Abe Fortas to come down and join the meeting. I was a little uncomfortable about that. I don't think that's the role for a Justice of the Supreme Court. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Did Abe Fortas join in the discussions on Vietnam and such? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yeah. Sure. Sure. And he consulted him frequently. Abe Fortas had been an old friend and had consulted with him on such things prior to going to the court. But it continued after he went to the court, which I thought was a little odd. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  There was some pressure for the court to review the constitutionality of the Vietnam War. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well they did on a number of occasions. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  And they decided not to get into it. They ducked the issue. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  The cases sometimes turn on different grounds. One was that it was a political question, which the court should not get into. But another one was that the Congress had legislated on the matter, that therefore those who were challenging it had no basis on which to make a successful challenge. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Justice [William Orville] Douglas and Justice [Potter] Stewart toward the end did an. unusual thing. It's not so unusual now, but they did an unusual thing stating an opinion why they voted to grant certiorari in cases where the majority denied certiorari, primarily on political question grounds. There was a growing sentiment, I think, to have the Supreme Court review the constitutionality of the Vietnam War. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Justice Douglas used to travel a lot, all over the world, particularly to the mountains, to the Himalayas and things like that. He had a pretty bad habit at times of leaving his seat on the Supreme Court and going out somewhere to make speeches about foreign policy. I tried to give him a hint at a press conference once by suggesting that I would try not to decide Supreme Court cases if he would not try to make foreign policy. But he didn't take the hint. One time at a White House party when we were standing around at a reception, Chief Justice Warren came up to me in the corner and he said, \"Dean, I think I ought to tell you that if you feel that you have to respond to ray brother, this would not be interpreted as an attack on the Supreme Court.\" \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Did you have any special relationships with any of the Supreme Court, on a personal level, members of the Supreme Court? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. I had known [Byron Raymond] Whizzer White while he was in the Justice Department at the beginning of the Kennedy administration before he went to the Court. We were former Rhodes Scholars and bumped elbows a few times. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Was he there when you were there, Ralph? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. He was much later. He was there later. I lost a number of cases before the Supreme Court on some of these civil rights issues. I think it's worth a comment on it because of some of the side effects of it. We had an American who had been a naturalized citizen for forty years or more, named [Beys] Afroyim, who went to Israel. While he was there he got caught up in the enthusiasm of the day over there and he voted in an Israeli election. So the State Department took his passport away from him. The law at that time very specifically said that if you vote in a foreign election you lose your American nationality. So, that went to the Supreme Court. Now, here's an interesting thing. I, myself, thought that particular part of the law was unconstitutional. Nevertheless that was a law which had been passed by the Congress and signed by our President, part of the law of the land. So I had a duty, it seemed to me, to try to sustain that law. So we cooperated with the Justice Department in trying to sustain the constitutionality of Afroyim against Rusk. When the decision went against Rusk, I was in the position of being rather glad even though I had been on the other side of the case technically. But then something else happened. When that decision came down we were under pressure from some of the senators not to change our regulations to conform to that decision, but to let the next fellow carry the burden of doing his own litigation: and then the next one, and the next one, you see. Because all the Supreme Court had decided was the case about Mr. Afroyim and an election in Israel. Suppose this had been an election in Poland or somewhere else? It was a five to four decision. It might have gone the other way, you see. But I took the view that we shouldn't play that kind of game and so we changed the regulations to eliminate in our own administration of the law voting in a foreign election as a basis for losing nationality. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  It's a great story. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Why would that have been a congressional issue? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, Congress tinkers all the time with the administration of the law. Their oversight-- and then the politics of it is such that they get involved in these things all the time. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Do you remember any other court cases specifically that carry the name Rusk? \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Just about all of them have carried the name Rusk, I think. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I lost several Supreme Court cases, I think generally in the right direction, I might say, as far as I was concerned. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  I think that there are a number of cases--This all occurred in a period in which the court ceased looking to the group and started looking to individuals in applying the Constitution, over a period of mid-1950s on up until maybe mid-1970s. Many of the group concepts developed in the New Deal days: upholding the constitutionality of legislation. The Legislature pretty much reigned supreme. The court deferred to legislative judgments and started coming under attack during this period in the name of individual rights. I think this was part of that development. There were many paying their Social Security payments to individuals who lived in foreign countries and so forth. It was all part of that same thing. The court generally upheld the rights of individuals versus what was considered to be in collective interest of the United States. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  The public doesn't understand as well as faculties of law schools do, the extent of law making which necessarily had to be done in the administrative process of applying the law because so often legislation is pretty vague and somebody has to decide what it means. For example, we can deny a visa to somebody on the grounds of moral turpitude. Now what is moral turpitude? There's a famous case back in the twenties of Lady [Vera Fraser] Cathcart of England, who got to be known as quite a swinger around London. She applied for a visa to come to the United States and it was denied to her on the grounds of moral turpitude. Punch, the British humor magazine, made the comment, \"Our American friends go to such extreme lengths to make themselves appear ridiculous, it would be downright churlish of us not to concede the success of their efforts.\" (laughter) You're not supposed to admit somebody who would become a \"public charge\" in the United States. Well what does that mean? What specifically does it mean in an individual case to become a public charge? An awful lot of lawmaking--I'm sure you would agree, Ralph--goes on in the administrative process of applying general language of the law to specific cases. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  I think, as a matter of fact, the executive branch quite often uses the strategy in getting legislation passed when it looks doubtful that it will pass, making sure that the legislation that is passed is nebulous enough so it can be administered in a way that--(unintelligible, multiple people speaking at same time) \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  We call that in the executive branch, putting appropriate flesh on the skeleton. And there is no way in which a legislative body can cater for every possible contingency that might arise under the law. A lot of it has to be left to an administrative process and to lower courts. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Did you get involved much in approving regulations where--I suppose those were mainly approved at a lower level and not the Secretary's level. But did you get involved in any specific sets of regulations for visas or-- \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, occasionally I would call some of these regulations into my own office for review. But there's a quirk in our law that might be of passing interest. The law vests in our consular officers abroad the power to decide whether or not to grant a visa. That is not vested in the Secretary of State, and from a strictly legal point of view the Secretary of State cannot instruct a consular officer abroad as to whether to grant or refuse a visa. He can advise him, and if that consular officer doesn't want to wind up in Ouagadougou he'll generally take that advice. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Be careful. We're trying to go to Ouagadougou! \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  But the responsibility rests with the consular officer. There were a good many regulations that were constantly needing revision, partly because they just turn out to be absurd or inapplicable. One thing that I did that I think helped me a good deal, long before the phrase \"zero budgeting\" came into use I would hold appropriations hearings myself in my own office with the different parts of the Department before going down to Congress because I wanted to know where every dollar in that appropriations bill was. If you follow every dollar every year, you cannot help but uncover some wastes and things that don't make sense: things that just develop by inertia over time. That happens in any large organization: foundations, universities, wherever. I'm very much in favor of a chief executive knowing where every dollar in his budget is because it reveals a lot of things. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You've testified about immigration. Racial relations surely must have been a factor in American immigration policies. Evidently under Lyndon Johnson, I think in 1965, the administration made a major effort to amend immigration law. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  There had been pretty strong racial aspects to immigration laws. It was tilted against blacks and orientals and people like that. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  Didn't Senator [Patrick Anthony] McCarran play a large role in early legislation? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  That's right. But, we managed to get that immigration law changed. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  I believe it was [Edward Moore] Ted Kennedy in his very early days who was one of the movers on that immigration bill. Was the Department involved heavily? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Oh, yes. We were heavily involved. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  In what way? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  We had a special officer in the Department, whose name I can't remember at the moment, who was almost passionately interested in these civil rights matters. He worked very hard on them. He was not very good in his working relationships with key members of Congress. Indeed, at one point we were advised by the leadership of the Congress that if we wanted to get those changes in our immigration bill we had better keep that fellow away from Capitol Hill and keep him in the Department. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Did that mean that you had to do more work as a result of that? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I did more work as a result. You see, when you go down and testify, either on the Civil Rights Act of '64 or on the changes in the immigration law, you've got to put in an awful lot of just plain drudgery before you go down there because there's no rule of relevance in the Congress. In any event, you could get questions from any direction on any aspect of any pending bill. So you had to work very hard to get ready to go down there. Usually I would only get ten percent of the questions that we figured ahead of time might come up. But I would usually go down there with a big black book like this with tabs in it so that I could turn quickly to the relevant materials in case a question did arise. It isn't just a casual thing. You have to work at it. \r\n \r\nBEAIRD:  This is a field, too, that I recall--talking about going down with a briefing book and so forth. I recall, though, that when you went down before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in about 1967 you went with nothing but your hat and testified for about, what, three days? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Two days solid. Of course, I was briefed to the gills on that before I went down there. That was a kind of an amusing incident to show how the wheels turn around in Washington. LBJ told me he did not want me to appear on a televised public meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee on Vietnam during that particular period of time. So, I stalled-- \r\n \r\n \r\nEND OF SIDE 1 \r\n \r\n \r\nBEGINNING OF SIDE 2 \r\n \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I would arrange to do this in a private session, an executive session. During this period when I was stalling at the direct instruction of President Johnson, both [James William] Fulbright and I knew that if we wanted a foreign aid bill, I would have to come down there in a public session to defend foreign aid. So finally the time came when I had to go down for foreign aid. I went down, and for two days there was no mention made of foreign aid. It was all about Vietnam. If anyone would have watched that hearing, you would think that there were senators there who were trying to cut my liver out. But when the hearing was over, we went into a little room in back of the hearing room and had a drink and people were on a first-name basis. Senator Albert Gore of Tennessee, who had been pretty rough during the hearing, wrote me a note a few days later and said, \"Dear Dean: I just thought I'd let you know that I have been looking at my mail and you won.\" The personal relationships are usually quite different than the public relationships. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Getting back to this immigration policy for a minute, if I can just reiterate the major thrust of what Lyndon Johnson was trying to do. Specifically, I think you fellows were trying to achieve three things, and one was eliminate the national origin system under which quotas for each country were determined; also eliminate the Asia-Pacific triangle provisions which require persons of Asian stock to be attributed quota areas, not by place of birth, but according to racial ancestry. And the other was to accord immigrants from newly independent former colonial areas in the Western Hemisphere the same non-quota status presently enjoyed by immigrants from the other independent nations. Were you able to achieve all that in 1965? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. Yes. It was really quite astonishing. You see, the sense of wanting to straighten out some of these matters of discrimination was a part of the ambience of the country. It was sort of generally recognized by a lot of people that the time had come to do something about these things. We managed to get a pretty good vote out of it. We got some conservative senators and congressmen voting with us on it. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Where did the initiation of the idea to straighten out the immigration laws come from? Do you remember? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  A combination of State and Justice. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  Who at State and who at Justice? Was it you at State? Or you and a group of people at State? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It's a little hard to put your finger on a particular individual when something emerges out of group discussion. Several people made contributions toward it. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  And you proposed it to President Johnson? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, we and Justice, together, proposed it. \r\n \r\nSCHOENBAUM:  That's a real feather in your cap and in everyone's involved. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Have those changes survived the test of time here? Do we still have a racially tolerant immigrations policy? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Pretty much so. You know there about two and one-half million people standing in line all over the world at any given moment waiting to get a visa for immigration to the United States. Entry into the United States is still a very valuable privilege. There are places where they would pay $50,000 for a visa to this country. It's a process which has to be watched very closely, very carefully, because under those circumstances the possibilities of corruption are always present. It's a delicate matter. It has to be supervised very carefully. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Pop, my question is: What influence did race relations or civil rights have while you were at Davidson College, or perhaps Oxford? We talked about your boyhood experiences. Let's follow it on up through the various stages of your life. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Davidson was a segregated college for white men. While I was there the question did not even arise, and indeed the segregation in the little village of Davidson was very clear. The blacks lived across the railroad tracks from the college, had their own community, their own church, their own school, and things like that. I dealt with a considerable number of blacks at the little bank where I worked when I was at Davidson, and indeed sometimes the blacks would come in and let us check over their--the tenant farmers would come in and let us check over the figures that had been turned out, largely by their landlords. Sometimes we found discrepancies there and the landlords did not particularly like our meddling in such things. We were able to be of some help. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Was the bank president aware of the fact you were doing these things? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Oh, yes. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  This wasn't while you were working at the bank that you were checking these figures? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Any of us at the bank would do that if the blacks asked us to. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You don't remember any exchanges in particular? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  One Monday morning during the summer when I was working in the little bank there, it was my turn to open up the bank in the morning. I went down there, and when I got there was a considerable line of blacks outside the bank. And when I opened up, it was clear that they were all lined up to come and get their money out of the bank. There seemed to be a black run on the bank. It didn't cause any banking problem because their accounts were very small and we had plenty of cash to deal with, but we were curious about just what had started this. We learned that the black preacher over in the black church the night before, in exhorting his flock to put money in the collection plate, said to them, \"You go down to that bank and get your money out and give it to the Lord. That bank's gonna go broke, but the Lord, he isn't gonna go broke.\" They believed half of his story and they came down to get their money out. Then in a few days, in a rather shamefaced way, they trickled back in and put their money back in the bank. It was a segregated life at that time. Then when I went to Oxford-- \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Just a minute, were there colored people of any types at Davidson? Was that strictly white? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  There were no blacks in the student body. There were black servants, waiters, janitors, things of that sort. There were no professional blacks living in the little village of Davidson in those days. We did not have a black man with the faculty. We had black trainers for our sports teams and things of that sort. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Intellectually, was it an issue on campus? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. It just didn't arise during the late twenties and early thirties. When I went to Oxford, however, there I was involved with students from all parts of the world: all colors, races and things of that sort--Africans and Asians and others. It was just taken for granted that there was no problem about it. It was just there and I had friends of different races and so forth at Oxford. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  When you showed up at Oxford--obviously later in your life it was quite clear that you had more or less shed whatever racial biases you might have picked up in the South. But when you first showed up at Oxford did you find yourself in a strange environment in terms of your racial beliefs? Were you challenged at all, being a Southerner? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No, not at all. Because as a child, you see, I had been a delivery boy for that little one-man grocery store run by a man named Claude Leatherwood. Part of my work there was to go into the black community and take their orders, then come back and fill up a little red wagon with their orders. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You had no trouble mixing with the people you encountered at Oxford? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I had no problem at all and had sort of taken it for granted, taken it in stride. Then after Oxford when I went to California to Mills College, there were a few black girls in the student body, not many. Then race was not that much of an issue around Mills College, Oakland, and San Francisco at that time. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  There were some black students at Mills? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  A handful. Very few. Then during the war and those two years in the China-Burma-India theatre I was working in a sea of people of other races. I was a part of a very small minority of whites in an ocean of people of other races and colors. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  That was probably the first time that you had been part of a minority group in any way. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. And I didn't feel any particular tension as a result of that. The Chinese were very race conscious. We had great difficulty getting Chiang Kai-shek to admit black soldiers into China. He seemed to think that since we considered these to be second-class soldiers, he didn't want second-class soldiers in China. The Chinese and the Japanese have very strong racial attitudes and feelings. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you have a lot of black American soldiers in the CBI [China-Burma-India theatre]? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  A good many, but they were parts of the engineer battalions working on the Burma Road and jobs of that sort. I don't remember any blacks in a position of high responsibility on the general staff or as troop commanders. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Were you close enough to the troops to know how the relationships may have been between black GIs and whites in the CBI? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. I really got into that question later when I became special assistant to Secretary of War Robert Patterson, who was working very early on the integration of the army. My adult experiences with people of different races came naturally and easily without tension or strain. You see, I did not bring with me out of the South the old magnolia plantation attitudes toward race. It just wasn't there. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  At what point in your career do you think you could call yourself a truly racially tolerant sort of person? Would this have occurred early? At Oxford? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Oh, I think probably that started in my childhood-- \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  This is in China. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  In China during the war we sent our convoy of, say, a dozen trucks from one city or town to another, with military supplies on board, driven by Chinese. Chances were that at least six or seven of those trucks would simply disappear en route. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  [Professor] Homer [C. Cooper] said one entire convoy--I think it was the number 13th convoy--disappeared--the whole shebang--and they never could find it. It checked out at the Assam end and never checked back in at the China end. Talk a little bit about your experience or involvement with writing the order that integrated the armed forces. You say you helped Robert Patterson work on that? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  He was determined to break down these racial lines in the armed forces, and moved on it pretty strongly. It's always been of interest to me that the Army was one of the first major units of our society to take seriously this problem of integration/segregation and do something about it. Now, it was off to sort of an uneven start because, oddly enough, there was a black special assistant to Robert Patterson to work on these things as well. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you recall his name, Pop? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No I don't. We got the impression in those early days that blacks themselves did not wish to serve under black officers until they saw blacks commanding white troops. There was a little bit of a special problem there for some reason. They were inclined to look upon black officers as second-class officers and they didn't particularly like that. As soon as we started mixing black noncoms and officers into white units then that problem rapidly disappeared. I think the Army was ahead of the other armed services in desegregation: ahead of the Navy and possibly even ahead of the Air Force. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  If you had to describe exactly to what extent you were responsible for integrating the armed services--You worked for Robert Patterson in the drafting of this order? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. I don't think I was directly involved in the military orders. I was simply a staff officer to Robert Patterson. Robert Patterson should be given the credit for making the effort. I wouldn't be able to assess any specific contribution that I made in the process. I was in favor of what he was trying to do and tried to help out in whatever way I could. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Was there a considerable fight within the Army hierarchy over this very integration of the Army? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Not by the end of the war. I don't know whether I've put this on tape before, but earlier, when I was captain in G-2 military intelligence on the War Department general staff, just before and after Pearl Harbor, I was charged with a section of G-2 which dealt with British areas in Asia: Afghanistan, India, Burma, Malaya, Australia, New Zealand, the British Pacific Islands, Hong Kong, and so forth. Over in OSS [Office of Strategic Services] there was a young black who had sort of specialized on those areas and I found myself working fairly regularly with him. One day he was over at my office for lunch and-- \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You're talking about Ralph [J.] Bunche? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. And I took him into the officers' dining room in the War Department there for lunch. Apparently that was the first time a black had been taken into the officers' dining room, and the timbers began to quiver. This man's name was, indeed, Ralph Bunche. The colonel in charge of my section of G-2 strongly supported me on this and nothing happened to me. But it was quite an incident when I did that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  How crowded was the lunchroom? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It was a large cafeteria-style lunchroom. There must have been--it probably could seat four or five hundred officers at one time. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Gee whiz. Was there that size of a crowd in there at the time? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It was a large number. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  What exactly was the reaction when you walked in there? First of all, did you two fellows know what you were doing when you did it? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Had no idea. I had no idea that blacks did not come to the officers' lunchroom. Anyhow, that was something that I remembered, and Ralph Bunche himself remembers that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  I'm sure he does. Is he alive? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No, he died several years ago. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you recall anything that was said to you? Was there any unpleasantness down there? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No unpleasantness in the lunchroom. But the repercussions sort of trickled back through the chain of command, in effect, and there were remarks made to me, but more to the colonel who was in charge of my section: Remarks along the lines of, \"What does Rusk think he's doing? Doesn't he know what this is all about?\" or something like that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you remember when that was? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  That was in '42. There was a later little story, also involving Ralph Bunche. During the Truman administration, Ralph Bunche had been working as a high official at the United Nations. President Truman asked me to go up to New York to see if I could persuade Ralph Bunche to come down to Washington to become an Assistant Secretary of State. I did, and I talked it over with Ralph. And finally he said, \"Well you know I appreciate this offer by President Truman, but I have lived in Washington before and I just don't believe that I, as a father, can ask my children to live in the circumstances in which they would find themselves in Washington.\" He said, \"When we lived there before my children were small and we had a dog. The dog died and we took it out to a pet cemetery to bury it and they turned us away. Of course,\" he said with a laugh, \"The dog was black.\" He would not come to Washington during the Truman administration because of the circumstances in which blacks had to live there, in which his children would have to grow up. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you report that back to Harry Truman? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I sure did. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  What was his reaction? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  He regretted it. But my guess is that old Harry Truman would have been ready to move on some of these basic human rights issues, but he knew that at that time there was no way to get it through Congress. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you ask Ralph Bunche to have lunch with you that time? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. He was in my office. We were working together and it came time for lunch and I just asked him to come have lunch with me. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Pop, would you care to comment on the effect that World War II itself might have had upon race relations in the United States? You read in the history books that the fact of American troops serving side by side, scattered to all different corners of the world, all in behalf of the same cause, itself must have played a role in the transitional way of thinking. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yes. I think that's a very interesting point. The Supreme Court case of Brown against the Board of Education came in 1954. My own hunch is that if that decision had come in 1945, just at the end of World War II, it would have been much more readily accepted around the country because we had millions of men who were coming back from service all over the world where they had fought alongside of, or been supported by, peoples of different races and colors, religions and so forth. And it would have been much more naturally accepted. The Brown case would have been much more readily accepted at that point. But they had to come home and get reacculturated back into their earlier attitudes. I have no doubt, in my own mind, that if that Supreme Court decision had come right at the end of World War II there would have been more general acceptance and less friction connected with it. \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did the Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education have any effect on you, or were you involved with that? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  With the Rockefeller Foundation operating under a charter purpose of contributing to the well-being of mankind throughout the world, we had had a good deal of experience traditionally at the Foundation with peoples of other races and colors and so forth. First priority of the Rockefeller Foundation since 1913 had been this hemisphere. And, of course, this hemisphere had in it different races and colors. We tried to move in various ways to support the principle of Brown against Board of Education. We had already given substantial sums of money from the General Education Board and the Foundation to black institutions of higher education: various other colleges in the Atlanta university complex, Tuskeegee, and others of that sort. I remember on one occasion we had a proposal in front of us for a grant to a New York group which would be used for the purpose of locating and upgrading black talent. We were attracted to this grant. Our lawyer told us, however, that he thought that such a grant would be in violation of the New York State equal opportunity legislation because it was aimed just at blacks. We looked at that and discussed it among the trustees and asked our lawyer if we made this grant who would challenge it: The Attorney General of the State of New York which had general supervision of New York chartered foundations? Would the Attorney General of the United States? Would we be sued by anybody in court? Our lawyer said he didn't think anyone would challenge it, so we went ahead and made the grant, although in a technical sense it might have been contrary to the equal opportunity legislation in the State of New York. Over the years the Foundation had given a lot of fellowships to blacks and people of other races. We had given some money for the support of Paul Robeson, the great black singer who became very left-wing politically and helped to bring some criticism onto the Foundation. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  What did he get involved with? Do you remember? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. Well, I forget the details now, but he was one of those for whom we were criticized by the [Edward H.] Rees Committee when it made its investigations. Then we gave some support money to black writers. There was no sense of prejudice in the Foundation. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you have blacks working for the Foundation at all? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  We did not have black officers at that time. We brought Ralph Bunche onto the Board of Trustees. We were rather slow in picking up black officers. In a group of that sort, and indeed in many places in government, you tend to recruit people through gossip circles: people who know whom. They had just not been involved in those circles that we were regularly dealing with when we were looking for people. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you have Ralph Bunche as a pretty close personal friend of yours? Can you volunteer some other names of blacks who you were on friendly terms with and would consider personal friends? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Carl Rowan. Dr. Benjamin Mays, who was an early hero of mine when he was president of Morehouse College. The General Education Board, of which I was also president, was assigned the field of education within the United States, as contrasting with the Rockefeller Foundation which was more international. The General Education Board, over the years, made very substantial capital grants to college. Well, you start making capital grants and you very soon spend yourself out of business no matter how much money you had. So by the time I got there in 1950 the resources of the General Education Board were dwindling: had dwindled rather sharply. So we faced the problem as to whether we should just go ahead with a trickle of resources or spend ourselves out of business. The trustees decided that we would just spend ourselves out of business and liquidate it. In that process I came down to Atlanta and talked to Dr. Benjamin Mays and asked him, among other questions, did he think that we ought to spend our remaining funds on black colleges. He said, \"No. No, I wouldn't advise that because these white boys need just as much education as the black boys.\" \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Is he still alive? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. He died recently. A great man who lived to be about ninety I think. For years he was the elected president of the School Board for the City of Atlanta. Highly respected both by blacks and whites. Extraordinary person-- \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  We're talking about my dad's efforts within the Department of State to advance blacks within the Department and more successfully integrate the Foreign Service. Pop, of your little working group there, which consisted of Carl Rowan and yourself, G. Mennen Williams, and one or two others, is there any written documentation left from that effort? Did you publish any reports? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I don't know that we published anything. This question might have come up in Congressional testimony from time to time. Once in a while we would simply take a look at the numbers to see if we were making any impact on the numbers of blacks in the Department and the kinds of jobs they held. But I don't recall anything published on the subject. We were working quietly but actively to try to bring this about. One of the problems was that the blacks were not, themselves, turning to service in the Department of State and to Foreign Service. They have to feel that there is a future for them, that this is a place in which they would be comfortable, that things would be normal for them. We had had so few blacks in that field that it took a while for blacks to begin to think in terms of the Foreign Service. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  It was tough to attract your better quality graduates, I guess? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, you see, a black who was qualified for the Foreign Service had a good many other jobs waiting for him, particularly when things like Affirmative Action began to catch hold. So, it wasn't easy to recruit a lot of qualified blacks for that kind of service. They simply had not been drawn to the kinds of things that would have prepared them to be successful in that career. It wasn't easy. The same thing is still true today as far as law professors are concerned. Very few blacks put themselves forward as possible candidates to become law professors, and one who is truly qualified has a good many other jobs waiting for him at much higher pay than to be a law professor-- \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Perhaps this is a place to put in a very brief comment on Peggy's marriage. I'm not going to invade her privacy, but she and Guy [Smith] did not look upon themselves as being symbols of anything. They were just two young people who decided they wanted to get married. When, in fact, they got married, this took on a symbolic-- \r\n \r\n \r\nEND OF SIDE 2 "},{"id":"gych_rbrl214droh_rusk-gg","title":"Dean Rusk interviewed by Richard Rusk, Thomas Schoenbaum, and Ralph Beaird. ca. 1985","collection_id":"gych_rbrl214droh","collection_title":"Dean Rusk oral history collection, 1984-1989","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Schoenbaum, Thomas","Rusk, Dean, 1909-1994","Beaird, Ralph","Rusk, Richard"],"dc_date":["1985"],"dcterms_description":["Dean Rusk (1909-1994), attorney and U.S. Secretary of State, was born in Cherokee County, Georgia. Rusk joined the Department of State from 1947-1952 and Assistant Secretary of State for United Nations Affairs and for Far Eastern Affairs. From 1952-1960, he was president of the Rockefeller Foundation. In 1961, President Kennedy appointed Rusk to the office of Secretary of State. He remained in this position until 1969. In 1970, he became the Samuel H. Sibley Professor of International Law at the University of Georgia, a position he held until his death in 1994.","Related collections in this repository: Dean Rusk Personal Papers, D.W. Brooks Oral History Collection, Martin Hillenbrand Papers. This interview is a continuation of Rusk P.","Interviewed by Richard Rusk, Thomas Schoenbaum, and Ralph Beaird.","Dean Rusk discusses his experiences with racism, integration and discrimination issues, including housing discrimination in Washington and his daughter’s marriage. This interview is a continuation of Rusk FF."],"dc_format":["audio/mpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Dean Rusk Oral History Collection","http://russelldoc.galib.uga.edu/russell/view?docId=ead/RBRL214DROH-ead.xml"],"dcterms_subject":["Racism","Discrimination"],"dcterms_title":["Dean Rusk interviewed by Richard Rusk, Thomas Schoenbaum, and Ralph Beaird. ca. 1985"],"dcterms_type":["Sound"],"dcterms_provenance":["Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://purl.libs.uga.edu/russell/RBRL214DROH-RuskGG/ohms"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Dean Rusk Oral History Collection, OH Rusk GG, Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies, University of Georgia Libraries, Athens, Georgia, 30602-1641."],"dlg_local_right":["Resources may be used under the guidelines described by the U.S. Copyright Office in Section 107, Title 17, United States Code (Fair use). Parties interested in production or commercial use of the resources should contact the Russell Library for a fee schedule."],"dcterms_medium":["interviews","oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":["1 interview (28.0 min.) : digital, stereo"],"dlg_subject_personal":["Rusk, Dean, 1909-1994"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"DEAN RUSK:  The international echoes from Peggy's [Margaret Elizabeth Rusk [Mrs. Guy Smith]] marriage were quite extensive. We had reactions from many parts of the world that we learned about. I think our own embassies abroad were somehow a little reluctant to report much on these things, but these reactions trickled in. They were all positive. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  They were? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yeah. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  There was quite an international reaction. Do you recall specifically what happened? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No I don't. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Would the Department have compiled that stuff? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I doubt they would have set up a special classification for pulling all that together. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  What ever happened to all that hate mail we got? I understand you got some in the Department and I remember some at the house. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Oh, I would think the so-called hate mail was limited to not more than a dozen letters. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  To the home? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Or to the Department. Oh, two or three of them might have come to the Department but there was very, very little of that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  It was certainly regarded as a significant step for its time. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well this was big news. Time magazine ran a cover story on Peggy and Guy--on the whole, a pretty good well-balanced story. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you recall what the advice was that you gave Peg and Guy on that?  \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Peggy and Guy [Smith] were married in the chapel of Stanford University. We all agreed that this marriage would not be announced in advance, and in effect made public, because I did not want the Vietnam protesters to come in there and interfere with or break up Peggy's marriage. That was the sole reason why we kept it quiet ahead of time. Then the moment the marriage was over reporters, cameramen, and everybody else were all there and got their pictures and got their stories. I just didn't want to have these protesters take it out on Peggy when their real object was me. So that was the sole reason for handling it that way. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  James [Howard] Meredith called that the \"perhaps the most significant thing to date in government to affect in a favorable way the racial situation in the United States.\" That's out of the Time magazine article of September 29, 1967. That was the cover story of Peggy's marriage. Did you feel, in your own mind, that it was really that significant a thing in 1967? \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Since Peggy and Guy, themselves, did not look upon this marriage as in any way symbolic of anything--they weren't doing this to promote some cause or something, they were simply two young people who wanted to get married--I, myself, approached it in this same way. I did not attach or attempt to attach a lot of outside significance to it. So I never tried to interpret it in those terms because I am sure that that was not in the minds of Peggy and Guy. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Do you recall what the reaction was among your colleagues in government, or perhaps President Johnson? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Very few of them spoke to me about it. Peggy and Guy got wedding presents from a good many of my colleagues and former colleagues. At one point I did tell Lyndon Johnson that if he thought that this wedding would make it more difficult for me to maintain my relations with the Senator the Congress, if that was his judgment, I would take that into account. He just dropped the remark one day that he had spoken to Senator [Richard Brevard] Russell [Jr.] of Georgia about it and Senator Russell had said, \"Forget it. It won't make any difference at all.\" So that was the end of that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you offer to resign? Was that part of it? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Not in so many specific words. If, indeed, some of these southern senators had taken out after me like baying hounds and made it more difficult for me to carry on my responsibilities, I would have had to think about that-- \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  [Warren I.] Cohen described you as the principal influence in the Graham mission that led to Indonesian independence, the \"only anti-colonialist venture of the early post-war years.\" Was race a factor in this effort with Indonesia and with respect to our foreign policy in general as a \"unilateralist\"? Did your battles with the Europeanists within the Department have racial overtones? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It's a little hard to measure, to extract out the racial issues from overriding political issues. You see, the United States looked with favor on the granting of independence to those large colonial areas at the end of World War II: India, Burma, Malaya, and so forth. But at the heart of the Indonesian independence issue was a very simple overriding fact. That is that the Dutch simply did not have the capability of maintaining their control over the Indonesians if the Indonesians were ready to resist, which they were. There was a very critical interview/discussion between Secretary of State George [Catlett] Marshall and the Dutch Prime Minister at the time in which Marshall simply pointed out as a military man that the Netherlands would bleed itself dry trying to assert its control over Indonesia and would fail, and that no one would come to help them, and that therefore they had no choice but to get out. I think that was the critical point, quite apart from the broad, sympathetic policy we had toward the independence of colonial areas. That was the clincher: that they simply couldn't do it and we wouldn't help them. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  This clash between the Europeanists and unilateralists: you know, between such people as George [Frost] Kennan and perhaps Dean [Gooderham] Acheson and others--Looking at them and from what you knew about those people personally, individually, did you think racial attitude was part of the makeup of the Europeanists? Did you ever suspect that? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It's hard to sort that one out. The problems we had with these independence movements, with the Bureau of European Affairs in the State Department, derived I think fundamentally from the fact that the Bureau of European Affairs was responsible for trying to build good relations between ourselves and Europe and this was a potential major point of friction. This was at the time when we were trying to work with our friends in Europe to rebuild Europe and making the first steps toward the Marshall Plan and NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] and things of that sort. So it's inevitable that my office, the United Nations Office or later the Far Eastern Office, would have some differences with the Bureau of European Affairs because our responsibilities were different. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You don't remember race being discussed, per se? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. I don't think that this was on a racial basis. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Moving ahead twenty years: Some of the critics of Vietnam have cast their objections to that war in racial terms, stating that the massive use of American fire power against Asians never would have occurred against Caucasian peoples had we been fighting Caucasians instead. How do you respond to a charge like that? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I would simply begin by saying it simply was not true. We helped South Korea defend itself against the North Koreans where Asians had elected to put themselves in the position of the aggressor. We helped South Vietnam defend itself against North Vietnam. After all, it was Asians who were moving in on South Vietnam and Laos and Cambodia. And we made a major effort during the Vietnam War to keep the impact upon civilians limited. There's one story about Vietnam that has never been told and I have suggested it to a number of reporters who simply were not interested. That is the additional casualties we took because of the rules of engagement which were designed to protect civilians. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  If someone was interested in developing a story along those lines--I'm not saying that I'm the one to do it--where would they look for that material? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  They would have to comb over a good deal of material. They would have to start with the Rules of Engagement, which are publicly available. Then they would have to comb over a good many materials in the Pentagon: the operational reports and things of that sort. I remember one full year after the bombing started in 1965: After one full year of that, the North Vietnamese put out a story reporting that there had been five hundred civilian casualties as a result of the bombing. Well now, in terms of bombing, five hundred for a full year is just nothing. I still have on my conscience the fact that we asked our own men sometimes to do things the hard way rather than the easy way in order to save civilian casualties. At those Tuesday luncheon sessions with President Johnson, when we were looking at a particular bombing target, if you approached the bombing target from one direction there would be less defensive resistance in terms of anti-aircraft and things of that sort, but there would be a greater risk of civilian casualties through overages or shorts. Whereas, if you went in in another way, there would be far less risk of civilian casualties but more defense. And there were times when we would send our flyers through the more difficult way in order to protect civilians. That's a very tough decision to make. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Pop, either as a private citizen or a public official, have you ever been called a racist or accused of discriminatory attitudes or practices? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I think only on one occasion. Somewhere in a press conference or something, somebody asked me about the People's Republic of China and I made three very factual statements about China: One, there would be a billion of them. Second, that they would be armed with nuclear weapons. And third, that we didn't know what their policies and attitudes would be twenty years down the road. Well, [James Barrett] Scotty Reston and, I think, [Eugene J.] Gene McCarthy picked that up and charged me with raising the \"yellow peril\" notion in racial terms. I don't know anybody who didn't know that there were going to be a billion Chinese and they'd be armed with nuclear weapons. And I didn't know anybody who knew what their policies would be twenty years later. These were just very simple, factual points. Well, about two or three weeks later, Scotty Reston halfway apologized for this in one of his later columns, but it was buried so deep in there it never caught up with his original column. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you call that to his attention? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I sure did. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  What did you do? Phone him? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I don't know whether I saw him or phoned him. I don't know. But he knew perfectly well that I wasn't raising the yellow peril in racial terms. That wasn't in my mind at all. And I think he would be the first today to confirm that that is so. I think that's about the only time I was ever accused of personal racism. Let me think a little bit more about that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:   Both in Scarsdale, New York, and Spring Valley, Washington, D.C., you refused to sign residential sale agreements that would prevent the future sale of those homes to blacks. Do you care to comment on this and, if you would, on any other ways in which you may have lived your personal life in a racially tolerant manner. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  When we bought our little home in Washington, D.C. there on Quebec Street just below American University, we found that for many, many years, decades the deed had provided that the home could not be sold to Africans or Asians or \"denizens of the Ottoman empire\"--(laughter) \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  It was in the deed, huh? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yeah, it was in the actual deed itself. So I asked my lawyers to figure out how we could knock that out. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:   Had you already signed the agreement? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:   I had not closed it at that time. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you see it yourself or did someone-- \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Oh, I saw the deed. I have always remembered that phrase \"denizens of the Ottoman empire.\" This was a 19th century deed, probably. My lawyers, who were themselves very liberal, advised that the process of changing a deed is so complicated, time consuming, and difficult that the best way to handle it would be simply to file a statement with the deed that I considered those clauses unconstitutional and would not comply with them. And that's what I did. Of course, they maintain that kind of discrimination also by resale contracts, which I refused to sign. That is, the real estate agent from whom we bought that little house in Washington was pretty well-known around town as dealing only in properties for whites. They wanted me to sign a resale agreement that if I ever wanted to sell that house I would sell it through them. And that would help to preserve the discrimination pact. But I didn't sign their resale agreement. Although, in fact, I think we may have sold the house through that particular firm, as it happened. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you have an unpleasant exchange with that fellow over that point? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:   No. Not particularly. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:   Was the Scarsdale house purchase set up the same way? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:   I don't think it was in the deed. I think this has disappeared now, but in Scarsdale the real estate people tried to guide Jewish families into a particular section of town. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  What section of Scarsdale was that? Fox Meadow? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Fox Meadow section. They discouraged even Jews from coming into Greenacres, although we did in fact have a number of Jews there. We didn't have problems with black discrimination in Scarsdale because we didn't have any blacks. I don't know that there were any blacks at all living in Scarsdale except as live-in maids and servants for people. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:   That's what I remember. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:   The discrimination in Scarsdale while we were there was on religious grounds rather than racial grounds. Now that has largely disappeared, I am happy to say. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You may need a little time to think, but do you recall any ways in which you may have ordered your personal life to try to live in a racially tolerant way? \r\n \r\n[break in recording] \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  When we lived in Scarsdale, you will remember that the Scarsdale Golf Club was just two or three blocks down the hill across a railroad track. I was invited more than once to join. Although it would have been wonderful for you kids to have been able to-- \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  It sure would. That was a great place. As a matter of fact we used to sneak on the course. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  --to run down the hill for a swim or to play golf or tennis or whatever. I could not in conscience join a club to which, for example, I could not invite the trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation. And since this club would not admit Jews, much less blacks, I just refused membership. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You had Jewish trustees at the Foundation? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well, sure. And also, just as a general matter of principle I didn't feel it was up to me to join that particular kind of situation. Whether they have changed that now, I just don't know. It was typical around New York in those days to have Gentile country clubs and there were a few Jewish country clubs. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Why was it you were rather insistent on Peg and Dave [David Patrick Rusk] and myself going to a public high school, public school system rather than a private? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Part of it was not principle at all, it was just money. (laughter) I don't think we could have afforded it. But also there was a pretty general sense that if people like we were didn't patronize the public schools, that we would turn the public schools more and more into a class element in our society. When I was in the cabinet in Washington you kids went to public schools. Some of the children of my good liberal friends were off in private schools. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  I would say, most of the children of your liberal friends were in private schools. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yeah. No, we've always felt and strongly supported the public school system. Mom and I were active in PTAs [Parent-Teacher Associations] here and there, particularly active in Scarsdale. It has just been our general orientation and attitude. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Did you ever get involved with Dave in his Urban League work in Washington while you were Secretary? Dave had entered the, joined the Urban League in the aftermath of Martin Luther King's march on Washington and his famous speech of \"I Have a Dream.\" I believe he worked there for four or five years as one of the leading officers in the Urban League. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Dave and I did not cross paths in connection with our respective jobs and responsibilities, but we saw each other frequently and talked about his work in the Urban League. I think he enjoyed it. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Pop, do you recall meeting with any of the protest groups in the sixties while you were Secretary, related to perhaps any of the marches on Washington? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  There was a poor march on Washington? \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Poor People's March? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yeah, mostly black. They came up and pitched their tents in the mud and all that sort of thing. One of the black leaders--was it Ralph [David] Abernathy? \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  I think it was Ralph Abernathy, yeah. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  --insisted upon meeting with me as Secretary of State. So I received him and a group of twenty-five or thirty of his colleagues. At that meeting they handed me a list of questions and points on which they wanted replies. When I looked through there, none of these had to do with foreign policy. They all were about domestic matters. So I simply distributed those questions to other cabinet members and they put together some replies. Then we assembled that and sent it over to Ralph Abernathy. Then he wanted to have another meeting with me before the news reporters and TV cameras and things of that sort. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Was this first meeting before the press at all? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  No. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Just privately? Was it up in your office? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  It was up in the Department somewhere. I don't think it was in my office. There were too many of them. It was somewhere else. He wanted a press conference with me on these answers. Well, they weren't my answers and I wasn't prepared to get into them. It wasn't my business to get into them and I refused that press conference. I didn't feel that he should use me, as Secretary of State, just to create a demonstration against my cabinet colleagues by being very critical about the replies they had made to his questions. I simply refused to meet him the second time. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  I think [William] Ramsey Clark had been through that experience and I think he had advised you that it probably wasn't an experience worth repeating. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  That's possible. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  You asked me for my opinion about it, I remember that. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Well I did meet with him the first time. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  I've got one final question and that is: The South has historically, and still even today, has come under criticism from other sections of the country, particularly up Worth, for being backward in their racial views and being an intolerant section of the country. Yet, you've grown up in the South. You've had the chance to see these issues on a national level. Care to comment upon these sectional differences? Is it in fact true, as the critics claim that it is, that the South is more intolerant toward black people? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  I just don't think that is true, generally speaking. I think with a little luck the South will be able to show the way to the rest of the country in race relations. You see, back in the old days when the theory was wrong about the white-black relationship, nevertheless there was an infinity of personal relationships between whites and blacks in all sorts of ways. Now, when the theory came to be straightened out, those personal relationships continued. Whites and blacks would join with each other in all sorts of common enterprises. There has been something there to build on in a way that you don't have in a place like south Boston, or in Watts, or in the south side of Chicago, and things like that. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  Well there simply just hasn't been any contact between the people there. \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  Yeah. So, I think that the South is in a position to make a major contribution on these race relations. You see, in the North, you have these problems where you have blacks. In a good many places in the North there are not any blacks so there is no problem, and they can take a very lofty attitude about these matters. Where you do have blacks in large numbers, there are problems in the North as well as in the South. They are withering away, but they are still there. \r\n \r\nRICHARD RUSK:  There was a great deal of progress in race relations during the sixties, especially the earlier part of the sixties, then greater tension in the late sixties, a lot of ghettos burning, a lot of public protest; some discouragement in the seventies, more or less in economic terms where blacks had obtained their rightful status under law, but were still suffering the effects of economic poverty and discrimination. Are you optimistic that this country will continue to make success in civil rights? \r\n \r\nDEAN RUSK:  We'll make progress, but the progress will depend in part on the general tone of the leadership we have in Washington, particularly in the White House. I don't think that has been particularly hopeful in recent years. I think it's very bad indeed that black unemployment is double that of white unemployment typically. I think it's still true that the blacks do not come out of higher education as sharply trained as a good many whites. Therefore, I think it's still true that some of them find that they are not competitive where competitive jobs are involved. That will steadily improve, but I just don't buy this attitude that somehow the Worth is far ahead of the South in race relations these days. After all, you've got an elected black mayor of the city of Atlanta and a good many other southern cities. You've got lots of black elected officials around the South. The black business community is steadily developing and moving ahead. So I think these things are changing. \r\n \r\n \r\nEND OF SIDE 1 \r\n \r\n \r\n[SIDE 2 BLANK] "},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47191","title":"[Dining room at the home of Leo and Gerri Branton, Los Angeles, California] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, California, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, 34.05223, -118.24368"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985/1995"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Dining rooms"],"dcterms_title":["[Dining room at the home of Leo and Gerri Branton, Los Angeles, California] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47191"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1980-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47192","title":"[Dining room at the home of Leo and Gerri Branton, Los Angeles, California] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, California, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, 34.05223, -118.24368"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985/1995"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Dining rooms"],"dcterms_title":["[Dining room at the home of Leo and Gerri Branton, Los Angeles, California] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47192"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1980-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47190","title":"[Dining room at the home of Leo and Gerri Branton, Los Angeles, California] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, California, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, 34.05223, -118.24368"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985/1995"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Dining rooms"],"dcterms_title":["[Dining room at the home of Leo and Gerri Branton, Los Angeles, California] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47190"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1980-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"suc_idn_5561","title":"Drawn portrait of I.D. Newman","collection_id":"suc_idn","collection_title":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009"],"dcterms_creator":["Ron Chapesky Studio (Artist - Photographer)"],"dc_date":["1985"],"dcterms_description":["1 portrait"],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Columbia, S.C. : University of South Carolina. South Carolina Political Collections"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Isaiah DeQuincey Newman Papers, Photographs, Portraits [of I.D.N.].","Isaiah DeQuincey Newman Papers"],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights--South Carolina","Civil rights movements--South Carolina","Race relations"],"dcterms_title":["Drawn portrait of I.D. Newman"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of South Carolina. South Carolina Political Collections"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digital.tcl.sc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/idn/id/5561"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Copyright Not Evaluated. For further information please contact the University of South Carolina, South Carolina Political Collections, Columbia, SC 29208."],"dcterms_medium":["portraits"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"auu_auc-047_auc-066-1170","title":"Dr. J. Deotis Roberts, circa 1985","collection_id":"auu_auc-047","collection_title":"C. Eric Lincoln Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985"],"dcterms_description":["Portrait of Dr. J. Deotis Roberts, fourth president of the ITC from January 23, 1980 to April 14, 1983."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Interdenominational Theological Center Audio Visual Collection||http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12322/fa:066"],"dcterms_subject":["Theological seminaries","African Americans--Georgia--Atlanta","Portraits"],"dcterms_title":["Dr. J. Deotis Roberts, circa 1985"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12322/auc.066:1170"],"dcterms_temporal":["1980/1989"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["photographs"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_48329","title":"[Everee McCauley Ward with unidentified man] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985/1995"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American men","African American women"],"dcterms_title":["[Everee McCauley Ward with unidentified man] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.48329"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1980-2000.gmgpc","portrait photographs1980-2000.gmgpc","group portraits1980-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_48328","title":"[Everee McCauley Ward with unidentified man] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985/1995"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American men","African American women"],"dcterms_title":["[Everee McCauley Ward with unidentified man] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.48328"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1980-2000.gmgpc","portrait photographs1980-2000.gmgpc","group portraits1980-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47189","title":"[Family and friends at Leo and Gerri Branton's home, Los Angeles, California] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, California, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, 34.05223, -118.24368"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1985/1995"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Persons"],"dcterms_title":["[Family and friends at Leo and Gerri Branton's home, Los Angeles, California] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47189"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1980-2000.gmgpc","portrait photographs1980-2000.gmgpc","group portraits1980-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":952,"next_page":953,"prev_page":951,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":11412,"total_count":81191,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":319},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":53},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":43},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":38},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"study guides","hits":11},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":9},{"value":"learning modules","hits":6},{"value":"worksheets","hits":6},{"value":"slide shows","hits":4},{"value":"quizzes","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40200},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35114},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4552},{"value":"Sound","hits":3248},{"value":"Collection","hits":41},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":25}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Peppler, Jim","hits":4965},{"value":"Phay, John E.","hits":4712},{"value":"University of Mississippi. Bureau of Educational Research","hits":4707},{"value":"Baldowski, Clifford H., 1917-1999","hits":2599},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":2255},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2077},{"value":"WSB-TV (Television station : Atlanta, Ga.)","hits":1475},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"The State Media Company (Columbia, S.C.)","hits":926},{"value":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution","hits":844},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":778}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":9441},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8347},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5895},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5607},{"value":"Education, Secondary","hits":5083},{"value":"Education, Elementary","hits":4729},{"value":"Segregation in education--Mississippi","hits":4727},{"value":"Education--Pictorial works","hits":4707},{"value":"Civil rights demonstrations","hits":4436},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3530}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966--Correspondence","hits":1888},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1809},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1282},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1071},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":858},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":814},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":719},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":674},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":626}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2598},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1909},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1704},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1070},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":856},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":806},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":625},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":605},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Williams, Hosea, 1926-2000","hits":431}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1763},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":965},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":704},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":366},{"value":"Selma-Montgomery March","hits":337},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":306},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":214},{"value":"Poor People's Campaign","hits":180},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":173},{"value":"University of Alabama Integration","hits":140}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":17820},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5428},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4862},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4610},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4177},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3943},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2579},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2430},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2387}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12843},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11307},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10219},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8503},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4583},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3770},{"value":"Florida","hits":2601},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2391},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1893},{"value":"New York","hits":1667}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10514},{"value":"1963","hits":10193},{"value":"1965","hits":10119},{"value":"1956","hits":9832},{"value":"1955","hits":9611},{"value":"1964","hits":9268},{"value":"1968","hits":9243},{"value":"1962","hits":9152},{"value":"1967","hits":8771},{"value":"1957","hits":8460},{"value":"1958","hits":8242},{"value":"1961","hits":8241},{"value":"1959","hits":8046},{"value":"1960","hits":7940},{"value":"1954","hits":7239},{"value":"1969","hits":7235},{"value":"1950","hits":7117},{"value":"1953","hits":6968},{"value":"1970","hits":6743},{"value":"1971","hits":6337},{"value":"1977","hits":6280},{"value":"1952","hits":6161},{"value":"1972","hits":6144},{"value":"1951","hits":6045},{"value":"1975","hits":5806},{"value":"1976","hits":5771},{"value":"1974","hits":5729},{"value":"1973","hits":5591},{"value":"1979","hits":5329},{"value":"1978","hits":5318},{"value":"1980","hits":5279},{"value":"1995","hits":4829},{"value":"1981","hits":4724},{"value":"1994","hits":4654},{"value":"1948","hits":4596},{"value":"1949","hits":4571},{"value":"1996","hits":4486},{"value":"1982","hits":4330},{"value":"1947","hits":4316},{"value":"1985","hits":4226},{"value":"1998","hits":4225},{"value":"1997","hits":4202},{"value":"1983","hits":4174},{"value":"1984","hits":4065},{"value":"1946","hits":4046},{"value":"1999","hits":4018},{"value":"1945","hits":4017},{"value":"1990","hits":3937},{"value":"1986","hits":3919},{"value":"1943","hits":3899},{"value":"1944","hits":3895},{"value":"1942","hits":3867},{"value":"2000","hits":3808},{"value":"2001","hits":3790},{"value":"1940","hits":3764},{"value":"1941","hits":3757},{"value":"1987","hits":3657},{"value":"2002","hits":3538},{"value":"1991","hits":3507},{"value":"1936","hits":3506},{"value":"1939","hits":3500},{"value":"1938","hits":3465},{"value":"1937","hits":3449},{"value":"1992","hits":3444},{"value":"1993","hits":3422},{"value":"2003","hits":3403},{"value":"1930","hits":3377},{"value":"1989","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3306},{"value":"1933","hits":3270},{"value":"1934","hits":3270},{"value":"1988","hits":3269},{"value":"1932","hits":3254},{"value":"1931","hits":3239},{"value":"2005","hits":3057},{"value":"2004","hits":2909},{"value":"1929","hits":2789},{"value":"2006","hits":2774},{"value":"1928","hits":2271},{"value":"1921","hits":2123},{"value":"1925","hits":2039},{"value":"1927","hits":2025},{"value":"1924","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2009},{"value":"1920","hits":1975},{"value":"1923","hits":1954},{"value":"1922","hits":1928},{"value":"2016","hits":1925},{"value":"2007","hits":1629},{"value":"2008","hits":1578},{"value":"2011","hits":1575},{"value":"2019","hits":1537},{"value":"1919","hits":1532},{"value":"2009","hits":1532},{"value":"1918","hits":1530},{"value":"2015","hits":1527},{"value":"2013","hits":1518},{"value":"2010","hits":1515},{"value":"2014","hits":1481},{"value":"2012","hits":1467}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":500952,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10708},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9437},{"value":"black-and-white photographs","hits":7678},{"value":"negatives (photographs)","hits":7513},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4462},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3623},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":3607},{"value":"black-and-white negatives","hits":2740},{"value":"editorial cartoons","hits":2620},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1955},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1692}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":41178},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17554},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8828},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6864},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":2186},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1778},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-CR/1.0/","hits":1115},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/","hits":197},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":60},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":51},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","hits":27}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Jim Peppler Southern Courier Photograph Collection","hits":4956},{"value":"John E. Phay Collection ","hits":4706},{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3288},{"value":"Baldy Editorial Cartoons, 1946-1982, 1997: Clifford H. Baldowski Editorial Cartoons at the Richard B. Russell Library.","hits":2607},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":2335},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Alabama Media Group Collection","hits":2067},{"value":"Black Trailblazers, Leaders, Activists, and Intellectuals in Cleveland","hits":2033},{"value":"Rosa Parks Papers","hits":1948},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1904},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"John Davis Williams Library. Department of Archives and Special Collections","hits":8885},{"value":"Alabama. Department of Archives and History","hits":8146},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4024},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3212},{"value":"Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies","hits":2874},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":2825},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2633},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":80736},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":80994},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}