Master of the Senate: The Years of Lyndon Johnson

by Robert A. Caro

  38. Hells Canyon

  All dates are 1957 unless otherwise noted.

  Price too high: Reedy, LBJ, p. 114. “Now completely”: Reedy to Johnson, undated, Box 420, JSP. Had to find allies: Evans and Novak, LBJ: Exercise, pp. 141–42; Shuman OH.

  The Hells Canyon issue: Drukman, Wayne Morse, particularly pp. 230–31, 267–68, 285, 302; Gunther, Inside U.S.A., pp. 127–29; Smith, Wayne Morse, pp. 304–07, 343–47; “The Hells Canyon Controversy,” Congress and the Nation, 1945–1964 (Washington: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1965). “Last year the governors …”: undated, pp. 23–25, “Interior—Hells Canyon” folder, Box 288, JSP; Carver, Ward Hower, McCulloch, Shuman interviews.

  McKay’s “giveaway”; “shocking”: Drukman, p. 230; Smith, Wayne Morse, p. 343; W P, June 9; NYP, June 21. “Republican”: Smith, p. 305. “Tooth and nail”: Carver interview. For an example of Senate speeches on the subject, see Mansfield’s in CR, 85/1, pp. 9775–76.

  “Irrelevant”: Fite, Russell, p. 340; Wicker, W-SJ, June 22.

  Secret deal: Merton Bernstein interview. Long: “I had voted against the high dam in Hells Canyon because Herman Welker had supported my position in the Tidelands,” Long OH II, p. 4.

  Negro population of Mountain States: The World Almanac and Book of Facts for 1956, p. 259. “I began”: Johnson, quoted in Goodwin, Lyndon Johnson, p. 150. Arranging the deal: Fite, p. 340. “With Herman”: Long OH II, p. 6. “Look”: Siegel OH IV, p. 3. “I need”: Pearson, WP, June 20; Shuman, quoted in NYP, June 27. Pearson wrote in this column that “although Murray was tempted, …no deal was made.” But Murray did, in the event, vote with the South despite his earlier support for civil rights. See, for example, Rowe interview, and WP, June 21. Steinberg, among others, says, “Russell now proposed a swap…. Five northern liberal senators agreed,” and names Murray as one (Steinberg, Sam Johnson’s Boy, p. 469). Southern votes available: Steinberg, Sam Johnson’s Boy, p. 469; Rowe interview. Johnson spelled out: Smith, Wayne Morse, p. 344.

  Russell agreed: Steinberg, Sam Johnson’s Boy, p. 469. “In return”: Johnson, in Goodwin, Lyndon Johnson, p. 150. Luncheon conversation: Bernstein interview. “Put together”: Long OH III, p. 4. As few as possible: Ward Hower, McCulloch interviews.

  Humphrey, Douglas, Eastland encounter: Javits, Autobiography, pp. 325–26.

  Discouragement in White House: Pearson in WP, June 9. “Prospects”: NYT, May 23. Morrow’s memo: Morrow Papers, Records Box 10, DDEL. “Turn up the heat”: clipping, June 6, Box 2030, JSP. Rayburn’s rulings, Republican moves: NYT, WP, NYHT, June 14–22. “Teaming up”: WP, June 16. “Don’t”: Russell, in W P, June 20. 45 to 39 vote; the very next item: CR, 85/1, p. 9827. Johnson voted with: NYT, June 21. “I desire”: Johnson, CR, 85/1, p. 9832. “A surprise”: WP, June 22, 1957. Analysis of votes: “UNITED STATES SENATE VOTE ON PASSAGE OF S. 555…. June 21, 1957”; Lyndon Johnson’s tally sheet, undated but with “Hells Canyon,” written in his handwriting on top, both Box 1299, JSP; W P, June 22. Senator Arthur V. Watkins (R-Utah) said, “Civil rights yesterday had a lot to do with the vote today—more than most people realize.” Wicker wrote in the W-SJ (June 22), “Southern Democrats apparently assured themselves of a trial by jury amendment” by their Hells Canyon vote. “Authoritative sources indicate that the Southern action was a quid for which they expect to receive a quo composed of a trial-by-jury amendment to the civil rights bill.

  “Western Democrats handed southerners five votes—not enough to sustain their position but enough, as one observer put it, ‘to let ’em know where the votes are.’ A source within liberal ranks reported his belief that western senators would now deliver enough votes for a jury trial amendment.”

  Church’s maiden speech: NYT, WP, other papers, June 22. “Magnificent”: Ashby and Gramer, Fighting the Odds, p. 80. “Boy orator”: WS, Jan. 11; quoted in Ashby and Gramer, p. 81. Photograph: NYT, June 22. “It made him”: Ward Hower interview. Only a temporary: Church OH; Mann, Walls of Jericho, p. 188. “If this bill”: Church OH. “All credit”: Church to Johnson, June 22, Box 41, LBJA CF. “If it”: Neuberger, AA-S, June 28.

  “A vicious”: AP story in W-SJ, June 22. “No deal”: Mansfield, in UP story, in W-SJ, June 24. He also said he hoped “the author (Sen. Potter) will reconsider his position and retract a statement which is untrue on the face of it” (AP in W-SJ, June 22). “Civil rights yesterday”: Watkins, W P, June 22. “A deal”: Alcorn in WP, June 24. “Fellows supposed”: NYT, June 22.

  “Frank, I’m afraid”: Douglas, Fullness of Time, p. 287; Newsweek (July 1) said: “In any event, the bill was not expected to be taken up by the House this session, and even if it passed there, President Eisenhower would certainly veto it.” “Look”: Childs, in NYP, June 26. “Beat down”: WP, June 22. “The action”: NYT, June 23. Liberal caucus: Drew Pearson described it in his WP column of June 22. His description is apparently based on his handwritten notes, which are found in Pearson Papers, Box G201 LBJL. The senator who gave him the information was apparently Morse, for a handwritten note (not in Pearson’s handwriting) in the upper-right-hand corner of the first page says, “file—Morse.” Douglas, describing the caucus himself, wrote: “I told Morse to his face that his action was unpardonable. If he had experienced an honest conversion from his earlier position, he should have informed me before taking the floor. Morse left the room in anger. The break was complete….” (Douglas, Fullness of Time, p. 286). “Authoritative”: Wicker, W-SJ, June 22.

  39. “You Do It”

  All dates are 1957 unless otherwise noted.

  “It was Part III”: Rauh OH. Feelings of liberals and Republicans: For example, NYP editorial, June 23; Stokes, WS, June 27. Brownell, Harlow, McCulloch, Rauh, Reedy, Rogers, Rowe, Shuman, Yarborough interviews. “Racial integration”: NYHT, July 15. As the Senate: WS, July 4; Childs, W P, June 26; Stokes, NYP, June 27; W P, June 23, July 4; NYT, June 28, July 1; Alsop, W P, July 3; Time, July 1; Minnich, LLM (handwritten notes), July 9; June 27; July 2, Box 4, DDEL; Brownell, Harlow, McCulloch, Rauh, Reedy, Steele interviews.

  Russell speech: CR, 85/1, pp. 10771–78. Atmosphere on Senate floor as he spoke: Mann, Walls of Jericho, pp. 192–94. Although Mann says that Russell spoke “in his usual low voice,” this was not the case after he got to the Reconstruction portion of his speech, according to several persons who heard it, including McCulloch, Rauh, and Zweben, and others recall Russell’s statement about putting “black heels on white necks,” for example, as being delivered in a hoarse, shouting tone. Two staff members: Zweben interview.

  Raising of discrepancies: “Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights of the Committee on the Judiciary,” “U.S. Senate, 85th Cong., I Sess, on S. 83 …,” Feb. 16, pp. 210–20. Perhaps the most complete analysis of the Brownell-Young exchanges is by Senator Ervin in CR, 85/1, pp. 11333–35. Ervin sums up his view of them by saying: “The Attorney General did not want to be asked whether the President of the United States would be empowered to call out the Army, the Navy, and the militia, under section 1993 of title 42, to enforce the decrees the Attorney General was asking the Congress to authorize him to obtain without trials by jury, under section 1985 of title 42…. Mr. Young was merely asking the Attorney General a question of law…. But I [Ervin] was never able to get an answer to that question…. Attorney General Brownell, who was asked that question, but did not answer it, is the gentleman who asks for the vast power which would be conferred on him by the bill …”

  “No intrigue”; “an accident”; “so many hands”: “A spokesman for the drafting group,” quoted in Krock, “The Part III Issue Made Clearer,” NYT, July 12. Rogers told the author the “spokesman” was actually Brownell, and Brownell, in an interview, repeated the gist of the contention Krock quotes. “Mysterious”; “on the surface”: Douglas, Fullness of Time, p. 288. Russell and Young: Young to Russell, June 17, Series III, A. Speech, Box 32, RBRL; CR, 85/1, pp. 10771–78; “Hearings,” pp. 214–15, 224–25.

  “A landmark”: CR,
85/1, p. 10775. “CHAMPION”: NYT, July 3. “Subtle dramatist”: Watson, Lion in the Lobby, pp. 383–86. “Senators”: Woodward, “The Great Civil Rights Debate,” Commentary, Oct. 1957. “A violation”: Coffin, “How Lyndon Johnson Engineered Compromise on Civil Rights Bill,” The New Leader, Aug. 5.

  Eisenhower’s press conference: Reston, NYT, July 4; USN & WR, July 12, Telephone conversation: Telephone conversation, July 3, AWNS, DDEL. “He said”: ACWD, Telephone Calls, July 3, Box 25, DDEL. Supporting Brownell’s contention are pp. 16–20 in Anderson, Eisenhower, which state that the first draft of the bill “said … explicitly” that Part III “could be used to initiate school desegregation suits” and that “the draftsmen wrote them as separate bills” and that it was at this point that “the Department’s lawyers began constructing the intricate chains of double and triple reference that were to give their final drafts an extraordinary technical complexity.” Support for Eisenhower’s contention that he had not understood the bill’s content is found, among other places, in his pre-press conference briefing of June 19. Summary notes state: “Civil Rights—President will say he is delighted it passed; very moderate bill, intended to persecute nobody. It was designed in the hope that all thinking Americans would see that it is the least that can be done” (DDEPP [1957], p. 357). Republican senators’ reaction: Harlow, Rogers interviews. “I think”: DDE to Swede Hazlett, July 22, AWNS, DDEL. “Had waged”: Ambrose, Eisenhower, p. 410.

  “Why”: McCulloch interview. “So I could”: Shuman recalls Douglas saying he should have been told “so I could [have been] prepared when Senator Russell brought all this out” (Shuman interview). “When”: McCulloch interview. Not “going”: Mundt, quoted in Lincoln, “The Political Mill,” WS, July 25. Southern Caucus: Fite, Russell, p. 339; “The Rearguard Commander,” Time, Aug. 12; McConaughy to Williamson, July 31; “A Round for the South,” Newsweek, July 22; NYT, July 4. “Instead of: McConaughy to Williamson, July 31, SP.

  “Given up”: Corcoran interview. Life on the ranch: Rather, Stehling interviews. “I hope”: “Lyndon Johnson, Civil Rights and 1960,” Rowe to Johnson, July 3, Box 32, LBJA SN. Only one guest: July 4–5 page, Appointment Book and Daily Memoranda, 1957, Box 2, Desk Diaries of LBJ. Corky in 1937: Caro, Path, pp. 428–30. Telephone call to Ava: Ava Johnson Cox interview.

  “Proceed”: CR, 85/1, pp. 10983, 10988. “The price”; “did not”: Mann, p. 199. “Eisenhower’s invitation”: NYT, July 4. “Aware”: Evans and Novak, LBJ: Exercise, p. 132. “Impassioned, emotional, poured out”; Eisenhower-Russell meeting: Ambrose, p. 408. “Poured out”: “Georgia Giant,” quoted in Goldsmith, Colleagues, p. 61. “Couldn’t say”: Russell, quoted in WS, July 10. “Indicated”: Robertson to Jones, July 11, Dr. 45, File 2, Legislative Files, AWRP, College of William and Mary. “Not at all”: ACWD, 7/10, DDEL.

  Johnson’s visit: Harlow interview. “Become worried”: Brownell interview. “I had tried”; “Lyndon Johnson went”; He had the votes”: Brownell, Advising Ike, pp. 223–25; confirmed by Rogers interview. Brownell, in his memoir, goes so far as to concede that “Eisenhower may also have had some reservations (unexpressed to me) about granting power in such broad terms to the attorney general.” If, however, Brownell genuinely felt that the President’s reservations were “unexpressed,” he hadn’t been listening carefully to presidential statements such as the one of July 3 reported by Whitman above. Brownell says he “had tried to assure the President otherwise, but Senators Richard Russell and Lyndon Johnson undoubtedly pressed this point in their conversations with him during this period” (Advising Ike, p. 225). President made his position: Evans and Novak, p. 133. “Well, no”: DDEPP (1957), pp. 546–47, 555.

  Could be flouted: For example, Time, July 29. And see Time, July 22; Harlow interview. “It was just”: Rauh interview. The day at Glen Welby: Graham, Personal History, p. 241; Rauh OH, Graham OH and her OH with Rauh, Rauh interview.

  “To enable”: Knowland, in CR, 85/1, p. 10986. “Merely”: Douglas, CR, 85/1, p. 10988. “Will pass”: Nixon, in NYP, July 9. “We’ll win”: Adams, quoted in Mann, p. 198. “He expected”: Legislative Leaders Meeting, July 16, pp. 4–7, DDEPP. A cold calculation: Harlow, Rauh interviews. “Will not be”: NYT, July 9.

  “The leader of”: For example, NYT, July 11, 14, 17, 25. Journalists applauded: For example, NYHT, July 18; Drummond, NYHT, July 15; Philadelphia Inquirer, July 16; W P, July 14;WS, July 14. “Is likely”: Evans in NYHT, July 9. “At least”: NYT, July 9. “Speculation”: NYT, July 11.

  Knowland’s predictions: NYT, July 10. “Justified”: Russell, CR, 85/1, p. 10989. The CR does not show the second “We will resist,” but Albright (W P, July 9) quotes him as likening the South “to a chained bear being poked with a pole and ordered to dance” and saying: “we will resist—we will resist. We will explain and discuss the issues involved in this bill until each and every Senator fully understands them in all their implications …You may call it a filibuster if you wish.” “Became apparent”; “I don’t”: Reedy OH III. “Until the snow”: Russell, quoted in WS, July 10.

  Johnson’s fears: Reedy, Rowe interviews; Reedy OH. Rising: CR, 85/1, pp. 10983, 10985; William White, NYT, July 9. Niagara Dam pending business: Johnson, CR, 85/1, pp. 10963, 10964. “I should like”: Johnson, CR, 85/1, p. 10983. Protest: Javits, Ives, and Kerr, CR, 85/1, pp. 10983–85, July 9, 10. “Folded his arms”: NYT, July 9. Declined: Tames interview.

  The gulf: Stennis, McNamara, Javits, Knowland in CR, 85/1, pp. 11311–313. “Increasingly”: NYP, July 12. “A rape”: Ervin, in CR, 85/1, p. 11333. A “new gestapo”: Johnston, CR, 85/1, p. 11335. “Cunningly devised”: Eastland, CR, 85/1, pp. 11347–53. “Let us all”: Hill, CR, 85/1, p. 11365. Case: CR, 85/1, p. 11346. “No amendments”: Knowland, in NYP, July 12.

  Noticed a figure, realized: Mann, p. 202; Anderson OH; Reedy interview. “I’m afraid”; “My principal”: Anderson with Viorst, Outsider in the Senate, p. 129. “Didn’t like”: Busby interview. Defeat as Agriculture Secretary: Howard E. Shuman, “Lyndon B. Johnson, The Senate’s Powerful Persuader,” in Baker and Davidson, eds., First Among Equals, pp. 211, 234; Shuman, Wood interviews. “I took it”: Anderson with Viorst, p. 129. It was going: Anderson OH. “I wouldn’t get”; “Knowland seemed”: Anderson with Viorst, pp. 147, 146. “Hopeless”; “Determined”; “Just sat”: Anderson OH. “Hints”; “They seemed”; “It seemed clear”: Anderson with Viorst, pp. 146, 147. “They were”; “I thought”: Anderson OH.

  His tinkering: Anderson’s handwritten changes are on his copies of H.R. 6127 as it was printed and placed on his desk—National Archives Record Group 46, Sen. 54-A—C2, Bill Files, Calendar No. 485, H.R. 6127, NA. “Curious”: Anderson OH. “You do it”; “How can I?”: Evans and Novak, p. 131. Goldsmith, p. 62, says: “Anderson, as a supporter of the bill, was reluctant to take the lead.” “Get a Republican”: Anderson OH; Reedy, Steele, Wood interviews. Although some accounts, such as Mann, p. 202, say that “Anderson found two respected Republican moderates,” Aiken and Francis Case of South Dakota, in fact, Aiken was the key, as Anderson himself said (“I went to George Aiken, whom I admire greatly, and asked him if he would join in such a plan”) and Case came along later (Anderson and Viorst, Outsider in the Senate, p. 147); Anderson OH. The role of Case, not nearly as respected a figure in the Senate as Aiken, was not, in fact, particularly significant. When Anderson introduced his amendment, he said he was doing so jointly with Aiken; he never even mentioned Case’s name (CR, 85/1, p. 11826). Johnson meant: Evans and Novak, pp. 131–32. Anderson, in his memoir, says that he himself thought of going to Aiken, and only thereafter “went to see Lyndon Johnson” to tell him “my plan” (Anderson and Viorst, p. 147). But Anderson appears to be giving himself too much credit. His version is not accepted by others familiar with the sequence. And in his oral history, Anderson himself said, “He thought I should get a really good Republican to join with me.” Also see Steinberg, Sam Johnson’s Boy, p. 471. “Well, I believe”: Aiken, quoted in Anderson
and Viorst, p. 147.

  Russell’s confidence: He called Anderson’s amendment “highly encouraging” because “Senator Anderson is an acknowledged leader of the civil rights forces” (Baltimore Sun, July 15). Johnson’s announcement: NYT, July 12. “I hope”: Evans, NYHT, July 12. Russell amenable: NYT, July 12.

  Southerners agree to UCA: “‘We have endeavored and shall continue to endeavor to comport ourselves as responsible men,’ Mr. Russell told the Senate in accepting the” UCA, NYT, July 13. The southerners’ agreement “was a measure of the changed atmosphere in the Senate today,” NYHT, July 13. Johnson introduces UCA: NYT, July 13.

  “I do this”: Anderson, CR, 85/1, p. 11826. “We who support”: Aiken, CR, 85/1, p. 11827. A “modern”: Byrd, NYT, July 17. “Gold Dust Twins”: Watson, p. 398, Rauh interview. 71 to 18: Kempton, NYP, July 17. “Not to be”: NYT, Baltimore Sun, July 17. Leaning across: Newsweek, July 29.

  “Parliamentary”: CR, 85/1, p. 11838. Knowland outsmarted: Rauh, Riddick interviews. “At the last”: Time, Aug. 5. Roy Wilkins was to estimate that between 57 and 60 votes were available to support the amendment had they been needed. Wilkins to Morsell, July 23, NAACP III B-55, LC, quoted in Watson, p. 388. “Strange”: Baltimore Sun, July 25.

  “I believe”: CR, 85/1, p. 12714, quoted in Mann, p. 204. “The adoption”: NYT, July 25. “This is not”: CR, 85/1, p. 12549. “He won; we didn’t”: Wilkins, quoted in Miller, Lyndon, p. 209. Clarence Mitchell called the passage of the Anderson-Aiken Amendment “a direct hit amidships” (Watson, p. 389). “The filibuster”: Rauh interview. “Almost literally”: Siegel OH. “No single”: Kempton, NYP, July 17.

  40. Yeas and Nays

  All dates are 1957 unless otherwise noted.