Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
August 25, 1957
Atlanta Daily World
Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia
What is this article about?
The editorial celebrates a congressional compromise on a civil rights bill that bolsters voting rights by permitting non-jury trials in contempt cases with a jury option for harsher penalties, restricted to voting matters. It praises Rep. Joe Martin's role in salvaging key provisions for passage.
Clipping
OCR Quality
98%
Excellent
Full Text
Compromise Strengthens Proposed Bill
From out of the chaos of the haze of political eventualities, we come into the sunlight of hope.
Hardly any question, since the foundation of this Republic has occupied and held so long the front headlines of the press, as this discussion around civil rights.
For many weeks it has occupied the Congress and engaged its best talents on both sides for and against its passage. Out of the wash, however, have come many things in their uninviting aspects that have astounded civilization.
It is an ill wind that blows nobody good; from the very first hearings on the measure, came those disclosures involving every violation of Democratic principle from the denial to appear at a poll, to threats and violence upon the person of individuals who insisted a free circulation in a free society.
The swift turn came in the aftermath of every pattern and precedent of the diehard strategy had seen service. While the four horsemen of the compromise shine gallantly in the deal, none is due more credit than Republican House Minority leader, Joe Martin, whose patience and wide resourcefulness played a leading role in the channeling of the bill into that stream where most of what the opposition glorified in was finally washed up.
Briefly stated, under the terms of the agreement made by both leaders of the Senate and the House, a federal judge could try without a jury, a defendant in a criminal contempt case involving the right to vote. If the judge imposed a penalty of more than $300, or 45 days imprisonment, the defendant, if dissatisfied could demand and get a new trial by a jury.
The compromise also embodies the limitation of the jury trial to voting rights cases only. (The original Senate amendment guaranteed jury trials in all fields of contempt law).
The difference, therefore, is obvious that much of what was apparently lost in the Senate amendment attachments, at last has been salvaged, and what appeared as a victory for the opposition, according to their commitment, has been washed up.
It is seen from here that regardless now of the condition of the political weather, we are definitely on the road to an effective and workable civil rights measure. We commend again Representative Martin for having taken a firm lead in working out this issue which seems to be assured of passage.
From out of the chaos of the haze of political eventualities, we come into the sunlight of hope.
Hardly any question, since the foundation of this Republic has occupied and held so long the front headlines of the press, as this discussion around civil rights.
For many weeks it has occupied the Congress and engaged its best talents on both sides for and against its passage. Out of the wash, however, have come many things in their uninviting aspects that have astounded civilization.
It is an ill wind that blows nobody good; from the very first hearings on the measure, came those disclosures involving every violation of Democratic principle from the denial to appear at a poll, to threats and violence upon the person of individuals who insisted a free circulation in a free society.
The swift turn came in the aftermath of every pattern and precedent of the diehard strategy had seen service. While the four horsemen of the compromise shine gallantly in the deal, none is due more credit than Republican House Minority leader, Joe Martin, whose patience and wide resourcefulness played a leading role in the channeling of the bill into that stream where most of what the opposition glorified in was finally washed up.
Briefly stated, under the terms of the agreement made by both leaders of the Senate and the House, a federal judge could try without a jury, a defendant in a criminal contempt case involving the right to vote. If the judge imposed a penalty of more than $300, or 45 days imprisonment, the defendant, if dissatisfied could demand and get a new trial by a jury.
The compromise also embodies the limitation of the jury trial to voting rights cases only. (The original Senate amendment guaranteed jury trials in all fields of contempt law).
The difference, therefore, is obvious that much of what was apparently lost in the Senate amendment attachments, at last has been salvaged, and what appeared as a victory for the opposition, according to their commitment, has been washed up.
It is seen from here that regardless now of the condition of the political weather, we are definitely on the road to an effective and workable civil rights measure. We commend again Representative Martin for having taken a firm lead in working out this issue which seems to be assured of passage.
What sub-type of article is it?
Suffrage
Constitutional
Legal Reform
What keywords are associated?
Civil Rights
Voting Rights
Compromise
Joe Martin
Jury Trial
Congress
Senate
House
What entities or persons were involved?
Joe Martin
Congress
Senate
House
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Compromise On Civil Rights Bill For Voting Rights
Stance / Tone
Supportive Of The Compromise
Key Figures
Joe Martin
Congress
Senate
House
Key Arguments
Compromise Emerges From Political Chaos To Provide Hope For Civil Rights.
Disclosures From Hearings Reveal Violations Of Democratic Principles Including Denial Of Voting And Violence.
Joe Martin's Patience And Resourcefulness Key In Channeling The Bill.
Federal Judge Can Try Voting Rights Contempt Cases Without Jury, But Defendant Can Demand Jury Trial If Penalty Exceeds $300 Or 45 Days.
Jury Trial Limited To Voting Rights Cases Only.
Much Of Senate Amendment Losses Salvaged, Opposition's Victory Washed Up.
Bill Assured Of Passage As Effective Civil Rights Measure.