Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-05-10
Time Marches On


After careful reading of the ex-
change between Representative Celler of
New York and Representative Colmer of
Mississippi during this weeks hearing
on the civil rights bill we are able to
report that these gentlemen are in agree
ment on one point-namely, that time
marches on. AS far as we can determine
they are not in agreement on any,
thing else.
Mr.. Celler is in favor Of the civil
rights bill, period. Mr.. Colmer takes a
dim view Of the bill in any circumstance,
and he is dead set against 1t without
provision for jury trials OF people accused
Of violating Federal court injunctions.
Mr.. Colmer was bent upon burning
Mr.. Celler at the stake of inconsistency,
and he succeeded in making it pretty
hot for the gentleman from New York.
ReSorting to tactic which is not con-
Sidered exactly sporting in the best cir
cles, Mr.. Colmer turned back to the Con-
gressional Record of 1882 and found there
an imprisoned speech which Mr.. Celler
had made against the use of injunctions
in labor disputes and demanding jury
trials for those accused of violating such
injunctionS. There you are, said Mr..
Colmer in effect, the gentleman demanded
jury trials in 1882 and denounces them
in 1857. If that isn't inconsistency, what
is?
But Mr.. Celler is not man to be
bagged so easily. Time, he said, has been
marching on (Mr. Colmer agreed) and
what If he had changed his mind? Then
came a very low. blow. On this business
of inconsistency, said Mr.. Celler he was
reminded Of what General Lee had said
to General Beauregard-that true pa
triotism sometimes requires of men to
act exactly contrary at one period to that
which it does at another" (For good
measure he tossed In Emerson's obServa-
ton about consistency being the hobgob-
lin of small minds.)
1t was the sudden arrival of General
Lee on the scene and in the enemy camp,
however, which really staggered the
gentleman from Mississippi He reeled
like a general who has been hit stimuli
taneouSly from the rear and on both
TANKS.
WOAACA, AC AllQunCQ, IL IIlC
famous General Lee used that quotation
at Gettysburg?" This, clearly, was a stall
for time, because Mr.. Colmer, as a good
Southerner, knows perfectly we'll that
General Beauregard was not at Gettys-
burg. And II General Beauregard was not
there, how could General Lee have spoken
to him about inconsistency or any
thing else?
Mr.. Celler said he didn't recall
whether General Lee had made the state
ment at Gettysburg obviously he doesn't
know anything about General Beaure-
gard) but he was positive that the Con-
federate commander had made the state
ment, and just for good measure he
repeated it.
BY this time Mr.. Colmer had recov-
cred sufficiently to stage a withdrawal
not an orderly withdrawal, but still
withdrawal This is what he said:
If you will pardon me. as I recall.
General Lees action at Gettysburg was
contrary to the advice of members of his
STAN. We are not going into details about
that but recall that General Longstreet
particularly and vehemently opposed the
Generals strategy. Maybe this was the
ment and maybe 1t was mistake I never
thought much of Longstreet's advice up
to this time. but think maybe he was
right.
We find 1t a bit difficult to follow
the thread Of this reasoning For II Gen.
eral Lee made his statement to General
Beauregard, as alleged by Mr.. Celler and
not denied by Mr.. Colmer, how does Gen.
eral Longstreet get into the act? There
is no denying, of course, that General
Longstreet was at Gettysburg. But II
General Lee made his comment on incon-
sistency to General Longstreet while dis
cussing battle strategy-which seems
unlikely-there is no record that Gen.
eral Longstreet said anything in reply,
much less that he disagreed on that point
with General Lee. So what does Mr..
Colmer mean, as far as inconsistency is
concerned, when he says he now thinks
that maybe General Longstreet was right?
Perhaps this is as good a point as
any at which to end this discussion. It
is clear that Mr.. Celler advocated Jury
trials In 1882 and is against them in
1857. In the matter of inconsistency,
he stands foursquare with General Lee.
Mr.. Colmer is not on record respecting
jury trials in 1882, but he Is for them
now. And he sees eye-to-eye with General
Longstreet, although on precisely what
we are not sure. Perhaps 1t is enough to
know that time marches on-or does It?
c1Ie A.