Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-07-19

right to expect a statement
from the President or Attorney
General Brownell as to Just
where they stand"
Senator Humphrey said he is
prepared to vote for Title III
with one change. eliminating
reference to the use of troops
to enforce Federal injunctions.
In no case would he retreat
beyond authorizing the Attor-
ney General to apply for in
functions at the request of
local officials or individual
citizens In a State. This would
meet a suggestion by the Presi-
dent Wednesday that he does
not favor the Attorney General
moving on his own motion
alone.
Senator Humphrey con-
tended there has been confu-
sion as to the exact position
OF the administration and
added. II want the administra-
ton to come down out of the
stratoSphere and tell us just
where it stands"
Would Repeal Old Law
Senators Knowland, Republi-
can of California. and Hum
phrey moved two days ago TO
repeal the old law which the
Southerners say would author
ize use of the armed forces to
back up injunctions.
Further concessions being
considered today by supporters
of the bill would allow the At
torney General to seek injunc-
lions under Title III of the bill
dealing with civil rights gen.
erally) only at the request of
local authorities or citizens.
BackerS of the House bill
have been prompted to con-
Sider these notifications by
reports that the Senate may
go along with a motion to strike
Title III entirely.
Such motion has been Of
fered by Senators Anderson,
Democrat of New Mexico, and
Aiken. 1t 1t carries, the new
injunction weapon could be
used by the Federal Govern
ment only to protect voting
rights, under Part w of the bill.
Jury Fight Delayed
Meanwhile, the biggest fight
of all-over jury trials-is be-
ing held until the Senate de-
cides whether the bill should
deal with all civil rights, or
only voting rights.
AS the bill came from the
House it would not allow jury
trials for local officials or indi-
viduals cited for contempt for
failing to carry out injunctions.
Defenders of the House bill
say there is no Constitutional
guarantee for trial by jury in
contempt cases.
Opponents argue that the in
junction process in civil courts
is being used in this bill merely
to get around jury trials. to
which the defendants would be
entitled if the Government pro-
ceeded in the criminal courts
under existing civil rights laws.
Two Amendments Pending
Two jury trial amendments
are pending. One, by Senator
O'Mahoney, Democrat of Wy
oming, would permit judges to
allow jury trial when ques-
tons Of fact are involved. An
other. by Senator Kefauver,
Democrat of Tennessee, would
authorize juries in cases of
criminal contempt, but not civil
contempt.
Civil contempt exists where
a judge sends a defendant to
jail only until he agrees to
comply with the courts order.
Criminal contempt involves
punishment for violating the
courts order. even if the de-
PENDANT agrees to comply in
future.
Senator Clark, Democrat of
Pennsylvania. a supporter of
the House bill. suggested two
possible concessions to the
South today on the jury trial
issue.
He said 1t would be "inad-
visable" to allow juries in all
contempt proceedings under
the bill. But he said juries
might be impaneled to make.