The Ivan Allen Digital Archive contains Allen's drafts of his testimony that he presented to the Senate in support of the public accommodations bill, which later becomes a section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This exhibit of our digital museum touches on the background of his statement, along with further analysis of his speech that is supported by the archive's textual and visual resources. We have also employed Mayor Allen’s memoir, Mayor: Notes on the Sixties, to provide insight on Mayor Allen’s experience while testifying on behalf of the public accommodations bill.
Background
Prior to the implementation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, violence plagued the United States as supporters and opposers of the movement clashed in what was deemed "a fight for humanity." Amidst the controversy, there was little political backing for the public accommodations bill among Southern legislators which made it increasingly difficult for the Civil Rights Movement to progress. One of the few political contributors and supporters of the public accommodations bill and Civil Rights Movement was Georgia Tech graduate Ivan Allen. During his tenure as mayor of the city of Atlanta, Allen publicly supported the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and played an integral role in leading Atlanta during harsh political and social turmoil. As the only Southern politician to testify before Congress in support of the Civil Rights Act, Mayor Allen heavily advocated for the elimination of discrimination and legal segregation throughout the United States.
|
President Kennedy's Proposal
In an address to citizens, President John F. Kennedy proposes new legislation in response to Jim Crow segregation, significant racial tensions, and blatant inequality of civil rights within the United States. Upon drafting this public accommodations bill (later known as the Civil Rights Act of 1964), President Kennedy personally requests Mayor Allen of Atlanta to testify on behalf of his bill in front of the Senate. Mayor Allen debates whether to support Kennedy’s bill and meets with white and black leaders of Atlanta and the rest of the South. He receives overall negative responses from members of both races, and Allen doubts his chances for re-election should he testify. After receiving reassurance from President Kennedy on Allen’s re-election chances and moral advice from his wife, Allen decides to travel to Washington D.C. to present his statement on the public accommodations bill. While at the Senate, Allen receives mixed responses from representatives, including bitter criticism from Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. After Allen’s address, initial public reactions are deeply passionate and divided. Allen receives praise from Northerners and some liberals, but many Southerners, including some of his family and close friends, condemn his actions. After initial emotions die down, greater support arises for Allen’s testimony in favor of desegregation. Allen’s “quiet courage” in Washington is commended by the black community and some whites who recognize the value of his words as a prominent Southern politician who spoke out against inequality.
|
Friday, July 26th, 1963: Ivan Allen, Jr. testified before the Senate Commerce Committee
News Clip of Mr. Thornwell, president of Young Republicans in Fulton County, Speaking to a Reporter about Allen's testimony
|
In the WSB TV news clip to the left, Mr. Thornwell, the president of the Young Republicans in Fulton County, presents his views on Mayor Allen's support of the public accommodations bill in Georgia. In the interview, Mr. Thornwell describes Mayor Allen's testimony as a "Turn-Coat Performance." By using this expression, he suggests that Allen testified at the Senate to impress the federal government and establish a political advantage with the Kennedy family. Since Republicans rejected federal intervention in the state legislation, Allen's appeal to Congress to pass new legislation to desegregate interstate businesses resulted in the Southern Republican's criticism of the testimony. As shown in the interview, Mr. Thornwell disapproves of segregation but insists that private businesses should have sovereignty in "deciding who they do business with." Moreover, Mr. Thornwell states that "we do not advocate segregation" but claims that the rights of white Americans should not be sacrificed in favor of equality of rights with the minority. The absurd statements that he makes throughout the interview depicts the severe lengths that Southern politicians took to preserve their social and economic dominance over African American citizens.
|