Parker Week

All week long the Senate debated the nomination of U. S. Circuit Judge John Johnston Parker of North Carolina to be an Associate Justice of the U. S. Supreme Court. All week long Senate sentiment for and against confirmation of this appointment divided so evenly that the result seemed to fluctuate within the narrowest margin of votes. All week long critics of Judge Parker flayed him for his Red Jacket coal case decision upholding a "yellow dog" labor contract, for his political animus toward Negroes. All week long his friends lauded his character, his integrity, his fitness for the highest bench.

The Senate debate lacked vitality and high conviction on both sides. Gallery attendance dwindled. Legal technicalities and interpretations of Judge Parker's decisions smothered popular interest. Republican Senators from the north made it plain they could not vote for Judge Parker because of his "lily white" attitude toward Negroes. That was, of course, the attitude of the southern Democrats, some of whom came to Judge Parker's defense.

Leading the Parker defense was North Carolina's Democratic Senator Lee Slater Overman, who, with the exception of his colleague. Senator Simmons, has been in the Senate longer (27 years) than any other member. Senator Overman, rotund, white-haired, oldfashioned, declaimed as follows: ''Judge Parker loves the plain people. . . . Irreproachable character . . . honest man. . . . He expressed the sentiment [political exclusion of Negroes] that every man in the State really entertains. . . . A man ought not to be held responsible for what he says in a political speech. . . ."

Idaho's Senator Borah, leader of the Parker opposition, flayed the nominee "because I think he is committed to principles and propositions to which I am very thoroughly opposed." Declared Nebraska's Senator Norris at the end of a three-hour harangue: "I close as I began. Judge Parker is only an incident. The Supreme Court is only an incident. Human liberty is the issue. The preservation of our Government is the issue."

When Judge Parker's friends charged that his critics were playing small politics in opposing his confirmation, a neat retort was turned up in the form of a confidential letter to the White House which had inadvertently got into the judiciary committee files. This letter was from Assistant Secretary of the Interior Joseph M. Dixon, a North Carolinian, to Walter Newton, political secretary to President Hoover, written three days after the death of Justice Sanford. Excerpts: "North Carolina gave President Hoover 65,000 majority. It carries more hope of future permanent alignment with the Republican party than any other southern State. . . . The naming of Judge Parker to the Supreme Court would be a major political stroke."

Judge Parker's friends were flabbergasted at such a bald exposition of the politics behind the appointment. Southern Democrats realizing the Administration's attempt to break the South politically by such appointments, wobbled. Attorney General Mitchell denied political motives in the Parker selection.

Underlying the Parker debate was the same deep controversy of Liberalism v. Conservatism on the Supreme Court that featured the Senate's consideration of Charles Evans Hughes as Chief Justice of the U. S. (TIME, Feb. 24). Two features, however, differentiated the two cases: 1) Judge Parker is not so distinguished a figure as Justice Hughes; 2) Negroes hold the political balance of power in many a border and northern State.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.