some time back, that 99 percent of our people want good law enforcement, and I believe this will give them law and order, and I think the citizens can participate in it. But if we are talking about the United Black Front, if we are talking about these pressure groups that are seeking some type of recognition, then those are the type that should be put in that bucket and sealed. Let's listen to the leaders of the city. They would have just as much opportunity to come to this Congress or come to the Chiefs of Police or the Commissioner or anywhere else. So we are not in any form in this bill preventing participation of citizens. But we could eliminate some of this harassment that is continually going around. I have other little documents of note that disturb me no end. When I read a piece in the paper where one of the leaders of a so-called organization, called a militant civil rights organization, will take over the sound truck campaign against the Metropolitan Police Department, specifically against the officer accused-we went through that the last time. This was about Office Tague, but this is one of the leaders. I would like to put this in the record, if I may. [From the Evening Star, Washington, D.C., Apr. 14, 1967] HOBSON DECLARES ACT WILL HARASS POLICEMAN (By Paul Delaney, Star Staff Writer) The militant civil rights organization ACT will take over the sound truck campaign against the Metropolitan Police Department and specifically against an officer accused of brutality, ACT chairman Julius Hobson said today. He said the sound truck campaign would be launched sometime after May 1. Hobson resigned from the Citizens Commitee for Equal Justice yesterday when that group retreated in its method of protest against Pvt. Thomas Tague, involved in a dispute after he arrested rights leader Marion Barry last month. The citizens committee announced yesterday that it would not use a sound truck to follow Tague on his beat and blast out that the patrolman is a "dangerous character." The group originally decided upon the tactic at a mass meeting Monday. PLANS DENUNCIATION But Hobson said today members of ACT, instead will man a sound truck and go through the streets of Tague's beat and announce to citizens that he is “armed and should be considered dangerous." The Police Department had issued a permit for the Citizens Committee to use a sound truck for one week beginning next Monday. Hobson would have to apply for another permit to legally carry out the threat. Hobson said leaders of the group were "boys trying to do a man's job." He accused them of lacking courage to carry out their plans after facing severe criticism. "They were frightened by some racist members of Congress," Hobson asserted. "I think they did a disservice to the community to plan a course of action and then not have the courage to act. But I'm not going to be frightened. "As soon as the school boycott (scheduled for May 1) is over, whether successful or not ACT will take up where CCEJ left off." Hobson said the committee's leaders, Lonnie King and the Rev. David Eaton, are not used to rough criticism, and "if they can't stand the excitement they should stay out of the arena." The committee was formed after the March 30 jaywalking arrest of Barry. A scuffle ensued during the arrest and Barry claimed he was struck by Tague. However, the officer was cleared of any wrongdoing by the District commissioners' after an almost immediate investigation. Barry still faces charges of jaywalking, disorderly conduct and destruction of property. APPEAL TO JOHNSON Meanwhile, John R. Immer, president of the D.C. Federation of Citizens Associations, wrote President Johnson to tell him the committee is trying to "fear down law enforcement." Immer said: "It is important that you disassociate the White House completely from the consistent backing and support your office has given the Rev. Walter E. Fauntroy, and to make clear that it is not backing him in this effort to harass Police Officer Thomas J. Tague." Mr. SULLIVAN. During the riots we had another such situation as this. It says "Black Brothers, we got Whitey on the run." It is called the "Black Hand." It would be quite interesting, I would suggest, and I submit that for the record. (The information follows:) BLACK BROTHERS !! WE GOT WHITEY ON THE RUN•• WHITEY HAS GOT TO BE TAUGHT A LISSON. THE MORE WHITEY DEVILS THAT ARE YOUND WITH WE HAD A DREAM TOD! WHEN THE TIME COMES TO INVADE WHITEY YOU WILL GET ORDERS TO DO YOUR PART. OUR BLACK POWER IS BABY TALK MAN. THIS 19 BLACK HAND POWER, THEY WILL FEEL THE STIHO.- BURN BABY BURN IS WHITE FLESH FROM NOW ON. NO LIGHTS, NO GAS. NO WATER. NO NOTHING PACK THE ROD AND STEEL IF YOU WANT TO WINGLE ASK YOUR BLACK BROTHER IT IS ONE OF THE HANDS YEAR Mr. SULLIVAN. These are the type citizens that I am talking about, Mr. Whitener, who should be sealed and put in some can and not voiced as a representative of the people, which they are not. We find that there is in our community proper representation for all of our people by dignified and competent people, but there are a few that are preaching anarchy, insurrection, and I think this should be stopped. Mr. WHITENER. Do you get the impression that some of the men in the Police Department have the feeling that these so-called militant groups and trouble-making groups are listened to by some of the people in authority here more than are the more sober and sound organizations and people? Mr. SULLIVAN. One gets that impression, and rightly so, because the people that seem to be more interested in good law enforcement go to a meeting at their civic organizations and through their local organizations, express themselves there. The more militant type are the ones that run around with banners, whooping and hollering and trying to stop free speech wherever it may be, so they do get some recognition and do get some acknowledgement of their behavior. How can it be any different when there sits right on the Council one who belongs to the Steering Committee of the United Black Front and will not repudiate the execution of the policeman when they declared it to be justifiable homicide? When the officer's gun was taken by one of the culprits and the man lying on the sidewalk was shot in the head and executed, this is a problem. I read just recently where they are going to take another suggestion from the same organization before the Council so that they can work more closely with the people. I think that the true representation of the people is not being heard. I don't think that they are making the effort that they should make to be heard. I think the greatest noise we are getting is from these selfindoctrinated leaders or would-be leaders of groups that are certainly detrimental to this government. When a man visits every Communist nation in the world and he can come here and set up an organization such as the United Black Front and draw into it the people he drew into it, one must question with great concern how this can happen, yet it did. I think they quote their number as 150 strong. Mr. WHITENER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Broyhill? Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. Sullivan, you stated that you have been with the Police Department for 26 years? Mr. SULLIVAN. Yes. Mr. BROYHILL. In what capacity did you serve immediately prior to your retirement, and for how long? Mr. SULLIVAN. I was in the Robbery Squad for the last three years of my service, as Commanding Officer. Mr. BROYHILL. What was your rank? Mr. SULLIVAN. Inspector. Mr. BROYHILL. You served as a Captain for some time, too? Mr. SULLIVAN. I served as a Captain both in what is called the Criminal Intelligence Division now-it was the Missing Persons Bureau and Special Investigations before-and also the Sex Squad and Narcotics. Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. Givens served with the Metropolitan Police Department for some time also, did he not? Mr. GIVENS. Just short of 25 years. Mr. BROYHILL. 25 years? Mr. GIVENS. Yes. Mr. BROYHILL. So both of you gentlemen have had a lot of experience with police work and are quite familiar with the attitude of the members of the Police Department? Mr. SULLIVAN. I would think we have a pretty good idea. Mr. BROYHILL. Your attorney, the counsel for the Association, submitted some figures here last week showing the results of a poll, a questionnaire that you sent out asking members whether they were for or against this particular bill. He reported that you had approximately 2,000 replies that came in prior to the April incident. Mr. SULLIVAN. Yes. Mr. BROYHILL. The result of this poll showed 1,642 in favor of the bill and 334 opposed. He stated that it was his opinion that if the poll had been taken any time since the April riots, the vote would be even more strongly in favor of the legislation. Do you share that opinion? Mr. SULLIVAN. I don't think there is any question about it. Mr. BROYHILL. The overwhelming majority of the members of the Police Department are for this legislation? Mr. SULLIVAN. No question about it. POLICE MORALE Mr. BROYHILL. You said something a moment ago about morale. Now, the respresentative of the city government here indicated that the morale has not changed, or has even improved. I don't think I misquoted him. He indicated that morale is presently of no significance. anyway. Mr. SULLIVAN. Yes, sir. I was present when the Deputy Commissioner made the statement referred to, and Mr. Beatty did say that the morale was higher than it had been at any time since the new Commissioner had taken over, but he had reference more to what you gentlemen had done in the way of pay than other aspects of morale. I think you must have morale. The majority of our policemen have it as I defined it a while ago. I am of the opinion that the morale of the Police Department in the two phases that I mentioned, however, is low and is remaining low because they don't feel that our Chief of Police has free reign and a free hand in the operation of the Police Department. Even in the backing of the men on the streets we find various and different types of commanders and this is something that I guess will always exist, but the morale of the Police Department. when you read statements such as I have quoted, certainly cannot be too high. It has to be low in some facets of it. Policemen do not take a job for money only, as was mentioned here by Mr. Sisk I think. I took the job back when it was $1,900 a year because I was a depression boy and needed a job and I liked being a policeman. It was pretty good money in those days. But as time went along I am sure I, as many others, could have gone out into other fields. So those that do stay on and those that do the job must have some morale and dedication. But the morale we are speaking about is, where do we stand when an officer goes out and does his job as he should do it under the law, and then the next thing we hear is that the City Council, let's say, is going to have a hearing on whether we should use gas or Mace to stop a riot or to stop a disorder? It is far more merciful to use this type of weapon than it would be to have to shoot someone. This is the type of thing that is affecting the morale of the men with the Police Depart ment. This is what we hear. I have answers here from them just as the attorney has. I wouldn't embarrass this committee by reading them. But the men just do not feel that under the present system, the present setup, they are going to get a fair shake. That is why we are so much in favor of these two bills. Mr. BROYHILL. You submitted some publications or leaflets for the record. Of course, these are being printed and distributed all the time. I have in my hand one that was distributed just last weekend out in Prince Georges County, Md., in support of a so-called Black United Front, pointing out that they advocate neighborhood elections or review boards, and also neighborhood authority to require transfers of personnel, and authority over the overtime hours of police officers. Another one here is concerned with city-wide democratic decisions, whether officers should carry guns, and so forth. Then there is a mimeographed leaflet attached to it urging that the people write to their Congressmen, in this case to Congressman Machen, to oppose this legislation and to support the efforts of the Black United Front. So the propaganda is out and is being distributed, and the pressure is on to do everything they can to defeat this legislation. SCOPE OF BILL I might say this for the purpose of the record, Mr. Chairman: I stated earlier that as one of the sponsors of the legislation—and I am sure most of the co-sponsors feel the same way-that this is a real problem with which we are confronted. We are trying to come up with the best possible solution. I don't know of any legislation which has ever been introduced in the Congress that was the perfect answer, or that did not result in some give and take and compromise before it -ever became law. In fact, I received a call from the Under Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Joseph Barr, last Thursday. He was concerned about the fact that this bill might take the White House Police away from the jurisdiction of the Treasury Department or do harm to the coordination with the Secret Service which is under the Treasury Department, and thus endanger the life of the President. Certainly, none of us would want to do anything that would place his life in greater jeopardy than it already is. It may well be-and I said this to Secretary Barr-that the White House Police Force should be taken out from under the provisions of the bill, if this situation causes any anxiety whatsoever as far as the protection of the life of the President is concerned. We know that even under the present situation, White House Police Force relies for its recruitment service upon the Metropolitan Police Department. They do the training and recruitment. So that is part of the coordination that is already in existence. We just want to help to simplify it somewhat. I am not proposing this as a compromise or an alternative but a suggestion also has been made, |