this Act, who violates said oath or affirmation by either failing to cast his ballot as Presidential Elector for the persons nominated for President and Vice-President by the national convention of the political party the Oklahoma convention of which nominated said Presidential Elector, or by casting his ballot for any other persons, shall be guilty of a misdemeaner, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00). Laws 1961, H.B.No.538, § 3. § 522. Nomination of candidates for presidential electors-Certification of names The State Central Committee of any political party recognized by the laws of this State shall cause a state wide convention of the members of such party to hold such representation of the members of such party and method of selection as such State Central Committee shall determine for the purpose, among others that such party may desire, of nominating such party's candidates for Presidential Electors. The persons nominated by such convention as candidates for Presidential Electors for such party shall be certified by name to the Secretary of the State Election Board by the Chairman, attested by the Secretary, of such State Central Committee at least ninety (90) days but not more than one hundred and eighty (180) days prior to the date of a Presidential Election. Failure of a political party to properly certify the names of candidates for Presidential Elector within the time herein specified shall bar such party from placing any candidates for Presidential Electors on the ballot at the general election next held following the time herein specified in which to certify. Laws 1961, H.B.No.564, § 1. Senator KEFAUVER. Did you challenge it? What did you do about it? Mr. IRWIN. I conveyed my opinions to my Senator and Representatives, who are in agreement, I believe, with me on that matter. I subsequently announced in the paper that I did not believe the action of the State legislature in this respect would void or supersede the U.S. Constitution. Senator KEFAUVER. You mean you conveyed your feeling to that. old guard Democratic senator? Mr. IRWIN. No; we have since had another election, Senator, and my State senator is now-having learned from my experiences-we now have a Republican who has displaced the old guard State senator. Senator KEFAUVER. So you are happy about the situation now? Mr. IRWIN. Much happier. We have seven more to go, however. Mr. KIRBY. Mr. Irwin, you stated you plan to run for presidential elector again in Oklahoma? Mr. IRWIN. I do not believe I said I planned to run. If someone wishes to run me I cannot object. I said that I would be a candidate. Mr. KIRBY. Will you place your own name in candidacy? Mr. IRWIN. That I would have to do. Mr. KIRBY. I gather you don't expect to be nominated by one of the party conventions? Mr. IRWIN. In this case-no, I will not petition. I don't know whether the law provides this. I have not studied the law for anyone but the two parties. I think I might even be, I mean, I am not stronger than the Republican Party, but I think there are enough-the Republican Party figures there are enough intelligent voters in Oklahoma to elect a conservative, and I think it might be prevailed upon the committee to designate me as an elector. Mr. KIRBY. Well, this law provides for an oath or affirmation now by the nominees of the parties. Mr. IRWIN. I am not aware of that. Mr. KIRBY. It provides for an oath or affirmation of intention to vote in the electoral college Mr. IRWIN. There again the Constitution Mr. KIRBY. I am apprising the Senators what the law provides. Please let me finish. It provides for an oath or affirmation to be taken by the nominees of the party conventions that if elected to the office of elector they will cast their ballots for the persons nominated by the national convention of the party which has nominated them. It provides a penalty; it declares it a misdemeanor if such an elector violates his oath by casting a ballot otherwise or by failing to cast his ballot, and provides for a fine up to $1,000 upon conviction. Now, apart from the constitutionality of that statute, Mr. Irwin, it applies only to nominees of party conventions who must take this oath. Mr. IRWIN. We are talking about the future? Mr. KIRBY. So you won't test that law unless you are nominated by the party convention. Mr. IRWIN. I don't know that that is so. In the first place, this was passed this January or February, whenever you indicated. The law requires an oath on something that is impossible to require, I think, legally. The law has never been tested. It remains to be tested. It will be tested if I am an elector. Mr. KIRBY. I believe it can only be tested, Mr. Irwin, by a nominee of a convention who takes the oath and violates it. Mr. IRWIN. We have not had any convention since then. Mr. KIRBY. I am talking only about the terms of the law. You are not even familiar with this, you said. Mr. IRWIN. Yes, but it remains to be tested also. Further, I don't know, I ask you, is there any provision made for a nominee who dies, what the electors shall do? I don't know, but certainly you can't swear to vote for a dead man. Mr. KIRBY. I think that is provided for in other sections of the law. One further question: I gather that if such a law had been in effect in 1960, the mere prospect of paying $1,000 as a fine in order to test the constitutionality would not have kept you from voting as you did? Mr. IRWIN. You are making a conjecture, a conclusion. Mr. KIRBY. I am asking you. Mr. IRWIN. My reply would have to be a conjecture or conclusion. I don't know. Mr. KIRBY. You think if a $1,000 fine had been involved you might have cast your vote for Mr. Nixon? Mr. IRWIN. I assure you of this: If Hoffa was the nominee I would, I assure you of that. If Walter Reuther was, I assure you I would. Mr. KIRBY. You assure me of what? Mr. IRWIN. I would vote against them. That $1,000, I have staked my life on a battlefield, I am not worrying about $1,000. Mr. KIRBY. A man who feels as strongly as you do, you would pay it, wouldn't you? Mr. IRWIN. I am not worrying about $1,000. Senator KEATING. You are not putting Mr. Nixon in the category with Hoffa and Reuther? Mr. IRWIN. I don't think I made reference to him, but the question was would I bolt in 1960 or 1964. I say if either of those gentlemen, using the word loosely, were on the ballot, I assure you I would. Mr. KIRBY. How did you happen to receive a legal opinion from Dean Manion, Mr. Irwin? Mr. IRWIN. My first contact with Clarence Manion was a telephone call about the end of November, the 28th or so. My wife-the telephone, she said. On the other end-he said, "This is Dean Clarence Manion." I had never talked with Mr. Manion. I had never approached Mr. Manion. He called me for a discussion. It was in that conversation Mr. KIRBY. He called you? Mr. IRWIN. He called me. It was in that conversation in which he stated that there were groups in Texas who wanted him to run for President. He said he had discouraged that. He would have no part of it. Further along in the discussion I inquired as to his opinion, which he gave me. Mr. KIRBY. You mean as a result of that telephone call he gave you his opinion? Mr. IRWIN. Yes. I have since communicated with Mr. Manion. Mr. KIRBY. Do you know if that opinion was circulated to other Republican electors? Mr. IRWIN. I feel quite certain it was because in the address for Manion's Forum he makes that point quite clear. Whether they got it or not I don't know, or whether they understood it or not I don't know, or whether they heard it or not I don't know. Mr. KIRBY. No, sir. You couldn't be expected to know. You mentioned a moment ago a telegram from a New Mexico elector telling you that she would vote with you. Mr. IRWIN. That telegram is in the record. I called out the State, the individual sending it, and I don't recall who she was. Mr. KIRBY. I think it was a Mrs. Moulton. Mr. IRWIN. Yes; I think you are correct. Mr. KIRBY. New Mexico went Democratic. Was this a Republican or a Democratic elector? Mr. IRWIN. I was not aware-maybe it wasn't New Mexico. I don't know. Senator KEFAUVER. You said it was New Mexico. My vote is Byrd President and Goldwater Vice President. Mrs. EARL L. MOULTON, New Mexico. Senator KEFAUVER. She didn't vote that day, did she? Mr. IRWIN. There was a miscount if she did. Mr. IRWIN. I presume you know she was a Democratic elector. Mr. IRWIN. I can resolve that quite readily. New Mexico, if we are to accept U.S. News & World Report, New Mexico is-I am getting to that age I cannot read this. Can someone read these figures? Mr. KIRBY. Sir, according to the statistics of the election prepared by the Clerk of the House of Representatives, the vote in New Mexico for presidential electors was Democratic 156,027, Republican 153,733. Mr. IRWIN. Then it went Democratic, and she had no voice in the matter, no voice in the college of electors in any case. Mr. KIRBY. Sir, you were kind enough to hand me this morning before you testified this correspondence between you and R. Lea Harris. Have these been put in the record otherwise by you? Mr. IRWIN. I beg pardon? Mr. KIRBY. Are they also included in the material Mr. IRWIN. I believe those you have, and more. I put them in a duplicate file which was miscellaneous papers. Mr. KIRBY. I wanted to offer these if you had not already offered them. Mr. IRWIN. Very well. However, whatever point you have in mind, sir Mr. KIRBY. I have no particular point in mind. Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer for the record, following the Opinion of the Justices, the Alabama decision mentioned by Mr. Irwin, the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in Ray v. Blair in 1952. It also arose in Alabama and held valid the requirement of a pledge of an elector, or candidate for elector, in a primary election. This was held not to violate the Constitution. However, it left open the question of whether the pledge itself was enforcible as a matter of constitutional law. But the pledge itself was constitutional, and I believe this supersedes the authority of the Alabama case. Senator KEFAUVER. Very well. Let that be made a part of the record at that point. (The opinion referred to is found at p. 571.) Mr. IRWIN. I would not question that. However, I would say that is inconsistent with the Alabama decision to which I have made reference, the one by the Supreme Court of Alabama. Mr. KIRBY. That is true, it is inconsistent. Mr. IRWIN. Yes. Mr. KIRBY. The Alabama decision was in 1948, and the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States was in 1952, both arising under the Alabama laws. Those are all the questions I have. Senator KEFAUVER. Anything else, Senator Keating? Senator KEATING. No. Senator KEFAUVER. Senator Keating asked you whether you were receiving any organizational assistance. Is there any organization that is proposing that the electors use their freedom and how they vote? Mr. IRWIN. I don't wish to avoid the question, but as to organization support, if we are talking about dollar support and me receiving dollar support, well, I can answer both. I received no dollar support from any organization. If there are organizations supporting such a coalition, I have no way in the world of knowing it. There might well be, I am inclined to believe there are. Senator KEFAUVER. I was just asking you whether you knew of any, and if so whether you were a member. Mr. IRWIN. Well, if Human Events-and I don't really know the policy of Human Events-but if Human Events is an organization, and actually it is-they have written in support of a coalition a number of times. I don't have the exact references. Manion's Forum is that; certainly Manion's Forum is an organization. Whether it has written in support of the coalition I don't know. Those I have no way of knowing, sir. To my knowledge I could not identify any such. (The following communications are those submitted by Mr. Irwin at p. 626, as having resulted from his actions.) HENRY IRWIN, Bartlesville, Okla.: MONTGOMERY, ALA., December 20, 1960. Congratulations and God bless you. Your courageous action has educated all the politicians and millions of Americans to the real purpose of the electoral college. You have taken your worthless vote for Nixon and accomplished a great service to our Nation. Furthermore you have shown all America there is a rallying position for the moderates and conservatives. It is men like you to whom America must look for leadership. Letter to follow. Mr. HENRY D. IRWIN, LEA HARRIS. HOUSTON, TEX. DEAR MR. IRWIN: I just read about your activity concerning the possibility of swinging the electoral college decision to Harry Byrd and Barry Goldwater. Hooray for you. This is the only thing that could save us from this oneparty government we have been operating for the past 20 or more years. We ran a Goldwater-for-President campaign down here before the Republican Convention and went to Chicago and gave it our all, and we are getting ready to organize the Goldwater conservative forces the first week in January. Hope to be in Washington for the Human Events Congress January 6 and 7. We are organized into John Birch Societies, Freedom in Action, Mindszenty groups and are going to set up a grassroots Freedom Council here in cooperation with Independence Foundation of Portland, Ind. Houston is a hotbed of conservatism and patriotism and political activity. Can you send me some information on your plans? Sincerely yours, Mr. HENRY D. IRWIN, Bartlesville, Okla. Mrs. NOELIE R. HOLTZ. ENID, OKLA., November 4, 1960. DEAR MR. IRWIN: I read the article about you and the electoral college with much interest. I believe you are a man of my own heart. I was a delegate to the Republican National Convention in Chicago and I feel just about the way you do. I am enclosing a couple of copies of a letter I have been writing and mailing to some of my relatives and friends monthly for the past 35 years. These might interest you. Most sincerely, HENRY B. BASS. OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA., New Year's Day, 1961. DEAR MR. IRWIN: I had been intending to write you, something like Mr. Doenges' views, so I will enclose his article with my agreement. I would add that inasmuch as it was now fully evident that Mr. Nixon would not be the winner, there was hope that if Oklahoma and a few others, not yet fully decided, would join with some of the southern electors and do just what you tried to do-it might have been the salvation of our country and our few remaining freedoms. I'm also glad there is someone from Bartlesville who shows some intelligence and honesty and good judgment. Would that we had a majority who had honorable and upright and sound convictions and the courage to stand for them. I hope you continue your efforts along this line. Most sincerely, V.J.R. P.S. There was an excellent message given by a minister over WNAD, Norman, Okla., this morning, that was in line with your apparent concepts and that would add to the encouragement and give you a "lift." It is the only one given over that station on Sunday-you might write for a copy and receive one, I do not know. |