The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 74, July 1970 - April, 1971 Page: 39
616 p. : ill., maps, ports. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Defeat of the Roosevelt Court Bill in 1937
ernment should take over crime prosecution." From the spring of
1934, things went along uneventfully until the court issue came to
the fore. In the space of a few minutes after hearing the proposed bill,
he decided he would oppose the measure. Sumners seems to have been
acting out of genuine conviction when he opposed the bill for there
is no indication that he had aspirations for higher political office or
was pressured into a stand from an outside source."
By the time Sumners finished his ride to the capitol, he had prob-
ably formulated his plan of action-or rather, inaction. It was simple:
the bill would not come up in his committee. He knew that if he
reported the measure out of his committee, it would pass in the House.
By ignoring the measure, he had "time to stir up opposition among
my colleagues, and among the people."" Sumners' position aroused
speculation as to the fate of the bill if it was introduced in his com-
mittee. Moreover, he did not say that he would introduce it at all,
and the possibility that he would split with the President was openly
discussed in House corridors. At best, it was obvious that Sumners
lacked enthusiasm for the proposal.
Sam Rayburn, who had misgivings, helped to convince the President
that because of Sumners' opposition, it would be unwise to introduce
the bill in the House. As a result, Roosevelt had it brought up in the
.Senate. This development had a powerful effect in killing the bill.
If it had been reported out of the House Judiciary Committee and
-passed in the House, it probably would have gone through the Senate
also; its House passage would have had a psychological effect on the
uncommitted senators."
18Ibid. According to Sumners, ibid., President Roosevelt called on the phone and the
-following conversation ensued:
"Roosevelt-'Hatton, when are you going to report those bills out of your committee?'
"Sumners-'Mr. President, I don't believe that they ought to be reported out.'
"Roosevelt-'How would you like to have your committee taken away from you?'
"Sumners-'Who in hell is going to do it?' (Sound of phone banging on the receiver.)"
1'Ibid. See also Sumners Papers, passim.
"Sumners to L. V. P., interview, September 25, 1952. See also Time, XXIV (March 1,
1937), xx; Newsweek, IX (February 2o, 1937), 18. Most reporters felt that the bulk of
the membership in the House backed the bill when it was first proposed by Roosevelt.
"eThe Chicago Daily News, February g, 1937; Tom Connally and Alfred Steinberg,
My Name is Tom Connally (New York, 1954), 186; Time, XXIX (March 1, 1937), 12;
Timmons, Garner of Texas, 218; Patterson, Congressional Conservatism and the New Deal,
92-93; Alsop and Catledge, "The 168 Days" (September 25, 1937), 96; Kenneth Harrell,
"Southern Congressional Leaders and the Supreme Court Fight of 1937" (M.A. thesis,
Louisiana State University, 1959), 42; New York Times, February 24, 1937; Sumners to
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 74, July 1970 - April, 1971, periodical, 1971; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101200/m1/51/: accessed April 24, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.