Last Tuesday, I saw David Dallas’ superb one-man play, “A Gentleman From Mississippi.” The most fascinating part of Dallas’ portrayal of former Sen. John C. Stennis, MSU’s most famous alumnus, was hearing Stennis (well, Dallas as Stennis) explain his votes on various civil rights legislation. After all, he was a part of the Southern coalition that delayed integration and civil rights as long as possible. Civil rights was not one of Stennis’ favorite issues. Even in the play, Dallas avoided saying a great deal about it. Since he was a senator from Mississippi, he couldn’t afford to be very progressive.
However, it is inaccurate to simply label Stennis a segregationalist and a racist. It does not do justice to the circumstances. When he fought against civil rights legislation, he was representing the views of the people who had voted him into office. He felt that in order to improve race relations in the South, the change must come from within.
Still, it is impossible to ignore what happened in Mississippi during the civil rights movement. Stennis was a senator when James Meredith needed the help of the National Guard to enroll at Ole Miss. He was a senator when three civil rights workers were murdered in Philadelphia and when Emmett Till was lynched.
I wonder how any person in a position of authority could not tell his people that racially motivated violence would not be tolerated. Why didn’t Stennis use his pulpit to tell his constituents that they must learn to live together? That every person had equal rights before the law? That we could only prosper by making sure every child had the opportunity to get a decent education?
Stennis often said, “We can’t legislate people’s hearts.” Perhaps he was right. If Stennis had taken a stand on civil rights, perhaps a few minds may have been changed. More than likely though, he would have been voted out of office. However, his votes on civil rights do not tell the whole story. He never hesitated to condemn Ku Klux Klan terrorism and other forms of intimidation.
Stennis’ views on race can be compared with the changing attitudes in all of Mississippi. In later years, he voted to continue the Voting Rights Act. He also fought, much to the chagrin of some Northern senators, for equal enforcement of civil rights legislation across the country. He correctly pointed out that racism was a national problem.
When he won re-election in 1982 (incidentally, over a young Republican named Haley Barbour), he did so with a majority of the black vote. Clearly, Stennis and the black community had reconciled with each other. They knew that when Stennis brought home major federal projects such as the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway and the Stennis Space Center, he benefited black and white Mississippians.
David Dallas said in an article, “It’s too easy for us to stand in judgment on history.” Indeed, there is a tendency to judge history, especially periods like the civil rights movement, in a modern context. It is easy for politicians to condemn racism in 2002. It was much more difficult in 1962.
While I am not trying to write off ugly parts of Mississippi’s history, I think it is important to realize that Stennis served our state well. He set a high standard for ethical behavior that was very welcome after his predecessor’s, Theodore Bilbo scandals. His service as chairman of the Armed Services and Appropriations benefited the country as well as our state.
In “A Gentleman From Mississippi,” Dallas as Stennis recounts what one senator told Stennis when he arrived in Washington, D.C.: “You will either grow as a senator or you will swell.” What has impressed me most while completing research for this article is that Stennis did grow as a senator. He changed his views on civil rights and pushed for progress.