Of God and Fair Housing

It was a different time—but in many ways not so different from our own. The year was 1964 and Sierra Madre, like many small Southern California communities in the 1960s, was dealing with moral questions raised by the Civil Rights Movement.

Though California doesn’t immediately spring to mind as a civil rights battleground, the state's landmark civil rights bill—the Rumford Fair Housing Act, set a national precedent that eventually resulted in passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, which criminalized discriminatory real estate practices nationwide.

California Governor Pat Brown had signed the Rumford Act into law on July 18, 1963, calling it a “milestone” in civil rights legislation. An immediate backlash ensued, however, and a movement spearheaded by the California Real Estate Association sought to overturn the measure. The CREA formed a coalition called “Americans to Outlaw Forced Housing,” and with the support of California Republicans and the far-right John Birch Society, drafted a ballot measure to overturn the bill. This became Proposition 14, a divisive issue in the 1964 elections that ultimately impeded fair housing legislation in the state for several years.

In reaction to Proposition 14, concerned citizens in Sierra Madre formed the Sierra Madre Fair Housing Committee to advocate for equitable real estate practices. If the editorial pages of the Sierra Madre News from the time were any indication, they must have had their work cut out for them.

In the 1960s, the small Sierra Madre paper espoused some of the most extreme examples of right wing rhetoric, and were radically opposed to all aspects of the Civil Rights Movement. A regular column called “Freedom At Any Price,” written by a Monrovia dentist and conservative activist named Henry V. Witty warned readers about “Communist infiltration into the race revolution,” and predicted that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would establish a “bureaucratic police state” and “rule under presidential dictatorship."

Another column called “Birch Society Says”—a mouthpiece for the John Birch Society, cautioned Sierra Madreans about the “complicity of the Communist Party and the Negro Revolution,” and railed against “Communists and their Liberal dupes” and “the danger of the Red Chinese.”

Cherry-picked letters to the editor complained about “militant colored groups […] fuzzy-headed liberals, pinkos,” and “plain old commies," and ads for the "Patriot Bookshop" in Arcadia told readers where they could pick up the latest copy of The Dan Smoot Report.

Unsurprisingly, the paper took a strong editorial stance against the Rumford Act.

In this less-than-sympathetic environment, the Sierra Madre Fair Housing Committee made a bold decision to stage Who? Me?, a short play written by Isabel A. Gehr, wife of the minister of Pasadena’s Throop Memorial Church, as part of their anti-Proposition 14 campaign.

Written in 1960, the play had first been performed at the Pasadena Fellowship Church, and told a parable-like story of a black family trying to purchase a home. Heavy with scriptural references, the play was a simple yet cogent plea for tolerance based on Christian teachings.

The Sierra Madre Fair Housing Committee found a sympathetic ally in Rev. Harley Gibbs Smith, Jr., rector of the E, who, after conferring with members of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles, agreed to let them stage the play at his church.

The performance took place on June 4, 1964, and the Fair Housing Committee handed out anti-Proposition 14 leaflets at the door following the show. Alerted to the production, another crowd gathered and distributed “Yes on 14” literature, and a squabble ensued outside the church.

Over the next few days, a rift formed in the congregation, and on June 10, 1964, over 100 people, mostly parishioners, gathered in the church to discuss the moral issues raised by the play. Two hours of turbulent debate followed and eventually, 82 of the 386 parish members drew up a petition stating that they would withdraw 90% of their financial support for the church until leaders promised not to participate in any more “political acts.”

The rector of the church, Harley Gibbs Smith Jr. defended the play, stating that the issue of fair housing was not political but “spiritual,” and quoting biblical verses such as “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” Cannon Noble Owings, executive assistant to diocese Bishop Eric Bloy, also stood behind the production, arguing that issues of human rights were moral, not political.

Those who opposed the play were not pleased. Some of them worried that the church might lose their tax-exempt status because of the play’s perceived political stance. Their de facto leader, vestryman Ted Hassell, threatened that if a similar play was presented in future, “the fever will rise again.”

The Sierra Madre News had their own take on the situation. After the incident received coverage in the Los Angeles Times, a letter appeared in the paper which aimed to clarify “misrepresentation by the press in the recent controversy.” Claiming to have been written by “a member of the vestry,” the letter charged that the play “contained the seeds of church disunity by exploiting political issues,” and that the discussion it provoked “seemed to many to be more appropriate to a political town hall.”

On July 2, 1964, the Sierra Madre News stated: “To us, the Rumford Act ceased to become a ‘moral’ issue when the initiative was filed and found sufficient to place the matter on the ballot for the vote of the people.”

The Ascension controversy lasted over a month, with bitter feelings on both sides, until finally in mid-July, a letter from the vestry parish lay board and Bishop Bloy urged congregation members to “return to [their] regular parish responsibilities and fellowship.”

Rev. Smith, concerned over the financial risk of a permanent loss of support from one quarter of his congregation, capitulated, and all but guaranteed that no similar performance would be staged in the future.

In November 1964, Proposition 14 passed by a 65% majority in California, nullifying the Rumford Fair Housing Act for the next three years, until in 1967 the United States Supreme Court ruled that it violated the Fourteenth Amendment, and overturned it. One year later, seeking to address the problem of housing discrimination on a national scale, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968 into law, ensuring that no individual state could ever hold a referendum to eliminate fair housing.