Correspondence between Dr. McCord and Attorney General McLeod

              November 26, 1965
Attorney General D. R. McLeod
State House
Columbia, South Carolina
Dear Mr. McLeod:
On June 21, 1965 I made a report to the Governor in regard to our problems
with compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Bill.    I believe you have a copy
of this in your files, but the highlights are as follows:
Funds which have been contracted to be paid by the Federal Government
were cut off in an arbitrary manner without warning.   This put us in a difficult
position of having employed people in good faith with the expectation of paying
them with money obtained from the Federal Government,   This specifically occured
to a grant held by Dr. Dale Groom last June (1965). The question was raised as to
the cutting off of funds before a complaint was proved valid and this was blandly
accepted.  The two problems here, the Federal Government broke its contract and
we were adjudged guilty until we could prove our innocence at some later time.
We were forced to remove our students from Roper Hospital to our detriment
in the training of students.
Attempts are made to force me to break the law by assigning people on the
basis of color, i.e., to specifically place a white patient and a colored patient
in the same room in the hospital.
Attempts were made to foroe me to require people to eat in certain dining
rooms on the basis of color,   I was requested to require white individuals on the
staff to eat in the free dining room which at that time furnished meals at no cost to
the wage earning group, which are, for the large part, negroes.
At the inspection of the hospital, it was stated that "informal" inspections
were more easily handled than by making a court case of the complaint.   I interpreted
this to be in the nature of a threat.
We feel that there is interference with medical education, with patient care,
with patient welfare and the internal operation of the institution.   Upon complaints
made by irresponsible individuals, by arbitrary and capricious decisions for which1
there is no recourse and no appeal.   Statements by me in this way, if publicized,
would most probably react to our financial disadvantage, i.e., loss of funds.