e 23-31: Both the Harris and Wilkins remarks
are quoted in Sundquist, "Building the Great
Society," pp. 205-06.]

_The Civil Rights Act and Voluntary Compliance_

The enactment of new civil rights legislation in 1964 had thrust the
armed forces into the heart of the civil rights movement in a special
way. As Secretary McNamara himself reminded his subordinates,
President Johnson was determined to have each federal department
develop programs and policies that would give meaning to the new (p. 591)
legislation. That legislation, he added, created "new opportunities"
to win full equality for all servicemen. The secretary made the usual
connection between discrimination and military efficiency, adding that
"this reason alone" compelled departmental action.[23-32] Obviously
other reasons existed, and when McNamara called on all commanders to
support their men in the "lawful assertion of the rights guaranteed"
by the act he was making his more than 300 local commanders agents of
the new federal legislation.

[Footnote 23-32: Memo, SecDef for SA et al., 10 Jul
64, copy in CMH; see also SecDef News Conference,
15 Jul 64, p. 13, OASD (PA).]

Defense officials quickly arranged for the publication of directives
and regulations applying the provisions of the new law to the whole
defense establishment. To insure, as McNamara put it, that military
commanders understood their responsibility for seeing that those in
uniform were accorded fair treatment as prescribed by the new law,
Assistant Secretary Paul had already ordered the services to advise
the rank and file of their rights and instruct commanders to seek
civilian cooperation for the orderly application of the act to
servicemen.[23-33] After considering the service comments solicited by
his civil rights deputy,[23-34] Paul issued a departmental instruction
on 24 July that prescribed specific policies and procedures for
processing the requests of uniformed men and women for legal action
under Titles II (Public Accommodations), III (Public Facilities), and
IV (Public Education) of the act. The instruction encouraged, but did
not compel, the use of command assistance by servicemen who wished to
request suit by the U.S. Attorney General.[23-35]

[Footnote 23-33: Memo, ASD (M) for Under SA et al., 6
Jul 64, ASD (M) 291.2; see also SecDef News