1
20
7
-
https://projectdaps.org/files/original/249570dd2fb9f3efdf76a55f5eb7c3fd.pdf
9004840316492419f98c01644914268e
PDF Text
Text
Se^/'s-f
&■>i' '-4vJ('&v4
• )
S c h o o ls O on iaiitee
;
A *T!>A
3
1 5 , 1961
li-Y o f A r lin g to n
a e se g re ^ a t& o n n s v e lo p m a its
S outh a s a whol e
V ir g in ia
T x t« it o f d e se g r e g a tio n s
a)
l l d ese g reg a ted acbool d i s t r i c t s ! ab ou t 173
t'egro o h ild rer. in predorainantly w h ite s c h o o l b
(105 l a s t y e a r )
b ) F , Va. - ^ 6 F ^ r o c h ild r e n in n ixed s c h o o ls ;
a b c u tj ia lf „ b y c o u r t o r d e r , h a l_ f_ b y _ sta te
assignment < ■
/.
c ) A rlin g to n - ^ 5 fe g r o c h ild r e n ; 2b by c o u r t ord er
12 by s t a t e a c tio n
begi station
/
•
•v ( v < (
y
‘
w
a ) ;V s s i v e r e s i s t a n c e s ta g e - p u p il p la c e m e n t a c t 195u
( r e v i s e d 1958) p h a s e 1. no n ix in g
3
p h ase 2 , P e ' board; 53 " egroe'5 &s ,’sohool c lo s in g la w s
cotap-ilasory a tta o d a n c e abandoned
o 2 "
b ) "fre ed o m o f C hoice" - 1959
C _ x t . * v_; I v
T u itio n g r a n t s . In 109 o f 153 or. v u n i t l e s
6lOb so f a r t h i s y e a r (^500 l a s t y e a r
ho c a l Assignment - n ev er y e t e f fe c te d
S ta t e Board1 e netf c r it e r ia *
s c h o l a s t i c a p titu d e
a v a ila b ility o f f a c i l i t i e s
potential effect on child and others
restriction of disruption
Maxinrum continuity in plncencnt
validity of parmti- reasons for requested R3g
h”
1
6
o . board v r-u i
-
Trmds* on Q u a lity o f V ir g in ia rduoation
A p p rop riation s 1?5 j sonflicn
• o g 0o mission
3n
Changes State Board
f Tiduo• * )arder. $ .owell
Schools Oon-aittee Activity
■‘
;
aroh/6h - local option
Dec*/6D - bud et (local;
J a n /6 j -
s t a t e Bd» o f r^*
.
\
ay/6'J to Ja".23/6l - nre-' soi.o.'l e<pa»*‘
sion (lcca ;
FJTURn
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
RG 44, Records of the Arlington County League of Women Voters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Schools Committee, February 15, 1961, Agenda, League of Women Voters of Arlington
Description
An account of the resource
Outline of developments in desegregation the South as well as in Virginia specifically.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
RG 44, Records of the League of Women Voters of Arlington, Virginia, Inc.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
League of Women Voters, Arlington Chapter
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1961-02-15
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
44_8_65_17
-
https://projectdaps.org/files/original/575c20ed01016ba44dd4c61b291de548.pdf
dd2145c1261f0dccc9458d9ef6e5cd36
PDF Text
Text
League of Women Voters of Arlington
June 1, 1959
PUFIL ASSIGNMENT AND THE COURTS
Under pressure of federal court actions, local school boards in Charlottes
ville, Norfolk, Arlington and Alexandria have adopted their own pupil assignment
plans to screen Negro applicants seeking admission to white schools, and these
criteria were accepted:
1. Attendance areas, or proximity to a school: used in all plans and upheld
in each case.(Judge Paul objected to obvious gerrymandering of school
districts in Charlottesville.)
.
rvV.
2. Academic achievement: recognized in each case as valid
3.
Enrollment conditions at the school to which admission is sought.
(Upheld by Judge Bryan.)
jjftr ts u c A ^ y y ^ U ' "
~ LJ
4. Adaptability: upheld by Judge Bryan in the Arlington case, though
recognized as the most difficult to evaluate.
Too frequent transfers: used to deny the transfer of Norfolk pupils who
pupils,
would remain in a school only one year.
r H a /g ^ y U J U J *yl j ) r -
Under psychological problems. Judge Bryan found the Arlington Eoard considering
race and color. Judge Hoffman told the Norfolk Board it could not refuse to admit
a Negro to a white school because the child's presence might lead to violence, or
because the child would be "isolated" among white children.
Each local school board used tests and personal interviews to screen applicants.
Any child who refused to submit to tests was disqualified. So far thirty Negroes
have qualified for transfer to all-white schools under these local assignment plans.
The NAACF contends it is illegal to apply criteria to negro children which are not
used for white children. School officials maintain that admission of a Negro child
to a white school is an "unusual circumstance" and therefore use of special
criteria is justified.
Following the demise of the school closing laws, Judge Sobeloff of the Fourth
Circuit Court of Appeals granted Charlottesville a delay in admitting twelve
Negro students, permitting the Charlottesville Board to reopen its two closed
schools in a segregated basis in February on condition that a good faith deseg
regation plan be presented for the fall of 1959.. Meanwhile the twelve negro
students were to be tutored by public school teachers. This will be the first
"voluntary" desegregation plan adopted in Virginia. In other localities,
specific Negro students have been ordered admitted to white schools only after
courts have decreed them eligible.
j
( L
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
RG 44, Records of the Arlington County League of Women Voters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
League of Women Voters of Arlington, June 1, 1959, Pupil Assignment and the Courts
Description
An account of the resource
A summary prepared by the League of Women Voters of Arlington regarding Virginia school boards' adopted pupil assignment plans to admit Black students in white schools.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
RG 44, Records of the League of Women Voters of Arlington, Virginia, Inc.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
League of Women Voters, Arlington Chapter
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1959-06-01
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
44_8_65_16
-
https://projectdaps.org/files/original/6228320767da3c1ec24f8748d0dc1b35.pdf
29f6aa4e8753b90ef90a2106ba73e10a
PDF Text
Text
June 1, 1959
League of Women Voters of Arlington
STATUS OF DESEGREGATION
Localities Affected
Ton Virginia communities arc now directly affected by desegregation.
three desegregation has actually occurred.
In
*N>7«
/»
'y%
It
In Arlington, /dexandria, and Norfolk, negro students are now attending
white schools following orders from a Federal Court.
In Front Royal, negro students are attending the white high school but
no white students are now attending.
In Charlottesville, negro students will enter white schools next September
under a city-wide plan of assignment without regard to race.
In Irince Edward County, Newport News City, Richmond City, Staunton City
and Floyd County, negroes have applied to enter white schools.
A total of 20 negro students are now attending white schools with white
students in Virginia. Eighteen others occupy the formerly all-white school
in Front Royal.
2~(
Legal Developments:
Summary
i
vW
In Arlington and Alexandria a review of rejected negro applications has
been ordered by the Circuit Court.
In Norfolk the City Council has been enjoined from cutting off school
funds to prevent operation of integrated schools.
i 3. Y«
f v
In Newport News Judge Hoffman has made the State iupil Ilacement Board
party to the desegregation suit. He has previously ruled the Board uncon
stitutional (under "massive resistance" laws).
I l{
l L
I/
fV
tu
(d
Z,
In Richmond the Iupil Ilacement Board has been made a party to the suit b y r
Judge Hutchinson. This will have the effect of drawing proceedings out past
the school opening date in September and thereby delaying desegregation in
Richmond. In the meantime the city is planning to go ahead with a new school
building program to preserve segregation on a residential basis.
In Staunton, applications for negroes to enter white schools have been
forwarded to the State Iupil ilacement Board.
y.5
In Floyd County the local Delegate (Rep. ioff) has recommended that the
negroes be admitted without going through a lawsuit.
In Front Royal a petition calling for the sale of the school building is
circulating, a t the same time the Superintendent has called for a school
budget on ap annual or quarterly basis .
In irince Edward the U. S. Supreme Court has rejected the seven-year delay
on beginning of desegregation. Local feeling will apparently result in closing
of schools and resort to tuition grants if negroes are admitted to white schools.
%tfo
a -r
s <r
r
nn
CM-
%
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
RG 44, Records of the Arlington County League of Women Voters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
League of Women Voters of Arlington, June 1, 1959, Status of Desegregation
Description
An account of the resource
A summary prepared by the League of Women Voters of Arlington regarding localities affected by desegregation and legal developments in Virginia. Handwritten notes pertaining to school funding are in the margins.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
RG 44, Records of the League of Women Voters of Arlington, Virginia, Inc.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
League of Women Voters, Arlington Chapter
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1959-06-01
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
44_8_65_15
-
https://projectdaps.org/files/original/8da52a75ba9eadc9e4da3c57d4e5d20f.pdf
e62766696b9697a64d967c60c7952138
PDF Text
Text
League of Women Voters of Arlington
Schools Briefing
June 1, 1959
Legislative Action
The General assembly enacted into law- but with many modifications - the
basic program recommended by 31 members of the 40-mcmber Commission on Education
appointed by Gov. J. Lindsay Almond and headed by State Senator Mosby G. Perrow,
Jr., of Lynchburg.
The gist of the commission's report, which the governor released April 1,
was that there is no legal way to have total segregation in Virginia short of
abolishing the public school system. The commission said it did not believe
the people of Virginia want to take that drastic step.
LOC.iL OPTION
Instead the Perrow group recommended a package of laws to permit localities
to decide whether or not to desegregate. Even where segregation was decided on,
however, "scholarships" would be made available to students who preferred to
attend private schools.
With G0v. Almond's backing, the basic Perrow program was approved by the
Assembly, with these results:
(1) The Virginia policy up to now has been to maintain a statewide front
against desegregation. The key to this program has been a three-member state
Pupil Placement Board which has had sole authority to assign pupils to schools
throughout the state.
(The effort has not been fully successful, of course,
since court-ordered desegregation has occurred in four localities.)
FUFIL ASSIGNMENT
House Bill 50, which squeaked through the special session with not a single
vote to spare, gives cities and counties the choice of remaining under the state
board or of having their local school boards assume the pupil assigning functions,
subject to rules made by the State Board of Education.
appeals from assignments made b^-local boards may be taken to a new body,
the 'state Llecoment Board of "
appeal s D u r i n g debate, the view was expressed
that this appeals unit may serve to check massive integration in any community.
The Almond-Ferrow forces were far short of the required strength (fourfifths of each house) to enable them to tack emergency clauses onto the assign
ment bill to make it become effective on passage. Without that clause, it would
not normally have become effective until July 24, hardly time enough to be of
use to the localities in the fall term.
In view of that fact, it was agreed to make March 1, I960, the effective
date. Since the Assembly will convene in regular session in January, the
massive resistance forces hope the act may be killed or modified before it
ever becomes law.
FLEXIBLE PLAN
(2) Under SB 26 localities were given more flexibility in handling budgetary
matters so that they may, in as short a time as 30 days, cut school appropriations
and force the closing of public schools.
�Page 2
Legislative Action
Le'ague of Women Voters of Arlington
(3)
Under the old law, tuition grants have been available to children who
have preferred to attend private, non-sectarian, segregated schools, rather
than desegregated public schools.
The new law SE 32, provides "scholarships".... to any children who request
them in order to attend non-sectarian private schools.
Unlike under the old
law, the grants are not given solely for the purpose of making it possible for
children to avoid attending desegregated schools. This requirement in the
former law was considered legally vulnerable. It is even possible grants will
be given to children to attend integrated private schools - though, of course,
this is not the purpose of the act.
GRiiNTS DEFINED
uyJ
A 5
The grants in any case will be (a) $250, (b) the tuition charge of the
private school, or (c) the per capita cost of educating children in the public
schools in the locality making the grant - whichever of these three sums is the
lowest. Up to $250, the grant will be made up of state and local funds in the
same ratio as public school operating funds in the particular locality. If
the locality wishes to put up more than the state will match... it may do so/ and
thus increase the grants beyond the minimum statutory limits.
(4) Foreseeing the possibility that the majority of the people in a
locality may want to abandon public schools but that local officials may be
opposed, the assembly enacted a law (SB 20) to permit citizens to force a
referendum on disposal of public school property. If a petition calling for
such a referendum is submitted by a number of voters equal to 10$ of those who
voted in the last preceding presidential election in the locality, the referendum
must be held and the results are binding.
(5) The General assembly ^ r e g u l a r session earlier this year repealed the
state’s compulsory attendance law. The special session enacted a new compulsory
attendance law,flB 1)8, but the law does not apply in any locality which does
not want it. Even where a locality is under it, a pupil may be excused from its
provisions if his parents certify they do not want him to attend school.
(6) Localities were authorized by SB 19 to provide free transportation to
pupils attending non-sectarian private schools.
(7) Existing buildings used for private schools arc exempt from complying
with local zoning or building codes for up to two years under..... SB 31.
(8) Students receiving teacher education scholarships may under SB 21
repay the state by teaching the prescribed number of years in either public
or private schools.
.... Gov. ^ilmond pocket^vctoed a bill which would have permitted teachers to
terminate their contracts on 30 -days*notice. The purpose of the bill was to
allow teachers to avoid working in schools which desegregate, almond said
if the bill becomes law, school boards would have no assurance they would
have teachers for a year. The lerrow commission had recommended against any
change in teacher contracts.
From Southern School News - May, 1959
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
RG 44, Records of the Arlington County League of Women Voters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
League of Women Voters of Arlington, Schools Briefing, June 1, 1959, Legislative Action
Description
An account of the resource
A briefing prepared by the League of Women Voters of Arlington regarding the Virginia General Assembly's enactment of the Gray Commission's recommendations. 2 pages
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
RG 44, Records of the League of Women Voters of Arlington, Virginia, Inc.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
League of Women Voters, Arlington Chapter
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1959-06-01
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
44_8_65_13
-
https://projectdaps.org/files/original/70e59d6fd0bdbb98a0556d216c1fed64.pdf
552e30676732a849cbcffb0a4813504e
PDF Text
Text
ARLINGTON COUNCIL ON HUMAN RELATIONS'
STORY OF INTEGRATION IN ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA
Under date of 1958, November 21, Sidney Lovett' pastor of Rock
Spring Congregational Church sent letters to a selected list of people
inviting them to a meeting in Rock Spring Neighborhood House to be
held on December 1, 1958. Hubert Beckwith and Paul Rilling, president
and executive director respectively of the Virginia Council on Human
Relations were to be present. The notice said: "dessert and coffee
will be served." At this meeting the Arlington Council on Human
Relations was formed. The charter members were:
Mrs. H.C. Thompson
Rev - J . Reinheimer
Mrs. E. Raby
Mr£ A . Walker
M r . Frank Ridge
Mr. G. Goodrich
Rev. H. H. Sink
Mr. Edward Kelly
Mr. Jame3 lettee
Mrs. E . Piovia
.
Mrs,A . Hadley
Rev. Sidney Lovett
Mrs. A.J.K- cPsbid
Mrs. P. Westhaeffer
Rev. J . Rowan .
M r s . Donald Wilhelm
'
At the time of the formation of the Arlington Council our county
was strictly segregated. There were white schools and Negro schools,
white play grounds and Negro play grounds.
No Negro was ^permitted
to enter a moving picture theatre or bowling alley nor stop at a hotel
or motel in the county. Even the Arlington Hospital lias segregated.
There being but one maternity ward, no Negro mother could have her
baby there (except in cases of emergency). There was a rail in
the hospital cafeteria to separate the white from the Negro patrons.
Negroes were permitted to live in a few restricted sections of the
county but any real estate dealer who showed property in a white
section to a Negro family would lose his job. The churches were al
most entirely segregated except for certain abortive attempts at in
tegrated congregations.
In the last half century.only a few cracks had occurred in the
segregation wall. Some organizations like the Ministerial Association,
The United Church Women of Arlington, The Community Council for Social
Progress had been integrated.
Up to 1946 Negroes were required to sit in the back of the buses.
In that year a Supreme Court decision ordered the desegration of all
interstate transportation. Inasmuch as practically all bus transpor
tation originated in Washington, the ruling applied to Arlington. The
public libraries were opened to Negroes in 1950.
About six years have elapsed since the founding of the Arlington
Council by Sidney Lovett. Now what do we find? The public schools are
reasonably integrated, the,public play grounds are completeliintegrated.
Of seven bowling alleys contacted in February 1 9 6 3 , two have'no racial
restrictions and two more will accept Negroes in integrated groups.
All the moving picture theatres are integrated.
�2
In the Summer of 1 5 6 3 three prominent white churches combined
with two Negro churches to hold a summer church school- There were 14
motels contacted recently to determine their willingness to accept
Negroes. Eight have no racial restrictions and three will accept
Negroes in integrated groups. Several Negro families are now living
in sections here-to-fore reserved for white people.
Negro women are now accepted in the maternity ward of the Arlington Hospital. There is no segregation in the new hospital cafeteria.
The lunch counters throughout the county are integrated.
The struggles - sometimes bitter,- which brought all this about
before the Civil Rights Bill became, law, are described in this paper.
All were accomplished without bloodshed or rioting! We should be
proud of our county!
The Moving Picture Theatres:
The first mention in our minutes of the exclusion of Negroes
from our motion picture theatres occurs on September 27, i9 6 0 .
The
exclusion was part of the general policy of racial segregation which
had prevailed in Virginia for half a century. Section 18.1-356 of the
Virginia State Law provided that any motion picture operator who failed
to segregate his audience shall be fined not less than $10Q nor more
than $500. Section 18.1-357 provides that any patron of the theatre
who refuses to take a seat in the,
appropriate section or refuses to
move to the appropriate section when requested by an usher., shall be
put out of the theatre and fined not.less than $10 nor more than $25Months were spent in writing letters to the theatre owners. It
was pointed out that although the laws of Virginia
plainlyfor
bid integration in moving picture theatres, they also forbid inte
gration in other places of assembly - churches, business meetings,
etc.. - where no attempt had been made to enforce the law. Con
ferences were held uiging the motion picture people to integrate their
theatres but to no avail.
Of course, the motion picture houses could
have designated certain of their seating areas for the use of Negroes.
This method of solving the problem was suggested to certain Negroes
but they preferred not to patronize theatres where segregation was
practiced.
The next step was to organize a committee composed largely of
members of the various interested organizations in the community. It
was known as "The Northern Virginia Committee to End Theatre Discriminination." It met in Richmond in May 1 9 6 2 . The Congress on Racial
Equality took up the cudgels.
Picket lines were organized at several
theatres. The moving picture people countered by getting the State
legislature to pass a law forbidding picketing where the object of the
picketing was malicious or interfered with patronage. A trial case
came to court but it failed to convict the defendents. so the picket
ing went on. Finally the Virginia law requiring segregation in
places of assembly was declared null and void by a Federal Court
July 3. 1962, but the motion picture theatre owners preferred to
continue to exclude Negroes. They claimed it was a private industry
and so they had the right to exclude anyone they wished.
�- 3 Finally,, after solicitation by two members of the Friendly
Relations Committee in Richmond and help from the WHITE HOUSE, the
owners suddenly changed their policy and on June 17, 1963, Negroes
were admitted everywhere in the county. Little mention of the change
v/as made in the papers. The picture theatres continued to do busi
ness and the white population hardly noticed what had happened.
Housing:
In the old days the proportion of Negroes to whites in the
county was much greater than it is today. Some time after the 1st
World War.white people began to buy up Negro farms. Taxes on land
gradually rose requiring more Negroes to move to Washington where the
taxes were lovier.
Once the Negroes left a given section of the
County, they were never permitted to return. The general belief in
Virginia that the two races would get along best by being segregated
precluded Negroes from moving into white sections. Universal custom-not laws maintained the segregation. All that is left of the exten
sive Negro settlements are four areas known roughly as Halls Hill
Green Valley, Hatsfield and Johnson Hill.
Another cause of the depleting Negro population vias the condem
nation of Negro property for public works, parks etc. It was cheaper
to buy and therefore the obvious thing to do. All these influences
caused a dwindling of our Negro population. Today that trend has begun
to
reverse itself due first to the natural growth of the Negro
population and second to the overcrowding of the Negro areas in
Washington. Children,grow up, marry and have children. In the areas
limited to Negroes in Arlington there are not
enough houses for
rent and not enough land for Negroes to build on. Washington is now
over half Negro and is bursting at the seams. Students tell us. that a
large part of this Negro population came from the suburbs and not from
the deep South. There are Negro ministers, teachers, and other profes
sional people who work in Arlington but have to live in Washington.
There is no room for them here.
So in 1961 . June., the Arlington Council set up a committee on
Housing. In November 1961 this committee arranged a panel discussion
attended by about 200 peopie. Early in 1 9 6 2 the Arlington County
Board considered the passage of a minimum standard housing ordinance.
It provided for the upgrading of homes that failed to come up to a
minimum standard of light, air, water, and sewerage per capita. The
ordinance has certainly helped to improve the living conditions of our
low income residents. The Arlington Council on Human Relations ap
proved the proposed ordinance but insisted that some clause be added
which would provide for the poor families made homeless by its en
forcement. Of course, some of the substandard property could be re
modeled or certain fixtures installed so as to bring it up to standard,
but it was believed that, in many cases, the owners would consider
the change not worth the cost.
The County Board went about half way in complying with our
urgent request by appointing a citizens committee armed with certain
judicial powers and duties to aid the evicted families. As no case of
eviction is recorded to date, we do not know how effective this
citizens committee will be. It is reported that, as a result of code
�- 4 enforcement, 75 families have been displaced to date. Of these at
least one-third have relocated in the County. As to the remaining twothirds, we know very little. Some of them may have been forced to
downgrade their living conditions in outlying areas. In other words,
we do not know what to do with people living in squalor when we force
them to adopt sanitary standards without giving them the means for the
improvement.
In so much as the problem of housing for Negroes is common to all
areas surrounding Washington, a number or organizations have combined
their forces to help in its solution. A corporation known as Hurelco
was formed in 1 9 6 2 to buy and develop land for open occupancy - i.e.,
having no restrictions as to race. Pour acres have been contracted for
in Alexandria. They were all ready to begin construction when the mat
ter was held up in the courts. That is where it hangs now.
Another facet of the Housing Committee's work was to conduct
telephone and visiting campaigns to obtain lists of people who agree
as a minimum not to move if a Negro family moved next door. The list
now contains some 200 families. Certain apartment houses heretofore
white are now integrated.
In April 1 9 6 2 , at the request of the U. S. Commission on Civil
Rights, Sidney Lovett wrote a report on the housing.
situation of
minority groups in our County.
President &ssss££3?'- Kennedy's order on equal opportunity in hous
ing has thus far had little effect on Arlington because it applies
only to new construction and we have little vacant land. Early in
1 9 6 3 , the Arlington Fairfax and Alexandria Councils on Human Relations
formed the Northern Virginia Fair Housing, Inc. They were aided by
the American Friends Service Committee and others. Their work has
been largely door to door interviews with tenants and conferences with
real estate owners and developers.
Arlington Hospital:
The subject first appears in our minutes of i9 6 0 , September 27On that date one of our members was asked to .talk with the super
intendent regarding the hospital's progress towards integration. ©rr~
T h e .findings were never given in succeeding minutes of the Council but
we now know that at that time, the cafeteria was divided into two
sections - one for whites and the other for Negroes. Furthermore
Negro maternity cases were not accepted except in emergency.
Some months before, the United Church Women of Arlington Va.,
became interested in admitting Negroes to the maternity ward but the
hospital policy of exclusion was not changed. Under date of 1 9 6 2 ,
March 20, the Board of Directors of the Arlington Council prepared a
resolution requesting a local newspaper to investigate the matter but
such action was never taken. It was decided later that a better way
would be to request a joint meeting of representatives of the Council
and Hospital. The request was granted and a conference held, late in
May. No change in policy resulted.
Again the United Church Women petitioned the Hospital to change
their policy and enlisted the support of the Department of Health.
�Education and Welfare.
Maternity Ward.
- 5 Finally a Negro mother was admitted to the
After certain additions were made to the Hospital a new desegrated cafeteria was built and the old one abandoned. There now re
mains but one segregated policy of the Hospital Board. Practically all
Negroes who come to the hospital for treatment or surgery are assigned
to Hall A.
Early in 1964, the Congress of Racial Equality sent two people
to talk with the hospital superintendent. Mr. Anderson. He said that
the hospital would be desegrated when the new wing was built in 1 9 6 7 .
A letter was then sent demanding prompt desegregation, mentioning
also the possibility of "direct action." This letter was followed by
another calling Mr. Anderson's attention to a recent decision of the
Supreme Court requiring all recipients of the Hill Burton Funds to
completely desegregate. No answer was received from either letter.
On March 22, picketing began and was continued at regular intervals un
til June. A "sit-in" was also attempted. Four people remained in Mr.
Anderson's office until arrested by the police and charged with tres
passing but Judge Cooper ruled that the lav; was inapplicable.
The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) broadcast to the community
by phone and letter asking that contributions to the hospital work be
deferred until it became integrated. All these efforts got no response
from the hospital but they did result in bringing the issue clearly
before the public. The Arlington Ministerial Association offered to
act as arbitrator between the hospital and GORE. Later they asked the
Hospital Board to state publicly their policy regarding integration.
The hospital refused both requests.
School Integration:
On May 17, 1956, The National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People sued the Arlington School Board in the name of three
children (one Negro and two whites) to permit integration in Arlington
Schools. The case was known as the Clarissa Thompson case after the
name of the Negro child involved. At about the same time the Arlington
School Board began to formulate its own plans for integration.
The
Virginia legislature, being strongly segregationist promptly took steps
to prevent such integration.
Under the leadership of Senator Harry F.
Byrd, the State Assembly instituted a policy which came to be known as
"Massive Resistance." Laws were passed providing:
1. That the Arlington School Board be hereafter appointed
by the County Board instead of elected by the people of
Arlington. (Evidently the State Assembly believed that the
County Board would be more favorable to segregation than
the old School Board );
2. That all pupil assignment be made by a newly constituted
Placement Board;
3. That any school which admitted pupils of another
race be closed.
�-
6
-
To illustrate the extent of segregation in the public schools
during this period., the following may be of interest.
An article in the Daily Sun of February 1 ' 1957. states: "The
9,
Arlington County Council of Parent Teachers Association carried out
plans last night to dodge the Virginia public assemblage laws by meet
ing off public school property. An effort was made to segregate the
observers but, because of the small space in the upper hall of the
Neighborhood House of Rock Spring Congregational Church, the plans
were ineffectual."
When in 1953, the Federal Court rendered a decision in favor of
Clarissa Thompson the people of Arlington feared that the State of
Virginia, through Massive Resistance would close their schools.
In
fact that is exactly what did happen in Norfolk. When the school
board attempted to comply with the federal order to integrate, the
State of Virginia closed the schools. At one time there were 17' 000
children on the streets of Norfolk. In an attempt to keep the schools
open, citizens of Arlington, Richmond, Front Royal, and Norfolk united
to form, the "Committee to Preserve the Public Schools" with Glenn
Stahl as chairman and Edmund Campbell as attorney. The committee in
cluded both segregationists and integrationists but all members in
sisted that the public schools must be kept open.
In the mean time various attempts had been made to enroll Negroes
in white schools. In September, 1957, E. Leslie Hamm, Jr., Rita and
Marolyn Johnson, Louis and Melvin Turner, Robert Eldridge,III, and.
George Nelson applied for admission to white schools but were turned
down.
One year later, 30 more applied. The Arlington School Board re
jected them all for various reasons which they claimed had no relation
to their race viz: (l) geography, (2) scholastic achievement,
(3) psychological instability. (4) adaptability, (5) overcrowding of
white school applied for. Federal Judge Bryan refused to recognize
categories 3, 4, and 5, but he ruled that the geographic relation of
the pupil's house to the proposed school and the scholastic achieve
ment of the pupil were lggitimate categories for rejection; On this
basis he ordered Ronald Deskins, Lance Newman, Gloria Thompson, Michael
Jones, admitted to Stratford Junior High School and concurred with
the School Board regarding the other 2&. At this point Governor
Almond entered the discussion. He directed that the State Pupil Place
ment Board and not the County School Board had the sole right to place
the pupils.
A month later (October 1953) the Committee to Preserve Public
Schools sued Governor Almond and got a favorable decision January 19,
1959, to the effect that the State School closing law was uncon
stitutional. The State then passed a law recommended by the Gray Com
mission to the effect that parents who objected to sending their
children to an integrated school shall receive a state grant of $ 2 5 0
per pupil per year to help defray the cost of a private school.
Now the great day came for the admission of the four Negroes to
Stratford Junior High School, February 2, 1959- For months prepara
tions had been made to avoid any embarrassing incidents. The four
L
�- 7 Negroes had been drilled, in their proper attitude towards tne white
students and conversely the white students had been drilled in their
behavior. Parties had been given for the Negroes and their new class
mates so that when they entered school they would-be among friends.
White helmetea police were present everywhere armed with riot equip
ment . Ho unauthorized person was allowed to enter the school grounds.
Shortly before school opened the four Negroes walked in and were as
signed to their classes. And so the school day passed like any other
school day, with but one incident to mar its serenity. A woman
drove down to the school to witness the excitement and possible riot
ing. She was staring so hard at the campus she ran into a tree! Since
that memorable day, more Arlington schools have been desegregated.
On March 16, 1 9 6 1 , the Arlington School Board assumed again the
duties of pupil placement formerly exercised by the State Pupil Place
ment Board. A general rule was then adopted providing that pupils
should attend their neighborhood schools, irrespective of race.
The Integration of Arlington's public schools has been a slow
process. This has had one big advantage in that difficulties could be
ironed out as they arose. Take the case of the Hoffman-Boston all
Negro School. Most of the school was taken up by the Junior High
grades. Senior High pupils were also taught there but the numbers
were small, the space was limited, and the equipment for science
courses was inadequate. In the fall of 1 9 6 3 , the School Board voted
unanimously to transfer the Senior High pupils to other integrated
schools in the County.
It was feared however, thfet the Negroes,
when integrated would find it hard to keep up with their white
classmates because of their inferior training. Inasmuch as the change
of schools was not to take place till the fall
1964, the Arlini ’ •.
••
•
Council on Human Relations together with the local P. T. A. and other
groups arranged to provide tutors and an evening study hall for there
pupils. The propject extended from January through the month of May.
The average attendance was 40 except for the month of May when it fell
off to 10 or 15 pupils. Instruction was given in Mathematics,
Sciences, French, English, and Public Speaking.
November 1964
Dudley P. Babcock, Rec. Secty.
Arlington Council on
Human Relations
�/Jyyoy
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
RG 44, Records of the Arlington County League of Women Voters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Arlington Council on Human Relations, Story of Integration in Arlington, Virginia, November 1964
Description
An account of the resource
Report describing the desegregation of the following in Arlington: movie theaters; housing; Arlington Hospital; and public schools. 8 pages
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
RG 44, Records of the League of Women Voters of Arlington, Virginia, Inc.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Arlington Council on Human Relations
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1964-11
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
44_8_65_9
-
https://projectdaps.org/files/original/eac9db849a4eab9122479e88098bbc0e.pdf
48d64cb850ded9a7acaec8ed0864fa05
PDF Text
Text
League of Women Voters
X.
-2-
Arlington, Va., December 1955
League Principles and Agenda Items Which Authorize This Study
We have National, State and Local sanction for this study.
League principles are:
'*1.
"8.
"9.
The appropriate National
The principles of representative government and individual liberty
established in the Constitution of the United States.
A system of free public education which provides equal opportunity for
all.
Protection of minority groups against discrimination."
The State and Local items reads "A study of the effects of the Supreme Court
decision on the public school system of Virginia/Arlington, with emphasis on
problems inherent in its implementation, and with a view to carrying out the
appropriate role of the Leaguo."
II.
The Gray Commission Poport
The Gray Commission was appointed on August 30,. .1954 and instructed to examine the
effect of the U.S, Supremo Court decision and to make recommendations for state
action. On November 11, 1055 it made the report to the Governor which is summarized
here.
The Supreme Court is strongly criticized as abandoning all legal precedent and
basing its conclusions on the evidence of psychologists. "With this decision,
based upon such authority, we are now faced ... The Commission, realizing that
the problem before it is the gravest to confront the people of Virginia, in this
century, has not been willing to take hasty actions which might tend to add to
the damage already done to the school system by judicial decree.”
The public schools have been built up slowly and painfully. They have been built
on a segregated basis. Enormous progress has been made, both for Negroes and
Whites. "Without segregation, white children would still be largely taught in
private academies ... Public schools would have made no progress and Negro children
would have received little or no public education."
"This commission believes that separate facilities in our public schools are in the
best interest of both races ... and that compulsory integration should be resisted
by all proper means in our power."
This problem varies radically in different localities; therefore "we must leave
a large measure of autonomy to the localities even though that may result in the
closing of public schools." Local school boards should have wide discretion in
the "employment of teachers; the regulation or abandonment of transportation; the
operation or abandonment of cafeterias; the continuation or abandonment of
athletics and other extra-curricular activities; the maintenance of existing social
practices or the entire elimination from the schools of every activity but bare
instruction; the maintenance of co-education or separation by sex."
�League of Women Voters
-3-
Arlington, Va., December 1955
As tbs Gray Commission sees it, then, the problem is "continuing a public school
system and at the same time making provision for localities therein public schools
are abandoned and providing educational opportunities for children whose parents
will not send them to integrated schools."
Its solution is: (A) The amendment of Paragraph 141 of the Virginia constitution so
that public funds may be appropriated "for payments of tuition, institutional fees
and other expenses of students who may desire to attend private schools."
(B) The
enactment of legislation providing:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
"That school boards be authorized to assign pupils to particular schools and
to provide for appeals in certain instances."
"That no child be required to attend an integrated school."
That school boards may decide whether or not to provide transportation to
schools, public and private.
That school boards have the authority to assign teachers to a particular school
and that, in this respect, the school superintendants may not act without the
consent of the board.
That localities be authorized to raise money and to receive state aid for
educational purposes. In those localities where no public schools are operated
there should be an educational levy, limited in the same manner as public
school levies, to be expended for tuition grants and possibly for transportation
costs. These localities should also receive their share of state funds for
this purpose.
That school budgets be required to include sufficient amounts for the payment of
tuition grants and (in some cases) transportation. Any child whose parents
object to an integrated school shall be given a tuition grant - "in no event
would such grant exceed the total cost of operation per pupil in average daily
attendance in the public schools for the locality making such grant as
determined for the preceding school year by the superintendent." "And that the
State Board of Education be empowered to waive certain conditions in the
distribution of state funds."
That provision be made for the reimbursement by the 3tate of half of any
additional costs which may be incurred in payment of tuition grants.
That school boards be authorized to expend funds earmarked for public school
purposes (excluding those for capital outlay and tax debt) for tuition grants
without authority from the tax-levying body.
That counsel be employed by local school boards to defend their actions and
that all expenses so incurred be paid from the local treasury.
That the Virginia Supplemental BetirenEnt Act be broadened to include public
school teachers who want to teach in private schools established to maintain
segregation.
That the Attorney General's office be expanded to enable it to give the advice
and legal assistance to local boards which will become necessary with their
new responsibilities and with the "vast number of rules and regulations."
That sections of the Virginia Code be amended as follows:
Local school boards should be authorized but not required to maintain
public schools for a period of at least nine months in each year. If this
period is less than nine months, there should be no loss in state funds.
"The section of the Code requiring segregated schools has been rendered
void by the Supreme Court of the United States and should be repealed."
"The section of the Code requiring cities to maintain a system of public
schools should be repealed since it duplicates another provision of the Code."
�League of Women Voters
-4-
Arlington, Va., December 1955
"Subsequent to the Constitutional Convention the commission will be prepared to
submit specific bills carrying out these proposals."
Appendix I - This is the preliminary report filed by the Gray Commission. It is the
feeling of the Commission that its hearings, held on November 15, 1954, represented
accurately the views of the people of the entire state. "Not only did the majority
... feel that integration would lead to the destruction of the public school system
but some groups indicated that they preferred to see the public school system
abandoned if the only alternative was integration."
"the welfare of the public school system is based on the support of the people who
provide the revenues which maintain it, and unless that system is operated in
accordance with the convictions of the people who pay the costs, it cannot survive."
Appendix II - It is recommended that the State Board of Education declare that it
is the policy of the state to continue schools through the school year 1955-56 as
presently operated.
Appendix III - This appendix gives the recommended wording for the bill which the
Commission wants the special session of the Assembly to pass, submitting the question
of a Constitutional Convention to the voters.
Considerable stress is given to the fact that the convention will be empowered by
the people to consider and act upon the revisions and amendments specified in the
Act and no others.
Reasons for the Constitutional amendment are listed: private education of war
orphans, the industrial rehabilitation program, grants-in-aid of Negro graduate
students, scholarships for teaching and nursing, and "in order to insure educational
opportunities for those children who may not otherwise receive a public school
education due to the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the
school segregation cases."
The ballots in the referendum are to read as follows:
"The Act of the General Assembly submitting to the people the question below provides
that the elector is voting for or against a convention to which will be delegated
by the people only the limited powers of revising and amending the Constitution to
the extent that is necessary to accomplish the following purposes, and no other
powers.
"To permit the General Assembly and the governing bodies of the several counties,
cities and towns to appropriate funds for educational puiposes which may be expended
in furtherance of elementary, secondary, collegiate and graduate education of
Virginia students in nonsectarian public and private schools and institutions of
learning in addition to those owned or exclusively controlled by the State or any
such county, city or town.
"The Act also provides that the legal effect of a majority vote for a convention
will be that the people will delegate to it only the foregoing powers, except that
the convention will be empowered to ordain and proclaim said revisions and amend
ments adopted by it within the scope of said powers without submitting same to the
electors for approval, but the convention will not have the power to either consider
adopt or propose any other amendments or revisions.
�League of Women Voters
-5-
Arlington, Va., December 1955
"In the light of the foregoing information the question to be voted on is as follows
Shall there he a convention to revise the Constitution and amend the same?"
III.
Virginia Supreme Court Ruling on Payment of State Funds to Private Schools
Since 1930, Virginia has legally provided educational opportunities for the oiphans
of soldiers, sailors and marines who entered the military service from Virginia.
The law provides for the payment of matriculation fees, board and room and books and
supplies at any educational or training institution of collegiate or secondary grade
in th9 State approved by the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
In the case of Almond v. Day, decided November 7, 1955, the Virginia Supreme Court
of Appeals held these payments were in violation of Sec. 141 of the State Constitu
tion which states that "state appropriations are prohibited to schools or institu
tions of learning not owned or exclusively controlled by the State or some subdivi
sion thereof." The court stated that the fact that in the administration of the Act
the funds may be paid to the parent or guardian and not directly to the institutions
does not alter their underlying purpose and effect. "Tuition and institutional fees
go directly to the institutions and are its very life blood ... When we consider
the natural, reasonable and realistic effect of the ... payment of tuition, institu
tional fees and other designated expenses of eligible children who attend private
schools approved by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, we are forced to the
conclusion that it constitutes a direct and substantial aid to such institutions and
falls within the prohibition of Sec. 141 of our Constitution." The court went on to
say that if payments are made to sectarian schools, they would he, in addition, in
violation of the sections of the Virginia Constitution which guarantee religious
freedom and of the 14th amendment to the TJ.S. Constitution. The court said that if
it were to uphold these payments, the General Assembly then might divert public
funds to the support of a system of private schools which the Constitution now for
bids. If this is a desirable end, it should be done by amending the Constitution
and not by judicial legislation.
If the court had made a contrary decision the Gray Commission simply could have
recommended a system of state-wide private schools. Non it must recommend a change
in the constitution to accomplish the same thing. For the wording of See. 141, see
The Virginia Leaguer, December 1955.
IV.
Outline of Procedures for Amending the Virginia Constitution
1.
Special session of the legislature (Nov. 30). Hay call for a referendum on a
Constitutional Convention. This Assembly consists of manbers elected in
Nov. '53, and Senators elected in ’51. A simple majority is required for
decision. Noimal method of amending constitution is passage of amendment by
two successive legislatures (*56 and *58) and submission of amendment to
electorate in '58. The Constitution has been amended by a "limited" conven
tion only once in the last 50 years (1945).
2.
Referendum (probably January). Ballot proposed by Gray Commission will specify
tint Convention has limited powers to amend. See page 4 for specific wording.
�League of Women Voters
-
6-
Arlington, Va., December 1955
3.
Gereral Assembly (elected in *55) provides for holding election of delegates
to Constitutional Convention and decides on representation. In 1945 there
were 40 delegates, one from each Senatorial district.
4.
Delegates elected at special election. Opportunity for expression of views
limited by number of candidates (if there is more than one)*
5.
Convention meets (may be as soon as ten days after election).
amendment by simple majority.
6.
Amendment goes into effect by proclamation.
opportunity to vote on the amendment.
7.
Assembly enacts appropriate legislation at regular or special session.
Decides on
The voter will not have an
Additional notes on procedure:
1.
2.
3.
The procedure recommended by the Gray Commission may take as little as 4 months.
Qualifications of Delegates: Delegates shall file five days after the call
for the election, thirty days before the election if possible. Anyone can file
by submitting his name supported by a petition.
Qualifications of Voters: All qualified to vote in November ’55 may vote in
the special elections. Those who are not paid up on poll taxes may qualify by
paying for T53, *54 and *55 by December 13. (*55 poll taxes are due
December 5.) Registration will be closed for six days before the referendum
and before the election of delegates.
V.
The Local Picture
A "wait and see** attitude seems to be the present point of view of both the Arling
ton School Board and the advisory committee it set up last June to study local
integration problems. They point out that the report of the Gray Commission is
only a report, and there is no way of knowing what legislation, if any, will grow
out of it. The final legal action may be something quite different from anything
that has yet been considered. If the proposed amendment is adopted, and imple
mented by legislative action in the next session of the General Assembly, there
will be many complicated issues to be resolved, both state-wide and locally.
At the moment it appears that Arlington will be allowed to go ahead with an inte
grated program if it wishes. There would probably be a minimum of real integration
since the Negro school population comprises less than ten percent of the total, and
is fairly well concentrated in two residential areas. There are about 100 junior
and senior high school pupils who could easily be absorbed. What steps would be
taken to insure segregated schools at all levels for those who want them is not
clear at the moment.
VI.
Miscellaneous Questions Raised by the Gray Commission Report
1.
Is there any guarantee that a limited constitutional convention will consider
only the one item for which it was called?
�League of ’' a t n Voters
.fte
-7-
Arlington, Va., December 1955
A.
The Constitution does not specifically provide for a limited Convention.
It will be up to the Assembly members to restrict themselves to the one bill.
Past special sessions have restricted themselves by resolving to consider only
bills submitted by the Governor or those introduced with unanimous consent.
Governor Stanley was reported by the press as reserving comment when reporters
asked if he would stick closely to the details of the Gray recommendations, or
whether he might ultimately recommend either more or less to the Assembly than
the report proposed.
2.
If a locality abandons public schools what is the effect of Sec. 129 of the
Constitution which provides that the State shall maintain public schools?
The Gray Commission apparently feels that supplying state funds for tuition
grants fulfills Sec. 129.
A.
5.
A.
What disposition will be made of public school buildings?
School buildings and sites are owned by the localities. It is not clear what
restrictions there may be on their di^position and use, but the U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals in the cases Davison v. Mayor and City of Baltimore and
Lonesome v. Maxwell has ruled that the State could not lease its parks for
segregated use. The leasing of school buildings may fall under the same
decision.
4.
A.
Will the Supreme Court accept the proposals of the Gray Commission?
Only the Supreme Court can answer this. It seems fairly certain that the
Supreme Court will reject any solution where there are no public schools and
where public funds are used to maintain a "private" system of segregated
schools. However, the situation in a school system which is integrated and
provides subsidies for pupils of segregated schools is not so clear.
5.
A.
What is the legality of Sec. 140 - "Mixed schools prohibited. White and Negro
children shall not be taught in the same school."
The Gray Commission states that this section of the Virginia Code has been
rendered void by the U.S. Supreme Court and should he repealed. Other
authorities have not publicly committed themselves.
6.
A.
Can the Supreme Court require the state to furnish public education?
No.
7.
Will the state or the localities oontinue to receive Federal funds if segrega
tion is maintained?
At present some Federal funds are given to support segregated activities and
some are not. It depends on Congressional and/or Administrative action.
A.
8.
A.
9.
A.
What effect will the Gray Commission proposals have on the State Board of
Educat ion?
Its authority will be greatly weakened, specifically in the matter of the length
of school tern. The proposals do not provide for any standards for private
schools except that they be segregated.
What effect do these proposals have on teachers’ retirement?
Public school teachers will continue in the state retirement system if they
transfer to schools which are established after the proposals are enacted.
�League of Women Voters
-
8-
Arlington, Va., December 1955
10.
A.
What local action is required in order to integrate the schools?
The local School Board makes the decision to integrate.
11.
A.
If a locality integrates its schools are state funds still available?
Yes.
12.
Whfat would it cost to amend Sec. 141 of the Virginia Constitution as the Gray
Commission recommends (through a Constitutional Convention)?
No figures are available. The Richmond-Times Dispatch says, "However long it
lasts, the special session probably will cost the taxpayers something close to
£>100,000. Members are entitled to a minimum of 30 days' pay at 318 per day,
or $540, even if the session lasts only two or three days. Other expenses for
travel costs, printing, clerks, stenographers, pages and similar personnel,
will run up the total." This is only part of the final bill. There will also
be the cost of two elections, the cost of the Constitutional Convention itself,
and finally one or two meetings of the General Assembly (one might dovetail
with the regular session).
A.
PLEASE NOTE:
The above answers represent our best judgment, not legal opinion.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
RG 44, Records of the Arlington County League of Women Voters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
League of Women Voters December 1955 Study Regarding the Gray Commission Report
Description
An account of the resource
A study produced by the Arlington Chapter of the League of Women Voters regarding the Gray Commission Report and the Virginia Supreme Court Ruling on Payment of State Funds to Private Schools. 7 pages total, only pages 2-8 are included.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
RG 44, Records of the League of Women Voters of Arlington, Virginia, Inc.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
League of Women Voters, Arlington Chapter
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1955-12
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
44_8_65_2
-
https://projectdaps.org/files/original/e8790110bcd29876669b9b5df2fb77c9.pdf
3dd844f67c98c5f75a6cb79bb551cee9
PDF Text
Text
I
1950
67-58
%
per pupil
expenditures
p6r year
Negro
pep.
Arlington
School tax
oente
per $100
actual value
% of
■ ohool fui
fro m
the etat<
4.9
$406
61
20
Alexandria
12.4
367
62
23
Norfolk
29.7
253
62
31
Newport News
43.2
252
58
36
Rich m o n d
38.4
300
70
28
Fl o y d county
4.3
212
43
65
Front R o y a l
8
220
42
50
44.6
232
63
55
234
45
40
PrincO Edward
Charlottesville
18.2
t
i
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
RG 44, Records of the Arlington County League of Women Voters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Table of Virginia Counties
Description
An account of the resource
Table showing Virginia counties and information on population, expenditures per pupil, school taxes, and percent of school funding from the state. ND
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
RG 44, Records of the League of Women Voters of Arlington, Virginia, Inc.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Unknown
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
No date
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
44_8_65_1