8 20 146 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/1c933a7cf675bd3f5897f29353293945.pdf bdfbae8174052d7a3e0a4561e4ec7789 PDF Text Text COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Richmond SUPTSo MEMO. NO* 3029 June 73 1 9 h % TO; The Division Superintendent FROMs Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction You received the opinion of the Attorney General and Statement of the State Board of Education regarding the recent Supreme Court decision. You are also aware of the Statement of Governor Stanley calling for the operation of our public schools at present and for the session 195 -55 on the basis of segregation in accordance with U Section l j 0 of the Constitution* l. I am confident you recognize it as your duty and mine, as those charged with the responsibility for administering our public schools, to fully respect this authority. I am confident, also, that your local school boards with the State Board of Education will conform as they may give consideration to any modification of their existing policies. To me this is fundamental and essential until such time as we may receive decrees from the Supreme Court and advice from the Attorney General and the Governor of Virginia. To this end I solicit your wholehearted cooperation. It seems wise that I make the following statement regarding the school construction program. There has been no change in the policies of the State Board of Education regarding school building construction; the amount of State money to which each locality is entitled has been allotted, and the need for school facilities in many localities remains serious. It is my opinion that the better the facilities the less complicated will be the solution regardless of the final decree of the Court. Each community presents a different problem. M y recommendation is that each locality consider the problem in view of existing conditions. If you need the facility, have the proposed facility located properly, have or can arrange for financing, and have an agreement with your local school board, I recommend that you proceed without delay. If you should need assistance from the State Department of Education in modifying your previous decision, we stand ready and anxious to cooperate. I can also assure you of the earnest consideration of the State Board of Education. In the meantime it will be most helpful if you will submit the information on the basis requested in Supts. Memo. No. 3022 - Survey of School Building Needs. I am aware of the grave concern of many prompted by the decision of the Court and conscious of the fact that neither Court decisions nor Legislative Acts change the customs and beliefs of people. The nature of the final decree will determine the degree of difficulty involved in making the necessary changes in the administration of our public schools. In the meantime, the problem must receive the calm/ 'deliberate, forthright and prayerful consideration of all Virginians. It is the duty and, I know, the desire of those charged with the responsibility for administration to participate fully. �- 2- We are aware that problems are not solved by sudden decisions. Man's destiny has been and will continue to be shaped by what he believes to be right and by what he finally desires, not by hasty and faulty action.. The ultimate solution will come in varying degrees « The degree of difficulty will > vary with the problems as they present themselves in each school division of the State. Definite procedures cannot culminate until such time as we have knowledge of the final decree. In the meantime, however, the situation warrants our best thought. I will, as early as feasible, ask for a meeting of the Superintendent's Advisory Council to give me the benefit of their counsel. By this means I will have their sound advice in assuming to the best of m y ability the responsibilities of this office. This will also give me the opportunity to inform you through the Council of the present thoughts of the State Board of Education and the State Department. As we give thought to the matter we must consider ways and means of strengthening rather than weakening our public schools. It seems extremely wise, also, that we all be informed thoroughly of the situation in the State and in each locality and that we avoid public statements offering panaceas for the solution of the problem which will not clearly present itself until we are informed of the final decree of the Court. I will greatly appreciate your cooperation. DJH/p � 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 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. 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 Commonwealth of Virginia, State Board of Education, Richmond, Superintendents Memo No. 3029 June 7, 1954 Description An account of the resource Memo from Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia to the Division Superintendent regarding the opinion of the Attorney General and the Statement of the State Board of Education for the continuation of Section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s 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. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-7 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_11 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/49554811bedc419bb3599d9488e1970e.pdf 79bf154d4064c6dd6c133a17a7069b6d PDF Text Text COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Office of THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Richmond. May 2J, Honorable Blake T. Newton, President, State Board of Education, Hague, Virginia, M y dear Mr. Newton; The State Board of Education at its session on this date propounded the following inquiry upon which it has requested my opinion: In view of the opinion handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States on May 17 in the case of Dorothy E. Davis, et al.. Appellants, - V - County School Board of Prince Edward County, Virginia, et al,, what is the legal vitality and efficacy of section 1*40 of the Constitution of Virginia, and the statute enacted pursuant thereto, providing, in substance, that white and colored children shall not be taught in the same school? I am sure the Board is familiar with the opinion of the Supreme Court is, this case. In its opinion, the Court said; !We conclude that in the field of public education the ! doctrine of “separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. * * * l t As an integral part of the Court's conclusion, the following language was employed; "Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this decision, and because of the great variety of local conditions, the formulation of decrees in these cases presents problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the considera*tion of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question - the constitutionality of segregation in public education. We have now announced that such segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we may have the full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, the cases will be restored to the docket, and the parties are requested to present further argument on questions 4 and 5 previously propounded by the Court for the reargument this term. * * •" Question U referred to by the Court is as follows: "Assuming it is decided that segregation in public schools violates the Fourteenth Amendment �2. "(a) would a decree necessarily follow providing that, within the limits set by normal geographic school districting, Negro children should forthwith be admitted to schools of their choice, or "(b) may this Court, in the exercise of its equity powers, permit an effective gradual adjustment to be broughtabout from existing segregated systems to a system not based on color distinctions?” Question 5 is not deemed material in answering your inquiry. While the basic issue before the Court has been determined, yet, the Court has ordered the case restored to the docket and has not entered, and will not enter, a final decree adjudicating the respective rights of the parties litigant until further hearings and proceedings are had and held. Pending a final adjudication, it is my opinion that section 1*40 of the Constitution of Virginia, and the statute of Virginia enacted pursuant thereto, remain intact and unimpaired, imbued with full legal vitality and efficacy. It is clearly manifest from the Court's opinion that it reserves judgment on the matter of final disposition of the cause before it until it could be further advised as to matters procedural relating to adjustment to the Court's opinion on the basic issue. You have also requested my opinion, in the event I conclude that our constitutional and statutory provisions retain vitality, as to whether the Stats Board of Education would be within its legal rights to direct the Division Superintendents throughout the State to proceed with plans for the coming school year on the same basis as have heretofore obtained. It is my opinion that the Board would have full legal authority to issus such directives, in view of the Court's retention of the question as to how and when the Court's opinion on the basic question is to be implemented. Sincerely yours, /s/ J. LINDSAY AIMOND, JE. J. Lindsay Almond, Jr., Attorney General. 10-20 COPY � 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 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. 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 Commonwealth of Virginia, Office of the Attorney General, Richmond May 27, 1954 Description An account of the resource Copy of a letter from Virginia Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond, Jr. to Blake T. Newton, President of the State Board of Education, regarding the legal vitality and efficacy of Section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J. Lindsay Almond, Virginia Attorney General Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s 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. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-5-27 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_10 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/648d9d028000db949b517dd94e0a4744.pdf 0a93d25a6054b889e684ee6acbf428d7 PDF Text Text COMMDNWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION RICHMOND SUPTS. MEMO. NO. May 23, I95U 3025 TO: Division Superintendents and Chairmen of Local School Boards FROM: Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction SUBJECT: Ruling of Attorney General of Virginia - Opinion of Supreme Court of the United States. I am enclosing a copy of an opinion rendered by the Attorney General in reply to an inquiry propounded to him by the State Board of Education at its meeting Thursday, May 27, I95H. I also quote below the action of the State Board of Education following receipt of the opinion: "In view of the opinion of the Attorney General on this day rendered, to which we adhere, the Board proclaims the following policy: "The local Boards of Education are hereby advised to proceed as at present and for the school session 195** - 55 to operate the public schools of this State on the same basis as they are now being operated and as heretofore obtained." �COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION RICHMOND SUPT3. IQ-10. NO. 3025 May 23, 1954 TOi Division Superintendents anil Ciiairmen of Local School Boards FROM: Dowell J. Howard. Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia SUBJECT! Ruling of Attorney General of Virginia— -Opinion of Supreme Court of the United States, I am enclosing a copy of an opinion rendered by the Attorney General in reply to an inquiry propounded to him by the State Board of Education at its meeting Thursday, b.y 27, 1954. Ruling by Virginia Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond, ir., May 27, 1954 While the basic iss- d before the Court has been determined, yet, the Court has ordered the case rostered to the docket and has not entered, end will not enter, a final decree adjudicating the respective rights of i.be parties litigant until further hearings aid proceedings are had and held., Ponding a final adjudication, it Is my opinion that section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia, and. the statute of Virginia enacted pursuant thereto, remain intact and unimpaired, imbued with full logal vitality and efficacy, I" is clearly manifest from the Court's opinion that it reserves , judgment on the matter of final, disposition of the causa before it until it could be further advised as to matters procedural relating to adjustment to the Court's opinion on the basic issue. You have also requested my opinion, in the event I conclude that our constitutional tic statutory provisions retain vitality, as to whether the State Board of Education would be within its legal rights to direct the division Superintendents throughout the State to proceed with plans for the coning school year on the same basis as have heretofore obtained. If is my to issue question qx.es tion opinion that the Board would have full legal authority such directives, in view of the Court’s retention of the as to how end when the Court's opinion on the basic is to be implemented. (See ne:rt page) �Supts. Memo Ho. 3025 - continued, I also quote below the action of the State Board of Education following receipt of the opinions "In view of the opinion of the Attorney General on this day rendered, to which we adhere, the Board proclaims the follow ing policys The local Boards of Education are hereby advised to proceed as at present and for the school session 1954-55 to operate the public schools of this State on the same basis as they are new being operated and as heretofore obtained." � 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 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. 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 Commonwealth of Virginia, State Board of Education, Richmond, Superintendent's Memo No. 3025 May 23, 1954 Description An account of the resource Memo from Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia to Division Superintendents and Chairmen of Local School Boards regarding the Ruling of the Attorney General of Virginia on the Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States. 3 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s 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. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-5-23 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_7 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/f3113a48cbc55083127f70dc2393de73.pdf da6e011de3cd2f885940ccc6f6543ff4 PDF Text Text Fr-om the "Richmond News Leader" of Mondays May 17, 1954. TEXT OF HIGH COURT RULING ON SCHOOL SEGREGATION Washington, May 17 - (AP) - The text of the Supreme Court's decision in the racial segregation cases, read by Chief Justice Warrens These cases come to us from the State of Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia and Delaware, They are premised on different facts and different local conditions, but a common legal question justifies their consideration together in this consolidated opinion. In each of the eases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representa­ tives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a non-segregated basis. In each instance, they had been denied admission to schools attendedby white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race. This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment, In each of the oases other than the Delaware ease, a three-judge Federal District Court denied relief to the plaintiffs on the so-called "separate but equal" doctrine announced by this court in Plessy v, Ferguson, 163 United States 537, Under that doctrine, equality of treatment is accorded when the races are provided substantially equal facilities, even though these facilities be separate. In the Delaware case, the Supreme Court of Delaware adhered to that doctrine, but ordered that the plaintiffs be admitted to the white schools because of their superiority to the Negro schools. Said Deprived The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not "equal." and cannot be made "equal," and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws. Because of the obvious importance of the question presented, the court took jurisdiction. Argument was heard in the 1952 term, and rs-argument was heard this term on certain questions propounded by the court, Beargument was largely devoted to the circumstances surrounding the adoption of the Fourteenth Anendment in 1868, It covered exhaustively consideration of the amendment in Congress, ratification by the States, then existing practices in racial segregation, and the views of proponents and opponents of the amendment. This discussion and our own investigation convince us that, although these sources cast some light, it is not enough to resolve the problem with which we are faced. At best, they are inconclusive. The most avid proponents of the postwar amendments undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among "all persons born or naturalized in the United States," Their opponents, just as certainly, were antagonistic bo both the letter and the spirit of the amendments and wished them to have the most limited effect. What others in Congress and the State Legislature had in mind cannot be determined with any degree of certainty. An additional reason for the inclusive nature of the amendment's history, with respect to segregated schools, is the status of public education at that time* In the South, the movement toward free common schools, supported by general taxation, had not yet taken hold. Education of white children was largely in the hands of private groups. Education of Negroes was almost nonexistent, and practically all of the race was illiterate. In fact, any education of Negroes was forbidden by �Text of High Court Ruling on School Segregation - 2 , law in some States. Today, in contrast, many Negroes hare achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in the business and professional world. It is true that public education has already ddvaneed further in the North, but the effect of the amendment on Northern States was generally ignored in the congressional debates. Even in the North, the conditions of public educa­ tion did not approximate those existing today. The curriculum was usually rudi­ mentary! ungraded schools were common in rural areas 5 the school term was but three months a year in many States; and compulsory school attendance was virtually un­ known, As a consequence, it is not surprising that there should be so little in the history of the Fourteenth Amendment relating to its intended effect on public education. Six Cases In the first cases in this court construing the Fourteenth Amendment, decided shortly after its adoption, the court interpreted it as proscribing all Stateimposed discriminations against the Negro race. The doctrine of "separate but equal® did not make its appearance in this court until 1896 in the case of Plessy v, Ferguson, supra, involving not education but transportation, American courts have since labored with the doctrine for over half a century. In this court, there have been six eases involving the "separate but equal" doctrine in the field of public education. In Gumming v. County Board of Education, 175 T » S, 528, and Gong turn v. J Rice, 275 U, S„ 78, the validity of the doctrine itself was not challenged. In more recent cases, all on the graduate school level., inequality was found in that specific benefits enjoyed by white students were denied to Negro students of the same educational qualifications, Missouri ex rel, Gaines v, Canada, 305 U, S, 377| S&puel v, Oklahoma, 332 U. S. 631| Sweatt v. Painter, 339 0. S, 629; Mclaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U, S, 6.37, In none of these cases was it necessary to re-examine the doctrine to grant relief to the Negro plaintiff. And in Sweatt v„ Painter, supra, the court expressly reserved decision on the question whether Plessy Ferguson should be held .'inapplicable to public education. In the instant cases, the question is directly presented. Here, uitlike Sweatt v. Painter, there are findings below that the Negro and white schools involved have been equalized, or are being equalized with respect to buildings, curricula, qualification and salaries of teachers and other "tangible" factors. Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools involved in each of the cases. We must look instead to the effect of segregation itself on public education. In approaching this problem, we cannot turn the clock back to 1868 when the amendment was adopted, or even to 1896 when Plessy v, Ferguson was written. We must consider public education in the light of its full development and its present place in American life throughout the nation. Only in this way can it be determined if segregation in public schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws. Biggest Function Today, education is perhaps the most important function of State and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for �Text of High Court Ruling on School Segregation ~ 3 . education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the State has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. We come then to the question presented2 Does segregation of children in public schools, solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does0 In Sweatt v. Painter, supra, in finding that a segregated law school for Negroes could not provide them equal educational opportunities, this court relied in large part on '"those qualifies which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness in a law school." In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra, the court, in requiring that a Negro admitted to a white graduate school be treated like all other students, again resorted to intangible considerations2 his ability to study, engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general to learn his profession." Such considerations apply with added force to children in grade and high schools. To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone. The effect of this separation on their educational opportunities was well stated by a finding in the Kansas case by a court which nevertheless felt compelled to rule against the Negro plaintiffs? "Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law| for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the Negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to retard the educational and mental development of Negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racially integrated school system." Whatever may have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern authority. Any language in Plessy v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is rejected. We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This disposition makes unnecessary any discussion whether such segregation also violates the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. �Text of High Court Ruling on School Segreation - 4. Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this decision, and because of the great variety of local conditions, the formulation of decrees in these cases presents problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the consideration of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question— the constitutionality of segregation in public education. We have now announced that such segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we may have the full assistance o£ the parties in formulating decrees, the cases will be restored to the docket, and the parties are requested to present further argument on questions 4 and 5 previously propounded by the court for the reargument this term. The Attorney-General of the United States is again invited to participate. The Attomeys-General of the States requiring or permitting segregation in public education will also be permitted to appear as amici curiae upon request to do so by Sept. 15, 1954, and submission of briefs by Oct. 1, 1954. It is so ordered. (End of Supreme Court decision) Memorandums Questions 4 and 5, mentioned in the last paragraph of the idSBision above, were set up by the Supreme Court before the anti-segregation ruling. Questions 4 and 5 l/ ares If segregation were held unconstitutional, should the Court decree that within limits set by normal geographic school districting, Negro children forthwith should be admitted to schools of their choice, or might the Court exercise its powers for a gradual adjustment from segregated to ncnsegregated schools? Should the Court formulate detailed decrees, what specific issues should such decrees reach, should the court appoint a special master to hear evidence and recommend specific terms for the decrees, cr should the Court send the problem back to the lower courts with directions to frame decrees to put into effect the will of the high tribunal? 1/ Summarized by The Washington Post and Times Herald for May 18, 1954. � 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 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. 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 Text of High Court Ruling on School Segregation, May 17, 1954 Description An account of the resource Washington, May 17 - (AP) - The text of the Supreme Court's decision in the racial segregation cases, read by Chief Justice Warren. 4 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource unknown Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s 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. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-5-17 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_3 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/048a137650d9214d0a038ebe80767362.pdf ef90ecb531d2c4d86c2491120fd1c494 PDF Text Text Leading Ed5.tor.-ial from The Ksv; York Times May 18, 1954- "ALL GOD'S CHILLIIN" The Supreme Court took a long and careful time to arrive at the unanimous decision re id yesterday by Chiei? Justice barren that "segregation of children in the public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities end other 5 tangible! factors nay be equal, deprives the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities," But the decision reached was inevitable in the year 1954 regardless of what may have been the case in 1868, when the Four­ teenth Amendment was adopted, or in 1896, when the "separate but equal" doctrine uas laid down in the case of flossy v. Ferguson, In the case under consideration the facilities offered to Negro children appeared to be equal, or were to be made equal, "with respect to buildings, curricula, qualifications end salaries of ojachers and other 'tangible1 factors," to those available to white children. The question, therefore, was more fundamental than in any previous case. It was whether Negro children segregated solely on tie basis of race, even though offered equal facilities, were thereby deprived of equil educational opportunities. The court holds that such segregation does have ” i detrimental effect upon the colored children," that it had "a tendency to rstrrd (theirj) educational and mental development «** and to deprive them of som of the benefits they would receive in a racially integrated school system," The eonrt, speaking thr. igh Chief Jus tice Warren, therefore concludes that "separate educational facil5.ti.rs .-re inherently unequal," that the plaintiffs and o'ih' rs similarly situated "are by reason of the segregation complained of deprived c ' - he equal protection of the lavs guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment," The due process clause is not involved. It is not needed. What the court is saying, is its formal, out, not complicated style, is a part c:' ihat Eugene O'Neill said in a play called "All God's Ch3.11un Got Wings." It in true, of course, that the court is not talking of that sort of .equality" which procucos inter-racial marriages. It is not talking of a octal system at all. It i3 talking of a system of human rights which 5 s foreshadowed in the second . p; n graph of the Declaration of independence, which stated "that all. men are crested equal." Mr. Jefferson and the others who ere responsible for the Declara­ t o r did not intend to say that all men are squally intelligent, equally good or eiual in height or weight. They meant to say that men were, and ought to be, equal before the lrw. If men are equal, children are equal, too. There is an oven greater necessity in the case of collaron, whose opportunities to advance them­ selves and t s be useful to the community may bo lost if they do not have the right tc be educated. No one ;an deny that the mingling of the races in the schools of the seventeen slates which have required rep-opvtion and the three states which have permitted io will creawe problems. The fo' -ways in Southern communities will have to be aJapred to now conditions if while ond egre children, together with white and Nogr> teacher s, are to enjoy not only equal facilities but the same facilities in tie same ichools. The Constitution and tie Bill of Rights are at times hard �» Editorial, Uew York Tines, May IS, 1954 - 2, :ias era. The court has recognized these difficulties by withholding a decree and 37 nvitlng "the full assistance of tho parties in formulating decrees." The sas s are therefore restored to the docket .aid the Attorney General, of the United its es and -;he Attorneys General of the stales requiring or permitting segregation .a ublic ee.ueation will be permitted to appear before the court next fall. There ;il. be somi delay before orders issue and it may be that petitions for rehearing and modification will take up a good deal, of time. These matters cannot be hurried. A constitutional principle inherent in the Declaration of Independence and iev r entirely forgotten, even in the days of human slavery, has, however, been •es ated. ' M s nation is often criticized for its treatment of racial minorities, -and particularly of the Negro. There have been / - this criticism. Little r >7 . ittls, however, in the folic customs and in such decisions as the one rendered yesterday, ve move toward a more perfect democracy, vlhen some hostile propagandist rises in Mo; cow or Peiping to accuse us of being a class society vie can if we vis! recite the courageous words of yesterday's opinion. The highest court in ■ve land, the guardian of our national sorsoience, has reaffirmed its faith— . i the undj ing American faith— in the equality of all men and all children before 'd -le law. �2 - " � 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 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. 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 Leading Editorial from The New York Times May 18, 1954 "All God's Chillun" Description An account of the resource Typed editorial letter regarding the Supreme Court decision holding public school segregation to be unconstitutional as in line with the ideal of 'equality under the law', the Declaration of Independence, and the 14th amendment. 3 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource unknown Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s 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. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-5-18 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_1 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/4827a71e530de79ee4eb6fae6628477b.pdf de69a1388a6dd0f86f349cbf646df8be PDF Text Text THE AMERICAN NATIONALIST COURT DECREES MONGRELIZATION NAACP Pushes Plan For Bringing Total Mongrelization To The South LOS ANGELES—Nowhere in America is the cult of “ brotherhood” taken more seriously than in California, where from kindergarten on the child Is continuously taught the blessings of racial equality and the horrors of “ bigotry” This year some of the visible results of this . “ tolerance” propaganda were especially apparent to the parents of Los Angeles when the tax-supported Los Angeles City College, largest junior college In the U.S., celebrated its 25th anniversary. Chosen as queen of the silver anniversary event was Barbara Lee Cooke, an attractive white co-ed. The “ king” fornia and a life-long advocate of , however, was a Negro as black as race-mixing. Warren’ new mis­ s the ace of spades. “ Brotherhood” sion, it would seem, is to extend , quite obviously, was beginning to jCalifornia's racerm ix'ng p rogra m pay off in Los Angeles. . . to all the 48 states. . . Although several states, includ­ A LESSON Actually, the disgraceful spec­ ing California, have long main­ tained interracial schools, 21 states tacle at Los Angeles City College and the District of Columbia have should provide a lesson not only continued to segregate Negroes to the parents of Los Angeles and whites. It is on these states (many of whom originally came s from the deep South) but to par­ that the real impact of the Court’ radical decision will fall, because ents everywhere. P is this: if they contain a substantial major­ white children are educated with ity of the nation’ entire Negro s Negroes, sent to church with them, population. The p o p u l a t i o n of thrown into constant and intimate Mississippi, for example, is about social contact with them, and in addition are continuously impres­ half white and half Negro. In the District of Columbia, which Eisen­ sed with the virtues of racial hower has fatuously designated as equality, then such things as this a “ pilot model” for the various are inevitable. Young people who states to emulate, 57% of the stu­ are taught all their lives that it dents enrolled in public schools is wicked to discriminate between are Negro while only 43% are black and white cannot be blamed white. too much if they fail to discrim­ ULTIMATE EFFECT inate between a black “ king”and The ultimate effect of the Su­ a white queen for their school preme court’ ruling against seg­ s anniversary, nor, for that mattter, if they fail to discriminate be­ regated schools will not, however, be apparent for many years. The tween a white or black marriage process of mixing whites and Ne­ partner. . . groes in the classroom may, as a SEGREGATION CASE matter of fact, be relatively slow Ironically, the episode at Los in many cases. Angeles City College occurred on The real damage will be done the eve of the Supreme Court’ s on the psychological front. The child will be conditioned at first to accept the mere presence of Negro students in the classroom. Later he will be taught that all races are -equal in ability and intellectual capacity and that there is no essential difference between the various racial groups. He will be inoculated against the evils of “ bias”and “ prejudice", and train­ ed to look upon any manifestation of racial pride or consciousness as anti-social, if not criminal. . . BRAINWASH Only when this process of brain­ washing is far enough along will the student be introduced to the joys of interracial social activities. Needless to say, it is only a step from there to interracial lovemaking and marriage, and as a matter of fact the legal barriers against interracial marriages have already been obliterated in some This interracial cake-cutting ceremony was states. And if all this seems far­ the highlight of the 25th Silver Anniversary fetched and over imaginative, it celebration at Los Angeles City College. should be remembered that this An entire generation o f California’ young s people have been brain-washed with "tol­ very thing has already occurred erance" and "brotherhood" propaganda in in some states, as the photographs preparation for this sort of thing. of Los Angeles City College will d e c i s i o n o u t l a w i n g segregated attest. . . schools. And fittingly enough, the N.A.A.C.P. Court’ anti-segregation decision s In this connection it would be was read by chief-justice Earl well to give some attention to the Warren, former governor of Cali­ National Association for the Ad- Shown here Is a preview of what Supreme Court's anti-segregation ruling mately means for parents everywhere. above event occurred recently when the ulti­ The the v a n c e m e n t of C o l o r e d People (NAACP) which in the main was responsible for bringing about the school s e g r e g a t i o n ruling. The NAACP b r o u g h t f o u r separate suits challenging the legality of segregated schools and it was on the basis of this action that the Court rendered its startling deci­ sion outlawing segregated schools. SILENT REVOLUTION This, incidentally, is but the latest of a series of court victories achieved by the radical, trouble­ making NAACP — victories which have brought about a “ silent revo­ lution” in race relations in this country within the past decade. The NAACP's most notable vic­ tory previous to the school segre­ gation case was, of course, the ruling under which the Supreme Court outlawed restrictive cove­ nants, thus making it possible for Negroes to force their way into previously all-white neighborhoods. The NAACP won another out­ standing victory when it obtained a Supreme Court ruling which compels Washington D.C. restau­ rants and hotels to cater to Ne­ groes—a precedent which is bound to be applied elsewhere as time goes on. In other Supreme Court cases the NAACP won decisions which insure Negroes the “ right”to at­ tend white universities and to ride with whites in public con­ veyances. . . There have been other similar cases. In each instance it was the NAACP bringing suit; in each case the Supreme Court either up­ held obscure and little known anti-segregation laws, or it out­ lawed statutes under which seg­ regation was enforced. OTHER VICTORIES The NAACP has also advanced the “ silent revolution” with the help of the executive branch of the government. Its greatest vic­ tory in this field was the "inte­ gration”of Negroes and whites in the Armed Forces. Under the “ in­ tegration” program—started under Truman and completed this year student-body at Los Angeles City C ollege chose a Negro "king” and a white queen to preside over the school's 25th Silver Anniversary celebration. . . by Eisenhower — all branches of the military have been mongrelized, with Negroes and whites serving t o g e t h e r in interracial units for the first time in Amer­ ican history. In many respects the NAACP regards this as its great­ est victory, surpassing even the school segregation case in impor­ tance. LITTLE F.E.P.C. Another NAACP victory, won with the help of organized Jewry, was the so-called “ little F.E.P.C.” which Eisenhower instituted last year. The “ little F.E.P.C." compels all government contractors to hire Negroes and members of other minority groups under threat of having their contracts cancelled, thus imposing over a substantial portion of American industry a de facto FEPC. . . THE PATTERN This, then, is the pattern of the “ silent revolution” silent, creep­ —a ing, insidious revolution w h i c h even at this moment is stealing upon this Republic like an assas­ sin in the night. And it should be noted that this revolution is not being promoted by legislation, but by executive decree and court de­ cision. Not a single one of the above described "civil rights”vic(Continued on next page) RACIAL SELF-RESPECT The advocates of racial mon­ grelization are again dusting off the canard about children hav­ ing no inborn racial conscious­ ness. They argue that children acquire racial awareness from their g r o wn u p s , who teach them racial “ prejudice” . . . They are right, too. Children ARE born without racial pre­ judice. They are also bom with­ out any prejudice against an open flame, a sharp instrument or a poisonous insect. The point is that children must be taught the difference b e t w e e n good and bad, right and wrong, black and white. . . —Frank L. Britton �THE AMERICAN NATIONALIST The Goal: M ongrelization Unlimited! (Continued from Page One) tories was obtained through an act of Congress. . . BEHIND N.A.A.C.P. This brings us to the question as to what the NAACP’ ultimate s objective really is. This is impor­ tant because we know from past experience the NAACP no sooner wins a concession than it makes new and even more extreme de­ mands, each victory is followed by new agitation. It is appropriate, therefore, to examine the NAACP’ s program in some detail. JEWISH LEADERSHIP Before doing that, however, it is necessary to correct a popular misconception as to the leader­ ship of the NAACP. Because it is not really and truly a Negro or­ ganization at all. The people be­ hind the NAACP are not Negroes, but Jews. This will come as a sur­ prise to some because the organi­ zation invariably uses Negroes as fronts for its activities, and the rank and file of its staff is Negro. Nevertheless t h e president of NAACP, and the real power in the o r g a n i z a t i o n , is the Jew, Arthur Spingarn. When this fact is digested the revolutionary pro­ gram of the NAACP becomes a little more comprehensible. . . THINGS TO COME The NAACP’ objective for the S next ten years is no secret. On the contrary it has been mapped out in detail and publicized under the slogan, "Free by 63” The “ . Free by 63” campaign was launched last March at a Washington D.C. meet­ ing with the blessings of Ike Eisenhower, who addressed t h e convention. The plan calls for the raising of a million dollars an­ nually for the next ten years and the announced goal is the total abolishment of racial segregation. THE GOAL In simple terms, the NAACP’ s goal is to “ integrate" Negroes into SUPREME COURT These are the nine left-wing political appointees who have decreed that your child must hereafter attend school with Negroes: To begin with there is Felix Frank­ furter, a Jew and an ardent defender of Sacco and Vanzetti—and a character witness for Alger Hiss during his per­ jury trial . . . There is Hugo Black, who twice accepted awards from the “ Southern Conference for Human W el­ fare"—one of the most notorious Com ­ munist-front organizations in existence . . . There is Stanley Reed, who, with Frankfurter, appeared as a voluntary character witness for Alger Hiss at his trial . . . There is the contemptible Robt. Jackson (the hangman of Nurem­ berg) who helped draw up the ex post facto “ war crimes" statutes at Nurem­ berg—and then proceeded to prosecute the helpless German leaders under those same laws . . . There is William Doug­ las, a fanatic leftist who tried desper­ ately to save the atom spies, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, from the electric chair with an extra-legal stay of execution last year . . . And finally there is the Negro-loving Earl Warren, who was not even a member of the Court when the segregation case was being argued, yet who used his leverage as Chief Justice to bring in a unanimous decision against segregation—-as he had obviously agreed to do before his appointment. . . These men, and these men alone, have "outlawed" segregated schools. S<\ Each year the student-body at the taxsupported Los Angeles City College, fargesi junior college in the U.S., puts on a “ Howdy H op "—a dance to welcome new students into campus society. In recent years these affairs have to an increasing extent assumed an interracial flavor, and the spectacle of a buck Negro dancing with a white coed has becom e a common­ place occurrence. Last September this interacial motif reached a sort of apex when a white gueen and a black “ king" were selected to reign over the “ Howdy Hop". And within a ten-month period Los Angeles City C ollege was the scene of two such interracial "coronations" in which colored “ kings" were paired off with white girls. And just as race-mixing has com e to Los Angeles, so it wilt com e to your community, to your school, perhaps to your family. The Supreme court has so decreed it. . . whi t e residential neighborhoods until the “ black belt”and the all white neighborhood are merged and thus cease to exist as such. The NAACP’ program is based s upon the premise that anti-dis­ crimination laws now in existence are ineffective so long as Negroes and whites continue to occupy separate residential communities. Under p r e s e n t conditions, the NAACP argues, Negro business establishments operate o n l y i n Negro communities, while white business places service only white districts. Negro civil servants—i.e. police, firemen, postal employees, etc. — generally are assigned to Negro areas, while white civil servants w o r k in white areas. Schools in Negro districts are attended exclusively by Negroes, and by the same rule whites often attend their own schools even in states where there is no official school segregation. Negro districts have their own social organiza­ tions and churches, as do the whites. Similarly, swimming pools, social affairs and sports activities tend to follow along the same lines, although there are many ex­ ceptions to the rule. Thus, accord­ ing to the NAACP’ reasoning, the s races will not freely mingle so long as they reside in different neighborhoods. This is the key to the entire situation. “ FREE BY ’ 68” The NAACP’ proposed solution, s therefore, is to mix up whites and Negroes until there is no such thing as a white or black residen­ tial area. Then, and only then, will Negroes and whites mix at school, at work, at church, in res­ taurants, at the swimming pool, at sports and in social activities. That, in essence, is the goal of the NAACP's “ Free by 63“campaign. the outlawing of restrictive covenants, the president’ “ s little F.E.P.C.” and other similar developments are but the first steps in this process. You have only to look again at the pic­ tures shown at the beginning of this article to see what the eventual out­ come will be. Somewhere along the line Americans are going to have to take a stand. They are going to have to take a stand or it will forever be too late. . . SIGNIFICANCE: It is impossible to review this particular situation without experiencing a chill of horror over what is happening. The Jewdominated NAACP has outlined what amounts to a declaration of revolu­ tion; a revolution more sweeping and profound in its total effect than any­ thing we have ever experienced in our history. The ultimate goal is to bastardize our civilization; to place Negroes in our schools, in our resi­ dential neighborhoods, in our social clubs, and even in our living rooms. NOTE: The above reprint originally ap­ peared in the June issue of the AMERICAN NATIONALIST. O N RACE-MIXING It has been said that "G o d made the white man, And God made the blaclc man, But the DEVIL made the mulatto" ... — Unknown You can help defeat the NAACP's pro­ gram for compulsory mongrelization in two ways: (1) You can distribute additional copies of this tract. (2) You can subscribe to the AMERICAN NATIONALIST, America's most forthright and fearless patriotic journal. THE AMERICAN NATIONALIST Box 301, Inglewood, Calif. FRANK L. BRITTON, Editor ~ □ One year $3.00 □ Two years $5.00 Name................................. Alvin Spingarn, president of NAACP This s Alvin Spingarn, the Jew who has headed the NAACP since 19 9 the fact has 3. been generally suppressed, but the NAACP is, and has been from its inception, a Jew-controlled organization. Street................................. They will never rest until every racial barrier and restriction has been destroyed. The school segregation ban Packets of this tract may be purchased at following rates: Packet of 1 for $1.00; 2 Packet of 30 for $2.00; Packet of 1 0 for 0 $5.00; Packet of 10 for $45.00. 00 , City................................... State.................................. � 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 Court Decrees Mongrelization Description An account of the resource In May of 1954, the students of Los Angeles City College elected a white Queen and Black King in honor of the college's 25th anniversary. A matter of days later, the Supreme Court handed down the Brown v. Board decision. Frank L. Britton, of Inglewood California, was the editor of "The American Nationalist," a bimonthly newspaper from which this broadside was reprinted. In it, Britton connects these two events as indicating that a trend of miscegenation-- which many white racists like Britton saw as an abomination. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Frank L. Britton Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1954 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 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. 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 The American Nationalist: Court Decrees Mongrelization Description An account of the resource Issue of the segregationist newsletter The American Nationalist from circa 1954. 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 Photograph Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RG07_SG1_S8_F19_The American Nationalist The Court Decrees