1 20 1089 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/762840b0d00ef1fcfcc73a853711b3e2.pdf 081813de723f6f211fe78f727bc0bd77 PDF Text Text N. A. A. CP L ega l .. D e f e n s e a n d E d u c a t io n a l Fund, inc. 10 Columbus Circle, New York 19, N. Y. JUd s o n 6-8397 April 15, 1958 Mrs. Barbara S. Marx 6897 North Washington Blvd. Arlington, Virginia Dear Mrs. Marx: Enclosed please find copy of decision in two consolidated cases which was rendered by a special three-judge federal court in Virginia on January 21, 1958. This is the case filed last year in the United States District Court in Richmond, Virginia in which the N.A.A.C.P. and this organization filed separate suits challenging five statutes passed by the General Assembly of Virginia which would make illegal practi cally all of our work in that state. A three judge court was convened and hearings were completed in October of last year. While the opinion and the dissenting opinion are both of considerable length, X thought you would be interested in reading them. We have a few additional copies. extra copies please let us know. If you need With all best wishes. Sine erely C o n t r ib u t io n s a r e d e d u c t i b l e f o r V . S. I n c o m e Tax P u rposes �X a t i o n a l O f fic e r s .... P r e s i d e n t .X a tion a l O f fic e r s ■ DR. A L L A N K N IG H T C H A L M E R S E ir e P r e sid en t H ON . F R A N C IS E. R IV E R S E x e c u t iv e O f fic e r S ecreta ry MRS. C A T H E R IN E H U G H E S W A D D E L L T H U R G O O D M A R SH A L L D ir t a o r C oan tel T reasu rer MRS. L O IS C O W L E S B o a r d o f D ir e c to r s J O S E P H D A V IS N ow York. N. Y. [>R. W IL L A R D W. A L L E N Baltim ore. Md. . S H A D P O L IE R N ew York. N. Y. HON. H O M E R BROW N P ittsburgh. Pn. DR. H A R R Y E M E R S O N F O S D IC K B ronx ville, N. Y. B IS H O P F R A N K M A D ISO N R E ID K ittrell, N. Car. CH A R LES BUCHANAN N ew York. N. Y. A M OS T. H A L L Tulsa. Okla. HON. F R A N C IS E. R IV E R S N ew York. N. Y. DR. G E O R G E C A N N O N N ew York. N. Y. HON. W IL L IA M H. H A S T IE Philadelphia, Pn. DR. C H A R L E S H. T H O M P S O N W ash ington. D. C. DR. A L L A N K N IG H T C H A L M E R S Boston, Mass. H A N S W. H U B E R . Red Bank. N. J. MRS. C A T H E R IN E H U G H E S W A D D K I.L N ew York, N. Y. W IL L IA M T. CO L EM A N . JR. Philadelphia. Pa. MRS. P H IL IP C. J E S S U P N ew York. N. Y. M ISS R U T H W E IN B E R G N ew York. N. Y. MRS. L O IS C O W L E S N ew York. N. Y. BE N JA M IN K A P L A N N ew H aven, Conn. C H A R L E S S. Z IM M E R M A N N ew York. N. Y. H A RTL EY CRU M N ew York, N. Y. REV. P A U L M OO RE. JR. Indianapolis, Ind. COMMITTEE OF 100” R o g e r N. Baldw in A lbert E. B a rn ett R obbins W. Bnrstow S arah G ibson Blandinjr J u stice Jun e M. Bolin Van W yck B rooks Fred L. B row n lee R alph J. Bunche C h arles Bunn Mrs. Sajnuol M cC rae Cov ert A llan K n igh t C h alm ers B ernard C. Clausen R ufus E. C lem en t F anny T ra v is C och ran J am es Brynn t C ona nt A lbert S prn gu e C o o lid g e G e o rge S. Counts H enry H itt C rane A lbert E dw a rd D ay A lbert C. D leffenbach On xton D o g g e t t R alph E llison M orris L. Ernst H. W illia m Fitelson H arry E m erson Fosdick Hue)] G. G a lla gh er H arry D. Gldeonse Mary B a rn ett G ilson R olan d B. Gittelsohn . F rank P. Graham M orton S. G rossm an Joseph F. Guffey _ John G unther ‘ erm an H a ilp crin 'H O sca r H um m erstcin 11 S. R alph H arlo w H orn cll H art J am es G. H eller H arrison H ires B ish op H e n ry W. H obson Joh n H a yn es H olm es S id n ey H ook . G e o rge K. H un ton Mrs. R nym ond V. In ge rsoll Mrs. H en ry A. In grah am Ruth E llin gto n J am es M ordccni W. Joh n son H o ra ce M. K nllen K ivie K aplan F ran k K ln gdon Freda K irch w ey John H ow la n d L athrop B ish op W. A pp leton L aw ren ce H enry S m ith I.eipcr Mnx L ern cr A lfred B aker I^Arl* A rchibald M acL eish L eopold M annes B en jam in E. M ays R ob ert J. M cC racken Karl M enn inger Paul M oore. Jr. C arl M urphy RctnhoM N iebuhr Bishop G. B rom ley Oxnara G e o rge L. P a in e B ish op E dw a rd L. P arso n s P alfrey P erkin s Ir v in g Pflaum J am es A. P ik e A. P h ilip R andolph FVcderick E. R eis Mg John I>. S alton stall, Jr. Guy E m ery S h ip ler G e o rge N. Sh u ster Mrs. H a rp e r S ib ley L illian S m ith A rth ur B. S p in g a rn T e lfo rd T a y lor N orm an Th om as C h an n in g H. T obias C h arles J. T u rek W illiam H. V an derbilt Mrs. C h au n ecy L. W addell B runo W alter Ju stice J a m es H. W olfe B radford Y o u n g The " o m t e o 10 ” 3 v l n a y c o e a i e c o p o i d v d a s h a e by D . A l n C m i t e f 0, outr oprtv r u f niiul e d d r la K i h C a m r h s s o s r d t e a p a o t e N A A C P L g l D f n e and E u a i n l n g t h l e s a pnoe h pel f h ..... ea e e s dctoa K n . Ic s n e 1 4 , a d h s c l e f r p b i s b c i t o o $ 5 , 0 d r n 1 3 t e a l u d n. i c 9 3 n a a l d o u l c u s r p i n f 1 0 0 0 u i g 9 8 o n b e t e Fund t p t i t o e a i n a p o r m d s g e t make d s g e a i n a raiy t r u h u h o u no p r t o r g a eind o eergto elt h o g o t t e U i e Sae. h n t d tts 1 � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Letter From Thurgood Marshall To Barbara Marx, April 15, 1958 Description An account of the resource Letter from NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Director-Counsel Thurgood Marshall to Barbara Marx which accompanied the opinion and dissenting opinion of 2 consolidated cases held in United States District Court in Richmond, VA. Dated April 15, 1958. Front and reverse (which includes officers, Board of Directors, Committee Of 100 members). Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Thurgood Marshall Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958-04-15 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_4_45 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ecb1e68e3971d0b47d65ec8a8aa36450.pdf 0a9cfe0181aae2fcd7555c409c3dd57e PDF Text Text EXECU TIVE O FFIC ER S VI CE P R E S I D E N T DR. P HI L I P WYATT F R E D E R I C K S B U R G . VA. TREASURER DAVID E. LD N BLEY R I C H M O N D , VA. YOUTH CO U N CILS AND COLLEGE CHAPTERS S E N I O R A D VI S ER H. A. MARSHALL N ORF OL K, VA. LEGAL VIRGINIA STATE CONFERENCE National Association for the Advancement eople f PRES IDENT L I NW OO D P A R S O N VI RGI NI A STATE C O L L E G E P E T E R S B U R G , VA. BOARD OF \ ■ IVE SECRETARY 1 S T ER B A N K S DIRECTORS DR. J. M. TI NS LEY R I CH M O ND , VA. DR. B. F. C D P PAGE NORF OL K, VA. C. C L AYBOU RN E B U S H CO V IN G TO N , VA. J. S. CA R RI N GT ON S O U T H B O S T O N , VA. MRS. NORVLEATE DOWNI NG N EWP OR T NEWS, VA. J A M E S A. DUVALL P E T E R S B U R G , VA. CH AR LEB D. FOWLER, JR. CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA. DR. J. B. H E N D E R S O N NORFOLK, VA. REV. W. J . H O D G E L YNCHBURG, VA. MR S. BARBARA S . MARX A RL IN GTON , VA. MR S. JULI A E. TUCKER E MPORI A, VA. MRS. BURNETTA B. WEST CUMBERLAND, VA. MRS. BADI E D. WYCHE IVOR, VA. STAFF □4'i N O R T H S E C O N D S* R IC H M O N D , V IRGIN IA DIAL 7 -5 G 7 B in -April Atty. Thurgood Marshall Director-Counsel NA'ACP Legal ana Defense Fund lOyflfelumbus C i ' ^ j ,N.Y /w *X • * Dear:'Hr.' Marshall: \ v / / V t — s ^ V ^ Thanks for sending ^e £Ke co. y of the decision of January 21st. - tj — Judge Soper seems to have done his home work very conscientiously and gives a fine sales talk fur the NAACP. I am sending you Xsta copies oftwo letters to Mr. Hill on the Arlington chool situation. I feel that it is very important that if the Arlington Sch -ole are de-oegregated in oeptember we have a sizable group of Negro children entering white schools,-not just three or four. Iwould appreciate having your reaction on this matter. Sincerely yours, Barbara G .Marx 6H97 N. Washington Dlvd. Arlington, Va. SU PPORT THE FREEDOM FUND � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Letter From Barbara Marx To Thurgood Marshall, April 18, 1958 Description An account of the resource Letter from Barbara Marx to NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Director-Counsel Thurgood Marshall which accompanied copies of 2 letters sent to Oliver Hill, dealing with court decisions regarding desegregation and the implications for Arlington County Public Schools. Dated April 18, 1958. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAACP, Barbara Marx Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 4/18/58 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_4_50 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/7851b915118c5761319239d3baf51db4.pdf bca84d7c5df534354c851eb307ae86db PDF Text Text VIRGINIA STATE CONFERENCE National Association for the Advancement of Colored People DR . E. B. HENDERSON EXECUTIVE S E CR ETA RY W. L E S T E R B A N K S R I C H M ON D , VA. 4 D 4 g N D R T H S E C O N D ST. RICHM ON D, VIRGINIA DIAL 7 - S 6 7 S April 13,1953. n Atuy. Oliver Hill 113 E. u«i,-.h t . Richmond, Va. bear .r. Hill: As yet I have not had a reply to my latter of i !th. „hile I realize that you and Mr. Roblr.soh are very bu. y there are some queal s to which we neei 1 ite anw er. Pupil assignment fcrnis are now being handed out to parents of children who will enter the first oer. race next eptem- ho id we discourage Ne yro parents from 3i;nin.; the e forms? In a few weoks forms will also be going home to parents of children entering the seventh snd ninth grades next .eptember. *ith ref erence to para ,raph focr of my lette of arch 12th, the seven Negro children ordered admitted to white schools are goin to be reduced by novoral because tlic Johnson ,irl is raduating^ the Nelson ooy moving to D.C. and one or two others -My net attempt to enter the white school. 1 sm very eager to recruit more Negro children to ap,,ly at white schools and would like to be sure this meets with your approval. I feel that the morale of the Negro plaintiffs In our school suit is not very good and that we need a cltu sr relationship with our a ttorney. It would be most elpful if you could arran ;u for a c nference such sa 1 suggested in my letter of March 12th. olncerely yours, liarbora . arx � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Letter From Barbara Marx To Oliver Hill, April 18, 1958 Description An account of the resource Letter from Barbara Marx to NAACP Legal Staff Chairman Oliver Hill dealing with pupil assignment in Arlington County Public Schools. Dated April 18, 1958. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAACP, Barbara Marx Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 4/18/58 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_4_51 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/43f99d4a28b8fa99aaf98e7f7aebbed0.pdf 8fb8a498f89d3f7db2703b374772b206 PDF Text Text March 12, .1^5^ Atty, liver hill 11S . -.1 , h t . „ hiahnio *o, Va. Bear r . till: A; 1 Mentioned tv you briefly r« cently 1 thi A it is ueeiri , >bX - tiffs i» w'. Arlington suit. !-« '.he a u th cria a ti. u« ware & ,:ne« xr. the f a i l £ l o 5 b, the p l a i n t i f f s acid wo huv.. never hsii a naetin.. t o diaou. w.th t u; attorney!. the prci,,reas i tne s u it , i t s financir. ,,etc. uch a con feren ce would iapror# morale ami anater a l o t ■ quo •tioiia. > £ ( in th« toot of t:t) se ,re .abed seatin law Attorney -arli.-icr hold t w . c i.feretctB with trtu seven perwona .fho worn arrested.:* These were rjjt constructive. j , .. .. t :r ciii^o< ren .tiitv chotla t is o . itsuh.ur bacouse It will ruaiut in cloa: in ; all eehoole, JthorojKa^axa spnaay Ke-upun..;. .uof all , axhsclv .a niacu. tea ihoro . , ,« co . unity presaur# upon .. m thorn to this of foot* ;t m y be desirable t j show then t<.at the . .C C v Mt; l O . t* C o - - v i O i • . . ..' i i >r i . ' V i , X tho seven . . . iito schools, one is graduating 1 . Juno, ur odu< : shsirmn and j aid .i u tv kaaw whathei yoa a i. v « . . oore Ma^ro children apply* la tho whit# schools, l£ •< a a d it be pri.fv rob). * t: t . so j i a i selective Ijssas, that is , y efclldraa w th goad .jrm u s , ;.r would it » be vi e to have the chlldrr.of the entire sixth rei.u of thii ban .ton school apply t o whiteJunior high schools, ho -Id applications bo wade by uy*paa»ln>' the pupll-placeaent f o r m as six of the children clu last fa!17 Mrs* luitii Huaaoy wants to anew live nearer to white schools in Aiexo apply* tv thoco ochovia'. any poop.a Opii ion Is ouch in northern Vir* inla ci.toils should be nuha hare. whether .e ru children who tiria and l ; irfsx -ou .ty should -uliave that tho o. i-.rte of that '.rente: . - .c ;nti . n . . iX’ you do plan for such a conference let us htve nt lecst ten day's notice. ihcersly you j Barbara ., . .iarx l>>}?7 <1 ■athi). t o n . nrlii.( ,lun , Va. f. . ivd. M ; /. v i i it ,rcti tith, a parent of two •r ,t uoyal children who are attend lit# tho rb-m..*as . ch,»ol atenti not that they hoc not yet had a conference with you but opeu to ue no H vo y u heart from � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Letter From Barbara Marx To Oliver Hill, March 12, 1958 Description An account of the resource Letter from Barbara Marx to NAACP Legal Staff Chairman Oliver Hill dealing with the ramifications of the desegregation of Arlington County Public Schools. Dated March 12, 1958. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAACP, Barbara Marx Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 3/12/58 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_4_52 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/94a5ae7538827173c499b3bf4ab8912b.pdf 70c46ab9d049563e3dd2c9364847285f PDF Text Text VIRGINIA STATE CONFERENCE National Association for the Advancement of Colored People DR. PR ESIDENT E. B. H E N D E R S O N EXECUTIVE S E CR ET AR Y W. L E S T E R B A N K S ^'X X f^ufeX cH 'Q fCstO U M C X X RICHMOND, va. 4 D 4 & N O R T H S E C O N D ST. R IC H M O N D , V IRGIN IA DIAL 7 - 5 6 7 8 April 13,ly&o. Atty. d iver :ill t- Richmond, ft, user r. Hill: As yet I have not, had a reply to my letter o ' x March 12t; . bile I realize t at you and Mr. i.obinson are very bu. y there arc none questions to which «e need iratiauiata ana. er. Pupil assignment forts ere now bairn; hsndou out to psrente of children who will enter the first her. race next epteo­ t h. lo vc clscour.. ,c He re parents f o r tijnlng these forme? rr. In a few weeks forms will also be ioin,; twoc to parents of children enteric the seventh snd ninth grades next September. With reference to paragraph four of ay letter of 12th, the seven He/fro children orders arch admitted to white schools are jolhi to be reuuced by several because the Johnson 0irl is raouatinjyp the Kelson toy movin;; to b.C. and one or two others may not attempt to enter the .hito school. I am very « er to recruit mors Kej.ro children to apply at white schools and would liico to be sure this moots with your approval■ I feel that the morale of the Ke.;ro pin stiffs in our school suit i s not very ^ood and that wo need a closer ru-atlonship with our attorney. It would he nost elpful if you could arran , u for a c nferanoe suo!i as J suggested in my letter of Kerch 12th. incvrely y.uia, Barbara . arx � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Letter From Barbara Marx To Oliver Hill, April 18, 1958 Description An account of the resource Letter from Barbara Marx to NAACP Legal Staff Chairman Oliver Hill dealing with pupil assignment in Arlington County Public Schools. Dated April 18, 1958. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource NAACP, Barbara Marx Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 4/18/58 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_4_53 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/99319c977288a59c02e2cbedc1db11ff.pdf 2f9f6fe0ccb99f8666b30dd95b29336d PDF Text Text BRIEF FOR APPELLANTS AND CROSS-APPELLEES IN TH E United States Court oi Appeals F o r t h e F o u r t h C ir c u it No. 7776 E. LE SL IE HAMM, JR., a n I n f a n t , b y E. LESLIE IIAMM, SR,, His F a t h e r a n d N e x t F r i e n d , e t a l ., Appellants, v. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA a n d RAY E. REID, D i v i s i o n S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s , A r l in g t o n C o u n t y , V ir g in ia , Appellees. and COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA a n d RAY E. REID, D i v i s i o n S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s , A r l in g t o n C o u n t y , V ir g in ia , x x Cross-A ppella nts, RONALD DESKINS, MICHAEL GERARD JONES, LANCE DW IGHT NEWMAN a n d GLORIA DELORES THOMPSON, Cross-Appellees. A p p ea l and C ross-A pp ea l fro m th e U n ited S tates D istrict C ou rt F o r the E a stern D istrict o f V irginia, A lex a n d ria D iv isio n O f Counsel: R o b e r t L. C a r t e r New York, N. Y. J a m e s M. N a b r it , J r . Houston, Texas H e r b e r t O. R e id Washington, D. C. J a m e s A. W a s h i n g t o n , J r . Washington, D. C. O l iv e r W. H il l 118 E a st L eigh Street Richm ond 19, V irginia F r a n k D. R e e v e s , and J a m e s M. N a b r it , I I I 473 F lorida Avenue, N. W. W ashington 1, D. C. S. W. Ro b i n s o n , I I I 623 N orth Third Street Richmond 19, V irginia O t t o L. T u c k e r 901 P rin cess Street Alexandria, V irginia Counsel for Appellants and Cross-Appellees. P r e s s o f B v r o w S. A d a m s , W a s h i n g t o n . D . C. �INDEX Statement of the Case Page . 1 Questions Presented .................................. 3 Statement of the Pacts: I. Prior Proceedings................................ II. Statement of Pacts on the Instant A ppeal..... III. Historical Background .......................... 4 7 1 4 Argument: I. The manner in which appellees acted upon ap pellants applications for admission to “ white” schools is racial discrimination in contravention of appellants constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process and equal protection of the laws .. II. The court below erroneously considered appellees ’ rejection of appellants applications for admission, enrollment and education in designated “ white” schools as ‘‘administrative determinations ” to be reviewed pursuant to the “ substantial evidence” doctrine and, having thus limited its scope of in quiry, failed to discharge its obligation to make an independent evaluation and determination of the facts decisive of appellants’ constitutional claim that their exclusion from said schools was because of race or co lo r ........................ III. Review and consideration of the Available and pertinent evidence compels the conclusion that the reasons advanced by appellees for their rejection of appellants’ applications for admission, enroll ment and education in “ white” schools were based upon considerations of race or color in con travention of appellants’constitutionally guaran teed rights of due process and equal protection and in violation of the prior orders of the court .. Response to appellee’ cross-appeal............. s 1 8 2 8 33 39 �Index Continued Page IV. The court’ previous judgment, affirmed on ap s peal, that five appellants were qualified for and could not be refused admission to designated “ white” schools, may not he nullified, in subse quent proceedings for its enforcement, on the ground of appellants’ alleged disqualification for reasons available to hut not urged by appellees in the prior proceedings........................ 41 V. The court below erred in postponing until the second semester of the school session of 1 58 9 9 -5 , the effective date of its order restraining and en joining appellees from refusing to admit four of appellants in the “ white” school from which they had been improperly excluded ................. 45 Conclusion ............................................ 5 0 TABLE OP CITATIONS Ca ses : Aaron v. Cooper, F.2d , (8th Cir. No. 1 09 , 6 4 10 November 1958) ............................. 26,35 Adkins v. School Board of the City of Newport News, 1 P. Supp. 430 (E.D.Va. 1957), aff’ 246 F.2d 48 d 325 (4th Cir. 1 957) ............................... 1 5 Baltimore & Ohio RR Co. v. United States, 298 U.S. 349 (1936) ........................................ 3 2 Baltimore S.S. Co. v. Phillips, 274 U.S. 316 (1927) 42 Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954) ............. 24 Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954); 349 U.S. 294 (1955) .......................24,34,47,49 Buchanan v. Warley, 245 U.S. 60 (1917) .........24,26 Carter v. School Board of Arlington County, 182 P. 2d 531 (4th Cir. 1950) ........................... 3 9 Cassell V. Texas, 339 U.S. 282 (1950)............... 26 Child Labor Tax Case, 2 U.S. 20 (1922) ........ 2 59 1 City and Town of Beloit v. Morgan, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 619 (1869)........................................ ' 42 Clemmons v. Board of Education of Hillsboro, Ohio, 228 P. 2d 853 (6th Cir. 1956), c r de . 350 U.S. et n 1006 (1956) .................................. 35,49,50 Chicot County Drainage Dist. v. Baxter State Bank 308 U.S. 371 (1940) ............................. 43 C. I. R. v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591 (1948) .......... 43 Index Continued Page Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958) ... .24, 3 , 45, 4 , 49 4 8 Cromwell v. Sac County, 94 U.S. 351 (1877) ...... 42 Davis v. Schnell, 81 P. Supp. 872 (S.D. Ala., S.D. 1949) .............................................. 2 1 Dowell v. Applegate, 152 U.S. 327 (1894) ........... 42 Ex Parte Endo.' 323 U.S. 283 (1944) ............. 24,38 Peiner v. New York, 340 U.S. 315 (1951) ........... 33 Gould V Evansville & C. R. Co., 91 U.S. 526 (1876) 43 . Grubb v. Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, 281 U.S. 470 (1930) .................................. 43 Hill v. Texas, 316 U.S. 400 (1942) .................. 2 6 Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945) 3 2 Hopkins v. Lee. 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 109 (1821) .... 43 Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944) .. 23 Lane v. Wilson, 307 U.S. 268 (1939)................2 , 25 3 Maggio v. Zeitz, 333 U.S. 56 (1948) ............... 43 Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946) ........... 32 McCullough v. Virginia, 172 U.S. 102 (1898) ...... 44 McKissick v. Carmichael, 187 F. 2d 948 (4th Cir. 1951), c r . d n 341 U.S. 951 (1951) .......... 38,49 et e . McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950) ........................................ 24,44,47 Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923) ........... 38 Morgan v. United States, 304 U.S. 1 (1938) ...... 30 NAACP v. Patty, 159 P. Supp. 503 (E.D.Va. 1958) 1 5 National Labor Relations Board v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 351 U.S. 105 (1956) ......................... 39 Ng Fung Ho v. White, 259 U.S. 276 (1922) ........ 32 Niemotko v. Maryland, 340 U.S. 268 (1951) ...... 33 Nixon v. Herndon, 273 U.S. 536 (1927) .......... 24 Norris v. Alabama, 294 U.S. 587 (1935) ........... 32 Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough, 253 U.S. 287 (1920) .................................. 32 Oriel v. Russell, 278 U.S. 358 (1929)............... 43 Perry v. Cyphers, 186 P. 2d 608 (5th Cir. 1951) .... 26 Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925) .... 38 Pierre v. Louisiana, 306U.S. 354 (1939) ........ 33,49 Radio Corp. of America v. United States, 341 U.S. 412 (1951) ........................................ 3 9 Rice v. Elmore, 165 F. 2d 387 (4th Cir. 1947), c r . et de . 333 U.S. 875 (1948) ......................... 26 n Secretary of Agriculture v. Central Roig Refining Co., 338 U.S. 604(1950) .......................... 39 Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948)............. 25,45 �Index Continued IV Page Sibbald v. United States, 37 U.S. (12 Pet.) 488 (1838) 42 Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 332 U.S. 631 (1948) . .24,47 Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942) ........ 24 Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649 (1944) .......... 2 6 Smith v. Cahoon, 28 U.S. 55 (1931) ............. 2 3 3 3 Smith v. Texas, 311 U.S. 1 (1940) ............... 2 28 6 Southern Garment Mfr’ Ass’ v. Fleming, 122 F. s. n 2d 622 (D.C. Cir. 1941) ........................ 3 0 Sparrow v. Strong, 7 U.S. (3 Wall.) 97 (1866) .... 2 0 1 Steele v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 323 U.S. 192 (1944) ....................................... 2 3 St. Joseph Stock Yards Co. v. United States, 298 U.S. 38 (1936) ................................... 3 2 Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 62 (1950) ...........24,47 9 Terry v. Adams, 345 U.S. 461 (1953) ............. 2 6 The Haytian .Republic, 1 U.S. 1 (1894) ........ 4 54 18 2 Thompson v. School Board of Arlington County, 1 4 4 F. Supp. 239 (E.D.Va. 1956), a fd 240 F. 2d 5 f ’, 9 (4th Cir. 1956), c r . d n 353 U.S. 910 (1957); et e . 1 F. Supp. 567 (E.D.Va. 1957), af ’, 252 F. 2d 59 fd 929 (4th Cir. 1958), c r . d n 356 U.S. 958 et e . (1958) ........................................ 2,5,6,25 United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36 (1950) ............................................ 4 3 United States v. Peters, 9 U.S. (5 Cranch) 11 5 (1809) ............................................ 44 Washington Bridge Co. v. Stewart, 44 U.S. (3 How.) 413 (1845) ....................................... 42 Watts v. Indiana, 3 U.S. 49(1949) ............... 21,32 38 Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 11 U.S. 356 (1886) . .24, 3 , 36,37 8 4 S o u t h e r n Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. S c h oo l N e w s ; 2 No. 8, Feb. 1 5 , p. 14.... , 96 .1 5 2 No. 9 March 1 , , 956, p. 14 . ................. 1 6 2 No. 1 , April 1 5 , p. 1 .... , 0 96 3 1 7 2 No. 1 , June1 5 , p. 1 ....... , 2 96 3 1 8 IN TH E United Stales Court ol Appeals F o r t h e F o u r t h C ir c u it No. 7776 E. LESLIE IIAMM, JR., His F a t h e r an I n f a n t , b y E. L E SL IE HAMM, SR., N e x t F r i e n d , e t a l ., and Aplat, pelns COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA a n d RAY E. REID, D i v i s i o n S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s , A r l in g t o n C o u n t y , V ir g in ia , Aples pele. and COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA a n d RAY E. REID, D i v i s i o n S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s , A r l in g t o n C o u n t y , V ir g in ia , v. CosAplat, rs-pelns RONALD DESKINS, M ICHAEL GERARD JONES, LANCE DW IGHT NEWMAN a n d GLORIA DELORES THOMPSON, CosAples rs-pele. BRIEF FOR APPELLANTS AND CROSS-APPELLEES A p p ea l and C ross-A pp ea l fr o m th e U n ited S ta tes D istrict C o u rt F o r the E a stern D istrict o f V irginia, A lex a n d ria D iv isio n STA TEM EN T O F TH E C A SE On 3 July 1956 the court below entered an Order of 1 Injunction restraining and enjoining appellees from refus ing on account of race or color to admit, enroll and educate in any school under their operation, control, direction or supervision (i.e. the public schools of Arlington County, Virginia) any child otherwise qualified. A Supplemental �2 3 Decree of Injunction entered by the court below on 14 September 1 957, restrained and enjoined appellees from refusing to admit, enroll and educate these seven children in the schools to which they had applied, effective 23 Sep tember 19 . Both of these prior judgments were affirmed 57 on previous appeals to this Court, and petitions for writs of certiorari were denied. Q U E S T IO N S P R E S E N T E D The instant and third appeal in this case is from the Supplementary Order of Injunction entered by the court below on 22 September 19 , upon appellants’ complaint 58 in intervention and motion for further relief under the prior orders, in which the court (i) approved, as being based upon valid evidence of disqualification and untainted by considerations of race or color, appellees’ rejection of the applications by twenty-five appellants, including five of the seven previously ordered admitted, for admission to designated “ white” schools; and (ii) delayed until the commencement of the second semester of the current school term, the effective date of its decree insofar as it restrained and enjoined appellees from refusing to admit, enroll and educate four of the appellants in the “ white” Stratford Junior High School, the rejection of whose applications by appellees the court found unjustified by the evidence. The appellees have filed a cross-appeal from the order of the court below restraining and enjoining them from refusing to admit the four appellants in Stratford Junior High School, and a separate brief in connection with that cross-appeal. In lieu of a separate responsive brief, a designated portion of this brief, i f a is addressed to nr, the issues presented by the cross-appeal. The previous decisions in the instant case have been reported sub nom., Thompson v. School Board of Arlington County as follows: 144 F. Supp. 239 (B.D. Va. 1956), a fd 240 F. 2d 5 (4th Cir. 1956), c r . d n 353 U.S. 910 f ’, 9 et e . (1957); 1 9 F. Supp. 567 (B.D. Va. 1957), a fd 252 F. 2d 5 f ’, 929 (4th Cir. 1958), c r , d n , 356 U.S. 958 (1958). The et e . opinion of the court below is reported at 166 F. Supp. 52 9 and included in the Joint Appendix herein at pp. 1 -2 . 1 4 The questions presented on this appeal are as follows: 1 Whether appellees’ action in refusing to admit, enroll . and educate appellants in the “ white” schools to which they applied, on the basis of appellees ’ ex parte determina tion, that appellants were not qualified for admission, en rollment and education in said schools by the application of standards not similarly applied to white pupils admitted, enrolled and educated in the same schools, contravened appellants’ rights to due process and equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment. 2 Whether the court below erred in failing and refusing . to exercise its independent judgment on those issues of fact which were decisive of appellants ’claim that appellees refused, on account of race or color and in contravention of appellants’ constitutional rights, to admit, enroll and educate appellants in the “ white” schools for which they applied. 3 Whether the court below erred in failing and refusing . to hold, upon the available and pertinent evidence, that the reasons advanced by appellees for their rejection of appel lants’ applications for admission, enrollment and education in the schools to which they had applied were based upon considerations of race or color in contravention of appel lants’ constitutionally guaranteed rights of due process and equal protection and in violation of the prior orders of the court. 4 Whether five appellants, previously found by the . court to be qualified and ordered admitted and enrolled in designated “ white” schools, can now be refused admis sion and enrollment in said schools, after appeal and affirmance of the court’ order, on the basis of their alleged s disqualification for reasons available to but not urged by appellees until said appellants sought enforcement of the prior order in the proceedings below. 5 Whether the court below erred in postponing, until . the commencement of the second semester of the 1958-1959 �5 4 school term (2 February 1959), the effective date of its order, entered (2 September 1958) two weeks after the 2 beginning of the first semester (8 September 1958), re straining and enjoining appellees from refusing to admit, enroll and educate four appellants in the “ white” schools from which they unlawfully had been excluded. These questions are raised in the record by the court’ s Supplementary Order of Injunction entered 22 September 1958 (JA 224), based upon its Findings of Fact and Con clusions of Law entered 17 September 1958 (JA 11-24), denying the relief sought in the Motion for Further Relief, filed 26 August 1958 (JA 1 ) in behalf of eight of the -5 present appellants then parties to the suit (A, B, C, D, E, 1 1 , and 22),1 and the Complaint in Intervention, filed , 3 26 August 1958 in behalf of twenty-two Negro children not theretofore parties (2 3 4 5 6 , 7 8 , 9 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , , , , , , , 0 2 4 5 1 , 1 ,2 1 , 1 , 2 , and 21). 6 7 8 9 0 STATEM EN T OF TH E FA CTS The consideration and determination of this appeal requires a review of the background and prior proceedings in this case, as follows: I. PRIOR PROCEEDINGS On 3 July 19 , the court below, acting upon the com 1 56 plaint of plaintiff Negro children of school age resident in Arlington County, Virginia, and their parents or guardians, for themselves and others similarly situated, entered the following Order Granting Injunction (R. 179, 181): . . . A d j u d g e d , Or d e r e d , and D e c r e e d that effective at the times and subject to the conditions hereinafter 1 T hroughout tho testimony, the exhibits and the co u r t’ F in din gs o f F act s and Conclusions o f Law, the individual pupil-plaintiffs are referred to by letters, iden tifyin g those who were ordered admitted to designated “ w h ite” schools in Septem ber 1957, and by num bers iden tifying those whose admission to designated “ w h ite” schools was b efore the court fo r the first time. The names o f these individual plain tiffs are related to the letters and numbers in a “ Code f o r S p o t M a p s ” (JA 284-285.) 2 This plaintiff has le ft the jurisdiction and, therefore, is n ot included am ong the present appellants. stated, the defendants, their successors in office, agents, representatives, servants and employees be, and each of them is hereby, restrained, and enjoined from re fusing on account of race or color to admit to, or enroll or educate in, any school under their operation, control, direction, or supervision any child otherwise qualified for admission to, and enrollment and educa tion in, such school. . . . the injunction hereinbefore granted should be, and it is hereby made, effective in respect to elementary schools at the beginning of the second semester of the 1956-1957 session, to wit, January 3 , 19 , and in 1 57 respect to junior and senior high schools at the com mencement of the regular session for 1957-1958 in September 1 5 . 97 This judgment was affirmed by this Court on 3 December 1 1956 (R. 188). Writ of certiorari was denied 25 March 1 5 . See 353 U.S. 9 0 97 1. No Negro pupils having been admitted to or enrolled in the theretofore white schools pursuant to this judgment, on 29 July 1957, the court below entered an order on plaintiffs’ motion to amend the original decree, as follows (R, 206): That the injunction specified in said judgment become in respect to both elementary and secondary schools effective at the commencement of the regular school term for 1957-1958 commencing in September 19 . 57 On 4 September 1957, the court below, in granting plain tiffs’ motion for further relief, found that Seven Negro children of school age were refused admission as pupils in the public schools of Arlington County, Virginia on the opening day of the current session. . . . (R. 239) * * * * Nothing in the evidence indicates that any of the plaintiffs is not qualified in his studies to enter the school which he sought to enter . . . Anyway, no �7 6 intimation of disqualification appeared as to any ap plicant. (R. 243-244) A review of the evidence is convincing that the only ground . . . for the rejection of plaintiffs was that they were of the Negro race. The rejection was simply the adherence to the prior practice of segregation. No other hypothesis can be sustained in any of the seven instances. ... (R. 244) Whereupon, on 14 September 19 , the court below entered 57 a Supplemental Decree of Injunction, as follows (R. 2 8 4249): Or d e r e d that the defendants, their successors in office, agents, representatives, servants, and employees be, and each of them is hereby restrained and enjoined from refusing to admit the said movants to, or enroll and educate them in, the said schools to which they have made application for admission, that is: * * * # 3 Robert A. Eldridge III in the Fillmore School or . the Patrick Henry School; 4 George Tyrone Nelson in the Stratford Junior . High School; or the Swanson Junior High School; 5 E. Leslie Hamm, Jr. in the Stratford Junior . High School or the Swanson Junior High School; 6 . Louis George Turner in the Swanson Junior High School; 7 Melvin H. Turner in the Swanson Junior High . School; upon the presentation by the said movants of themselves for admission, enrollment and education in the said schools commencing at the opening of said schools on the morning of September 23,1957. This injunction was suspended pending appeal (R. 256) and, on 1 February 1 2 958, was affirmed by this Court (R. 399). Writ of certiorari was denied 19 May 1958. See 356 U.S. 9 8. 5 Against this background, we present the factual basis for the instant appeal. II. STATEMENT OF FACTS ON THE INSTANT APPEAL Subsequent to the close of the 1957-58 school term, appel lants, Negro pupils attending the Arlington County, Vir ginia, public schools, through their parents and guardians, applied to the appellees, the School Board and the Division Superintendent of Schools of Arlington County, Virginia, for admission and enrollment at the commencement of the next school term on 4 September 1958 in designated schools theretofore maintained exclusively for white students, “ or to such other school his [or her] assignment to which may properly be determined on the basis of objective considera tions without regard to his [or her] race or color.” This group of thirty pupils included five of the seven students who had been ordered admitted to designated schools by the Supplemental Order of Injunction entered by the court below on 14 September 1957, supra. The parents or guardians of each of these infant appel lants received a letter dated 7 August 1958 from the Pupil Placement Board of the Commonwealth of Virginia request ing that they appear with their children for personal interviews to be conducted by that agency [PI. Ex. 7 , T. 359]. All declined to attend the interviews, but they again requested the appellees to assign their children in accordance with their previous requests, offering to co operate in furnishing necessary information to appellees [Def. Ex. 1 , T. 356]. Subsequently, the appellees and 3 the Pupil Placement Board jointly summoned the appel lants to personal interviews [PI. Ex. 8 , T. 359]. Each of the pupils, accompanied by one or both parents, attended one of the interviews which were conducted jointly by the state and local authorities on 1 , 1 , and 29 August 19 , 8 9 58 and each applicant was subsequently notified by appellees that their requests (for assignment to “ white” schools) had been denied by the Pupil Placement Board. On 26 August 1958, twenty-two of the applicants who had not previously been parties to this action filed a Com plaint in Intervention (R. 408), which complaint, as did the Motion for Further Relief simultaneously filed in be- �8 9 half of the eight applicants already parties herein (JA 1 -5), prayed for specific injunctive relief in enforcement of the previous orders entered herein. On the same day appellees filed a Report and Request for Guidance, describ ing the course of events subsequent to the filing of the Mandate and Opinion of this Court on the previous appeal, and stating that they intended to make no assignments of the appellants unless directed to do so by the court below (JA 6 ). -9 mentioned problem areas as reasons for rejecting appel lants’ applications is as follows: On the evening of 28 August 1958, having studied and familiarized themselves, upon advice of counsel, with sum maries of data prepared from the cumulative folders of each of the appellants, appellee School Board met in closed session and, after discussion, determined that the appli cations submitted by appellants fell into five different prob lem areas on the basis of which, by vote of appellee School Board, each of the applications would be rejected if the court should determine that appellees had the legal re sponsibility for assigning appellants to Arlington County public schools (JA 43-44). Appellees’ “ proposed” rejec tion of appellants’ applications for admission to “ white” schools and the reasons therefor were first disclosed to appellants and the public on 2 September 1958 at the hearing before the court below. { b d ) Ii. The five problem areas into which appellants’ applica tions fell and on the basis of which all were rejected by appellee School Board were described as follows: I. At tendance Area; II Overcrowding at Washington and Lee High School; III Academic Achievement; IV Psycho logical Problems; and V Adaptability ( b d ) Ii.. The procedure followed by appellees in the consideration and rejection of appellants’ applications, was a procedure developed and used only with respect to those pupils who sought to enter schools attended by pupils of the opposite race (JA 3 , 7 2 4-78). The evidence presented at the hearing with specific reference to appellees’ consideration of each of the afore- A tten d a n ce A rea Rejection of the applications of eleven appellants (2 3 , , 4 9 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 2 , 2 , 25) was voted by appellee School , , 4 5 7 8 3 4 Board on the basis of problems related to attendance area (JA 44-49). These eleven pupils were residents of the attendance area prescribed for the Hoffman-Boston School, and were reassigned by the Pupil Placement Board and appellees to that school. The Hoffman-Boston School has heretofore enrolled and now enrolls Negro pupils only (JA 9 -91 99-100), and houses both elementary and sec0 , O ' \ ondary grades. The boundaries of this attendance area were established prior to this litigation (JA 90), and for the specific purpose of serving the Negro pupils within its confines (R. 374). The portion of Arlington County embraced by the Hoffman-Boston attendance area bound aries is occupied almost exclusively by Negroes, but the few white pupils residing therein are assigned to schools other than Hoffman-Boston (JA 9 -9 , 142-146). 1 2 Pour of the pupils affected by this reason for rejection are high school students seeking admission to Wakefield School. For high school zoning purposes, the HoffmanBoston area forms an elongated enclave within the Wake field (“ white” ) attendance area (Def. Ex. 7 T. 101). The , seven remaining pupils sought admission to Kenmore, Gunston, and Thomas Jefferson (“ white” ) Junior High Schools. These schools are located closer to their respec tive residences than Hoffman-Boston, the latter school being located at one end of the district and their residences at the other end (Def. Ex. 6, T. 101). Each of the rejections based upon Attendance Area was approved by the court below. O v e r c r o w d in g a i W a sh in g ton and L e e H ig h S ch o ol Five pupils (D, 1 , 1 , 1 , 21) were denied assignment to 2 9 the Washington and Lee (“ white” ) High School on the �10 1 1 ground that Washington and Lee was overcrowded (JA 5 , 53). Those students are residents of an area referred 0 to as the North Hoffraan-Boston area. This area which was entirely surrounded by the Washington and Lee at tendance area, and was widely separated from the HoffmanBoston school and Hoffman-Boston attendance area abovedescribed, was reported to have been abolished for assign ment purposes by the appellee School Board at the same meeting at which the appellee School Board considered and rejected appellants’ applications. The area was made a part of the Washington and Lee attendance area for high school students and a part of the Stratford attendance area for junior high school students (JA 4 , 48). 6 The court below approved this reason as the basis for rejection of these five requests for assignment to Washing ton and Lee, or other appropriate “ white” high school. For the 1958-59 school term Washington and Lee had a planned enrollment of 2600 and a capacity of 20 00 ; Wakefield had a planned enrollment of 2 540, with a capacity of 2000; and Hoffman-Boston had a combined elementary and secondary enrollment of 5 5 with a capacity of 3 5 7, 7, increased by 100 through the use of temporary facilities, and with facilities for 100 more students under construc tion and estimated for completion in January 1959 (PI. Ex. 5 JA 2 , 25). In a prior action unrelated to appellants’ request for admission to Washington and Lee, the appellee School Board had assigned all 10th grade students residing in the northwestern sector of the Washington and Lee attendand area, numbering 2 0, to attend the Wakefield School, 5 in order to equalize the burden of overcrowding between Washington and Lee and Wakefield, pending completion of a proposed new high school (JA 50-51). The area from which these 250 white 10th grade students were siphonedoff from Washington and Lee to Wakefield abuts but does not embrace the “ abolished” North Hoffman-Boston attendance area where the affected appellants reside (JA 53). The five affected appellants, four of whom were 10th grade students, were assigned to the Hoffman-Boston School. A ca d em ic A ch iev em en t Twenty-two appellants (B, C, D, E, 2 3 4 5 6 , 8 , 9 1 , , , , , , 0 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 2 , 2 , 2 , 2 , 25) were refused admission 1 2 4 5 7 1 2 3 4 and enrollment in “ white” schools on the basis of academic accomplishment (JA 54-62). These included all of the pupils rejected for reasons of Attendance Area and Over crowding except for Nos. 1 1 , and 1 , in addition to nine , 8 9 others not previously mentioned. The data used by the Board in connection with this reason for rejection consisted of the latest available scores at tained by the appellants on the California Achievement Test. This test is given annually in the county schools to children in grades 3 5 7 and 9 (JA 54). The individual , , , pupil’ test scores were compared with statistical data indi s cating the median achievement levels of typical junior and senior high school classes at Hoffman-Boston (Negro) School, and with similar data for Stratford Junior High and Washington and Lee Senior High (white) Schools. This data indicated that in the two all-white schools seventy percent of the pupils scored above the national norm, while at Hoffman-Boston only twenty percent of the students scored above the national norm (JA 56). In Arlington County the median score at the white schools ranged above and at the Negro school below the national norm (JA 55). The applicants who had scored below the national norm and who, consequently, fell below the median score of the typical class at the white school to which they applied were rejected. The scores of these applicants fell within the lower one-third of the typical white class to which they were seeking admission (JA 116). An expert witness called by appellants testified that the California Achievement tests are extremely limited as a means of determining the proper grade placement of pupils �12 1 3 (JA 148); that the national norm published by the authors of the test does not represent a minimum standard of achievement for pupils in a particular grade because fifty percent of all pupils will score above and fifty percent below this median score or national norm (I i .); and bd that within any typical class of a given grade tested, there would normally be a variation of scores within the middle sixty percent of such class of two to three years in grade equivalent (JA 148-149). This witness concluded that, upon examination of the school records of the appel lants, all but three of them scored within the range of achievement of this middle sixty percent (JA 167), and were qualified for advancement to the next grade in any school (JA 153-166); and that the three students who scored within the bottom twenty percent probably needed remedial work (JA 167-171). The witness stated that in his opinion the gap between the achievement of pupils in segregated Negro and white schools tended to increase with the passage of time, and thus to be greater in the higher than in the lower grades (JA 171). The court below approved the rejections based upon the Academic Achievement reason and the consequent assign ment of these appellants to Hoffman-Boston School. race (JA 6 4-65 and Def. Ex. 1 , JA 286). Accordingly, 0 these appellants would remain at Hoffman-Boston School. An expert witness called by appellants testified that there was insufficient data in the School Board’ cumulative s records on the individual pupils to justify any clinical judgment with respect to their psychological problems (JA 211-213), but that, on the evidence available, conclu sions opposite to those made by appellees were justified (JA 198-199). P sy c h o lo g ic a l P ro b lem s Seven appellants (C, 1 2 6 , 8 , 2 , 24) who were also , , 1 disqualified for admission to the “ white” schools they sought to enter for one or both of the reasons described above, where rejected because of alleged psychological problems (JA 65). The appellee School Board explained that it had relied upon the conclusions of the State Di rector of Psychological Services, which conclusions were based upon his examination of appellants’ school records. He did not testify, but the report he submitted to the appellee School Board stated that the records of the pupils discussed evidenced such things as “ instability”, “ lack of self-control”, “ extreme shyness”, etc., and he con cluded that it would be unwise to subject these pupils to the pressures of attending a school with children of another With respect to Psychological Problems, the court below concluded as follows (JA 21): 3 . The reasons given for disqualifying the seven students upon the test of the Psychological Problems obviously give consideration to race or color. On the other hand, the rejection was not due solely to these features. The court, however, does not rule on the evidence to be accorded this test because the evidence before it upon the point is too scant. . . . Therefore, this test must be disregarded for this case. A d ap tab ility The remaining appellants, who had not been disqualified for any of the foregoing reasons (A, 7 1 , 1 , 20), were , 3 6 rejected by the School Board for lack of adaptability to new situations (JA 66 ). The appellee Division Super intendent of Schools defined this reason as the ability to accept and conform to the new and different educational environment occasioned by entering a school predominantly occupied by pupils and teachers of another race (JA 70-72). The sole evidence upon which the appellee School Board acted in the application of this 1 standard ’’was the Super 1 intendent’ opinion that, if these five students were ad s mitted and enrolled in the “ white” schools they sought to enter, they would lose the position of leadership and scholastic superiority which they enjoyed in the all-Negro schools they attended, as well as their “ sense of belong ing”, that this loss would be discouraging and possibly emotionally disturbing to them ( b d ) and that only Ii., superior gifted Negro children could adapt to desegregated �1 4 1 5 schools (JA 7 , 80-81). An expert witness for the appel 1 lants expressed a contrary view (JA 213-218). The court below concluded that there was no ground in the record to bar four appellants (7 1 , 16 and 20) from , 3 the school to which they had applied for the Adaptability reason. However, as to one appellant (A), the court said (JA 23): appointment of the Gray Commission on Public Education, to study and make recommendations concerning public school desegregation. That Commission’ report was sub s mitted in November 1 955. The nature of that report and the subsequent history of “ massive resistance” is exhaus tively treated in NAACP v. Patty,159 F. Supp, 5 3, 5 1 0 1518 (E. D. Va. 1958). See also Adkins v. School Board o f th City of Newport N i s 148 F. Supp. 430, 434-442 e ev, (E.D. Va. 1957), aff’ 246 F. 2d 3 5 (4th Cir. 1947). d. 2. Pursuant to the “ massive resistance” policy, the legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia, acting upon recommendations by the Governor, has enacted twenty-odd statutes designed and intended to thwart desegregation, including provisions— already invoked— for the closing of schools desegregated by court order, cutting-off funds for such schools, and creating the Pupil Placement Board. See Adkins v. School Board of th City of Neivport Neivs, and e NAACP v. Patty, supra. The “ massive resistance” policy has had a direct bear ing and impact upon Arlington County, Virginia and appellees, as is indicated by the following excerpts from the Southern School News: Item 1 Southern School News, Vol. 2 No. 8, Feb. 1 5 , — , 96 p. 14: ... In certain circumstances, undoubtedly, the line of demarcation between it [adaptability] and racial discrimination can be so clearly drawn, that it can be the foundation for withholding a transfer. Pupil A exemplifies this hypothesis. At the conclusion of the hearing before the court below, the court stated that it had no objection to the operation of the schools on the basis of the assignments proposed by appellees (i.e. to Hoffman-Boston School) pending the court’ decision (JA 222). The 1958-1959 school term com s menced on 8 September 1 5 , the School Board having 98 once postponed the opening scheduled originally for 4 September 1 5 . Although the court below in its Findings 98 of Fact and Conclusions of Law, filed on 1 September 7 1 5 , disapproved appellees’ rejection of the applications 98 by four of the appellants for admission and enrollment in the “white” Stratford Junior High School, it postponed until the commencement of the second semester of the current school term in January 1959,3the effective date of its decree, entered 2 September 19 , restraining and en 2 58 joining appellees from refusing to admit, enroll and educate these four appellants in said school (JA 1 -1 , 224-225) 1 2 III. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Following the decision of the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board o Education the official, declared and operative f policy and practice of the government of the Common wealth of Virginia became and continue to be “ massive resistance” to desegregation. The first official action in furtherance of this policy and practice was the Governor’ s 3The second semester is scheduled to commence on 2 February 1 5 . 99 The Arlington County School Board has adopted a plan to integrate countyschools . . . * # # * The plan presented by Supt. T. Edward Rutter, and unanimously approved by the Board, based on the assumption that the Gray Commission proposals will become law. The Gray plan is designed to prevent enforced integration but not to prevent a locality from integrating if it chooses to do so. * # * # Here is the text of the statement adopted by the Arling ton Board: “ The Arlington School Board interprets the Gray Commission recommendation and the vote Monday, Jan. 9 19 , for the Constitutional Convention in Vir , 56 ginia, to mean that no child in Virginia shall be forced �1 6 to attend a school in which children of both white and Negro races are enrolled. The Arlington public schools as a division of the public school system of Virginia will comply with any action taken by the State Legislature. The Arlington' School Board also believes that legis lation will be enacted to carry out the proposed Gray Plan and that in order to meet the Supreme Court’ s decree for ‘deliberate speed’ desegregation, it will be necessary to provide schools, in which children of both T races may attend classes. “Assuming that the legislature will enact the provi sions recommended by the Gray Commission, the Arlington School Board adopts the following policy: ‘‘Integration will be permitted in certain elementary schools in the Fall of 1 5 . 96 “ The Arlington School Board will continue the policy of determining elementary school attendance areas on a geographical basis. “ Children whose parents object to their attendance at an integrated school will be assigned to a school that is not integrated. “ Parents who ask to have their children assigned to schools outside their own school district will be responsible for their children’ transportation to and s from school. “ Certain Arlington junior high schools will be inte1grated in the fall of 1958; certain senior high schools 1 will be integrated in the fall of 1 5 . For these grade 98 'levels, also, a plan will be put into effect permitting transfer of those students whose parents object to their attending integrated schools. “ Any child in Arlington may attend a non-segregated school if his parents so desire. The Arlington School Board does not anticipate the necessity of pay ing tuition grants for children to attend private schools.” Item 2 Southern School News, Vol. 2 No. 9 Mar. 1 5 , — , , 96 p. 14: Overwhelming approval of an interposition resolu tion and consideration of another resolution to con tinue segregation during the 1956-57 school year high lighted February’ deliberations of the Virginia Gen s eral Assembly. 1 7 The Arlington County School Board’ announced s intention of beginning desegregation next fall . . . also touched off a bitter controversy in the Assembly. The fight revolved around a bill which would take away from Arlington its right to elect its school board members by popular vote. Arlington is the only county in the State in which school board members are elected. * * * # By a vote of 9 -5 in the House of Delegates and 3 -2 0 6 in the State Senate, the General Assembly on Feb. 1 adopt a resolution “ interposing the sovereignty of Virginia against encroachment upon the reserved powers of this state, and appealing to sister states to resolve a question of contested power. # * ** The Arlingtoncounty controversy in the Assembly centered around a bill introduced by delegate Frank Moncure of Stafford County (a county with 14% Negro school enrollment) to take from Arlington its privilege ofelectingits school board members. * * * * Delegate Moncure’ bill, as introduced, would pro s vide for replacing the present board members by the system used in most Virginia counties. Under this system, the Circuit Judge appoints a school trustee electoral board, which in turn appoint the school board. A House committee, however, voted to amend the Bill to permit appointment of the school board by the county’ governing body, the Arlington County Board. s This is the system used in all Virginia cities and in a few counties. Item 3— Southern School Ne v , Vol. 2 No. 1 , April is , 0 19 , p. 13: 56 Meanwhile in addition to approving an interposition resolution— the Assembly’ other action dealing with s the segregation issue included: 1 ) Arranging for a Constitutional Convention, sub sequently held March 5 , to amend the State Constitu -7 tion to permit the payments of public money tuitiongrants to children attending private non-sectarian schools. �1 9 1 8 2) Adoption of a resolution opposing racially-mixed competition involving public school athletes. 3 Adoption of a bill to take away from Arlington ) County residents the power to elect their school board. The Arlington Board is the only one in Virginia to announce definite plans to begin integration next school year. Item 4 Southern School Ne v , Vol. 2 No. 1 , June 1 5 , — is , 2 96 p. 13: Virginia has temporarily shelved— and conceivably may abandon— its much-publicized Gray Plan for solv ing the School Segregation problem. * * * # Suits seeking to force an end to racial segregation in the schools at the start of the fall term have now been filed against five Virginia localities— Prince Ed ward and Arlington Counties and the cities of Nor folk, Newport News, and Charlottesville. All cases are in Federal District Courts. In this context, appellants submit and urge the Court’ s consideration of their contentions in this case. ARGUMENT I . THE MANNER IN WHICH APPELLEES ACTED UPON APPEL LANTS' APPLICATIONS FOR ADMISSION TO "WHITE" SCHOOLS IS RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN CONTRAVEN TION OF APPELLANTS' CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEED RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS. A. In the attempted exercise of their right to enjoy educational opportunities provided by appellees, appellants were sub jected to terms and conditions based solely upon race or color. The elimination of race or color as a factor in the assign ment of pupils to the public schools of Arlington County, Virginia was decreed by the court below in July 1 5 . In 96 September 1 957 the court below made a judicial finding that appellees were still adhering to the prior practice of racial segregation. As late as 26 August 19 , appellees 58 made the following admissions: (1 ) that they had solicited and referred to the State Pupil Placement Board all appli cations from pupils seeking to enjoy the constitutional rights decreed by the court; (2 ) that they had cooperated with the Pupil Placement Board in furnishing information and in interviewing these applicants; (3) that the Pupil Placement Board had rejected all of these applications; and (4) that they had made and would make no assign ments of these applicants and would admit them only to the [Negro] schools to which they had been assigned by the Pupil Placement Board, unless directed otherwise by the court. This course of action appellees “ felt” was com pliance with the order of the court. (Report and Request for Guidance, JA 7 ) -9 Meanwhile, on 26 August 1 5 , appellants filed their 98 Complaint in Intervention and Motion for Further Relief, alleging, in effect, that appellees were still adhering to their prior practice of racial segregation. Consequently, on 28 August 1958— five days before said complaint and motion and appellees’ report and request for guidance were scheduled to be heard by the court and seven days before the scheduled commencement of the 1958-1959 school term— appellee School Board met in closed session and, having studied and familiarized themselves, on advice of counsel, with summaries of information pertaining to the 30 applications of Negro pupils seeking admission to “ white” schools, found that these 3 cases fell into certain 0 “ groupings” or “ problem areas”, upon the basis of which the appellee School Board voted to reject each of appel lants’ applications (JA 43-44). It is vital to an understanding of this proceeding to note that these “ problem areas”, “ groupings”, “ criteria”, “ tests”, or‘“ categories”, as they are referred to, were not a “ plan”, “ assignment regulations”, or “ formal cri teria” adopted, promulgated and published by appellees in the regular course and discharge of their lawful duties and responsibilities in the operation and maintenance of the Arlington County public schools. These “ problem areas” were formulated and used by appellees solely as �20 reasons to explain or justify their rejection of the thirty applications which were involved in the pending litigation. They were first disclosed and tendered to the court at the hearing below, not as formally adopted “ criteria for as signment” applicable to all pupils seeking admission to a school other than that in which he had theretofore been en rolled, but as the basis upon which appellees would refuse to assign the thirty appellants to the schools in which they sought admission. Thus, as appellees appeared before the court below on 2 September 19 , racial segregation in the public schools 58 of Arlington County, Virginia, remained an accomplished fact. This result is consistent with the Commonwealth of Virginia’ declared official policy of “ massive re s sistance” to desegregation and appellees’ prior judi cially declared adherence to the maintenance and operation of racially segregated schools. The pattern of “ different” treatment afforded to the Negro appellants is patent. The evidence in the record discloses that, notwithstanding appellees’ alleged adoption of “ an administrative procedure applicable to all . . . ap plicants for transfer to a school other than the one at tended at the end of the 1957-1958 session” (Report and Request for Guidance, JA 7), the only pupils in the Arling ton County public school sj^stem whose requests for trans fer were subjected to (1 ) the preparation and submission of data to the State Pupil Placement Board (JA 2 , 32); 5 (2 ) personal interviews by representatives of appellees and the Pupil Placement Board (Report and Request for Guidance, JA 8 ); and (3) application of the five “ criteria” or “ standards” upon the basis of which their individual re quests were rejected, were the thirty Negroes and two white students seeking transfers to schools theretofore at tended exclusively by pupils of the other race (JA 74-76). The court below specifically rejected appellants’ conten tion that the very formulation and use of these “ criteria”, as well as the other special treatment accorded appellants’ applications, was racial discrimination (JA 20). This con clusion the court justified on the basis that there was no L 21 previous necessity for the use of such tests and their use represented a new method for assignment of pupils which was “ not discriminatory as born of a social change.” This argument disregards the essential realities of the situation as disclosed by the record in this case. The dif ferent treatment accorded to appellants was not part of a “ plan” designed or intended to facilitate and accommodate a “ social change”. On the contrary, it operated, as it was au u. intended, to maintain the st t s q o The failure and re fusal of the court below to discern this obvious fact recalls the expression by Chief Justice Taft in the Child Labor Tax Case, 259 U. S. 2 , 37 (1922): 0 . . . All others can see and understand this. How can we properly shut our minds to it? C . Sparrow v. Strong, 70 U. S. (3 Wall.) 97, 104 (1866); f Watts v. Indiana, 338 U. S. 49, 52 (1949); Davis v. S h e l cnl, 81 F. Supp. 872, 881 (S.D. Ala., S. D. 1949). The evidence in this record emphatically and indisput ably demonstrates that the method by which appellants’ transfer requests were handled applies only in those cases that are differentiated from all others by the factor of race alone. The limited operation of what the court below chose to call “ assignment regulations” and an “ assign ment plan” is underscored by the uncontradicted testimony of appellees’ witnesses, supra, that these “ assignment regulations” had no application to any student other than a Negro student seeking enrollment in a previously “ allwhite” school, or a white student seeking enrollment in a previously “ all-Negro” school (JA 74-76). As respects those to whom applied, the “ assignment regulations” in issue establish standards and procedures significantly variant from those normally applicable to other children. Ordinarily, in cases other than those in volving “ racial” transfers, assignments are accomplished routinely, without personal interviews, school board con sideration and action, or special procedures. And, al though it is only in cases where children seek admission and enrollment in a school populated by pupils of the op- �22 2 3 posite race that appellees applied the special standards or criteria here involved (JA 77-78), the court below con cluded this does not prove discrimination. It is beyond question that the “ assignment plan” under consideration subjects all Negro applicants for nonsegregated education to a searching scrutiny and a survival of disqualifying phenomena not present in ordinary cases. This is more than merely the inconveniences, loss of time and trouble incidental to compliance with the special “ as signment” procedures which were applied. It is necessary that the Negro child satisfy requirements additional to and different from those established for and applied in all other cases. For the Negro child, rejections may follow from either a lack of special abilities and qualifications, or the presence of special circumstances. The difference in treat ment of Negro applications under the approved “ assign ment regulations” appears plainly from the fact that no white child is excluded from the schools to which the Negro appellants seek admission because his academic ability is rated below the median of the typical class in that school, or because he has “ psychological problems”, or because he is not “ adaptable.” These “ criteria,” the analyses of individual records, and interviews4 utilized in consideration of “ racial” transfer requests, all accumulate their weight to make exceedingly heavier demands of the Negro applicant to a white school. The validity of this observation is amply demonstrated by the fact that of the thirty Negro applicants submitted to appellees’ “ assignment regulations”, all were denied the requested transfers. This result is not remarkable when it is considered that the “ plan” necessarily operates in such fashion that while the Negro child, if exceptional, may survive application of the other criteria, he is doomed to failure under the Adaptability standard if he is not excep- tionally gifted or superior (JA 80-81). The vice in its operation is accentuated by the consideration that the Negro applicant to a Negro school or the white applicant to a white school need not be special but is admitted as a matter of course. In the context in which these “ problem areas” were conveniently contrived in a hastily called night meeting five days before the trial below, and in light of the fact that only Negro pupils were placed in such “ groupings,” and that the entire state is politically united in “ massive resistance” to desegregation, any consideration of these so called “ groupings” must be with suspicious scrutiny. Cf. Korematsu v. United States,323 U. S. 214 (1944). In the light of these facts and its own previous and present experience with appellees’ efforts to thwart the court’ prior order by disclaiming responsibility for appel s lants’assignments, the court’ legal justification for appel s lees’ continued successful defiance of the constitutional mandate for non-segregated public school education makes the following statement from the concurring opinion by the late Mr. Justice Murphy in Steele v. L u s i l & Nashville oivle R. R. C . 323 U. S. 192, 208 (1944) peculiarly apposite o, here: 4 A transcript of the personal interviews conducted by appellees and the State Pupil Placement Board appears in the record as Plaintiffs Exhibits 1 2 3 4 (T. 3 , , , . 49). The character of these interviews is exemplified by a question asked of each parent in substantially the following words: “ Are you seeking this transfer solely because of your so-called constitutional rights under the May 1 , 1 5 decision.” 7 94 The equal protection clause does not leave the state free to unjustifiably impose upon the exercise of rights by one group requirements not applicable to other groups. Smith v. Cahoon, 28 U. S. 553 (1931). See also Lane v. Wilson, 3 The utter disregard for the dignity and the well being of colored citizens shown by this record is so pronounced as to demand the invocation of constitu tional condemnation. To decide the case and to analyze the statute solely upon the basis of legal niceties, while remaining mute and placid as to the obvious and oppressive deprivation of constitutional guarantees, is to make the judicial function something less than it should be. B. The difference betw een the treatment a c co rd e d appellants and others sim ilarly situated, b a se d u pon ra ce alone, in vokes the con dem n ation of the d u e p ro cess and eq u a l protection g u a r an tees of the Fourteenth Amendment. �2 5 307 U. S. 268 (1939). Classifications violate the Constitu tion when they unjustifiably increase the group burdens, or depreciate the group benefits, of public education. S v a t v. Painter, 339 U. S. 629 (1950); McLaurin v. Okla iet homa State Regents, 339 U. S. 637 (1950); Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 332 U. S. 631 (1948). And it is hardly neces sary to state that the difference in treatment cannot be justified upon grounds of race, Brown v. Board o Educa f t o , 347 U. S. 483 (1954); Sweatt v. Painter, supra; Ex in parte Endo, 323 U. S. 283 (1944); Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U. S. 535 (1942), at 541; Nixon v. Herndon, 2 U. S. 73 536 (1927), at 5 1 Where, as here, such requirements are 4. enforced at all, they must be enforced without unequal results among groups identically situated despite differ ence as to race. Here the “ special” requirements con tained in the “ plan” under consideration are imposed only upon Negro children seeking to enter white schools, and white children seeking entry to Negro schools. The single factor determinative of its operation in particular cases is the difference in race between the appellants and those already in the school. Subjection to the “ plan” thus de pends solely on race— “ simply that and nothing more.” Buchanan v. Warley, 245 U. S. 60, 73 (1917). Neither the making of classifications based upon race, nor different treatment (by imposition of burdens or grant of benefits) to groups defined by racial considerations, have any reasonable relation to any legitimate purpose of the appellee School Board. Such discriminations by the school board constitute deprivations of liberty without the due process of law and denials of the equal protection of the laws in violation of the 14th Amendment. Brown v. Board o Education, 347 U. S. 483 (1954); Bolling v. f Sharpe, 347 U. S. 497 (1954), Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U. S. 1 (1958). An unjust discrimination not expressly made by the “ standards” adopted by appellees, but made possible by them, is nevertheless a denial of equal protection. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356 (1886) is the classic state ment of the rights of persons aggrieved by discriminatory administration of schemes appearing innocent on the sur face, where, at pp. 373-374, the court said: . . . Though the law itself be fair on its face and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons in similar cir cumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Con stitution. The fact that this different treatment may apply to white children who seek enrollment in “ Negro” schools, as well as to Negro applicants to “ white” schools, is en tirely beside the point. Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U. S. 1 , 21-22 (1948). In any event, in all of its ramifications the “ plan” here involved applied only to Negroes. The fact that the “ plan” may not absolutely preclude all Negro children, and that exceptionally gifted children may survive its operation, does not save it from constitu tional condemnation. Indisputably, it discriminates against the class that included the Negro appellants here by im posing greater demands upon them than upon others. This vice in its operation alone suffices to render it invalid. As the Court in Lane v. Wilson, supra at 275, stated in treating another constitutional right The [Fifteenth Amendment] nullifies sophisticated as well as simple-minded modes of discrimination. It hits onerous procedural requirements which effectively handicap exercise of the franchise by the colored race although the abstract right to vote may remain unre stricted as to race. Nor is the decision to be affected by the consideration that the discrimination resulting from the operation of the plan may not have been intended by the defendants. “ It is immaterial that the defendants may not have intended to deny admission on account of race or color. The inquiry is purely objective. The result, not the intendment, of their acts is determinative.” Thompson v. County School Board of Arlington County, supra. Non-intentional dis- �2 6 crimination is nonetheless unconstitutional. C assell v. Texas, 339 U. S. 282 (1950); Hi l v. Texas, 316 U. S. 400 l (1942); Smith v. Texas, 311 U. S. 128 (1940). The fact that appellee School Board sought to achieve, by the means employed, compliance with the previous orders of the court below is equally impotent. However, well-intended their efforts may be, this objective cannot be attained by a device that denies rights created or protected by the Federal Constitution. Buchanan v. Warley, supra, at 8 . 1 C. The failure of the court b e lo w to rec o g n ize and con d em n the patent discrim ination in the m ethod b y w h ich a p p ellees acted u pon appellants' ap p lication s is inconsistent with c a s e s in other a reas in w hich State action h as b e e n p ierced and found to represent a stratagem or d ev ice resorted to for p u rp oses of p reserv in g racial discrimination. See Terry v. Adams, 345 U. S. 461 (1953); Smith v. A l lwright, 321 U. S. 649 (1944); Perry v. Cyphers, 186 F. 2d. 608 (5th Cir. 1951); Rice v. Elmore, 165 F. 2d 387 (4th Cir. 1947), c r . den. 333 U. S. 875 (1948). Singularly apposite et is the following excerpt from the recent opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in Aaron v. Cooper, F.2d (8 th Cir., No. 1 ,0 4 1 No 6 9, 0 vember 1958): The effect of all these cases [cited above], in their relation to the present situation has been epitomized by the Supreme Court in Cooper v. Aaron, 78 S. Ct. 1401, 1 0 , as follows: “ In short, the constitutional 49 rights of children not to be discriminated against in school admission on grounds of race or color declared by this Court in the Brown case can neither be nullified openly or directly by state legislators or state execu tive or judicial officers, nor nullified indirectly by them through evasive schemes for segregation whether at tempted ‘ ingeniously or ingenuously’ ”. D. The court's con clu sion that ap p ellees' rejection of appellants' ap p lication s w a s not b a s e d u p on ra ce or color is in con sistent with its fin dings that tw o of the rea son s for rejection in volv ed racial considerations. In its examination of the five reasons or “ criteria” ten dered by appellees in justification of the rejection of ap pellants’ applications, the court below concluded that 27 “ The reasons given for disqualifying the seven stu dents upon the test of Psychological Problems ob viously give consideration t race or co o . . . (JA o lr 21 ) and with reference to the testimony of appellee Division Superintendent in his definition and opinion concerning the Adaptability test, the court said: . . . Eaee or color is not the basis for his opinion, though, he owns, the necessity for his decision is oc casioned by the removal of racial bars (JA 20) These are express findings that race or color was involved in at least two of the reasons given by the appellee School Board. There is an apparent inconsistency between the court’ opinion that “ it would be almost a mental impos s sibility for a witness to say how much weight he gave to any one of the several factors” (JA 113) and the rationale by which the court itself found that two of the factors 1‘ obviously give considerations to race and color ’’ but con , cluded that the other three were “ valid criteria, free of taint of race or color.” (JA 2 ) 2 It is submitted that the foregoing considerations sup port only one credible conclusion, namely, that appellees’ action upon appellants’ applications is designed and ad ministered to accomplish, pursuant to the policy, practice and custom of the Commonwealth of Virginia, perpetua tion of racial segregation in the Arlington County public schools, in contravention of appellants’ constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process and equal protection of the laws. �2 8 29 II. Having thus indicated the limits of the scope of the judi cial inquiry in this matter, the court below, in its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of 1 September 1 7 958, stated (JA II) : THE COURT ERRONEOUSLY CONSIDERED APPELLEES' REJEC TION OF APPELLANTS' APPLICATIONS FOR ADMISSION, ENROLLMENT AND EDUCATION IN DESIGNATED "WHITE" SCHOOLS AS "ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS" TO BE REVIEWED PURSUANT TO THE "SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE" DOCTRINE AND, HAVING THUS LIMITED ITS SCOPE OF INQUIRY, FAILED TO DISCHARGE ITS OBLIGATION TO MAKE AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION AND DETERMINA TION OF THE FACTS DECISIVE OF APPELLANTS' CONSTI TUTIONAL CLAIM THAT THEIR EXCLUSION FROM SAID SCHOOLS WAS BECAUSE OF RACE OR COLOR. As this case came on for hearing in the court below, the only issues presented upon the pleadings filed by the par ties were: (i) appellants’ demand for the enforcement and implementation of the previous orders of the court re straining and enjoining appellees from refusing to admit, enroll and educate appellants in any public school in Ar lington County on account of race or color; and (ii) ap pellees ’request for guidance, in the light of their contention that all power and authority to assign pupils to schools in Arlington County was vested in the Pupil Placement Board. However, at the hearing below, appellees were al lowed to present evidence as to the action they would take upon appellants’ applications i the court should reject ap f pellees ’disclaimer of authority to make pupil assignments. Thus appellees’witness testified that appellee School Board met, upon advice of counnsel, five days before the hearing below, considered appellants’applications, and voted to re ject all of them because they fell into five “ problem areas.” It was during cross-examination of appellees’ principal witness that the court below first indicated its concept of the scope of the inquiry in the instant proceedings, as fol lows : T h e C o u r t : A s I understand the case now, it has been channeled and reduced to the point where the Court is actually reviewing administrative action, and th inquiry o th Court i not whether th Court would e f e s e have done t i or t a , hut i h t i r there i evidence hs ht vele s t support i h t has been done; that is, that it is o va neither capricious, arbitrary or unlawful . . . (JA 82) [Emphasis supplied] . . . Decision is restricted to an administrative re view. . . . A. A ppellees' action w a s not such an "adm inistrative determ ina tion" a s w ou ld justify application of the "substantial evi d e n c e " doctrine. In concluding that appellees’ action upon appellants’ applications was an “ administrative determination” en titled to conclusive respect if based upon substantial evi dence, the court below relied upon premises which are not supported by the record in this case. More specifically, the court stated (JA 11): The case signally demonstrates the soundness and workability of these propositions: (1) that the Federal requirement of avoiding racial exclusiveness in the public schools— loosely termed the requirement of inte gration— can be fulfilled reasonably and with justice if the guide adopted is the circumstances of each child, individually and relatively; (2 ) that it may be achieved through the pursuit of any method wherein the regulatory body can, and does, act after a fair hearing and upon evidence; and (3) that when a con clusion is so reached in good faith, without influence of race, though it be erroneous, the assignment is no longer a concern of the United States courts. Tested by the existing record in this case appellants contend, and argue elsewhere in this brief, that the first and third of the above-stated “ propositions” are not sus tained. However, the second “ proposition” is the basis upon which the court limited the scope of its inquiry to an “ administrative review” and commands our immediate attention. To justify the court’ conclusion in this case it must s appear that appellees’action was based upon a “ fair hear ing”. The barest essentials of a “ fair hearing” would be notice, an opportunity to be heard, and findings based �30 3 1 upon the evidence. The fact that appellees acted ex p r e at, in closed session, without notice to appellants, or an oppor tunity for them to be heard in their own behalf is uneontroverted in this record. As stated in one of the leading cases in this area, Morgan v. United Sta e , 304 U. S. 1 ts , 1 -19 (1938): 8 and application of the “ substantial evidence” doctrine accorded it by the court below. . . . The right to a hearing embraces not only the right to present evidence but also a reasonable oppor tunity to know the claims of the opposing party and to meet them . . . Those who are brought into contest with the Government in a quasi-judicial proceeding aimed at the control of their activities are entitled to be fairly advised of what the Government proposes and to be heard upon its proposals before it issues its final command. No such reasonable opportunity was accorded appel l n s [Emphasis supplied] at. The fundamental rationale upon which administrative determinations are accorded respect by the courts is the fairness and adequacy of the procedure before the admin istrative agency. In Southern Garment Mfrs. Ass’. v. n Fleming, 122 F. 2d 622, 632 (D.C. Cir. 1941) the stand ards are set forth which, applied to the record in this case, conclusively demonstrate the court’ error: s The scope of judicial review should depend largely upon the adequacy of the preceding process. Here the process was fair and complete. The Committee and the Administrator did work that was authorized by Congress and they did it the way that body directed. The Committee heard evidence and deliberated. Its report went to the Administrator. There, the proceed ing was upon narrow, well-defined issues; the consid eration was detailed; the affected parties or their representatives were present; specific wage orders re sulted. These elements, inter alia, caused the Supreme Court, in the Opp case to call this proceeding judicial in character. A court, under such circumstances, should hesitate long before nullifying the resultant classification. It is submitted, therefore, that the “ administrative de termination” here was not entitled to the conclusive effect B. M oreover, appellants' claim that a p p ellees h a d ex clu d ed them from the sch oo ls to w hich they applied, on accou n t of their ra ce or color, in violation of constitutionally gu ara n teed rights, ob lig a ted the court b elo w to m ake an in dependent evaluation and determ ination of the factual issu e s d ecisiv e of appellants' claim. Accordingly, the court below was required to make its own independent evaluation and determination, upon all of the available and pertinent evidence, of the decisive factual issue; viz., whether appellees refused on account of race or color to admit, enroll and educate appellants, who were otherwise q a i i d in the “ white” schools for ulfe, which they applied. Thus, the issue of appellants’ qualifi cations, or lack thereof, was decisive of their claimed con stitutional right. The court was obliged to examine the evidence on this issue not merely to determine “ whether there is evidence to support the assignments as made”, or “ whether there is evidence to support what has been done,” or “ whether there is evidence to support the admin istrative finding”, or “ whether or not there was before the administrative agency valid evidence that supports its findings”, or “ whether there was justification in the mind of the others to come to the conclusion that they have reached, ” or “ only to see if the rebuttal evidence destroys any weight that might be given to the defendants’ proof.” Directly contrary to these expressions of the court’ inhi s bition and self-imposed limitations in the proceedings below, appellants contend that the court’ responsibility s was to make an independent review and determination upon the evidence “ whether the court would have done this or that,” and to weigh the evidence “ in the light that the court ordinarily weighs evidence, that is, determining the decision that the court will make,” resolving “ such differences” as may appear in the evidence, and, if so persuaded, making “ a different decision on this evidence” which “ may not agree with the conclusions of the Boards.” Wherever a citizen submits to a Federal court his claim �32 3 3 that an administrative body has acted in derogation of his constitutional rights, the court may and must exercise its independent judgment on those issues of fact that are decisive of the constitutional claim. This conception of the duty and function of the court is supported by the case law. In Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough, 253 U. S. 287 (1920) it was held that a court must exercise its independent judgment on the law and the facts in deter mining a claim of confiscation of property without due process of law, which resulted from a regulation of utility rates. The principle was again applied in S . Joseph Stock t Yards Co. v. United S a e , 298 U. S. 38, 49 (1936). Cf. tts Ng Fung Ho. v. White, 259 U. S. 276, 284-285 (1922). In Baltimore & Ohio BR Co. v. United S a e , 298 U. S. 34 , tts 9 372 (1936), the court again applied this doctrine, and re ferred in a footnote to Norris v. Alabama, 294 U. S. 5 7 8, 589-590 (1935), which may be regarded as involving an analogous principle. This principle, frequently stated in cases involving claimed coerced confessions and systematic exclusion of Negroes from juries, is that the power of the federal judiciary, in appellate review of state court pro ceedings, extends in certain circumstances to a considera tion of “ issues of fact.” The proposition is clearly stated in Watts v. Indiana, 338 U. S. 4 5 -51 (1949) : 9, 0 See also: Niemotko v. Maryland, 340 U. S. 2 8 271 (1951) 6, and Pierre v. Louisiana, 306 U. S. 3 4, 358 (1939); Feiner 5 v. Neiv York, 340 U. S. 3 5, 3 6, 323 footnote 4 (1951). 1 1 . . . “ issue of fact” is a coat of many colors. It does not cover a conclusion drawn from uncontro verted happenings, when that conclusion incorporates standards of conduct or criteria for judgment which in themselves are decisive of constitutional rights. Such standards and criteria, measured against the requirements drawn from constitutional provisions, and their proper applications, are issues for this Court’ adjudication. Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, s 324 U. S. 6 2, 659, and cases cited. Especially in cases 5 arising under the Due Process Clause is it important to distinguish between issues of fact that are here foreclosed and issues which, though cast in the form of determinations of fact, are the very issues to review which this Court sits, Sec Norris v. Alabama, 294 U. S. 5 7 89-90; Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U. S. 5 1, 5 0 8, 0 1. Logic and reason cannot sustain the contention that appellees’ “ administrative determination,” made ex parte and without notice in closed and secret session and without a record other than the testimonial recital in the instant proceeding below, is entitled to greater respect than the determinations by the quasi-judicial administrative bodies and the courts represented in the cases cited, supra. Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that the court below erred in failing to make an independent determina tion, on all the evidence properly before it, of the decisive issue of appellants’ qualification, or lack thereof, for admission to the ‘‘white ’’ schools from which they claimed appellees excluded them on account of their race or color. il l. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE AVAILABLE AND PERTINENT EVIDENCE COMPELS THE CONCLUSION THAT THE REASONS ADVANCED BY APPELLEES FOR THEIR REJECTION OF APPELLANTS' APPLICATIONS FOR ADMIS SION, ENROLLMENT AND EDUCATION IN "WHITE" SCHOOLS WERE BASED UPON CONSIDERATIONS OF RACE OR COLOR IN CONTRAVENTION OF APPELLANTS' CON STITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS OF DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION AND IN VIOLATION OF THE PRIOR ORDERS OF THE COURT. Appellants contend that an independent review and de termination upon the uncontroverted evidence in the record herein compels a conclusion contrary to that of the court below. A. A tten dan ce Area The Attendance Area reason as applied denies t appel o l n s the equal protection o th laws as guaranteed by at f e t e Fourteenth Amendment. h An attendance area basis for the assignment of school children to particular schools is, of course, not unusual or objectionable where applied without reference to race or color. However, even this seemingly innocuous and �34 rational standard may be applied in such a manner as to violate the mandate of equal protection. The action of appellees exemplifies this proposition. The evidence indicates that Attendance Area as a basis for assignment has been loosely applicable in Arlington County. The attendance area for the principal Negro school in the county, Hoffman-Boston, was established and has remained unchanged as an area for determining the assignment of Negro students only. (R. 374, JA 90-92). The few white children living within its boundaries are not required to attend Hoffman-Boston school (JA 9 0 9 , 143-145). Approximately 100 students are daily trans 1 ported from outside [from former North-Hoffman-Boston area] to Hoffman-Boston school. Those of the appellants, and all other Negroes, living outside the zone were nevertheless assigned by appellees to Hoff man-Boston school. It is submitted that this simple recitation conclusively demonstrates that Attendance Area, as administered by appellees, is but a rationalization for the use of “ naked and arbitrary power” to maintain segregation. Cf. Yich Wo v. Hopkins, supra at 3 6 6. In Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 2 4, 300-301 9 (1955), the Court indicated that among the factors to be considered by the district courts in granting time for compliance, were problems related to “ revision of school districts and attendance areas into compact units to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis.” In Cooper v. Aaron, supra at 7 the , Court said that “ State authorities were thus duty bound to devote every effort toward initiating desegregation and bringing about the elimination of racial discrimination in the public school system.” Certainly the action of ap pellees herein, in continuing to maintain the prior school zones specifically designed to facilitate and accommodate the invalidated system of racial segregation, coupled with their disregard of these zones in cases where rigid enforce ment is incompatible with the maintenance of segregation, cannot be squared with any concept of “ good faith com pliance” with the duty “ to devote every effort toward 3 5 initiating desegregation.” See also Aaron v. Cooper, supra, with respect to the affirmative obligations of state and local authorities. B. O v e rc ro w d in g at W ash ington and L ee T e Overcrowding reason i a mere r t o a i a i n for h. s ainlzto continued r c a seg e a i n ail rgto. Appellees assign overcrowding as their reason for re jecting the applications of five Negro students to Wash ington and Lee High School. Appellants do not contro vert the fact that the enrollment at Washington and Lee exceeds the school’ planned capacity. Similarly there s is no contradiction of appellees’ assertion that a portion of the Washington and Lee attendance area was “ severed” and annexed to the Wakefield High School area for the assignment of 250 10th grade students to the latter school to equalize the burden between the two schools. However, upon these facts, appellees’treatment of the five appellants who did not live within the severed area is the most patent and obvious racial discrimination. These students, one of whom was in the 11th grade and would not have been affected by the severance in any event, were assigned in a manner dissimilar from all other students in the Wash ington and Lee attendance area— except the 100 other Negroes not parties to this suit— to the Hoffman-Boston School. Thus, although appellees claimed abandonment of the “ North” Hoffman-Boston attendance area in defer ence to its clearly racial character, the assignment of these five appellants and all other Negroes in that area to the Hoffman-Boston School is an obvious contradiction and adherence to the prior policy of segregation. The use of Overcrowding as a rationalization for con tinued maintenance of racial segregation has been specifi cally rejected. Clemmons v. Board o Education o H l s f f il bo o Ohio, 228 F. 2d 853, 85 , 860 (6th Cir. 1956), c r , r, 7 et d n 350 U.S. 1006 (1956). Tn a concurring opinion, Circuit e. Judge (Now Mr. Justice) Potter Stewart said (p. 860): It was estimated at the time of the hearing in the district court that the new school buildings in Hillsboro �36 would be completed about January, 19 , although 57 the record is not entirely clear on this point. If that is true, there may be some overcrowding of classrooms for the first half of the next school year, in the event the Board decides to make no use of the present Lincoln School building. Overcrowded classrooms, however, are unfortunately not peculiar to Hillsboro, and th avoidance alone o somewhat overcroivded e f classrooms cannot j s i y segregation of school c i utf hl dren s l l because of th co o of t e r s i s [Em oey e lr hi kn. phasis supplied] C. A ca d em ic A ch ievem en t The uncontroverted evidence with respect t th Aca o e demic Achievement reason c n l o c usively demonstrates t a ht t i i an attempted j s i i a i n for continued r c a hs s utfcto ail segregation. No white children, including those with achievement scores lower than those of the appellants, were excluded from the schools appellants sought to attend. It is said that the Negro students excluded for reason of academic deficiency, were found to have achievement scores that would place them in the lower portions of their classes if admitted to “ white” schools, and that they will have seri ous academic difficulties if transferred. But it is apparent on the face of the record that there were some white stu dents in the schools involved with achievement scores as low as those of the appellants. For, although the Arlington “ white” schools have median achievement levels above the national median, the “ Negro” schools have students scoring above and below these median scores. By definition a “ median” is merely the point dividing the upper and lower halves of the students tested. The pattern of discrimination is clear. Students are di vided into two groups, those with relatively high and those with relatively low achievement attainments. Those with relatively high attainments are deemed qualified. Those with relatively low attainments are then divided into two more classes— those excluded from a given school (all Negroes) and those not excluded (a l white students). Cf. l Yick Wo v. Hopkins, supra. It is apparent that the deci- 37 sion on whether or not those students with low attainments are qualified for attendance at the heretofore “ white” schools is exercised on a racial basis. It is submitted that it was erroneous, as a matter of law, for the court below to restrict the right not to be racially segregated in public schools to Negroes who are intellectu ally gifted. The equal protection of the laws is a “ pledge of the protection of equal laws” to a l persons within the l state, Yick Wo v. Hopkins, supra. The state is not required to treat as alike the genius and the imbecile, for they are different in fact, but the state may make no distinctions in its treatment of either geniuses or imbeciles of different races. I To exclude these Negro children from the benefits of superior schools, for the reason that as the victims of in ferior segregated schools they have not as a group reached the level of achievement of the more privileged race, is to forever consign them to an inferior education in seg regated schools. D. P sy c h o lo g ic a l P ro b lem s The exclusion of some appellants by reason of psycho logical problems was disapproved by the court below for insufficient evidence. It is submitted that the court’ s finding that this reason involved considerations of race and color was sufficient to invalidate it, without regard to the quantum of evidence on this point. E. A d ap tab ility Finally,with respect t l c o adaptability as a reason o ak f for exclusion o a p l a t , i i submitted t a t i a s f pelns t s h t hs l o was a r c a a d discriminatory standard. Its racial char ail n' acter is clearly indicated in the definition of this standard as given by the appellee School Superintendent, and testi mony that, in his opinion, the five appellants who had successfully met every other test mentioned above, should nevertheless be excluded from the schools to which they sought admission on the ground that they might be injured or harmed by the transition to attending school with mem- �38 3 9 bers of the other race, and their consequent loss of school superiority and leadership. One of the presuppositions of this opinion is a theory of the supremacy of the white race. The testimony of the appellees’ witness is that only exceptionally gifted Negro children could “ adapt” to desegregated schools (JA 80-81). Not only are the presuppositions of this rationale alien to American ideals, Ex Parte Endo, supra at 308, but the paternal solicitude for the supposed welfare of the appellants, which is urged to justify continued deprivation of their constitutional rights, touches an area beyond the power of the appellees or the courts, i.e. the rights of par ents and the children to decide whether or when to exercise their constitutional rights and what is in their best interests. McKissick v. Carmichael, 187 F. 2d 948, 954 (4th Cir. 1951) c r . den. 341 U.S. 951 (1951); Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. et 390 (1923); Pierce v. Society of S s e s 268 U.S. 510 itr, (1925). Carter v. School Board of Arlington Comity, 182 F. 2d 531 (4th Cir. 1950). The conclusion of th court below th t pupil A was e a lacking i a a t b l t , and th t t i was a proper ground n dpaiiy a hs for h s exclusion from the school th t he othenvise was i a q a i i d t a t n , i s milarly erroneous. In its consider ulfe o ted s i ation of this pupil, the court below has assigned reasons for his rejection not suggested by appellees. The court below considered information relative to his academic achievement, although appellees did not raise this objection. As no achievement test score was available for pupil A, the court below concluded that the statement taken from his most recent report card, that he was “ on grade level” , meant that he was on grade level in relation to the inferior standards of the Negro school to which he was assigned by appellees, despite the fact that a witness for appellees testified with respect to this very same pupil that the term “ on grade level” was used in relation to all the schools in the county (JA 37). The balance of the court’ dis s cussion of this pupil amounted to a balancing or weighing of the advantages and disadvantages to him of attending the white and Negro schools. This type of treatment of appellant A ’ constitutional claim is clearly erroneous. s R esp o n se to A p p ellees' C ross-A ppeal The appellees have filed a cross-appeal from the deci sion of the court below restraining and enjoining them from refusing to admit, enroll and educate four appellants in the Stratford Junior High School at the commencement of the second semester of the current school term, which decision was based upon the court’ finding and conclusion s that there was no substantial evidence to support appellees’ disqualification of these pupils by reason of lack of adaptability. As indicated, supra, in this brief appellants (cross appellees) disagree with the premises upon which appellees’ (cross-appellants) argument is based with respect to the proper function and scope of inquiry of the District Court. In this connection, the three cases relied upon by crossappellants in their brief on cross-appeal— National Labor Relations Board v Babcock < Wilcox C . 351 U.S. 105 . & o, (1956); Radio Corp. o America v. United S a e , 341 U.S. f tts 412 (1951); and Secretary o Agriculture v. Central Roig f Refining C . 338 U.S. 604 (1950)— have no relation to the o, problem posed by this appeal. Those cases involved the quasi-judicial determinations of administrative bodies fulfilling specialized technical functions, exercising expert knowledge, and following procedures affording to the inter ested parties full administrative or procedural due process, all as contrasted with the secret ex parte determinations of the appellee School Board (itself an interested party) based upon only the evidence it chose to consider and upon no “ record.” The school board’ suggestion that they s acted “ after a fair hearing and upon evidence” is palpably false. No hearing was accorded to the plaintiffs by the defendants and they were neither requested nor given an opportunity to present “ evidence” to the school board in support of their requests. However, assuming arguendo, t a the court below prop ht e l used and applied th “sub t n i l evidence” d c r n , ry e sata otie �40 41 i i submitted th t therei no evidence i th record t sup ts a s n e o port the School Board’ conclusion th t these four pupils s a were not q a i i d t attend Stratford Junior High S ulfe o chool. IV. The testimony of the school board’ own witnesses estab s lished that these students lived within the Stratford attendance area, were academically qualified by applica tion of the board’ own standards, had no disqualifying s psychological problems and could not be barred for lack of space. The only suggested reason offered by appellees for their exclusion was that these four students could not adapt to the new situation they faced. This was an opinion and a prediction based upon no individual data or information with respect to these students, at least so far as was disclosed to the court. The school board clearly failed to present any adequate evidence in justifica tion of the exclusion of these four students from the schools which they were otherwise admittedly qualified to attend. No basis for the exercise of discretion in their case was proffered except for the opinion of the School Superin tendent, and this is on its face a subjective prediction, admittedly occasioned only by the prospective removal of racial barriers. It is apparent that this reason has no meaning except in terms of racial issues and that the real basis for exclusion is race or color. And, of course, the objections to the entire procedure and pattern of action pursued by the school board, devel oped elsewhere in this brief, apply with equal force in consideration of the rights of these four students. THE COURT'S PREVIOUS JUDGMENT. AFFIRMED ON APPEAL, THAT FIVE APPELLANTS WERE QUALIFIED FOR AND COULD NOT BE REFUSED ADMISSION TO DESIGNATED "WHITE" SCHOOLS, MAY NOT BE NULLIFIED, IN SUBSE QUENT PROCEEDINGS FOR ITS ENFORCEMENT, ON THE GROUND OF APPELLANTS' ALLEGED DISQUALIFICATION FOR REASONS AVAILABLE TO BUT NOT URGED BY AP PELLEES IN THE PRIOR PROCEEDINGS. A. T h e 14 S ep tem b er 1957 D e c re e H erein F o re c lo se d Fu rth er L itiga tion W ith R esp ect to the Q u alification o f F ive A p p el lan ts fo r A d m ission to D esig n a ted "W h ite" S ch o ols In the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law entered in this case on 14 September 19 , the court below found 57 that seven Negro children, including five of the present appellants (A, B, C, D, and E), were refused admission to designated “ white” schools because of their race, inas much as “ no intimation of disqualification appeared as to any applicant.” Upon the basis of the foregoing find ings and conclusions, the court below entered its Supple mentary Decree of Injunction, ordering that the defendants [appellees here] be restrained and enjoined from refusing to admit, or enroll, or educate the named plaintiffs in the [white] schools to which they have made application for admission upon the presentation of said plaintiffs for admission, enrollment and education in the said schools commencing at the opening of said schools on the morning of September 2 , 1957 (R. 248). This injunction, on the 3 present appellees’motion (R. 252), was suspended pending appeal (R. 256). On 1 February 1 5 , this judgment was 2 98 affirmed by this Court (R. 399) and writ of certiorari was denied 19 May 1 5 . 98 The court below, with specific reference to appellants’ present contention said (JA 14): . . . Five of the thirty are the children who were ordered admitted by this court in September 1 5 , 97 but the order was stayed pending appeals. Contrary to their argument, however, these pupils have not by virtue of that order a vested position for this session. Admissions must be judged on current conditions, the rule to be applied to all students . . . �42 Appellants contend that the court’ order of 14 Septem s ber 1957 was final and conclusive of the rights of the parties thereby adjudicated. Washington Bridge Co. v. Stewart, 44 U.S. (3 How.) 413 (1845); Sibbakl v. United Sta e , 3 ts 7 TJ.S. (12 Peters) 488 (1838). More specifically, the issue of these appellants ’ qualifica tions for admission to the schools to which they applied was tendered, litigated and forever settled as between the parties and their privies. Baltimore S S Co. v. P i l p , . . hlis 274 U.S. 316 (1927); City and Town o Beloit v. Morgan, f 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 619 (1869). This result obtains, notwith standing appellees’ claim that the defenses and evidence presented in the instant proceeding were not presented in the proceedings leading to the 14 September 1957 order. This is not a case where the law has been subsequently changed relative to the authority of the appellees to judge the qualifications of the five appellants. Nor is it one where subsequent to the 1957 decree additional data on the five appellants were obtained and reviewed by the appellees. The objections raised at the 1958 hearing were based upon the same data available to appellees prior to the 1957 hearing. Under our system of jurisprudence, it is wellestablished that a decree of judgment estops not only as to every ground of defense actually presented in an action, but also as to every ground which might have been presented. Otherwise, in many instances, litigation would be interminable. The Haytian Republic, 154 U.S. 118 (1894); Dowell v. Applegate, 152 U.S. 327 (1894). In Cromwell v. Sac County, 94 U.S. 351, 352-353 (1877), the Court said: Thus, for example, a judgment rendered upon a promissory note is conclusive as to the validity of the instrument and the amount due upon it, although it be subsequently alleged that perfect defenses actually existed, of which no proof was offered, such as forgery, want of consideration or payment. If such defenses were not presented in the action, and established by competent evidence, the subsequent allegation of their existence is of no legal consequence . . . The language, therefore, which is so often used, that a judgment 4 3 estops not only as to every ground of recovery or defense actually presented in the action, but also as to every ground which might have been presented, is strictly accurate .. . See also Gould v. Evansville& C R. C . 91 U.S. 526 (1876); . o, Grubb v Public U i i i s Commission o Ohio, 281 U.S. . tlte f 470 (1930); C i c t County Drainage D s . v Baxter State lio it . Bank, 308 U.S. 371 (1940); C l R v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591 ... (1948); U.S. v Munsingwear, I c , 340 U.S. 3 , 38 (1950). . n. 6 Moreover, if the appellees are allowed to litigate the qualifications of the five appellants and in some subsequent proceedings, as below, to relitigate the same matter by tendering further objections which could have been raised in the prior proceedings, then the constitutional rights of the appellants could easily be “ frittered away” and rendered incapable of effective enforcement. Cf. O i l re v. R s e l 278 U.S. 3 8, 363 (1929);Maggio v. Z i z 333 usl, 5 et, U.S. 5 , 68-69 (1948). 6 B. T h e F in al J u d gm en t S ecu r in g T h ese A ppellants' C o n sti tu tion a l B ig h ts C o u ld N ot b e V acated and S et A sid e b y A p p ellees' S u b seq u en t A ction In 1957 the court below found the five appellants qualified and ordered their admission to certain designated schools. In the instant proceedings below the appellees found appel lants disqualified by the application of “ criteria” which, when recognized by the court below, had the effect of nulli fying the prior injunction. No change in circumstances was shown. Prior to the 1957 hearing the appellees had the power and authority to apply the same “ criteria” subsequently tendered. The 1957 decree was thus “ va cated” without any showing of a change in state law, or administrative regulations, or that it was impossible for the appellees to carry out the terms of the injunctive order. In other words, whatever the distinction between a decree and a judgment at law, the 1957 decree did estab lish in the appellants a constitutional right to attend the schools designated by its terms. The decree fixed the rights of the appellants, Hopkins v. Lee, 1 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 9 �44 45 109 (1821), and by force of the decree the appellants were in legal effect placed in the designated schools. It has been repeatedly held that where a judgment has been rendered the rights flowing from it have passed beyond the legislative (administrative) power, either directly or indirectly, to reach or destroy. In United States v. Peters, 9 U.S. (5 Cranch) 1 5, 136 (1809), Chief Justice Marshall 1 observed: appellees well within the “ controlling legal principles” pronounced in Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 1 -17 (1958). , 6 Furthermore, since the District Court failed to enforce the 1957 decree on the basis of “ criteria” which could not be constitutionally applied to these five appellants, its action may be deemed to be unconstitutional within the meaning of the principles declared in Shelley v. Kraemer, If the legislatures of the several states may, at will annul the judgments of the courts of the United States, and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments, the Constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery; and the nation is deprived of the means of enforcing its laws by the instrumentality of its own tribunals. See also McCullough v. Vir i i , 172 U.S. 102 (1898). gna The appellants submit, therefore, that the court’ ap s proval of appellees’ subsequent rejection of appellants’ applications on the basis of the alleged “ criteria” is within this principle. The action of appellees, approved by the court, nullified the rights flowing from the 1957 injunctive decree. C. T h e F in a lly A d ju d ica te d C on stitu tion al R igh t o f T h ese A p p ella n ts to A tten d th e S c h o o ls D esig n a ted in the Court's 14 S e p te m b e r 1957 O rd er C o u ld N ot b e S u b je c te d to C o n d ition s N ot S im ila r ly A p p lie d to A ll O th er S tu d en ts A d m itted and E n r o lle d in S a id S c h o o ls The 1957 decree gave the five appellants a legal status comparable to that of those students who were already enrolled. With this status they were entitled to be treated in the same manner as other students already enrolled, rather than as mere applicants for admission. Cf. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra. Appellees, however, applied the “ criteria” only to these five appel lants and the other Negro children seeking admission to “ white” schools. No white students, enrolled in these schools, or seeking admission for the first time, were subjected to these “ criteria”. This is a clear case of arbitrary and discriminatory action on the part of the supra. Accordingly, it is submitted that the ruling of the Dis trict Court, denying to these five appellants the enforcement and implementation of their constitutional rights as finally and specifically adjudicated under the prior orders of the court, should be reversed. v . THE COURT BELOW ERRED IN POSTPONING. UNTIL THE SECOND SEMESTER OF THE SCHOOL SESSION OF 1 5 9 8-1959. THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ITS ORDER RESTRAINING AND ENJOINING APPELLEES FROM REFUSING TO ADMIT. ENROLL OR EDUCATE FOUR OF APPELLANTS IN THE "WHITE" SCHOOL FROM WHICH THEY HAD BEEN IM PROPERLY EXCLUDED. A. T h e C o u rt B e lo w th e P erson a l and It fou n d to H a v e fo rd J u n ior H ig h E rred in P ostp o n in g the E n joy m en t o f P resen t R igh ts o f the F ou r A p p ella n ts B een E x clu d ed U n la w fu lly F rom S trat S ch o ol The court below, upon review of appellees’ determina tion that each of thirty timely requests by Negro pupils for admission and enrollment in designated white schools for the current (1958-1959) school term should be rejected, found that as to four of these pupils “ . . . refusal of their applications for transfer is not justified in the record (JA 11).” In apparent anticipation of this result, the court, at the conclusion of the proceedings below on 4 September 1 958, made the following remarks: Without intending intrusion for a moment upon the functions of the administrative agency or of the State, the Court simply wants to say that as far as the Court is concerned, the schools may be opened and the pupils assigned to them. That i cludes t e n h ri h o th applicants here t enter th schools under gt f e o e t e assignments as made, hut reserving t themselves h o �47 46 without prejudice i any way, th ri h sil t i s s n e g t tl o n i t upon th change of the assignment after t e r cases e hi have been heard. This would be the course that would effective at the commencement of the next semester, January 1 959. This short deferment will not be hurt ful. Indeed, if the basic problem can be solved by time, the price is not too dear. do not want anyone t be prejudiced by the time t a o ht the Court w l require to reach its decision in this case. il Five days thereafter, on 22 September 1958, the court entered its Supplementary Order of Injunction be followed if, I am sure, there was no Constitutional question involved. I mention that simply because I (JA 222) * * * # ... I mean the children may return to the school as scheduled with reference to the applicants, the 30 here, they would take their places in schools as they are assigned now, but i doing s , they would not i any n o n way waive t e r r g t t continue the prosecution o hi ih o f t e r objections which are now before t e Court (JA hi h 223). * * # * ... In other words, i these 30 enter the s h o s f col, they w l be receiving th same c a s work, I take i, il e ls t but under conditions t a they do not a c p , but ht cet i o l only be for th temporary period u t l the Court vud e ni decides one way or the other (JA 223-224). [Emphasis supplied] However, notwithstanding the foregoing assurances that appellants would not be prejudiced by the delay involved in the court’ consideration and determination of their s motion to be admitted and enrolled at the commencement of the current session, on 4 September 1958, in the schools to which they had made timely application, the court, in its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, entered on 17 September 1958, declared (JA 11-12): These four are all applicants for Stratford Junior High School; they have asked to enter the seventh grade, the first year of junior high. Before this deci sion can be effectuated by a final decree, ten days or more would routinely elapse, carrying the effective date into October. In the judgment of the court it would be unwise to make the transfers as late as that in the term.5 The decree, therefore, will be made I t should be noted that appellees postponed until 8 Septem ber 1958 the opening o f the 1958-1959 school term. N ote also that, on 14 Septem ber 1957, the court below ordered the admission o f seven N egro applicants into the white schools to which they had applied, effective 23 Septem ber 1957, not withstanding the 1957-1958 school term, had comm enced on 4 Septem ber 1957 (R. 239, 248). . . . that the defendants, their successors in office, agents, representatives, servants and employees be, and each of them is hereby restrained and enjoined from refusing to admit, enroll or educate plaintiffs Ronald Deskins, Michael Gerard Jones, Lance Dwight Newman and Gloria Delores Thompson to, or in, Stratford Junior High School, Arlington County, Vir ginia at the commencement of the second semester of the school session of 1958-1959, . . . The rights of appellants to the equal protection of the laws and to due process of law as secured by the Fourteenth Amendment are “ personal and present” rights. S v a t iet v. Painter, supra at 635; McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra at 642, and the state must provide these rights for appellants “ as soon as it does for applicants of any other group.” Sipuel v. Board of Regents, supra at 63 3. B. A p p e lle e s P resen ted N o E v id en ce in Justification o f th e D ela y G ranted In Brown v. Board o Education, 3 U.S. 294 (1955) f 49 it is suggested that the United States District Courts must apply equitable principles in the timing of desegre gation orders, by consideration of particular local prob lems. However, the Brown decision clearly states the limitation of the area of this discretion and the conditions upon which delay in compliance may be permitted. Thus, at 349 U.S. 294, 300-301, the Supreme Court said: .. At stake i the personal i t r s of t e p a n i f . s neet h litfs i admission t public s n o chools as soon as p a t c b e rcialon a nondiscriminatory b s s To effectuate this inter ai. est may call for elimination of a variety of obstacles in making the transition to school systems operated �49 48 in accordance with the constitutional principles set forth in our May 1 , 1954 decision. Courts of equity 7 may properly take into account the public interest in the elimination of such obstacles in a systematic and effective manner . . . While giving weight to these public and private considerations, th courts w l require t a the defend e il ht ants make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance with our May 1 , 1954 ruling. Once such 7 a s a t has been made, the courts may find that addi tr tional time is necessary to carry out the ruling in an et h effective manner. The burden r s s upon t e defend ants t e t b i h t a such time i necessary i t e o sals ht s n h public i t r s and i c n istent with good f i h com neet s os at pliance a the e r i s practicable date . .. [Emphasis t alet supplied] Similarly, in Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 3 L. Ed. 2d , (Adv.) 5,10, the Court, after quoting the preceding passage with approval said: Under such circumstances, the District Courts were directed to require “ a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance,” and to take such action as was necessary to bring about the end of racial segre gation in the public schools “ with all deliberate speed.” Ibid. ... I i a made plain t a delay i any guise t vs ht n i order t deny th c n t t t o a r g t of Negro n o e osiuinl ihs children could not be countenanced and t a only a ht prompt s a t d l g n l and earnestly pursued, t tr, i i e t y o eliminate r c a segregation from th public schools ail e could c n t t t good f i h compliance ... [Emphasis osiue at supplied] In the instant case, none of the conditions is present upon which the District Courts are “ directed” to predi cate the exercise of their discretion in granting delay in admission of Negro children to white schools in accordance with the Supreme Court’ desegregation mandate. The s prior proceedings and present record in this case conclu sively demonstrate that no “ prompt and reasonable start” has been made by appellees “ toward full compliance” with the May 1 , 1954 decision or with the prior decisions 7 in this case. In these circumstances, there can be no occa- sion for consideration of the factors which might justify a delay if there had been such a start. Brown, supra, and Cooper v. Aaron, supra. The appellees not only did not carry “ the burden . . . to establish that such time is necessary in the public interest and is consistent with good faith compliance at the earliest practicable date,” they did not, on the existing record, even assume that burden. Thus, there is no occasion for a balancing of interests or equities where previously determined and adjudicated constitutional rights are being thwarted by those local authorities who are duty bound to secure them. There is no conflict of public and private interests to be considered here, for it is always in the public interest to enforce the Constitution’ guarantee to each citizen or group of citi s zens of the equal protection of the laws. “ [E]qual protec tion to all is the basic principle upon which justice under law rests ...” Pierre v. Louisiana, supra at 358 C. T h e A p p ella n ts N eith er R eq u ested N or C o n sen ted to the D e la y for T h eir Benefit. O n th e Contrary, T h ey R eq u ested Im m ed ia te R elief If, as it appears from the opinion of the court be low (JA 11-12), the delay is sought to be justified by a concern for the interest of appellants themselves, the court’ action is erroneous as a matter of law, s since neither these infants nor their parents sought a delay. The court and the school authorities have no power or obligation to decide for appellants when or whether they may demand their right to equal treatment before the law, except under the expressly de fined and limited area of judicial discretion permitted by Brown v. Board of Education, supra. See Clemmons v. Board of Education of H l s o o supra at 857, 859. Indeed ilbr, when the constitutional rights of the individual citizen are at stake “ it is for him to decide in which direction his advantage lies.” McKissick v. Carmichael, supra at 95 4. It is respectfully submitted, that the court below erred as a matter of law, in delaying the enforcement of its injunction as to the four appellants whose constitutional �5 0 rights it found were denied by appellees and that, in this sense, the error constituted an abuse of judicial discretion which must be reversed. Clemmons v. Board o Education f o Hl f i lsboro, supra. C O N C L U S IO N For the reasons stated herein, it is respectfully submitted that the judgments appealed from should be reversed as to the appellants herein, except as to Appellants (Cross-Appel lees) Ronald Deskins, Michael Gerard Jones, Lance Dwight Newman and Gloria Delores Thompson, with respect to whom the judgment appealed from should be affirmed and modified to make it effective forthwith. Respectfully submitted, Ol i v e r W. H i l l 118 East Leigh Street Richmond 1 , Virginia 9 F r a n k D. R e e v e s , and J a me s M Na b r it , III . 473 Florida Ave., N. W. Washington 1 D. C. , S. W. R o b i n s o n , III 623 North Third Street Richmond 1 , Virginia 9 Ot t o L. T u c k e r 901 Princess Street Alexandria, Virginia Counsel for Appellants and Cross-Appellees. � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Brief For Appellants And Cross-Appellees For Case No. 7776 From The United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia, Alexandria Division Description An account of the resource Brief For Appellants And Cross-Appellees For Case No. 7776 From The United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia, Alexandria Division, E. Leslie Hamm Jr, by E. Leslie Hamm, Sr vs. Arlington County School Board and Ray E. Reid, Division Superintendent of Schools, Arlington County, and Arlington County School Board and Ray E. Reid, Division Superintendent of Schools, Arlington County Virginia vs. Ronald Deskins, Michael Gerard Jones, Lance Dwight Newman and Gloria Delores Thompson, for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division. Undated. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource No date 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_4_38 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ad39871b4bb0c094e1cb53e60db53ecb.pdf 56aaf0f7fb10b6708191393f210b4c28 PDF Text Text j I An S clio o b ' y ; •Session Call Jj O p p o sed b y Sj M rs. Ston e _ » 1 ----- tv —- a I . K athryn H. Stone. A rlington a delegate to the Virginia Gener- al Assembly, M id y e s te r d a y s h e I w a s o p p o se d to callin" a r nn 1 /stitu u o n al Con* a Con‘ * “n tio - • — a m en d "the < btatc C onstitu- : flion to perm * it jspending of jpublicfunds on . tuition grants: I fo r p upils to a t- : ■ end private t s c h o o ls. j s u 'h 'a p t a ," « 2 ij (Suggested in i*,rs- Stone I /|/!e 9"a> Commission report on| ‘ /Vj.gmja school segregation ft!!?1 „!c,carl>' ytoiate Section ** I,1- 9 of ‘he Constitution relating 'anecr ot V1ShmCwc ,a nthroughout' v „ ^ free schools d “ dintontne state. Mrs. Stone said. I t.nt be. . af ded ‘hat she would,' tote against any such nlan ini the Special Assembly. ' I ••iuakeshjft private schools without adequate buildings and equipment, and without any set of controlling standards would! indeed produce a generation of illite r a te s and wipe out decades iS,rcT C S “ ' S,on,! / “I am sure that the Federal j C o u rts r e a lize th a t th e im p le ­ m e n ta tio n o f the Supreme / C o u r t s decision on de-segrega- tion will require much more K f r A S° mC ,< a,ities than in • K * sa,d- “The efforts ue,. 1 ,ot t.jo General Assembly will . ^issjuiuioo ° - “ er spent on working out 1 ^ e ‘ijat.uuoj | ff?5!ire, -''‘•ps. however! . oieis small lCG.i-ng towards compll.,0 . -aoj jo aouSap uje^ .once. J3-o w d ^noMeode i r -c.ii jno ljodar am P/!Pn)S ,ou p . , ) ! , , , ™ , 3’ ' .(iqiuossv lejauoD Olif'oi nt?s oioa uoj^ujfay 'auois u&nnev u j o j j otueo luommoa jejm n s ^ i« ° r ov „ 0„ o S ? p p 03 “ •* uodoi Pin i i„ jo » » , w s s r / s ! "1 r1 v v e ft& op ssq Po.ssj uiiuojo oqx V e t o jq ) suoddns oil M e! OIL■•'““ •••P-'op.'s'dodlPOiU'oqx Iv- some,. •ojiSarorr 3 M S W S S g l ,WU2XW PJW « 3 g “ 1S 1 /oifl ki!wswd, ! a , S -f* 1001,05!........................ . . . . «•»!“!» s. , ln0qS-u)jqi son!l*Mt °t -.-..o.ii qejijoejd si- i:e,tf oqx„ 3%uiaiqojd oqi osneooq 'oieis -uuissriuoioo aq, uq sueoiiqim awISSo<i se oSaes » opus sq Sui ou o«l JO-no 'qiojouei p.i'01.1 . , , j Uj jqju 3)Inb jj.ioqi quiqi : -uos ois'-S poqJdmod ..'.UiOd. . 'eiuiSJ'A 1° tnu»s 11Bui urn r !Sl-j, ie ajnis,i|S»[ am J0'jiiopisoJii 'uopsea oqi pun cqdjoil oqi so.i|3 u„ a,e3|03 moo J»«uoj •pDjetoop Alunoo os(At' ‘ „'.<opoi 1! iouq o.iesc uoildonpo 3||qnd uo ! :o lpdiuco 1 oqJO o;p3o;oa:A8j*pinoAiiiasnsooq,,uon«M '.ue, oq) jo odoos oqi uiqt!" ,H poosu pu« ooop o.u’q Plt'oo -4) V L e!U U . ,2j'!A uoqco.Mpino.-A o.vi se poo« « S|H PAO I„ •|„C a q '‘S[ooq3s oiu.ujd jo iioq s ■ajnqstjooj jo uibis.<s peojilsapi* v ohh Saiqi . I!IPn»3 '3 '.tt Joieuos oiDS'-due oj uamoa v '••'JniuoD B ' pies „'ouo3 o.ieq Pinoo it '" sjen uutiEanpa oqqnd ciu'di'A Jdj i t 03 jouBpip.puc qosojd 138 p[no.A -------------- uoisspu sjesodoad •d e OIOJOPOUI e qp.n dn su,,j V oi.Jopow 1 1 1 * .. - -------- /JUOISSIIUUOO . oqi .. . ' ' 03 oqipjejuosjopuon.ua u •jno lio.ujou . pojuiodl „ i[ns i o'iqi ' uoj j oos lO fq - 01 q 2 3" g —2 5 - 't '1 ° s q h . " 5 .. ’ | g . | a S „ = . s § . 3 " .E “ g.g; ' ■ . .J! ; \° JJT jf 'o o s V,0Ue W 0JJ .. .Mope uc 132 j °* '“ " P tiq odejnoo r , e J‘ 2 j.p jg o, ; o siuojed o Ji'oqi ,( •4f|uno3i'a » ,l|3!ur M I* s.»e[ aouepuoi 3P « « u n v s ip t J B j - l ' Ioofos « |1 0 ) luoiupujuie ' l i n r n u t m J“ “ M ••'UIW J JO UE ,s “ !e3c pouje.n u j p j Etr ! s j s i a o . - d. a -= A = S 'S '3 s WO 3 s aS *s 8S1 1 -3 s S p e - t . * “ c l | g ? 5 _E f ! *5 . n . = 3 = 3 « o i j » ; ? S io m u ll a. |-oo: ^ g; ^ O -► 1 i al\ 3 3 -5 . 5 - 3 “ gi § - « S . f .f f S ? ° § 8 g f f s s a - 8 S a . e s r 3 •s S ? . A S 5 . S5 s J ^ ° s S 0 -: = o - i ~i3e.s .• 2.=.o — 3 oa-cai _ 3- » X ^ -r o < ? o 5i o * » 3 : 3 S l 3 5 - ,§ ■ S s . i l l - ! Si!f tje-3 2 3 5-^.3 c-u • • 3 M » ? r ? 9 o ° ~ n .iTo- N i s . 1 rs 2-g-H 1 * *°5 3 - e = - 3 i o'*< 3 o a -“ r s o 3 i j ------oouB puoiiB '■•'■'L s e ^dM ojjns u o jp iiu o pojo ' .u u s'n d u io o o q j ju o d o j I " P«« o ijq .n q 1r.A 'u o ,iEonpo h • u ijj,3 J w u < f p u e 3 i[ q n d ;o o n H 'q pi i -t.-wew pio uu S[ 3J01[X uioj • , U jA i o q n iu u o d Pino.sv A O . — icsodoju - i __i __ llM iw-um °« r „u O l 10 T .U .T nr.1 ......iiu..ijo L” U B AT J.L . ’A- • — . •b , , [ouipt; 0{[qnd W W i u i A r ' *Sodojd"3m ]o 33essBti d pmoAv s.uiujSJjA^.|B' J, 1 ntoe s J 0 ^ ..i;iU0 u o r m in s u o o 3in 31() M esodojd oq i j o o au ssed ptc s non ! Uf o J u i'q o P ) s „ d 0 J do q iq iOAoqoqI - /• -a— ao o j pojO[03 1U0UI00UBA o oAoqoq fd jo ; o JUOUIOOUBA JOu Op AJl(J P.IBS c .a.— .o.'I-DV am JOJ UOI1BJOOSSV [BU0I1 niB» s.loiB[SjdO(j-PV' 31(1 inr imnw...__ /•"’ oj oqj 'oui;| o u ib s o q i ) v • - i» * “ ‘‘1 ’ 3 11 j o o ou o joju om biui’ s .o j q o s o q q n d o q i ui o j b j;,j IA o q i j o lu o p iso s d ' q o j n i n s ( H*»u • - - .- j— •A'lieiucd iSBJf n ,i ::IlcJ JO uowopuoH (f "I u rr Ju!;:w tO.UJd J[[.H SUOJIBpUOUIUlOOOJj •lU JA Jjd J/r.il SUDliBUUOUIimiml U loqi JOJ jq i pips i-iuijj.’.v tiJoiso.il S!1S' ot! " ooo.tuc) siu b js uoji L 0 u io j; uoiss'jiuuioo A ’j g oqi ‘!n > 5 '!* ° -lB Puc sjooqos oi[ ;o s j iq u u iu jn o ; itq ) popiod 11° onujjuoo pino.vi o jj ■oj i . j j j . p om posity oqx ’UB.iouoa Pies ..‘.(.loiduiiuijo •ptBj oq ,.‘3u!|oo; -s|p„ ojb uio)s.(s jooqos ouqnd •pj«i oq „'o8«n3u»( jol-ouoa 'M 'V uqor -uos opus punoj3-o|pp;ui li’ojS siuosojiiojjou i t oioqi jo iu3 j « qons loi v quo) iqSnojq pub pjiqKuojJ oiuuo quossip loqiouy b jjfldoJ oqi p o ; j •stseq qidoui sisonboi (idail oqi ojoq.n so sw 3uo[ pojoqs[ OAeq .ioqx,,; pus ’to n u s f ujaoqjo -suorispuouiuioooj oqi ui ..osi'oqei sioquioui pspop •ol-qiuuui B uo P u ip jo d o o Jo.nP qpotis ui s itd n a o i Xjuo sjutuSj •ItlnT/f iia«... «— ' 4w •u | s p o q o s j q i 'o i e i s j q i j o s u o i p o s 'l u o j i j n j o.i;3 o j s|i'so d o i^ io jd q o n u i o o i i.u o p j , p , Cs °q-'v -tju n o o .... w jits j jo•u sa [ Jliuj m ouj— AVT19 ss«r' » J>qw 0\' Uojjuojv M OX G I V UjIH S 3 I U 1 puo .1.90(1 KO.T.OSIIHSVAS. 3 H 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Three News Clippings Description An account of the resource Three news clippings: "Assembly Setting Up Machinery For Vote on Constitution Study"; "Session Call Opposed by Mrs. Stone"; "Gray Report Reactions Vary" Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource "Gray Report.." Washington Post and Times Herald; all else Unknown Authors and Papers; 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_3_10_16 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/a83582fc40756e4b5d9fd35dd1022c4b.pdf 340139469a8f504ed18dd477d4582bfb PDF Text Text THE WASHINGTON POST and TIMES HERALD B4S u n d a y , F e b ru a r y 3, 1957 A id s P r o B e r s By Connie Feeley Staff (Reporter * ' Leslie Hall,'chief counsel forthe Virginia Legislature’ new s Committee on Law Reform and’ Racial Activities, is a softspoken, Alabama-born, segrega­ tionist. Reared in southern tradition, the 44-year-old attorney be­ lieves that. racial, integration “ is'wrong for Jhe South.” "As legal adviser for the .in­ vestigating committee, he will guide a state-wide probe of groups concerned with racial activities. . I Critics of the 10-member t , committee have called it aL. “ witch hunting”unit set up to W stifle the National Association, for,the Advancement of Col­ ored People.. The. committee, itself . am nounced this week that the initial targets of its probe will be the NAACP and the'two major pro-segregation groups . in', Virginia:, the Defenders of State Sovereignty and Individ­ ual: Liberties . and th e, White Citizens Councils, ' Hair said: “ s .bound to be It’ subfec'^mltter!*'butit w / the ton l ° °s he '"t* ad' consensus of thought of the mltted to the Virginia bar in members of the committee not .1314 and began law practice in to go on any witch hunt or any-'Arlington. He served as a Comthing resembling a McCarthy mjsioncr in Chancery there for committee . . .-wc’ re/going.to . try to conduct it in an orderly!1 years and als0 P a n te d 0 fashion.” periodically as an acting rAr21 Years of Practice > cuit Court 3 udSe- In 1955> he The orderliness of the^ up-lbc* ame a prosecutor in Alexcoming hearings and the col- a!?dJ*f where he now lives at lection ois evidence will be V ® "A Commonwealth ave. ?® some of Hall’ responsibilities In his new job, Hall, father; s, as'chief counsel. He will rely, of four children, will be' inon his background of 21 years volved in a study of the pos-« . of law practice, including sible effects of integration op! nearly two years’ service as As-!public schools in Virginia. His sistant Commonwealth’ At- personal opinion is that segre-j s torney in Alexandria. gation should be continued, j He temporarily left this job “ The South has just as good] to take the committee post.'schools .for. colored people as^ “ The committee was looking for white people in most places.^ for somebody with trial .experi- Colored people have just as] ence and asked me if I was equal opportunity for an educa-j interested ... it was a complete tion as the white people do. surprise. I felt very compli- There is no reason why any one mented.” igroup should be-forced on anThe trial experience came other group against its ■ ill 'w naturally to Hall because he when it’ not to the advantage s was born into a family of law- of either one.” yers and political office'hold- Reflects Byrd Thought ers in Bay Mmette, Ala. lie b left his home town to obtain a .The 1 954 Supreme Court de­ law degree from the Univer .ty cision banning segregation in of Alabama'in 1 3 , then re-Public schools was “ 95 based an turned home to practice for six sociological and phychological yeavs> \ principles rather than on legal \ He moved to the Washington theory'and precedent.1 ' area in 1 4 and became head Hall’ thinking on this issue 91 s of the Claims Branch of the reflects that of leaders in the Real Estate Division, Office of Byrd organization, dominant the Chief of • Engineers, War group in the state. “ like Sen. I Department. i Byrd’ idea, very much,” says s After moving from Washing-. Hall, a Democrat. on Told To Review Ban On 26 Negroes Court Says School Closing Law Hampered Transfer Decisions lyn By Robert E. Baker , v , r Staff Reporter • * 1 0 6 "f .1 A Federal appeals court directed the ArlingtoirSchool Board yesterday to restudy the applications of 26 Negro pupils denied admission to schools for white children, now,that Virginia has no school closing law.' In another opinio^, the U. S.* Fourth Circuit, Court of Ap­ peals again upheld the North Carolina p u p i l assignment plan. It stated that Negroes first must exhaust administra­ tive remedies set up in the: ^before seeking relief inFederal-,^QUr s t. The decisions were handed down in Richmond. In its 4 30word Arlington opinion, the Court did not invalidate spe­ cifically the standards of the pupil assignment plan used by the School Board to screen Negro applicants last Septem­ ber. Nor did the Court reverse the Federal District Court opinion of .Judge Albert V. Bryan who upheld the rejec­ tion of the 26 pupils. The School Board originally rejected 30 Negro applicants,, but Judge Bryant ordered four-’ of them admitted to Stratford;. Junior High School where they ! have been attending since FeB. 2. Court Cites 2 Reasons But the Circuit Court, in telling the School Board to take another look, cited two reasons why the School Board action should not be accepted; as a precedent for future as­ signments: •Virginia’ law closing de­ s segregated schools, invalidated by State and Federal courts in-January, was in effect when;1 } the School Board rejected th e * applications, and Judge Bryan ] supported it. ~ r-U “ With this threat hanging!* over them,”stated the Circuit) j ,Court, “ neither the Countyh School Board nor the District! Court could act with the same U freedom and independence as|r they can now.” jj • The Negro pupils were sub-jr jected to tests which <white ( applicants for transfers were); not—the main contention byji -attorneys for the Negro pupils j in their arguments before the ■ appeals court. The School Board has since adopted a r olicy subjecting!, all applicants for transfers to!* the same te: regardless oJT jj race. ! j The Circuit Court directed ) the School Board to restudy j the applications soon so that!; any dissatisfied pupils can ask1 • Judge Bryan for a review be-, lore the September school: term. : --- Appeal Held Unlikely The School Board will con­ fer with its attorneys to dis­ cuss a possible appeal of the Circuit C o u r t decision — a move held unlikely by Chair­ man Robert A., Peck.' | Peck said the Board, instead, probably will consider the re-J j jected applications along with • other transfer applications all !for the next term. Unless some facts affecting [the 26 rejected pupils have i changed, Peck said, he as­ sumes the Board will reject them again. He added, how­ ever, that each pupil will have another school year in his record, which might change the Board’ decision. s L. Lee Bean, Board member, agreed and said he was not influenced by the school clos­ ing law when he voted to re­ ject the applications. On the- other hand, James G. Stockard said he maintains now, as he did in September, that attendance areas and overcrowding are the only standards which can be ap­ plied without racial discrim­ ination. The Arlihgton plan also ine l u d e s standards involving academic achievement, adapta b i l i t y and pyschological problems. � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Newspaper articles from the "Washington Post and Times Herald, "Integration Foe Aids Probers, February 3, 1957, and "Arlington Told To Review Ban on 26 Negroes," March 20, 1959. Description An account of the resource Newspaper article from the "Washington Post and Times Herald, "Integration Foe Aids Probers, February 3, 1957. Describes Leslie Hall, chief counsel for the Virginia Legislature's Committee on Law Reform and Racial Activities who believes that racial integration "is wrong for the South." and article "Arlington Told To Review Ban on 26 Negroes," March 10, 1959 in which court says school closing law hampered transfer decisions. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource "Washington Post and Times Herald" Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1957 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_5_9 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/9b0fecb1c01a3b553575bf42a63c7272.pdf f48a7676410babdba89db8870358bcdd PDF Text Text T p f r P O S T and T IM E S H E R A L D Friday, June 1, 1956 CLARISSA THOMPSON . . .I.asks for equality' tern. People are just people to him now, but'if'he is exposed to only one kind of people, he will have odd feelings about the other kind.” , • Orndorff,- office manager of an Arlington engineering firm / • , A t/Au* is a native of Winchester, V Arlington Petitioners a. He attended Strayer Business When white persons join College and American Univer­ sity. His wife is from Wiscon­ colored in petitioning for de­ sin. They have lived in Arling­ segregation of the schools, as has recently been the case in , ton about 12 years. The case will be known as Arlington, they deserve the Photographer Clarissa Thompson et al,vs. . gratitude of the community. It cannot have been easy to • Barbara S. Marx of Arlington and her daughter, Ann, prin­ the Arlington County School the name cipals in the Arlington school integration suit, examine a Board et al. becauseNegro girl take such a step, and those who . of the 11th grade did so have undoubtedly been file of papers filed in the litigation. leads the .list of. plaintiffs.! subjected to abuse. But their Clarissa, 1 , of 1 3 - . Colum­ 6 8 1 Nbus st„ says, simply, -I want! names on the petition have “ to be considered an equal in | made clear an important fact in anything I want to do.”.Cla­ this integration hassle: that it rissa would like to attend Wash­ is not a matter of opposing ington and Lee High School in­ races, white and Negro, but rather of opposing principles, stead of Hoffman-Boston. white supremacy against broth.erhood of m an. Surely it is better for white children, too, to attend inte­ grated schools. How else can By Tony Mason • they learn that democracy is i , StaffReporter for all of us, and that making A unique feature of Arling-j school board to end racial segdemocracy work is' a task lon school integration suit, now,relation in the c o u n t y ’ s which calls for all shoulders to awaiting action by the United ;fc"° ls* ° ' ,. the wheel together? So for the sake of the chil- j States District Court for the in the suit are Barbara ,nv° . » • « « S. M “• « « * - lved arx, dren, both white and colored, District of Eastern Virginia, is 6 9 N Washington blvd.,-and 87 . who are expected to 'learn 7 that both white and Negro chil­ M and M Jack G. Orndorff, ’ democracy in our schools, for dren claim that they have been ofr.5 0 rs. . Spring the sake of the Northern Vif- ' (discriminated against because Mrs.2 0 N isCarlinpresident rd. Marx of ginia community which has al­ Iof the existence of the segre­ the Arlington vice , ‘ NAACP' and the ready made clear its belief in gated school system. such democracy, and for the The suit was filed in the Fed­ Orndorffs are members. rs. sake of our country which is 1 eral Court in Alexandria, May M Marx has filed suit in being challenged by the worlji 1 , by the National Association the name of her daughters, 7 to prove its democracy, thanks for the Advancement of Col- Ann, 8, a third-grade pupil at should go to the courageous Iored People. It named as de- Tuckahoe School; and Claire, 8 white parents and children Ifendants the Arlington'County 1 , a senior at Washington and who have taken a position 'School Board and T. Edward Lee High School. |alongside the Negro petitioners ,[Rutter, Division Superintend­ The Orndorffs filed in the for desegregation. ent of Arlington Count y name of their 6-year-old son, CATHERINE JACOBS. SchbolS. The board has until Eugene, in the first grade at Alexandria,, Barrett School. Both families June. 0 to reply, f .-Plaintiffs include three white stated that they took the action as children who say they are be? ! a matter of principle.” rs. ing discriminated against be­ M Marx is a native Penn­ cause they are unable to attend sylvanian and an Arlington res­ 3 classes with Negroe§ and 1 ident for the past 1 years. She 9 INegro children who say they said segregation imposes [are being discriminated against!artificial barrier” ,unfair to chiljbecause they cannot attend jdren of both races. [schools with white students. . i The Orndorffs said their dei None of the pupils h?ve cision was “ firmly based on our J.sought admittance to a particu- religious beliefs." They told a lar school. Instead, the court is reporter: "We want our child Suit Charges Bias Against White Pupils � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Newspaper article, "Washington Post and Times Herald," June 1, 1956, "Suit Charges Bias Against White Pupils" and Letter to the Editor (newspaper unknown), "Arlington Petitioners". Description An account of the resource Unique feature of Arlington school integration suit "is that both white and Negro children claim they have been discriminated against Letter to the Editor in favor of integration suit. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource "Washington Post and Times Herald" and unknown Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956-06-01 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_2_1_3_37 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/b7c1eb10bfbc24a8983324fdeb14ebf4.pdf 27871839b2c7bfc9243a4842beea8f39 PDF Text Text NOFLACXto G t �NO TAX RISE; NO COUNTY BONDS Federal funds have already been appropriated for planning and construction of low-rent hous ing by local authorities. Rents m ust c o v e r o p e ra tin g and m anagem ent costs. The Authority’ housing program s will not cause any bond obliga tion on the county. 28 YEARS OF FEDERAL TAXES. BUT NO HOUSING We have helped pay for over a half million housing units in other communities through our Federal taxes. T h is is our chance to receive something in return for our tax dollars. COUNTY CONTROLLED The County Board of Super v is o r s a p p o in ts fiv e lo ca l citizens to run the Authority. The Board of Supervisors must approve the housing proposed by the Authority. Projects must co m p ly w ith local building codes, zoning and master plans. Rents, income limits, and resi d en ce requ irem en ts are all determined locally. AUTHORITY CONTRIBUTES REVENUE While the County would not tax housing owned by the Author ity, approximately 10% of rents would be paid to the County as the Authority’ share of the s c o s t o f re gu la r m u nicipal services. F o r F u r t h e r I n f o r m a t io n C a ll: JE 4-4085. UNLESS YOB V O T E YEI H FOR A REDEVELOPMENT AND H O U SIN G AUTHORITY ALL WILL BENEFIT will be able to afford decent housing for the first time.. F a t h e r s will be able to keep their jobs in the area.. M o t h e r s will have more money to feed and clothe their families, | when housing costs are reduced. I C h i l d r e n will be given a "head start” at school, with better conditions at home enabling them to study and get a good night’ sleep. s T h e e l d e r l y , most often victims of poverty, can live in housing designed for their special needs, with social and medical services readily at hand. C o u n t y t a x p a y e r s will benefit from reduced health and welfare c o s t s as im proved housing conditions, lower disease rates, and lower rents help families remain independent. F a m ilie s w it h lo w in c o m e s P r iv a te e m p l o y e r s a n d c o u n t y can better retain lower skilled workers in essen tial s e rv ice operations. At present these workers cannot find housing in the area or are being forced to leave. Many become discouraged at having to commute long distances to work, and quit. P r i v a t e c o n t r a c t o r s will build the housing for the Authority, and thus will be able to serve the low in c o m e m ark et w hile making a fair profit. govern m en t T H IS A U T H O R IT Y IS N E C E SSA R Y BECA U SE: County long-term residents are being forced from their homes by housing code enforcement and suburban development. Those low-income families displaced cannot afford housing in the County or metropolitan area. Private builders have not been able to construct low-cost housing. The County should not continue to displace these workers and their families without ensuring they have a place to go. A local Redevelopment and Housing Authority using Federal funds can provide truly low-rent housing. League of Women Voters— Fairfax Area, SO 8-9327 or RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS CUSTOMARY Our local Authority can, and most authorities do, set up resi dence requirements to ensure that the housing is built for Fairfax County residents. Fairfax County Citizens for Adequate Housing, �in L**-" l !UI1"1'1'--- Inferior Housing ,\?. 5 Aid Sought for Evicted Fairfax n Gum Springs Fire Victims Relocated Many Endorse Housing Authority The Housing Authority for Fairfax County has been endorsed by: two official county committees set up to study the problem; the County Board of Public Welfare; the Housing Hygiene Board; the Health and Welfare Council; the Federation of Civic Associations; the League of Women Voters; Catholic Church Women; the Christian Family Movement; the Vienna Town Council; the Fairfax Division, Council of Churches of Metropolitan Washington; the Fairfax County Council on Human Relations and many other county-wide and local church and community organizations. Over 850 county citizens and freeholders petitioned the Board of Supervisors to call a referendum. The Board called the referendum by resolution, for Tuesday, November 2, 1965. In its resolution the Board stated: “There is a shortage of safe and sani tary dwelling accommodations in the County available to persons of low income at rentals that they can afford.” Sixteen Virginia communities have housing au thorities, including Alexandria, Harrisonburg, Norfolk 1 and Richmond. VOTE 'FOR'' ON NOV. 2 1965 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Leaflet urging a vote for "yes" for a redevelopment and housing authority on Nov. 2, 1965 and newspaper clippings on housing issues in Fairfax County. Description An account of the resource Leaflet urging a vote for "yes" for a redevelopment and housing authority on Nov. 2, 1965 and newspaper clippings on housing issues in Fairfax County. 3 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource 1965 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1965-11-02 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s 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 18_2_1_7_3 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/42d7f99c70eabd1f6ffb3db9afa59c30.pdf e2a943ec52283c0f5c7f42d8d6e1585e PDF Text Text FROM: 3037 N. STAFFORD STREET ARLINGTON 7, VIRGINIA Bulk Rate U. S. POSTAGE I'Ac PAID Arlington, Va. Permit No. 315 W HAT’S AHEAD Peter Morstein, Barbara S & Barbara S Marx 6897 N Washington Blvd Arlington 13, Va 11 FOR A R LIN G TO N ? X 6 © 0 § GOVERNMENT BY ABCThe central issue of this contest for the Arlington OR MORE MISRULE BY A IM ? affiliated candidates to the School Board. County Board is whether the ABC program for good government and good schools will be carried out. This year the voters can finish the job by electing ABC candidate Curtis Tuthill. Last year the voters made a determined start toward Curtis Tuthill’ election will give ABC a -working s putting that program into effect by overwhelmingly majority on the County Board, and this majority will, electing Ralph Kaul and David Krupsaw, the ABC in turn, give Arlington the kind of responsible govern candidates, to the two open seats on the five-man ment that the great majority of our citizens want. Here is a concrete program for Arlington. County Board. They also overwhelmingly elected all the ABC- Here are the policies which Curtis Tuthill and ABC support. WHAT ABC STANDS FOR A B C believes that long-range comprehensive planning must be the cornerstone of county policy. Arling ton continues to grow. has been lost. That growth must not continue to be haphazard and undirected. Much time already A well-ordered, carefully drawn plan is needed now for the development of parks and play grounds, streets and sidewalks, water and sewage distribution systems, storm drainage, libraries, and parking facilities near business areas. Arlington businessmen will be placed at a competitive disadvantage and Arling ton homeowners will be threatened by falling property values if we plunge blindly into an unmapped future. ABC worked for and will fully support the newly reestablished Planning Commission. A B C supports, and will strive to improve still further, our excellent public school system. ABC believes in adequate school budgets to make sure our children keep receiving basic and up-to-date training, as well as the other benefits of a well-administered educational program. ABC will resist all attempts to close or immobilize our public schools, to deprive them of state funds, or to take them out of the hands of the people of Arlington. �A B C regards the zoning ordinance as a contract between the County Board and the people of Arlington. This contract should be amended only when the public interest so requires. Spot zonings for the benefit of land speculators will be vigorously opposed by ABC. Z&IBCC believes in keeping taxes to the absolute1minimum consistent with providing the essential services demanded by the people. ABC will keep taxes down by careful scrutiny of every budget item, thorough exploration of new revenue sources, vigorous collection of taxes when due, and careful planning for public improvements. ABC pledges to make sure we get the most mileage out of each penny spent. A B C believes that all citizens should be made to feel at home when presenting their views to the County Board. Hostility to citizens’ groups and community associations is indefensible. ABC suggests that the County Board should cooperate with neighborhood associations desiring to set up non-profit swimming pools and other recreation facilities. ABC believes in strengthening, not limiting, the franchise. will work to regain our right to have an elected School Board. ABC believes in an elected School Board and ABC believes that Federal employes should be permitted to serve on the County Board and will endeavor to reestablish that right. holders’ veto over bond issues. ABC opposes a free ABC endorses full citizen participation in county affairs. AT THE The ABC Board members, though a m n r t , have e e g t c l y pressedfor ioiy nreial t e ABC program .and already have accomplished much. h HOW ABC HAS WORKED FOR ARLINGTON The ABC B oard m em bers, sh ortly after th eir election last year, d ram a tized the absence o f effectiv e county plan n in g and forced the Board to reestablish the P lanning Com m ission. The ABC B oard m em bers focu sed pu blic attention on requests fo r rezon in gs which th reaten ed residential n eigh borh ood s o r orderly com m ercial d evelopm en t. The ABC B oard m em bers ex p osed the AIM polity of sellin g bon ds b e fore the County w as read y to spen d the m on ey on plann ed projects. ABC m em bers revealed that this practice w as costin g taxpayers at least $35,000 annually. HOW AIM HAS HURT ARLINGTON 1 ^ - The AIM County B oard tried to abolish the P lanning C om m ission an d scattered its fu nctions a m o n g th ree u n coord in ated com m ittees. The AIM Board a b a n d on ed A rlington's six-year plan for County im provem ents. The AIM B oard h as rep ea ted ly d a m a ged residential n eig h b o rh o o d s by rezon in gs. Exam ples: the Sickles tract on the old Shirley H om es site in South Arlington, r ezon ed to h igh -density apartm en ts o ver the virtu ally u n anim ou s opp o sitio n o f the w h ole area . . . the Altha Hall tract betw een Lee H ighw ay and Spout Run, w hich w a s rezon ed from detach ed - h om e use to high-density apartm en ts o ver the opp o sitio n o f the P lann in g Com m ission, the Zon in g an d Land Use C om m ittee, the County's P lanning Division, an d the citizens o f the area. The ABC Board m em bers o p p o sed the freeholders' v eto proposal, which The AIM Board forced tax p a y ers to p a y u n n ecessary in terest on bon ds w ou ld v irtually disenfranchise, in bon d elections, all our citizens w h o rent 1 by sellin g th em lo n g in a d van ce o f the actu al con stru ction o f projects. their hom es. The AIM Board p etition ed the L egislatu re to a u th orize the freeh olders' The ABC Board m em bers su pported an ad equ ate sch ool b u d get and ! referendum . w orked in h arm ony w ith the School Board. The AIM B oard slash ed sch ool b u d gets an d in terfered in the p o licy The ABC Board m em bers stron gly o p p o sed the M oncure bill an d testified m ak ing functions o f the Sch ool Board. again st it in Richmond. The AIM Board form ally spon sored an d a d o p ted a resolu tion u rging the The ABC Board m em bers tried twice, w ithout success, to get AIM Legislature to abolish A rlington's right to elect a Sch ool Board. m em bers to u rge the Legislature to tak e no action which w ou ld d a m a ge or destroy ou r locally con trolled, free pu blic sch ools, or w hich w ou ld deprive A rlington o f its sh are o f state fu nds for public education. The AIM Board v oted d ow n a resolu tion w hich w ou ld h av e pu t the County on record as o p p o sin g state legisla tion w hich w ou ld d a m a g e or d estroy ou r locally con trolled pu blic schools. �THE ABC CANDIDATE FOR COUNTY BOARD THE AIM CANDIDATE FOR COUHTY BOARD Curtis Tuthill, the ABC candidate, is a t e s t e d a n d e x p e r i e n c e d public servant. E l e c t e d to Arlington’ first elected School s Board in 1947, he was r e e le c t e d in 1949 on his record of accomplishments. He served as Chairman of the School Board for part of his second term. The AIM record has been so bad that some of the supporters of the AIM candidate, Dr. L. H. Blevins, are trying to create the impression that Dr. Blevins is d iff e r e n t from the o ld Curtis Tuthill is, in fact, one of the principal architects of Arlington’ nationally recognized school system. s During his six years on the School Board, Curtis Tuthill faced many of the same problems that confront a member of the County Board— h o w t o p la n a h e a d t o k e e p p a c e w ith A r lin g t o n ’ g row th , h o w s f li c t in g n e e d s, h o w to e s t a b lis h p r i o r it i e s a m o n g con t o u n d e r s t a n d a n d e v a lu a te c o m p l ic a t e d g o v e r n m e n t bu d gets. Curtis Tuthill, h im s e l f a r e s id e n t o f A r l in g t o n f o r 14 y ea rs has met with civic associations and advisory committees, over the years, from every corner of Arlington and every field of interest. H e k n o w s A r l in g t o n a n d a h o m e o w n e r f o r 8 years, A I M c liq u e . B u t t h e f a c t s s h o w th a t D r . B le v in s is 1 0 0 % A IM . Dr. Blevins has been a member of AIM since its founding in 1952 and has publicly supported every AIM candidate in every election for County Board and School Board. D r . B le v in s w a s h im s e l f a n A I M c a n d id a t e f o r S c h o o l B o a r d la st year. H e w a s d e c i s i v e ly d e fe a te d . D r. B le v in s a ls o s ta te s th a t h e f a v o r s t h e A I M - e n d o r s e d M o n c u r e bill, w h ic h t o o k a w a y A r l in g t o n ’ r ig h t t o e le c t a s S c h o o l B o a rd . Dr. Blevins has said he would have voted to request the Legislature to approve that bill had he been on the County Board when the question arose. T h u s D r. B le v in s, h a v in g p r e s e n t e d h im s e l f t o t h e v o t e r s a n d h a v in g lo s t i n t h e S c h o o l B o a r d e le c tio n , is now o p p o s e d to having the voters c h o o s e their School Board. i n s id e a n d out. Curtis Tuthill also served as campaign manager for the ABC-Convention candidates who swept all offices in the election last year. Curtis Tuthill’ specific civic achievements are a matter of s record, a n d t h e v o t e r s h a v e t w i c e e n d o r s e d h im . F R A LIN TO C U TY B A D O N V M E 6 O R G N ON OR N OE BR Curtis Tuthill helped formulate and wholeheartedly supports the ABC program for Arlington. SEGREGATION, INTEGRATION AND OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS Arlington faces a crisis in public education. The situation has passed the point where it makes any material difference whether anyone is personally for or against segregation or integration. Arlington is directly under the gun— under a Federal Court order to desegregate its public schools this coming January. I n t h is c r is is w e c a n n o t a ff o r d t o b e g o v e r n e d b y a n A I M C o u n t y B o a r d , w h o s e m e m b e r s h a v e p r o v e d th e y c a n n o t b e c o u n t e d o n t o s ta n d u p f o r A r lin g to n . ABC includes both segregationists and integrationists. But ABC believes it would be tragic and inexcusable to turn Arlington into a segregation-integration battle ground. T h e r e a l i\ su e a t t h is t i m e is w h e t h e r A r l in g t o n w i l l b e a b le ABC w ill d o e v e r y t h in g in it s p o w e r t o a s su r e th a t n o t o p r e s e r v e , k e e p o p e n a n d r u n its o w n s c h o o ls . A r l in g t o n c h ild , w h it e o r c o lo r e d , w i l l b e r e q u i r e d t o a t t e n d If our public schools are closed or paralyzed, the damage will be incalculable. a n i n t e g r a t e d s c h o o l. The education of our children will be impaired, our teach ing staff dispersed. Our school plant, Arlington’ largest s single public investment, will be jeopardized. Home and property values will be threatened. The present AIM County Board has refused to oppose Governor Stanley’ program, which was fought by the entire s Arlington delegation in the Legislature. This punitive pro gram can deprive Arlington annually of $1,300,000 in state funds if the Federal Court order is upheld. ABC will continue to fight for the right of the people of Arlington t o r u n t h e ir o w n s c h o o ls . ABC will do everything in its power to keep the schools 'open and to carry out the provisions of State and Federal [law as finally determined by the Courts. J ABC pledges that if the State attempts to cut off Arlington’ s rightful share of state funds, t h e A B C B o a r d m e m b e r s w i l l ta k e e v e r y l e g a l m e a n s t o c o m p e l t h e S ta te T r e a s u r e r t o m a k e p a y m e n t. �WHAT’S AHEAD FOR ARLINGTOH? THE CHOICE IS CLEARS A iC = iiS T O R A T M OF @@@i GOVERNMENT A IM = MORE YEARS OF MISRULE VOTE VOTE FI TUTHILL FOR ARLINGTON COUNTY BOARD ON NOV. 6! N O T E : Neither N B C (A rlingtonians f o r a Better County tior A I M (Arlington Independent Movement ) has ) the official sponsorship or endorsement o f either national politica l party. A B C , however, numbers within its ra n is many leading A r lin g ton Republicans, Democrats, non-partisans and independents. ABC CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE FOR CURTIS E. TUTHILL 3 3 North 07 Stafford Street, Arlington 7 Va. , � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 ABC Party campaign pamphlet for Curtis E. Tuthill. Description An account of the resource ABC Party campaign pamphlet for Curtis E. Tuthill for County Board. Description of ABC Party and what it stands for. 4 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ABC Campaign Committee for Curtis e. Tuthill Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource No date Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant undated 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 18_2_1_3_3 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/db9552c7f9925704733edec4bfe73464.pdf f0fef67ea84dddf47cb193d3d7ca2671 PDF Text Text „ Z aunf------- siuapnjg (ooips TS!H » inpv ‘ rasrajaxa uop« npeJ0 6 ^¥1 jo >l« M----------------------------- PU0MS >° pu3 Z - (AepipH) SZ IeHc qSnojip ZZ t y ei ‘ XjBtuqag : 01 suiSsq jsjsauiag Suudg ‘ Mqniajdag : £2 sutSsq jsjsauiag peg , ' -162S 1 ' 81-‘2 ZL 0999-9 VI sjaquinu suoqdapj aqj_ ‘ uojSuiijy ui J33J}§ Aouinft qjjojg gogl 1® p3J®30[ s aoqjo J3JU3Q sqx i •3|qBIIBAB S BDJB 3qj UI SUOIJBZIUeSjO SnOIJEA qjIM UOIJBJ3 I -doos UI SuiI33UlSu3 3)BnpEiS puB UOIJB3np3 SJBnpBjS puB sjenperSispun ui S3Sjno3 jo Xjsuba spiM y SuuosuiSug puB ‘ 33J3UIUTO0 ‘ S33U3I3g pUB SJjy [EJ3qiq UI S31E3yiJJ33 OJ PB3[ S3SJI103 |3A3[ 3S3||03 3qX 3J3 ‘ 3JBJS3 |B3J ‘ SUU33U -lSU3 ‘ SUIJUII033B U| S3SSB|3 Jip3J3-UOU |BUOISS3JOjd XuBUI PUB (SulU3A3 puB Xep) SlUSpnjS 3UIIJ-JJBd puB -||nj JO J UIBjSojd [3A3[ 3S3||03 B SJOJJO (SSipnjg [EJ3U30 puB UOISUDJ -*3 JO uoisiaiq) H3 XN3 0 V IN IO H IA NH3 H XHON ‘ Xienuef :suiSsq jsjsaursg Suudg 0£ ‘ Jsquiajdsg isuiSsq jsjssursg peg 61 • uoijEunoj -ui js q jjn j puB uoijEspdde jo j 2862'I f l H II®3 JO I° oq3s 3qj JE SU ISSIU JO 3 IJ O 3qj J3B O ‘ O ipB 3J JU Q XjUIlOQ XBJJIEJ U I asinor) MiA - iu3uido|aA uouejnpa puauso a Otf 3Q 0£ Xienuef jo jp a ^ ------ ----------- luiifag jajsauias Puo3aS £Z Ajenuef jo qaa^-------------------- jaisauias 3 Pu3 ° .ilE lstfan « 3<PW J -- ! g Xjenuef 0 £J Jaqui; 1 — sas» B ojq iu o iie o b a sbWHMO |0 ---(A epi[O ) Aeq SuiAiStquEqx H fZ J»qui3A0N ----ZZ pue \ aunf qSnojqj J. puB £ |udy :uuax I» £ z 0£ pue 6Z qaJBjAj qSnoiqi QI pue 6 Xjenuef :uuax PU Z • o (ainipoiq aqj ui suopduacap aunoa japun pajsq bj b sasjnoa (Bioadt joj sajep SuiuodQ) 61 aaquiajdag jo qaaM----------« uiSaq jaieauias 1 !J “ jaqeaiaqi puB zJ' \ 6Z IsnSny jo qaaM— •X aqi Suiin ep I96I-096I a o a a v a N a i v D Noixvonaa x in a v L 3JnoH pu® 3 I d ®iquin|oQ ib sjsuBnb XjBJoduisj ssq aSaj 5! *l°0 39 X '([®S3[ pUE |B3ip9UI-3jd SOpnpuj qDiqM) S33U3PS puB swy [BJ3qiq puB ‘ 2uu33ui2ug ‘ uoijBonpg ‘ 30J3uiuioq ui paidjjo 3jb Xpnjs jo sssjnog (Suiuoao pus Xsp) Xpnjs jo uiEiSojd jbsX-omj b szuspnjs 3uni-||nj Suusjjo Xjisjsaiuii uibui sqj jo qouBjq b s 3 0 3 1 1 0 0 MOSVW 3 0 3 0 3 0 i :e3JB biuiSjia. ujsquojif sqj ui suiBaSojd omj sisjjo biuiSjia jo Xjisj3aiu0 aqx VINIOHIA ON NI WVHOOad S U ONV VINIOHIA d O AJJSH3AINH 3HX :jo susziip puiuisj o j 33Eds siqj opiAOid o j p9SB3[d si uisjsXg [ooips 3i[qnj XjunoQ uojSuqjy s q x s a s s v i o A x i s a a A iN f i x n o a v N O i x v w a o a N i • jsj jsquiojdos ung biuiSji^ u jsqjjoiq ui sjnpsqos 33g ‘ ip6I -isqurajdss jo q33« uiSoq S3SSB|0 q jsquiojdsg suiSsq S3SSB JUStUJJBdag U J3 OIJB3JD 33 40J UOIJBJJSlSsg sjjods pus sqnp ‘ sSpuq ‘ upusp ubiibmbh S pus 3JEnbs ‘ upusp puB SutJOB Xpsuioo [B S 3ISHUI ‘33UBp uispoui ‘ s3ijsbuuii|s ‘ sjniino XjnBoq pus Suippoui ‘ Suus -JE3 puB SuiUUB|d XjJBd ‘ SuiJBJODSp 3qBD ‘ SuiSuBJJE J3M0J J ‘ Suiqsiuysj ainjiujnj ‘ sSiu paqooq ‘ Xjsjqoqdn ‘ sjsaod dys ‘ jIo8 Mouoipoqo Sop ‘ XqdBiSojoqd ‘ ssdujy [BDisXqd s,U3Ui ‘ Suippouisj ouioq ‘ jBjinS ‘ ouBid ‘ Suimss ‘ Xj3uij[iuj ‘ Sui -jured 3JIJX ‘ 3qjE3[ ‘ 3J j diesoui ‘ Suijured BUiqD ‘ soiuibjsq ispnpu; S i 3j -uvpDB puB S3SSB J0 000£-^ V f auoqdspj ‘ 3AUQ qJEJ qjJOfsJ oo£ ‘ a a v a o n v N o i x v a a o a a d o X N 3 K x a v d 3 a s A X N flO O N OXONITH V l 3® luo3 pjnoqs ssijiaijob jo sdXj |BU 0ijE3J3oi ui sossBp Suuissp uojp|iq3 puB sjjnpy s a s a n o o a h h o h o n v N o ix v a a o a a piooq jooyjg Kjunoj uojSuyiy g / o j q X i gpoui » q tt j j v o / pjnoqs sqoaqo jjy -noX o j juas sq ][t« pjE3 uoissiuips ssep puB jdl9D Jnox ‘ 3J SSBp 3q j UI 33B|d B 3AJ3S34 OJ UIBjSoid Siqj JO spis 3SJ3A3J UO ULIOJ 3q j 3SQ -JPfY <C U l V } l 3} q O)iS§ J • U I Xu b JB aiqissod S S3SSBp 3IJ I 3S3UJ JO JSOUI JOJ UOIJBJJSjSag SISBq J3JS3UI3S E UO 3JE -jsdo X O N ° P ssssBp jn o jo jsquinu y : o j i s S } uztJo utvtx3 j 1 XjBiuqsg qSnojqj 91 XjBnuBf : uoiioiiS}S»yJ » j V j -ptfy • SSB s q j jo ss3iSojd sq j spsduii pjno« uoijejjsiSsj js q jjn j p 3J9qM qJOM sji ui juiod b p sq3B3J SBq j o paunoj ussq ssq SSBp 3ip [Ijun U 3do UIBUI3J [|IMS3SSEP JSO J JOJ uoijBjjsiSsy U '9|qissod ji suiijXBp 3qj Suijnp jsjsiSoj oj poSjn sjb sjjnpy ' W d 6 IPun ‘ XEpsjnqx qSnojqj XBpuojAj ‘ sSuiusaj sqj Suunp usdo 3q osjb ||i« 33190 sqj ‘ 0961 ‘ Jsquiajdsg ‘ 21 XBp -uojq uo SuiuuiSsg j\ d £ IPun jq y 6 uiojj 62 JsnSny uo Xsp oqj Suunp ‘ suiSoq uoijbjjsiSsj ||Bd u»tst%»u o usi/qj j • uojSui[jy ‘ J33JJS XouinQ M 2121 ‘s s q jo uoijB3np3 qn py sq j o j psjssjip sq pjnoqs ‘ jibui Xq jo uos -jsd ui spEui JsqjsqM ‘ uoijbjjsiSsj ||y o j Jisi/qj : u o ijb j js iS s y -Xjuo Suiusas sqj ui S|qB|iBAB sjb sjoj|ssuno0 33tjjo jn o o j Suiuios Xq jusunuioddB UB sqBui Xbui n o x ‘ S|qE|iBAB si ssijqpBj [BUoijBSnps joqio puB ssSs||03 ‘sjooqos sjBAud puB sijqnd Su;ujs3U03 soppy -uieiSojd |BU0ijB3nps jnoX SuiuuBjd ui noX d p q ||i« puuos -jsd souEpinS [Buoisssjojd j n o t s s o i a js s S u q p s u n o i •ssBp sqj jo Supssui puosss s q j o j jo u d uoijBsnpg q n p y jo joj3sjiq sq j o j Suijijm ui spBui s q jsnui spunj -ai joj sjssnbsq Xaipd punjsj jooqss oqqnd s q j qjiM soub -pjossB ui punjsj qons joj juspnjs sq j Xjipnb jou ssop jssnb -sj jisq j joj uosbsj s q j j spunjsj Xusp o j jqSu sq j sajss i -sj sjootp s s q q n j XjunoQ u ojSu qjy sq j usqj usAg pjaq ujjq S X S D 3 3yj jo OUI/JJIU pU033S 3qi i3jfv S33UVJSlUn31l Bj SJ 3 (.uv i»pun 3porn 3q jjim spun/ii ou 3s i u i r 3i/]Q -pssjuBJBnS s uoijinj jo punjsj b ‘ i psjpsuBo s ssBp b jj :s p u n js y i *ssssBp jno ui ssn ui sjxsj sqj jo jsouj s j s s o q jo uoijBsnpg q n p y s q x sjusp js -njs sq j Xq psssqojnd sjb s ssq x :S[Bu s j b ^ j p ue s q o o y ‘ psSiBip s q Xbui ssj sjbusjeui jo ‘ doqs ‘ qBg -sjuspissj-uou joj 92$ pus sjuspissj uojSu ipy joj ssinoo js d jsjssuiss js d 91$ si uoijinj sq j ‘sssjnos syp sds jspun psjBSipui ssiAUsqjo sssjuii ‘BUio[d;p jooqss qSiq j p q j Suiqsss jou sjuspnjs jo g SSSjnOO JBJSASS JSA03 Xbui siq x sjuspissj-uou joj jsjssuiss Jsd 52$ Pu® sjuspissj u ojSu ip y joj jsjssuiss js d 51$ si uoijinj Buioidip [ooqss qSiq Jisqj joj Subjjom sjb oqM sjuspnjs jo g u oijin x qssM jsd uoponjjsut jo sjnoq xis sjinbsj sssinoo psjBJsposy •SJnoq ssjqj joj tjssm q3BS souo jssui ssssBp suiog ‘ sjnoq J|Bq-3U0 puB SUO JOJ SJB SSSSBp JSOjq ‘ 3JSSM q3BS 93IMJ jssui XjjBnsn sssssp [ooqog qS ijf i s s s s b q j o s in p s q sg ■sSuiusas 1001-i vf JO X P aq> Suunp 1001'X V f J0 99 ® jo ‘ sjxs ‘ OOLL-Z V f au oq dspx jssjJS XouinQ M 2121 ‘ sSBpunjg ‘ u b sq — jo js s iiq — soyjO uopBonpg j|npy 3 : I1 « » aJaM V BD A NOIlV^^IOd NI 1V93N39 A M ER ICA N IZA TION C U S S E S SE W IN G AND TAILORING The Arlington Schools, through their Adult Education Program, provide in struction for the foreign-bom in the funda mentals of English, the principles of American government and the American way-of-life. English for the Foreign-bom is now available. It is designed to bridge the gap between Americanization and English I— a high school English course. Develop new skills, through the popular Bishop Method of Sewing or Tailoring. Classes are open to a limited number of students. Reserve your place now. 6 W OODW ORK IN G, B A SIC M ETAL WORKING, AUTO M ECH AN ICS AND ELECTRONICS Persons who wish to complete their high school studies or to review various subjects may do so through the Adult Education • Program of the Arlington County Public Schools conducted in the Senior and Junior High Schools. Many graduates go on to college or university for study. B U SIN ESS AND M AN AGEM EN T TRAINING In cooperation with government, busi ness, labor and other groups, we will set up special classes designed to help people de velop more thorough understanding and competency in particular fields. If inter ested, please contact the Adult Education Office, JA 2-7700, exts. 54 or 66 or JA 7-1001 during the day or JA 7-1001 Learn to “Do it Yourself” with our courses designed to teach you woodwork ing, metal working, auto mechanics, and electronics. Adult classes in these fields are proving very popular, so register promptly. DRIVER TRAINING Leam to drive safely and competently in our dual-control vehicles. Seven hours of individual, behind-the-wheel instruction and seven hours of observation are given by experienced instructors. SECR ETA RIA L AND COM M ERCIAL The great demand for competent secre tarial and commercial employees continues to grow. Our well-qualified staff can help you prepare for a better job through de velopment of your skills in typing, short hand, bookkeeping and related fields. A pilot program for adults needing quick and thorough t brush-up in prepara- ^ tion for Civil Service exams will Jse avail able. RESERVATION REQUEST Please hold for — • Reservations in. (course or courses) (school) FOREIGN LANGUAGES, ART, M U SIC AND LITERATURE No one is truly educated who has failed to foster some appreciation of our cultural life and heritage. Why not avail yourself of the opportunity to join other adults in an informal, interesting quest for a fuller understanding of art, or of music, or of literature? My check, payable to the Arlington County School Board, for-------------------------------------------ls enclosed herewith • If reservations are for more than one person, please include their name, address and telephone number. NAME ADDRESS TELEPH ON E Thome) (bu i e s sns) U pon receipt of reservation request and payment o f tuition, receipt and class admission card will be forwarded to the student. Admission card is to be given to instructor on the first night o f the course. �A M ER ICA N IZATION B egin n in g A m erican ization : Introduction to the Eng lish language— for those who do not speak English. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Cunningham— Room 222— W-L. In term ediate A m erican ization : Emphasis on vocabu lary development, speech, reading and writing o f English. For the foreign-born who have some knowledge of English but wish to improve their skills in the language. Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Cunningham— Room 222— W-L. A dvanced A m ericanization: Study of American gov ernment and institutions in preparation for citizenship. Thursday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Cunningham— Room 222— W-L. E n glish fo r th e F oreign -B orn : Designed to bridge the gap for the foreign-born between Americanization and English on the high school level. Monday— 7-10 P.M.— Miss Lusk— R oom 115— W-L. ENGLISH E n glish I: Introduction to high school English. Gram mar, composition, vocabulary drill. Monday-Wednesday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Drayer— Room 207— W-L. Tucsday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Lindsey— Room 220— W-L. E n glish I I : Tenth year level, recommended for those in terested in reviewing fundamentals of grammar, essay work, reading. Monday-Wednesday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Bryan— Room 223— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Lindsey— Room 220— W-L. E n glish II I : Junior English emphasizes composition, de velopment of skills in the fundamentals of grammar as well as a survey of American literature. Monday-Wednesday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mrs. Rich— Room 220— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-8:30 P.M.— T o be announced— Room 224— W-L. E n glish I V : Senior English provides a review of grammar and survey of English literature. Monday-Wednesday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mrs. Rich— Room 220— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— T o be announced— Room 224— W-L. B u sin ess E n g lis h : The course is intended to improve student’s oral and written communication skills for more effective use on the job. Spelling, punctuation, composi tion, vocabulary, business forms are stressed. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mrs. Rich— R oom 115— W-L. D ev elop in g W ord P o w e r : A greater understanding of word structure, pronounciation, spelling and sound usage is developed in this course. Correct use o f the English language is an asset. Monday-Wednesday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Bryan— Room 223— W-L. E n glish f o r E v e ry o n e : A comprehensive grammar and composition course designed to meet individual needs in the area o f communication. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. B ook - R oom 114— W-L. F eature W ritin g: A writing workshop with major em phasis on writing for the magazine market will be con ducted by Frances Noel Crane,- whose highly successful course in Creative Writing sparked this program. Other non-fiction writing will be treated upon request. 15 sessions — September 28 through January 11. Wednesdays— 7:15-9:15 P.M.— Mrs. Crane— Room 115— W-L. Creative Writing for Publication Three years ago the Adult Education Program introduced a seminar to help writers and prospective writers to sell their short was arranged. The guest speakers covered a wide range of the literary world. Their presentations, followed by questions from the class, helped many students to gain insights which resulted in a heavy volume of sales by class members. Another series of lec tures is planned. Class members will be entitled to receive pro world of literature this course is a “must" item on your Spring calendar. 12 sessions— February 23-May 1 . 1 Thursdays— 7 P.M.— Cafeteria— W-L -9 Mrs. Frances Noel Crane Arlington residents— $15 Non-residents— $25 SPEED READING CLINIC An opportunity for adults to improve their reading patterns at the well equipped reading clinic at Wakefield is available. These classes, introduced three years ago, have attracted students from the entire Metropolitan area. If you are an average reader printed page, this course should please you. Particularly valu able to the person whose job demands extensive reading. Classes offered: Monday, September 26 through December 1 . 5 Also offered in the Spring, March 6 through May 25. Tuition: Arlingtonians— $20 Non-residents— $30 Monday and Thursday— 7-8:15 P.M OR 8:30-9:45— . ____________Mr. O’ Neill— Room 135— Wakefield_________ SO C IA L STU DIES V irgin ia and U nited S ta te s H isto ry : Study of Amer ica’ past from the age of discovery to the present. Re s quired for high school graduation. Monday-Wednesday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Pond— Room 219— .W-L. Tucsday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Bloomingburg— Room 207— W-L. ' /_________________ In trod u ction to M odern P sy ch olo gy The study of psychology offers insight into the patterns of human behavior and group adjustment to the forces of environ ment. Designed to help you understand more clearly the per sonal and social problems which confront us in the world of 1 <iay‘Monday-Wednesday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Pond0 Room 219— W-L _________ Virginia and United States Government: Every citi zen needs to know the structure and the functions of his government. This course provides such information. In cludes a study of current events. Students may be expected to participate in various civic activities during the term. Monday-Wednesday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Drayer— Room 207— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Bloomingburg— Room 207— W-L. World Geography: Study of Man and the Changing World. Understanding our fellow man, how he is influ enced by natural environment, his contributions to the world, and his problems. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Harris— R oom 219 — W-L. M ATH EM ATICS General Mathematics: A survey and review of practical everyday mathematics which will increase your efficiency in keeping accounts, making purchases, figuring your taxes, interest and similar items. Monday-Wednesday — 8:30-10 P.M. — Mr. Williams — Room 221— W-L. A lgebra I : Fundamentals of Algebra. Monday-Wednesday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Williams— Room 221— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Hannan— Room 203— W-L. Plane Geometry : First year of Geometry. Monday-Wednesday— 7-8:30 P.M.— 'To be announced— Room 203— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Hannan— Room 203— W-L. Algebra II: Second year of Algebra. Students must have completed one year of Algebra. Monday-Wednesday— 8:30-10 P.M.— T o be announced— R oom 203— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Cosgrove— Room 225— W-L. Trigonometry: Algebra I and I I are preliminary require ments to this course. Tuesday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Cosgrove— Room 225— W-L. Spring— Wednesday— 7-10 P. M.— Mr. Morgan— Room 163— Wakefield. Solid Geometry: Algebra and Plane Geometry are pre liminary requirements to this course. Wednesday— 7-10 P.M. — Mr. Morgan — R oom 163— Wakefield. Spring— Tuesday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Cos grove— Room 225— W-L. Accelerated Courses at Wakefield High School Accelerated Algebra I : This course covers a full year’s work in one semester. Excellent for those who need to review the subject or who need to gain rapid mastery of first year Algebra. Monday-Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Scott— Room 161 — Wakefield. A ccelerated Plane G e o m e try : Course covers an entire year’ work in one semester. s Tuesday-Thursday— 7-10 P.M.— T o be announced— Room 160— Wakefield. A ccelerated A lgebra II: Second year high school Alge bra. Student must have completed first year algebra in order to enroll. Monday-Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Pleacher— Room 160— Wakefield. FOREIGN LANGUAGES S P A N IS H B egin n in g C onversational S p a n ish : Spanish is of par ticular interest today because o f the growing economic and cultural ties between the United States and Spanish-speak ing peoples. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Miss Jones— Room 223— W-L. In term ediate Conversational S p a n ish : For those who have had the equivalent of one year of Spanish. Thursday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Bavetta— Room 102— W-L. A dvanced Conversational S pan ish : For those who have had the equivalent of two years of Spanish. Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mrs. Webb— Room 113— W-L. FREN CH B egin n in g C onversational F ren ch : Learn to read and speak French. Easy, informal atmosphere characterizes all classes in foreign languages. Monday-Wednesday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. MacIntyre— Room 248— Wakefield. Monday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Degenhardt— R oom 113— W-L. In term ediate Conversational F re n c h : For those who have had the equivalent of one year of French. Monday-Wednesday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. MacIntyre— Room 248— Wakefield. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Vienneau— R oom 113— W-L. GERM AN B egin n in g Conversational G erm an : An introductory course in German which emphasizes fundamentals of the language and which affords opportunities to converse in German. Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mrs. Neil— Room 243— Wake field. In term ediate C onversational G erm an : For those who have had the equivalent of one year o f German. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mrs. Neil— R oom 243— Wakefield. R U SS IA N B egin n in g Conversational R u ssian : Interest in Rus sian is growing by leaps and bounds. Why not join one of our informal Russian-study groups? Dr. Jones, the teacher, has had extensive preparation in the language and is an instructor o f proven ability. Thursday— 7-10 P.M.— Dr. Jones— Room 244— Wakefield. Education is not In term ediate Conversational R u ssia n : Review of basic elements. Russian history and culture will be included. Some conversation, reading newspapers and contemporary literature. Wed — 7-10 P.M.— Dr. Jones— Room 244— Wakefield. ITA L IA N B egin n in g Conversational Italian : Learn to read, speak and enjoy the language of the Opera. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Bavetta— R oom 102— W-L. A RT AND M USIC A ctive L isten in g to G ood M u sic: This class is designed to provide opportunities for cultural growth and apprecia tive listening in the realm of music. Mr. Crowder is an eminent musicologist, who gives a well balanced presenta tion to the "lay student” . 15 Sessions— September 21 through January 4. Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Crowder— Room 127— W-L. E n jo y in g G ood M u sic: The music of the great masters constitutes an integral segment of our civilization. Learn more about our musical heritage by registering in this class designed to provide good listening and stimulating discussion. 15 Sessions— February 15 through May 24. Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Miss Alexander— Room 127— W-L. A rt— Fun dam entals o f D e s ig n : Our adult art classes feature individual and group creativity, lectures, demon strations and individual help. Work in oils, contc’ tem pera, plasticine, and other media. 14 class meetings— September 28 through January 4. Also offered in the Spring, February 1 through May 3 . Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Anderson— Room 214— W-L. A pp reciation o f A r t : A study of man’ artistic achieve s ments from ancient times to the present. Gain an under standing o f art as an indication of the thinking of the times and as a record o f man’s varying positions in societies of history. 15 sessions— September 21 through January 4 . Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mrs. Gillilland— Room 102— W-L. SCIEN CE B io logy : Study of plant and animal life and functions. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Lamkin— Room 208— W-L. Tuesday-Thursday— 8:30-10 P.M.— Mr. Lamkin— Room 208— W-L. C h e m istry : Introduction to high school chemistry. In cludes laboratory work. Tuition plus $5 lab fee. Monday-Wednesday— 7-9 P.M.— T o be announced— Room 149— Wakefield. P h y sic s: Introduction to high school physics. Includes laboratory1work. Tuition plus $5 lab fee. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-9 P.M.— Mr. Ullrich— Room 159— Wakefield. B U SIN E SS AND M ANAGEM ENT In trod u ction to Pu blic S peak in g : Gain confidence and poise through improved oral expression. Our course in public speaking will help your vocabulary, diction, and power of expression. Techniques in group discussion and informal conversation will also be presented. Designed particularly for the businessman or woman, the civic, social or religious worker whose ability to speak well is important to success. 12 class meetings, September 28 through De cember 1 . Also offered in the Spring, February 1 through 4 April 26. Tuition: Arlingtonians § 12, Non-residents, § 18. Wednesday— 7-9 P.M.— Dr. Jean Ervin— Room 105— W-L. R eal E sta te : The continuing growth of our community assures opportunities in the field o f real estate for both in vestors and those employed in the business. This course is a survey of Virginia law and practice, relationships between buyer and seller, local market conditions, real estate invest ment, property management and sound business practices. 14 sessions, September 27 through December 1 . Tuition: 3 Arlingtonians $14, non-residents $20. Also offered in the Spring, February 7 through May 9. Tuesday— 7-9 P.M.— Mr. Stanton— Rom 313— W-L. Personnel A dm in istration and H um an R elations: This class is offered in response to many requests from people interested in the field of managing personnel. Each session consists of instruction in the fundamentals of per sonnel management in industry and business followed by discussion of actual cases. This is a discussion type course with no final examinations. Certificates of completion are given to students and employers upon completion. Excel lent for the individual working in small business and seek ing guidance in effective personnel relations. 14 sessions, September 29 through January 12. Also offered in the Spring, February 2 through May 4. Tuition: Arlington ians $14, Non-residents $20. Thursday— 7-9 P.M.— Mr. Reynolds— Room 105— W-L. H ow to In v est in S to c k s an d B on ds: In cooperation with firms associated with the New York Stock Exchange the Arlington County Adult Education Program offers an opportunity to the adults o f the area to learn the essentials of investment. Designed for the housewife, professional person, military careerist or businessman, this short course will give you insight into the elements of sound investment. 8 sessions, October 3 through November 21. Tuition: Arlingtonians $10, Non-residents $15. Monday— 7:30-9:30 P.M.— Mr. Godridge— Room 313— W-L. Spring— March 6 through April 24. In trod uction to B ook k eep in g: Important for those who wish to undertake bookkeeping work in business or govern ment. Helpful to housewives in keeping their household expenditures. Essential to managers of small businesses. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-8:30 P.M.— Mr. Westbrook— Room 237— Wakefield. a way of In trod u ction to E lectron ic C om pu ters an d M anage m ent C on trol: Covers the latest developments in office automation, machine functions of accounting machines, automatic data processing. Individuals trained in this field are in great demand. Why not get started now? 10 ses sions, October 3 through December 5. Tuition: Arlingtonians § 12, Non-residents § 18. Monday— 7-9 P.M.— Mr. Brady— Room 102— W-L. SPRING— February 6 through April 10. S a les T ra in in g C o u rses: Special emphasis in Salesmar ship, Stockkeeping, Merchandise, Information and Con trol, Advertising, Display, Human Relations, and Effective Speech will be offered by the Distributive Education Serv ice of the Arlington County Public Schools. Each section will be taught by a specialist in that area. Separate an nouncement o f course content, schedule and etc. available upon request. SH ORTHAN D AND TYPIN G Classes in shorthand and typing are among the most popular of all the courses presented by the Adult Education Program. In order to accommodate the many adults who desire to learn typing and/or shorthand, new classes in these subjects are formed three times a year. Registration for them may be made at any time during the school year. Tuition is § 12 per term for Arlington residents and § 18 per term for non-Arlingtonians for each subject. The follow ing calendar indicates the dates for these classes: Schedule for First Term: September 26 and 27 through December 14 and 1 . 5 Class Evenings Time Beginning Shorthand Mon.-Wed. 7-8:30 Beginning Shorthand T ues.-Thurs. 8:30-10 Beginning Shorthand Tues.-Thurs. 7-8:30 Intermediate Shorthand Mon.-Wed. 8:30-10 Intermediate Shorthand Tues.-Thurs. 7-8:30 Advanced Shorthand Advanced Shorthand Mon.-Wed. 7-8:30 Advanced Shorthand Tues.-Thurs. 7-8:30 Professional Shorthand Tues-Thurs. 8:30-10 Beginning Typing Mon.-Wed. 8:30-10 Beginning Typing T ues.-Thurs. 7-8:30 Beginning Typing Tues.-Thurs. 8:30-10 Intermediate Typing Mon.-Wed. 7-8:30 Advanced Typing Tues.-Thurs. 8:30-10 Advanced Typing Mon.-Wed. 8:30-10 School i W-L Teacher 227 W-L 227 Wakefield 238 W-L 227 Mrs. Geiger 10 0 M Rawls rs. W-L 229 W-L 229 W-L 227 12 0 W-L 21 3 Wakefield 238 10 2 Mrs. Dopier W-L 21 3 Mis. Grant T.J. 10 0 Mrs. Rawls A ccelerated S horth and— B rush Up. This new ap proach to help students seeking government positions is de signed to concentrate on a detailed review of shorthand. New audio-visual aids will be used in this program. Classes will meet two nights a week for three hours per night for 12 weeks. Those seeking enrollment will be interviewed by the instructor before registering. Because of the nature o f this accelerated program, there will be a limited enroll ment. Because of the special nature of this course, books and other materials will cost each student $12.00. Tuition: Arlingtonians— $20. Non-Arlingtonians— $30. Monday-Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Green— -Room 229 W-L. A ccelerated T y ping— B rush Up. New techniques in typing skills designed to help students acquire speed pre paratory to taking the Civil Service examinations or ob taining better positions. Students registering for this course will be interviewed by the instructor to ascertain their background in the subject. Because of the special nature of this course, book and other materials will cost each stu dent $8.00. Tuition: Arlingtonians— $20. Non-Arlington ians— -$30. Mondav-Wcdnesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Mullins— Room 231— W-L. W o od w ork in g: An informal course based on individual projects. Includes planning, designing and construction of projects in cabinet making, instruction in the use of hand tools, the principles of joinery and the application of finishes. Monday and/or Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Mav— Stratford Jr. High, 4100 N. Vacation Lane. Tuesday and/or Thursday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Hodinko— Shop 7— Wakefield. Jewelry and Lapidary will cover all the required steps in making a precious gem stone from rough material to fin, sand and polish it. Then 1 'dry— rings, clasps, brooches, pi i skill which c n be developed into an interest and profitable hobby or > more technical skills which greatly in demand in business ana inaustry today. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Stcmplc— Shop 1 — Wakefield. 3 In troduction to M echanical D raw in g: The drafting room at Stratford provides a good setting in which to learn the essentials of mechanical drawing. This course includes lettering, orthographic, isometric and oblique projection, auxiliary drawing, sectioning and some architectural draw ing. Wednesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Saxman— Mechanical Draw ing R oom — Stratford Jr. High. M echanical D raw ing I I : For those who have completed one year of mechanical drawing. Monday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Saxman— Mechanical Drawing Room— Stratford Jr. High. A rt Metal and B a sic Metal W o rk in g: Designed for the homemaker or hobbyist who desires a basic knowledge of metal working and artistic metalwork. Basic metalworking will cover sheet metal, soldering, brazing, metal spinning and foundry work. Art metal will cover copper, tooling, ornamental brass and aluminum wrought iron, and antique metal work. Welding both arc and oxacctelene will be given to interested students. Tuesday-Thursday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Stiles— Shop 11— Wakefield. CLOTHING CON STRU CTION By T h e B ISH O P M ETHOD The Bishop Method of Clothing Construction is designed to teach the techniques in construction that will result in a garment that has “a quality look” . The Bishop Method is based upon the following principles of good construction: Grain perfection, accuracy in preparing, cutting, mark ing fabrics, cutting to fit, perfection in stitching and in pressing, and attaining a quality look with the right The sequence consists o f : T h e B egin n in g B a sic : For those just learning to sew; how to select fabrics and a pattern, how to cut, mark, how to use the sewing machine, how to construct a simple garment. Th e B a sic B ish op : For those who know how to sew but who would like to improve their technique. This course is a prerequisite for additional Bishop courses. A study of new fabrics and fashions will accompany the making of a blouse and skirt T h e In term ediate: This course is a continuation o f the Basic and consists of making a dress with cut-on sleeves, a shirt-waist dress or a man’ shirt. Students must have s completed the Basic Bishop Course before enrolling in this Th e A dvan ced: This course deals with problems of fit ting. The projects will include a basic shell and a dress using the student’ basic pattern. Prerequisite— The Basic s Bishop. T ailorin g I : Students who have completed the Basic Bishop are eligible for enrollment in this course. A topper or long coat will be made. This series of courses will be offered during, the fall semester of 1960-1961. Each course will be 12 lessons in length. Each class will meet once a week for 2'/a hours. W OODW ORK IN G, ELECTRONICS, AUTO M ECH AN ICS, JEW ELRY, DRAW ING AND M ETALW ORKING B egin n in g E lectron ics: Fundamentals of radio theory. Lecture, discussion and demonstration. Includes laboratory practice. Tuition plus $5 shop fee. Student must also pur chase $20 radio instructional kit. Tuesday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Cerutti— Room 1 Wakefield. — In term ediate E lectron ics: Coverage of basic electronic components to include study of radio transmitters and electronic test instruments. Tuition plus $5 shop fee. Monday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Rose— Room 1 Wakefield. — A dvanced E lectron ics: How to use television test pat terns, deflection systems, television power supplies, tele vision receiver alignment, FM receiver servicing, ultra high frequency, FM receiver alignment. Tuition plus $5 shop fee. Thursday— 7-10 P.M.— Mr. Trompeter— Room 1 Wake — field. A u tom obile M ech anics: This course covers the theory of operation, construction, maintenance, repair, assembly and adjustment of automobile components. Practical ex perience is stressed and actual work in the Washington-Lee auto shop is included. Learn how to service your own vehicles. Enroll now. Students will be organized into groups based on their backgrounds in mechanics and the facilities available. Stu dents should attend two nights a week. All registrants should report to the W-L Auto Shop on Monday, Septem ber 19 at 7 P.M. for an organizational meeting. Tuition is § 1 for Arlingtonians and $25 for Non-residents. Shop fee 5 life, it is life - - - � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Flyer. Arlington County Public Schools Adult Education, 1960-1961, 2 pages. Description An account of the resource Flyer. Arlington County Public Schools Adult Education, 1960-1961. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Adult Education Office, Arlington County Public Schools. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s 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 18_2_1_6_43 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/8da90ec190d40c74993cd5bf24897fcd.pdf e3b2a3c13763587f62478c83186aa20d PDF Text Text 55 We . . . strive . . . to win full respect for the dignity of the hu­ man individual whom our unions serve. 59 Preamble to the AFL-CIO constitution AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education a f l 815-16th St. N.W., Washington 6, D. C. - ci Number 3 October 26, 1956 WHY DID POWELL CHANGE? Last week Representative Adam Clayton Powell (D, N.Y.), one of the three Negro members of the House of Representatives, announced he is supporting President Eisenhower for re-election. Powell's announcement was made in the White House after he had conferred with the President. He added he is setting up an organization to work for the Republican candidate. The announcement created something of a stir. Six prominent elected Negro officials in New York, headed by Manhattan Borough President Hulan Jack issued a statement declaring: "The people of Harlem regret that the White House was able to apply sufficient pressure upon Adam Clayton Powell at the time of the trial of another of his personal staff, now pending in federal court, to persuade him completely to change his convictions." The statement noted that on March 2, 1956, Powell had accused the President of "dodging the civil rights issue, passing the buck, and trying to wash his hands, like Pilate, of the blood of innocent men and women in the southland." Willard Townsend, vice president of the AFL-CIO and president of the United Transport Service Employees, termed Powell's announcement "a shocking betrayal of his race and his party." "If Representative Powell had been more conscientious in his attention to his congressional duties, "Townsend added, "he �would have been aware, as are all working men and women in the country, that the record of the Eisenhower administration in the field of civil rights, as in the field of general welfare, is a cynical compound of a callous disregard for the rights of individuals and a tender solicitude for the privileges and prerogatives of big business." Townsend said he "was reluctant to believe that there is any connection between Representative Powell's change of heart and the investigation of his finances by the Department of Justice." Background The man who created all this furor, Representative Powell, has apparently been having a hard time making up his mind. In December, 1955, according to the New York Post, Powell talked with Adlai Stevenson, the standard bearer of his party, and then held a press conference at which he explained that Stevenson was very sound on civil rights. Two months later, on February 13, he announced in Boston he would vote for Eisenhower over Stevenson but by March 2 he had swung around to his bitter comparison of Eisenhower and Pilate. Just four days before his October 12 announcement on behalf of Eisenhower, Powell told his church congregation that he couldn't campaign for either Stevenson or Eisenhower. "There isn't anything to the Democrats or the Republicans," he said. Chicago Daily News interview with Powell quotes the New York congressman as being sore at Stevenson because Powell wasn't given a chance to appear before the Democratic convention in Chicago and because Stevenson held two rallies in Powell's district without inviting Powell to take part. In 1954 Powell's name was signed to a Readers' Digest article highly praising President Eisenhower. Over 2,000,000 copies of the article were reprinted by the Republican National Committee, it was reported at the time. However, the vote for the Democrats in the Negro precincts in 1954 was overwhelming. In September, 1954, during the course of a Senatorial investigation of irregularities in the Federal Housing Administration, Powell's name bobbed up as having received a loan of $3,000 at 1% interest from a builder of a housing project. Powell got the loan in 1952 but paid nothing on it until a few days before— some insist it was after— President Eisenhower announced the investigation in 1954. In April, 1954, Powell gave the builder a check for $30. After the election in 1954 Powell repaid the loan. �Two of Powell’s secretaries, Acy Lennon and William Hampton, became rental managers of the builder's project and were paid on a fee basis, netting about $8,800 a year. Early this year three of Powell's aides were indicted on tax charges. Two of them--Lennon and Mrs. Hattie Dodson--have been convicted. The third, Hampton, is currently under indictment. Powell denies any connection between the tax troubles these three and his position in the current campaign. "What happens to any people who work for me, and I have 38, does not concern me at all," he said. What He Said On May 24, 1956, Representative Powell addressed a big mass meeting in Madison Square Garden in New York City. He described President Eisenhower in vastly different terms than he did last week. He started by saying, "Tonight I will present documented evidence to show that the official family and intimate friends of President Eisenhower are deliberately bringing back segregation in the United States of America at a time when we can least afford it." "Here is a man," said Powell, "of good moral instincts completely separated from the people. The forces of reaction, obstruction, segregation, white citizens' councils, have reached out through the tentacles of his own palace guard and stopped Eisenhower's progress toward making this a nation of one people. "We have literally retrogressed as a nation during the past few months and if I went to Bandung again I would not be able to stand up and defend so vigorously my country in the field of civil rights as I did a year ago this past April." Powell went on to charge that "an insubordination has broken out in our armed forces" and that in many areas segregation was being restored on army posts. He cited as evidence an order issued at station 594, Police Company, Fort Worth, Texas, reading, "Overseas duty must be for Caucasians only." The 505th Air Borne Infantry, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, issued an order reading, "The above levy for overseas duty will be filled with Caucasian personnel only." The Guided Missile Battalion the Army Chemical Center, according to Powell, posted an order reading, "Non-Caucasians allowed in non-commissioned officers club on Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday and only whites on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday." �A message from the Commanding General of the 69th Division, Fort Dix, New Jersey, was cited by Powell. He said it read, "Your attention is invited to the table which indicates the large percentage of Negro personnel now assigned to this organization as compared to other units. It is recommended that necessary action be taken to adjust this percentage." Powell recommended four courses of action. They were: 1. "We should demand that Eisenhower call a conference at the White House of Negro and white leaders of the south and talk like a President should talk to the people." (The day after Powell announced his support of Eisenhower he explained that Eisenhower had given him assurances on civil rights matters privately. Then, later, Powell said he had misquoted the President.) 2. "We should demand that the Department of Justice should establish a civil rights division." (When the Department of Justice bill containing this provision was debated in the House Powell was in Europe.) 3. "A general order should go out to the Army and the Air Force and the Navy that all insubordination should be stopped." (Nothing further has been heard of this.) 4. "We should demand that every single Democrat and Republican stand up and vote for the Powell amendment." (The Powell amendment was adopted July 5, 1956, by a vote of 225 to 192). Still unexplained as of this date is why Powell changed. Bulk Rate U. S. POSTAGE PAID W a sh in g to n , D . C. P e rm it N o . 9270 AFL-CIO C om m ittee on P olitical E ducation 815 16th St. N.W ., W a sh in g to n 6 , D. C. � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Notes from COPE, 1956 Description An account of the resource Newsletter "Notes from COPE, AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education," dated October 26, 1956. Content is exclusively on Congressman Adam Clayton Powell's endorsement of Dwight D. Eisenhower in the 1956 Presidential Election. Includes short history of Powell's statements about Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson, issues with an investigation of the Federal Housing Commission, and Powell's actions against segregation in the military. 4 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource AFL-CIO Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956-10-26 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_1_1_3_36 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/1407b075f4818562d602e013b65fd7b1.pdf 3f4cf4a9135387d1a52f41122ef3e1cf PDF Text Text We . . . strive . . . to win full respect for the dignity of the hu­ man individual whom our unions serve. 99 Preamble to the AFL-CIO constitution AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education A 815-16th St. N.W., Washington 6, D. C. F L. C I O Number 3 October 26, 1956 WHY DID POWELL CHANGE? Last week Representative Adam Clayton Powell (D, N.Y.), one of the three Negro members of the House of Representatives, announced he is supporting President Eisenhower for re-election. Powell's announcement was made in the White House after he had conferred with the President. He added he is setting up an organization to work for the Republican candidate. The announcement created something of a stir. Six prominent elected Negro officials in New York, headed by Manhattan Borough President Hulan Jack issued a statement declaring: "The people of Harlem regret that the White House was able to apply sufficient pressure upon Adam Clayton Powell at the time of the trial of another of his ipersonal staff, now pending in federal court, to persuade him completely to change his convictions." The statement noted that on March 2, 1956, Powell had accused the President of "dodging the civil rights issue, passing the buck, and trying to wash his hands, like Pilate, of the blood of innocent men and women in the southland." Willard Townsend, vice president of the AFL-CIO and president of the United Transport Service Employees, termed Powell's announcement "a shocking betrayal of his race and his party." "If Representative Powell had been more conscientious in his attention to his congressional duties, "Townsend added, "he �would have been aware, as are all working men and women in the country, that the record of the Eisenhower administration in the field of civil rights, as in the field of general welfare, is a cynical compound of a callous disregard for the rights of individuals and a tender solicitude for the privileges and prerogatives of big business." Townsend said he "was reluctant to believe that there is any connection between Representative Powell's change of heart and the investigation of his finances by the Department of Justice." Background The man who created all this furor, Representative Powell, has apparently been having a hard time making up his mind. In December, 1955, according to the New York Post, Powell talked with Adlai Stevenson, the standard bearer of his party, and then held a press conference at which he explained that Stevenson was very sound on civil rights. Two months later, on February 13, he announced in Boston he would vote for Eisenhower over Stevenson but by March 2 he had swung around to his bitter comparison of Eisenhower and Pilate. Just four days before his October 12 announcement on behalf of Eisenhower, Powell told his church congregation that he couldn't campaign for either Stevenson or Eisenhower. "There isn't anything to the Democrats or the Republicans," he said. Chicago Daily News interview with Powell quotes the New York congressman as being sore at Stevenson because Powell wasn't given a chance to appear before the Democratic convention in Chicago and because Stevenson held two rallies in Powell's district without inviting Powell to take part. In 1954 Powell’s name was signed to a Readers' Digest article highly praising President Eisenhower. Over 2,000,000 copies of the article were reprinted1by the Republican National Committee, it was reported at the time. However, the vote for the Democrats in the Negro precincts in 1954 was overwhelming. In September, 1954, during the course of a Senatorial investigation of irregularities in the Federal Housing Administration, Powell's name bobbed up as having received a loan of $3,000 at 1% interest from a builder of a housing project. Powell got the loan in 1952 but paid nothing on it until a few days before— some insist it was after--President Eisenhower announced the investigation in 1954. In April, 1954, Powell gave the builder a check for $30. After the election in 1954 Powell repaid the loan. �Two of Powell's secretaries, Acy Lennon and William Hampton, became rental managers of the builder's project and were paid on a fee basis, netting about $8,800 a year. Early this year three of Powell's aides were indicted on tax charges. Two of them— Lennon and Mrs. Hattie Dodson— have been convicted. The third, Hampton, is currently under indictment. Powell denies any connection between the tax troubles these three and his position in the current campaign. "What happens to any people who work for me, and I have 38, does not concern me at all," he said. What He Said On May 24 , 1956, Rep resentative Powell address ed a big He mass meeting in Mad ison Square Garden in New York City, described President Eisenhower in vastly different terms than he did last week. He started by saying, "Tonight I will present documented evidence to show that the official family and intimate friends of President Eisenhower are deliberately bringing back segregation in the United States of America at a time when we can least afford it." "Here is a man," said Powell, "of good moral instincts completely separated from the people. The forces of reaction, obstruction, segregation, white citizens' councils, have reached out through the tentacles of his own palace guard and stopped Eisenhower's progress toward making this a nation of one people. "We have literally retrogressed as a nation during the past few months and if I went to Bandung again I would not be able to stand up and defend so vigorously my country in the field of civil rights as I did a year ago this past April." Powell went on to charge that "an insubordination has broken out in our armed forces" and that in many areas segregation was being restored on army posts. He cited as evidence an order issued at station 594, Police Company, Fort Worth, Texas, reading, "Overseas duty must be for Caucasians only." The 505th Air Borne Infantry, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, issued an order reading, "The above levy for overseas duty will be filled with Caucasian personnel only." The Guided Missile Battalion the Army Chemical Center, according to Powell, posted an order reading, "Non-Caucasians allowed in non-commissioned officers club on Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday and only whites on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday." �A message from the Commanding General of the 69th Division, Fort Dix, New Jersey, was cited by Powell. He said it read, "Your attention is invited to the table which indicates the laree percentage of Negro personnel now assigned to this organization as compared to other units. It is recommended that necessary action be taken to adjust this percentage." Powell recommended four courses of action. They were: 1. "We should demand that Eisenhower call a conference at the White House of Negro and white leaders of the south and talk like a President should talk to the people." (The day after Powell announced his support of Eisenhower he explained that Eisenhower had given him assurances on civil rights matters privately. Then, later, Powell said he had misquoted the President.) 2. "We should demand that the Department of Justice should establish a civil rights division." (When the Department of Justice bill containing this provision was debated in the House Powell was in Europe.) 3. "A general order should go out to the Army and the Air Force and the Navy that all insubordination should be stopped." (Nothing further has been heard of this.) 4. "We should demand that every single Democrat and Republican stand up and vote for the Powell amendment." (The Powell amendment was adopted July 5, 1956, by a vote of 225 to 192). Still unexplained as of this date is why Powell changed. Bulk Rate U. S. POSTAGE PAID W ashington, D . C. Perm it N o. 9270 AFL-CIO C om m ittee on Political Education 815 16th St. N.W ., W a sh in g to n 6, D. C. � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Notes from COPE, 1956 Description An account of the resource Newsletter "Notes from COPE, AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education," dated October 26, 1956. Content is exclusively on Congressman Adam Clayton Powell's endorsement of Dwight D. Eisenhower in the 1956 Presidential Election. Includes short history of Powell's statements about Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson, issues with an investigation of the Federal Housing Commission, and Powell's actions against segregation in the military. 4 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource AFL-CIO Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956-10-26 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_1_1_3_37 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/bc369b92cf8e9ba98146750e45eff7a1.pdf 3af8467bd4d7312e7cd5d39889292b35 PDF Text Text North Virginia NAACP lauds Court decisions I The Seventh D istrict of NAACP for northern Virginia held its uarterly meeting Saturday a t Mead’s Episcopal Church in Alexandria. Officers land delegates, represented more than 1500 m embers of the As sociation from branches in •Alexandria City, Fairfax, Arl in g to n , Loudoun and Prince William counties. Delegates hailed the recent unanimous Supreme Court d e cisions restoring 1300 colored voters to the Louisiana voting rolls, and denying Arkansas the [ names of the NAACP members 1 in that state. The delegates praised the vot ing record of the race’s rep resentatives in Congress on bills favoring justice to colored citi zens. A COMMUNICATION from lithe national office of the IjNAACP indicated sympathy IIwith and approval of the ‘'sitstudents who demonstrated II against discrim inatory practices in public service institutions | and places of public accommo dation. The Branches voted to sup port projects designed to im prove home and sanitary con, ditions and to work for better and more houses for low income groups. Problems of increasing m em berships, increasing voters, and interest in m eetings brought forth discussion of the use of newsletters, telephone comm it tees, church bulletins, the I press and radio. Each Branch pledged to ob|| serve the May 17 decision ol 1 the Supreme Court outlawing Iscgregation in public schools. B*s a second emancipation proc am ation by church services or Itfay 15 or m ass meetings on f l a y 17. �President's program are seW for inspection, sorting and packaging. This processing is done by 15 student residents of the m en’s dormitory, each of whom volun teer 10 hours every week. The books range from children’s literature to those of science, with fiction comprising the dominant category. >wners ing losses from theft is that you will probably have to show some evidence that the theft took place. Be sure th at there is at least a police record of the theft and a report of any findings the police m ay have come up with. Also, you might keep track of newspaper accounts, insurance reports, and so on. Theft loss es are deductible in the year Federal Job By EDWARD PEEKS Union representatives were | quick to act this week to ques tionable testim ony on the p art I of a government official in the [ dispute over the proposed | tran sfer of Freedm en’s Hospi tal to Howard University. A telegram was sent by Lo- I cal 1 of the American Federa- I tion of State, County and Muni-1 ipal Employees (AFL-CIO)I to the House Subcommittee onT Appropriations, calling a tte n l tion to incorrect statem ents b J official of the D epartm erf of Health. Education and W e i ■ Li v QUEEN — Miss P at Smith, daughter of Dr. and Mrs. Clarence I. Smith, recently was crowned "Junior Prom Queen" a t the Catholic Uni versity Junior Prom DinnerDance held at Arlington Tow ers. Miss Smith, a CU junior, was selected over five other candidates. � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Newspaper clipping, Afro-American, March 1960 Description An account of the resource Newspaper clipping from the Afro-American dated March 19, 1960. Article describes the most recent meeting of the Seventh District, Virginia NAACP. The meeting lauded recent court decisions, supported sit-ins that promoted desegregation of public places, and discussed increasing memberships. Verso is other side of newspaper page. Two pages. pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Afro-American Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-03 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s 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 18_1_1_7_24 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/304df691075d01973af55f8bd4b95407.jpg e9d25f876aef5361e82d1c3978a95828 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/79d11d30595fff52f0dde31f5d9e32e9.pdf 34cf7574f582d4ba1bfe9e9ec1cc2e70 PDF Text Text FAIRFAX COUNTY COUNCIL ON HUMAN RELATIONS P .' O. Box 170, A nnandale, V irg in ia NEW SLETTER NO. 23 5 Ja n u a ry 1961 ****************************************************** HEAD O F VIRGINIA UNION UNIVERSITY TO TALK A T FAIRFAX CHURCH O c c a sio n : G e n e ra l m e m b e rsh ip m eetin g of o u r C ouncil. S p e a k e r: C h a n c e llo r T hom as H. H en d erso n of V irg in ia Union U . , P r e s id e n t of th e V irg in ia C ouncil on Hum an R e la tio n s P la c e : F a ir fa x M eth o d ist C h u rch , T im e: F a irfa x . 8:15 p .m . T h u rsd a y , Ja n u a ry 19, 1961 7:45 f o r coffee and fello w sh ip b e fo re m e e tin g . O u r C ouncil is in d eed h o n o red to h ave D r. T hom as H. H en d erso n , P re s id e n t of V irg in ia Union U n iv ersity and P re s id e n t of th e V irg in ia C ouncil on H um an R e la tio n s , a s o u r n ex t s p e a k e r. D r. H en d erso n w ill b rin g u s a m e s sa g e on h is view of th e s ta te of hum an r e la tio n s in V irg in ia , a s an o ut­ sta n d in g N egro le a d e r in th e s ta te . -To re a c h th e F a irfa x M ethodist. C h u rch , go out R oute 236 on R oute 5 0-29-211 to c e n te r o f tow n of F airfax-r T he C h u rch is th e la r g e c h u rc h on the h ill, w ith lig h ted ste e p le , fu lly v isib le fro m th e i n t e r ­ se c tio n of R oute 123 (Chain B rid g e Road) and R o u tes 5 0 -2 9 -2 1 1 . T h e c h u rc h i s at. th e c o r n e r o f K enm o re D riv e and S tra tfo rd A ve. P -T - A FEDERATION TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS ON I NTERRACIAL SPORTS BAN A t a m e e tin g on Ja n u a ry 24, th e County F e d e ra tio n of P a r e n t- T e a c h e r A sso c ia tio n s is to c o n s id e r a c tio n on th e r e c e n t ban on p a rtic ip a tio n of N egro stu d e n ts in in te r - s c h o la s tic s p o r ts a t in te g ra te d sc h o o ls. V ario u s p ro p o s a ls h av e b een m ade, including one by H ollin H ills P -T A u rg in g re p e a l of th e ban. O th er w e a k e r re s o lu tio n s have a ls o b een p ro p o se d . C ouncil m e m b e rs who a r e a c tiv e in P -T A s m ay w ish to e n c o u ra g e su p p o rt of th e H ollin H ills r e s o ­ lutio n by t h e i r own P -T A s and by th e F e d e ra tio n . L a s t m onth, th e B oard of D ir e c to r s of o u r C ouncil a u th o rized the p r e p a r a tio n of a l e t t e r to the School B o ard p ro te stin g th e ban on N egro stu d e n t p a rtic ip a tio n . In a l e t t e r to the B o a rd , P re s id e n t \ B e rt S eidm an em p h asized th e a p p a re n t r e a d in e s s of th e com m unity to a c c e p t i n t e r - r a c i a l s p o r ts c o m I p e titio n , and th e v alu es to hum an r e la tio n s of su ch co m p etitio n . He u rg e d th a t th e School B o a rd re c o n ' s id e r it s ac tio n , w hich w as taken on a 4 -3 vote th is fa ll. S u p erin te n d en t W. T. W oodson, upon re c e ip t of a copy of th e l e t t e r to th e School B o a rd , re p lie d to the effe c t th a t th e d e c isio n took into acco u n t the b e s t in t e r e s t s of th e stu d e n ts and the sc h o o l s y s te m , and r e f e r r e d to th e im p a c t of in te g ra te d a th le tic s beyond the co n fin es of th e county. | S e v e ra l l e t t e r s to th e e d ito r fro m youth in th e County h av e b een p rin te d r e c e n tly p ro te s tin g the I b an a s c o n tra d ic tin g the d e m o c ra tic b e lie fs taught in the school s y s te m . The Youth C ouncil on Hum an | R e la tio n s h a s p r o te s te d to th e B o ard , and is in itia tin g a p e titio n cam p aig n a g a in s t the b an (se e o th e r a r t i c l e in th is is s u e ). R e fe re n c e s have b een m ade in the p r e s s to a re so lu tio n of th e V irg in ia A ssem b ly at the h e ig h t of th e m a s s iv e r e s is ta n c e e x c ite m e n t of fo u r y e a r s ago. T h is re so lu tio n h a s b een in c o r re c tly r e p o rte d a s a "la w ". P re c e d e n ts e x is t in d icatin g th a t th e ban on i n t e r - r a c i a l s p o r ts p a rtic ip a tio n is u n c o n stitu tio n a l. �HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS URGE R E P E A L O F INTERRACIAL SPORTS BAN R e p eal of F a ir fa x C o u n ty 's b an on N egro p a rtic ip a tio n in in te r s c h o la s tic s p o r ts a t in te g ra te d high sc h o o ls h a s b e e n u rg e d by a g ro u p of high school stu d e n ts in th e County. The stu d e n ts a r e m e m b e rs of th e J u n io r C ouncil on H um an R e la tio n s , r e c e n tly o rg a n iz e d in th e County b y a g ro u p of w h ite and N egro high sc h o o l s tu d e n ts . T he J u n io r C ouncil h a s w r itte n to th e School B o ard to allo w N eg ro es a t in te g ra te d h ig h sc h o o ls to p a rtic ip a te in in te r s c h o la s tic s p o r ts , and h a s in iti­ ated a p e titio n cam p aig n am ong high sc h o o l stu d e n ts thro u g h o u t the C ounty. T he p e titio n now b ein g c ir c u la te d re a d s: "W e, th e u n d e rsig n e d stu d e n ts of F a ir fa x County high sc h o o ls, h e re b y p r o te s t th e School B o ard p o licy ad opted on N o v em ber 15, w hich b a n s in te g ra te d p a rtic ip a tio n in in te r s c h o la s tic s p o r ts . We b eU eve i t i s a v io latio n of c o n s titu tio n a l rig h ts to b a r any stu d e n ts f ro m playing on a sch o o l te a m b e c a u s e of h is c o l o r ." The F ello w sh ip in an accom panying s ta te m e n t r e f e r r e d to th e p a rtic ip a tio n of R ayfield B a rb e r in a fo o tb all g a m e a t G ro v eto n High School, w h e re h e i s a f re s h m a n . "In te g ra tio n in th e s p o r ts p r o g ra m h a s cau sed no d is tu rb a n c e and w e fe e l th a t th e ru lin g te n d s to a g g ra v a te a p re v io u sly u n tro u b le d situ a tio n , " th e F ello w sh ip sta te m e n t a s s e r te d . O v er 25 hig h sc h o o l stu d e n ts a r e m e m b e rs of th e F ello w sh ip , w hich h a s sp o n so re d s e v e ra l i n te r ­ r a c ia l a c tiv itie s . A p r o je c t in N o vem ber w a s fixing up th e run-d o w n hom e of an in d ig en t N egro fam ily in G um S p rin g s. Dw ain L ee o f S p rin g field , a 11th g r a d e r a t L ee High School, i s p r e s id e n t of th e g ro u p . T he p e titio n w as p r e p a r e d by a co m m itte e c h a ire d by D ick B e a rm a n , of T auxem ont, a stu d e n t a t M t. V ernon High School. T he Youth F ello w sh ip i s a d v ised by M r s . R o b e rt Godwin of F ra n c o n ia and th e R ev. H eslip L ee, m in is te r of th e F i r s t B a p tis t C h u rch of S p rin g field . T he R ev. M r. L ee is f a th e r of Dw ain L ee, p r e s i ­ d e n t of th e F ello w sh ip . M r s . Godwin and th e R ev. M r. L ee a r e c o - c h a ir m e n of the Youth A ctiv itie s C o m m ittee of th e C ouncil and m e m b e rs of o u r B o ard . In itia l re s p o n s e to th e p e titio n b e fo re the C h ris tm a s h o lid ay s w as e x c e lle n t, th e Youth C ouncil r e p o r t s . O v er 50 s ig n a tu r e s w e re s e c u re d in one day a t L ee High School, and an ad d itio n al n u m b e r of o v e r 100 w e r e s e c u re d a t J a m e s M adison High School and G ro v eto n H igh School. High School P a p e r S u p p o rts D e se g re g a tio n tio n . In D e c e m b e r, th e high school p a p e r a t F a irfa x High School u rg e d p r e p a r a tio n f o r sc h o o l d e s e g re g a ­ T he p a p e r ap p ro v ed of d e s e g re g a tio n , and u rg e d th a t sc h o o ls do m o re th a n ju s t " r e m a in o p e n ." In a co lu m n in th e p a p e r, School B o ard m e m b e r M e rr it R uhlen of M ason D is tr ic t, sa id "we a r e fo rtu n a te th a t o u r peo p le g e n e ra lly a r e s in c e r e , co n scien tio u s p e r s o n s who w ill com ply w ith th e law r e g a r d le s s of t h e ir p e rs o n a l opinion a s to its w is d o m ." R uhlen a ls o s ta te d in th e g u e s t colum n th a t he p e rso n a lly d is a g re e d w ith th e School B o a rd 's r e c e n t d e c is io n banning N eg ro es fro m in te r - s c h o la s tic co m p etitio n , and hoped the p olicy would b e re c o n s id e re d . NOMINATING COM M ITTEE A PPO IN TED ; SUGGESTIONS FO R BOARD POSTS INVITED P r e s id e n t B e r t S eidm an h a s appointed a n om inating c o m m ittee c o n sistin g of c u r r e n t and f o rm e r B o ard m e m b e rs to n o m in ate B o ard m e m b e rs f o r c o n s id e ra tio n f o r e le c tio n a t the annual m eetin g in M a rch . S ug g estio n s f o r n o m ination to the B oard should be fo rw a rd e d to any m e m b e r of th e c o m m itte e . The C o m m ittee c o n s is ts of th e follow ing: Noel H em m in g d er, H ollin H ills, W ashington a tto rn e y and f o rm e r B o ard m e m b e r, c h a irm a n (So 5-5825) M rs . R ay field (B e a tric e ) B a rb e r , B o ard m e m b e r, Springbank (So 8-7242) M r. Ed L ynch, C ouncil V ic e - P re s id e n t and f o r m e r m e m b e r of th e V irg in ia H ouse of D e le g a te s, B u rk e, (F L 4 -7 0 0 0 o r CR 3-0764) M rs . E dith H u ssey , T auxem ont, B o ard m e m b e r (So 5-6150) M r. Sidney H olland, A nnandale, B o ard m e m b e r, P re s id e n t of th e County F e d e ra tio n of N egro C itiz e n s A s so c ia tio n s (CL 6-1944) - 2- �ANNIVERSARY PARTY FO R HENDERSONS A HUGE SUCCESS! T he re c e p tio n f o r th e H en d erso n s a.i th e A nnandale M ethodist C hurch on D e c e m b e r 8 w a s a tr e m e n ­ dou s s u c c e s s in th e opinion of th e o v e r 150 p e r s o n s who atten d ed . Since th e a f fa ir w as g iv en e x c e lle n t c o v e ra g e in th e lo c a l p r e s s , d e ta ils w ill n e t be r e p e a te d h e re . H ow ever, f o r th e r e c o r d , th e follow ing w e r e am ong th o se sending o r p re s e n tin g c o n g ra tu la tio n s to the H en d erso n s f o r a life tim e of se rv io e to t h e i r com m unity and to th e c a u s e of b e t t e r hum an re la tio n s : D e le g a te John W ebb, who e x p re s s e d h is sy m p ath y f o r V irg in ia ’s N eg ro es and th e ir b u rd en , and looked fo rw a rd to th e tim e "when a ll peo p le in V irg in ia can liv e in eq u ality and m u tu al r e s p e c t, and o u r N egro c itiz e n s w ill be w elco m e e v e ry w h e re in V ir g in ia ," A lso , S en ato r John A. K„ D onovan, M ayor C. M. H aley of F a lls C hurch, Sidney H olland, M rs, S usan O lom , R o b e rt G ow ell, M rs . E dith H u ssey . W. T . W oodson, E dw ard L . E ric s o n , B e rtS e id m a r,, and J a m e s N. N a b rit, am ong m any o th e r s . Ed B e h re m ad e th e m a in p re s e n ta tio n of th e evening, re c a llin g th e long y e a r s c f c o u ra g e , p atien ce p e r s is te n c e , and " s e re n ity of s p i r i t " of the H e n d e rso n s. T he H e n d erso n s spoke of t h e i r e a r ly t r i a l s , o r h a r r a s s m e n ts , and, fin ally g ra d u a l p r o g r e s s to ­ w a rd s u c c e s s in th e ir e ffo rts f o r eq u ality and ju s tic e f o r th e ir fellow m en. A fe a tu re of th e evening w as a m ock m eetin g of th e new ly o rg a n iz e d J u n io r C ouncil on H um an R e la tio n s . T he g ro u p re p o rte d on t h e i r w o rk cam p a t w hich they sp e n t a day helping fix up th e ru n ­ down h o u se of an in d ig en t N egro fam ily in Gum S p rin g s. T he H en d e rso n ’s two so n s , of W ashington, D .C . and T u sk eg ee, A lab am a, w e re p r e s e n t, a s w as D r, H en d e rso n ’s s i s t e r . BOOKS, CHRISTMAS CARDS NEEDED FO R PRIN CE EDWARD CENTERS C ouncil m e m b e rs h av e b een re q u e ste d to sa v e t h e i r C h ris tm a s c a r d s f o r u s e in th e com m unity c e n te r s in P rin c e E dw ard C ounty. K eep y o u r c a r d s and w a it f o r w ord soon a s to d isp o s itio n . A lso , a p la n is u nderw ay to c o lle c t books f o r the P rin c e E dw ard c e n te r s . K eep tr a c k of a ll tex tbooks and li t e r a tu r e s u ita b le f o r e le m e n ta ry o r high school stu d e n ts . M ore w ord, soon, on th is, a ls o . P la n s fo r c o lle c tio n and shipping of th e c a r d s and books w ill be w orked out by o u r L ib ra ry C o m m ittee, h ead ed by M rs . John (T e rry ) B e re s fo rd , 3 A le x a n d ria A v e ., A le x a n d ria , Va. (SO 8-7825) C a ll h e r if you think you can help on th e p ro je c t. ED LYNCH NAMED TO CHURCH POST M r. Edwin Lynch of B u rk e, a V ic e - P re s id e n t of o u r C ouncil and f o r m e r m e m b e r of th e V irg in ia H ouse of D e le g a te s, h a s b een e le c te d c h a irm a n of th e D ivision of H um an R e la tio n s and E conom ic A ffa irs of th e C o m m issio n of C h ristia n S ocial C oncern of the V irginia C o n feren ce of the M ethodist C h u rch . M r, Lynch is a m e m b e r of th e A nnandale M ethodist C hurch and a c h a r te r m e m b e r of o u r C ouncil. H is new p o st in v o lv es c o n c e rn w ith public sc h o o ls and r a c ia l re la tio n s . -3 - �F a irfa x County C ouncil on H um an R e la tio n s P . O. Box 170, A nnandale, V irg in ia N o n -P ro fit O rg an izatio n Uo S. P o sta g e PAID P e r m it No. 19 � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Newsletter of the Fairfax County Council on Human Relations, anuary 19, 1961. Description An account of the resource Newsletter of the Fairfax County Council on Human Relations. Includes PTA Federation to Consider Resolutions on Interracial Sports Ban". Board of Directors of the Council authorized the preparation of a letter to the Fairfax County School Board protesting the ban on Negro student participation. 4 pages. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1961-1-19 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource airfax County Council on Human Relations Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s 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 18_2_1_18_1 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/1f088daac15aeec85e0f347d0469ea2e.pdf 07cb6819ce065db1407469c316b086ef PDF Text Text Alexandria B ra n d i of the National A ssociation Fur The Advancement OF Colored P eople FREEDOM FUND RALLY SUNDAY, JULY 29, 1956 4:00 P.M. Parkin1Gray Hiijh Sellout 1300 Madison Street Alexandria, Virginia ★ THEME CHALLENGE �ALEXANDRIA BARBER LOCAL NO. 996 OF ALEXANDRIA, VA. L E. RANDOLPH, President— 210 N. Payne Street . J. D. REDD, Vice President— 400 W olf Street ELLIS TABSCOTT, Secretary-Treasurer— 824 O r on o co Street BENNIE BYRD, R ecording Secretary— 1114 Q u een Street DAN C. WILLIAMSON, Guard— 1114 Q u een Street JULIUS ATKINSON, Sgt at Arms— 1114 Q u een Street (C olored Local) �STAR CAB Regal Restaurant 728 N. Henry St., Alexandria, Va. ASSOCIATION Finest H om e-Cooked 1212 Q u een St. Foods King 9-4800 ABC 1655 Radio Dispatched C abs from O p en Daily 8 a.m.-12 p.m. A lexandria to A nyplace at Anytime Drugs Air C onditioned for Your Com fort Hair Beauty Aids Phone King 9-0462 C o m m u n ity W il l ia m A. B ra n s on D r u g s, Inc. CONTRACTOR Prescription Specialist Fountain Service Plaster & Cement Worker Cosm etics 1209 1-2 Q ueen Street "Q u ality at Low Prices" Kl. 9-3355 TE. 6-9731 Alexandria, Va. �PROGRAM Processional...... Interdenominational Male Chorus of Alexandria City Mr. G. H. Turner, Director; Mr. L. C. Baltimore, Organist Opening Selection— National Anthem__________ Chorus and Audience Invocation......... Rev. Nathaniel S. Hargraves Pastor, Ebenezer Baptist Church, Alexandria, Va. Solo_______________________________________________ Thomas Major Purpose of Meeting and Introduction of Platform Guests Mr. Robert I. Terrell, Chairman Freedom Fund Committee Selection..........Interdenominational Male Chorus of Alexandria City Remarks............ A. Pending Cases; B. Campaign Objectives Attorney Edwin C. Brown, Member of the Legal Staff and President, Alexandria Branch NAACP Freedom Rally Song— Lift Every Voice and Sing Chorus and Audience �PROGRAM Collection Appeal for Freedom Fund and Members Rev. William H. Brown, Pastor Bulah Baptist Church, Alexandria, Va. Rev. David L. Miles, Pastor Mt. Jezreel Baptist Church. Alexandria, Va. Introduction of Speaker.................. ...........Mr. W. Lester Banks Executive Secretary, Virginia State Conference NAACP Guest Speaker___ _______________________ -Mr. Madison S. Jones Special Housing Assistant NAACP Announcements Selection....... . .Interdenominational Male Chorus of Alexandria City Benediction �BOYD S TRANSPORTATION SERVICE LIMOUSINES FOR HIRE AMBULANCE SERVICE Phone Kl. 9-0632 o r Kl. 9-0089 Alexandria, Va. COURTESY DEPENDABLE R esidence Phone TA. 9-3419 Business Phone King 9-9387 M odern B eauty Shop “ here Customer Satisfaction Com es First” W Ruth H. Brooks, M anager 1218 M adison Street Alexandria, Va. Office Phone: TEmple 4073 CHARLES F. WEST, M.D. Office Hours: 9 to 10 A.M.— 2 to 3 and 6 to 9 P.M. Sunday by Appointment Alexandria, Va. 1006 Camerofi Street Phone Kl. 8-1253 RADIO -TELEVISIO N SERVICE C O T T O N ’ RADIO AND TV CLINIC S SALES A N D SERVICE D A Y A N D N IG H T J. F. C O T T O N , P ro p rie to r 923 Cam eron Street Alexandria, Va. Phone TEmple 6-'3800 DR. FREDERIC H. PERRY DENTAL SURGEON 1010 Cam eron Street Alexandria, Va. Office Hours: 10:30 to 1:30 P.M.— 4 P.M. to 9 P.M. Saturday 10:30 A.M. to 6 P.M., and by Appointment Phone Kl. 8-6287 DANCY DELICATESSEN & CARRY OUT S H O P 1123 Q u een Street Alexandria, Va. King 9-0089 GREENE FUNERAL HOME 814 Franklin Street Alexandria, Va. Com plim ents o f M A C O ’ BEAUTY SHOPPE S Phone King 9-9542 �FRE ED O M FUND CO M M ITTEE Mr. Joseph Williams Mr. Arthur Preston Mr. Rufus Dancy Mr. George Turner Mr. Fred Galloway Mrs. Dorothy Galloway Mrs. Irene E. Terrell Mrs. Lillian Winslow Miss Marion E. Jones, Secretary Mr. Robert I. Terrell, Chairman AUDIENCE ATTENDANCE Mrs. Laura Kahoe Mrs. Dorothy Galloway Mrs. Teresa Cross Mrs. Beatrice Washington Mrs. Valeria Henderson Mrs. Ray Martin �GORDON PRESS, 1014 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E., LI. 1-3929 � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Program for the Alexandria Branch NAACP Freedom Fund Rally, 1956 Description An account of the resource Multi-page program for the Alexandria Branch, NAACP, Freedom Fund Rally, July 29, 1956. Rally was held at Parker Gray High School. Includes names of committee members, program of events, and advertisements from local businesses. 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Alexandria Branch, NAACP Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1956-7-29 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_1_1_3_13 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/129f7513c8e1658e5eff3ba9c47670a1.pdf 553a75e52d461ad8a3f0d19d8c9605df PDF Text Text NEW YEAR BANQUET AND INSTALLATION OF OFFICERS OF ALEXANDRIA BRANCH N. A. A. C. P. Monday January 26th, 1959 At 7 P.M. National Airport Terrace Room Music by the Interdenomination Mixed Chorus, UNDER THE DIRECTION OF Mr. Joseph Marshall Lucas Miss Marion E. Jones, Mistress of Ceremonies Mrs. Mattie Brooks, Chairman of Committee �PROGRAM M E OPENING SONG____________ “Lift Every Voice and Sing” INVOCATION_________________ Rev. Ross Allen Weston Minister of tlie Unitarian Church of Arlington, Virginia Greetings and Introduction of Mistress of Ceremonies Dr. Robert M. Williams, Jr. Past President, Alexandria Branch, N.A.A.C.P. SELECTIO N _____________________________________ TheChorus INTRODUCTION OF GUEST SPEAKER Mr. W. Lester Banks Executive Secretary, Virginia State Conference N.A.A.C.P. SELECTIO N _______ The Chorus GUEST SPEAKER______________ Attorney Oliver W. Hill, Chairman of the Legal Staff of the Va. State Conference N .A .A . C .P . SELECTION_____________________________________ TheChora:, INTRODUCTION OF GUEST SELECTION _____________________________ The Chorus INSTALLATION OF O F F IC E R S ___ Dr. Philip Y. Wyatt President, Virginia State Conference N.A.A.O.P. PRESENTATION TO ALEXANDRIA BRANCH N.A.A.C.F. Mr. Harry Archer, Unit Commander, Civil Air Patrol Arlington, Virginia CLOSING SO NG_______ “We Are Climbing Jacob’s Ladder” BENEDICTION_______________________ Rev. D. L. Miles Pastor, Mf. Jezreel Baptist Church, Alexandria, Virginia �ALEXANDRIA BRANCH N.A.A.C.P. 1959 OFFICERS ELECT FOR INSTALLATION P R E S ID E N T ___________ ------Mr. Robert I. Terrell VICE P R E S ID E N T _____ _____ Mr. Arthur Preston SECRETA RY___________ Miss Dorothy V. Galloway ASSISTANT SECRETARY _____ Mrs. Bertha Preston ________ Mr. Rufus Dancy TREASURER___________ ALEXANDRIA BRANCH N.A.A.C.P. 1959 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ELECT FOR INSTALLATION Rev. F. D. Williams Rev. D. L. Miles Rev. J. G. West Miss Marion E. Jones Mrs. Ethel McCullough Mrs. Mattie Brooks Mr. Willie Mudd Mr. Fred Galloway Mr. Fred Majors Mr. George Turner Rev. J. D. Peters Dr. Frederick II. Perry Mrs. Anna Miller Mr. Nelson Greene Mr. James Boyd Mrs. Edith Turner Mrs. Lucille Penn Rev. William II. Brown Rev. Thomas A. Robinson Rev. N. Howard N. Stanton Dr. Robert M. Williams HOSTESSES Mrs. Marion Miller Mrs. Dorothy V. Galloway Mrs. Anna Miller Mrs. Teresa Cross Mrs. Shirley Johnson �"Lift Every Voice and Sing” Lift every voice and sing, ’Til earth and Heaven ring, Ring with the harmonies of Liberty; Let us rejoicing rise High lias the listening skies, Let it resound, loud as the rolling sea. Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us; Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us; Facing the rising sun of our new day begun, Le us inarch on ’til victory is won. Stony the road we trod, Bitter the chastening rod, Felt in the days when hope unborn had died; Yet with a steady beat, Have not our weary feet, Come to the place for which our fathers sighed? We have come over a way that with tears has been watered, We have come treading our path thro’ the blood of the slaughtered; Out from the gloomy past, ’Til now we stand at last, Where the white gleam of our bright star is cast. God of our weary years, God of our silent tears, Thou who hast brought us thus far on the way; Thou who has by thy might, Led us into the light, Keep us forever in the path we pray. Lest our feet stray from the places, our God, where we met Thee, Lest our hearts, drunk with the wine of the world, we forget Thee; Shadowed beneath thy hand may we forever stand, True to our God, true to our Native Land. "We Are Climbing Jaoob’s Ladder” We are climbing Jacob’s ladder We are climbing Jacob’s ladder We are climbing Jacob’s ladder Soldier of the Cross Every rung goes higher higher Every rung goes higher higher Every rung goes higher higher Soldier of the Cross We are climbing Jacob’s ladder We are climbing Jacob’s ladder We are climbing Jacob’s ladder Soldier of the Cross � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Program "New Year Banquet and Installation of Officers of Alexandria Branch, NAACP," 1959 Description An account of the resource Program for "New Year Banquet and Installation of Officers of Alexandria Branch, NAACP" for January 26, 1959. Gives program of speakers and lists officers and executive committee members of Alexandria Branch, NAACP, for 1959. Includes song lyrics for Lift Every Voice and Sing and We Are Climbing Jacob's Ladder for musical portion of program. 4 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Alexandria Branch, NAACP Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1959-1-26 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. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 18_1_1_6_2 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ec614939538bb88e54ca8a46d91e048b.pdf 7ce8995efecf8f84b190d83acd84398a PDF Text Text A LETTER TO UNREGISTERED NEGRO CITIZENS OF ALEXANDRIA WHO HAVE PAID THEIR VOTING TAX April 28, 1961 Dear Negro Citizen of Alexandria: A few days ago a Negro citizen of Alexandria was mysteriously shot and killed in his homo by an Alexandria policeman. The colored population has been up in arms ever since the incident s These citizens have been demanding JUSTICE, And the other day. D R e MARTIN LUTUER KING., leader of the Iloutgoraery (Alabama) boycott, was asked this question: "What can Negroes do to get JUSTICE?" This is whan 1&B2IN LUSHER KING said: "The most significant step the Negro can take /tawards JUSTICE/ is that short walk to the voting booth*." A few Negroes voters of Alexandria took that "short walk" in the Demo cratic Primary election for City Council on April 4 „ These few 17eg.ro Toters ' of Alexandria help elect three NEW councilman and defeat one who has opposed • more public housing, slum clearance, and urban renewal. These few Negroes voters could have done more than this and can do more if they can get some help from YOU, Hore can be done in Alexandria to get Negroes JUSTICE if YOU go downtown to REGISTER as a voterd m3 have examined the latest City Treasurer1 s tax list and we find that YOU are eligible to REGISTER to vote now, if you have not al ready done so. We found that YOU have already paid your voting tax for years straight (the requirement)., but YOU just have not REGISTERED to vote yet, Five Negroes are running for public office in Alexandria (a first) this year. One Negro is planning to run for School Board appointment. But the five of us are running for seats on the Democratic Committee on July 11. On this same day, the Governor of Virginia, Lt, Governor, and Attorney General are chosen in a state-wide primary election too. General Elections for City Coun cil is on June 13 . But YOU cannot vote for us, ncr the state officers, nor the City Council if YOU have no'c REGISTERED to vote yeti Me have a ohar.ce to put good men down at Richmond cn July 11; we have a chance to defeat Delegate Thomson, the segre gationist, on July 11; We have a chance to elect Senator Armistead Boothe our Ltj Governor on July 11, and we have a chance to get a new Ciuy Council and a Negro on the School Board this year if we can get some help from YOU. YOU can best help by becoming a REGISTERED voter, Ue can get more housing, decent homes, Negro policemen and better city and private jobs for Negroes if we had more Negro voters*. The more Negro votes t.nere are downtown the mere pressure is put on the people in city hall 0 Help us ger. elected and help us get some JUSTICE by REGISTERING to vote. Note, the tax list shows that you have already paid all of your voting taxes. All YOU have to do is REGISTER to become a voter. �- 2 - Remember, too, that nobody stops anyone from REGISTERING and VOTING in Alexandria. YOU can't blamo it on "then! downtown J ' REGISTRATION is not hard " either. YOU just fill out a simple form and you are a REGISTERED voter and a first-class citizen for the first time,,. Saturday., May IJ,’is the last time you can register to be able to.vote in tjse June City Qene'ral ElecTm 6ns~ariiI the elections on the 11th of .July (tlie tiine tp vote for US). , V *' The registration office is located at ROOM 113 of City Hall At the corner of South Royal and Cameron Streets „ >The office i£ op#n Monday to Fri day from 9 to 5? It will bo open f more SATURL^YS^Som '$ to 12. Ho on for those who work in the daytime thlJ p iy/eek and cannot ge*** £o'the office before M 5 P. M. The SATURDAY openings are?pa»T<SATDRDAY, « a y 6 »ad SATURDAY, May 1J, which is the last day. , ! •* * Please REGISTER to vote b y May 15, if you have not done so already. And, remember, if you want to vote in the November general election for state of ficers, your now poll tax has to be paid by May 6 . Help us get this JUSTICE that MARTIN LUTHER KING talks about. We ALL can get it by being REGISTERED voters and voting. Should you need any help, information about registering, or transportation to the REGISTRATION office, call on one of us. RICHARD H. POOLE, Democratic Committee Candidate, Cameron Street Center, 5d Ward 311 North Patrick Street KI 9-1072 MRS. HATTIE BROOKS, Democratic Committee Candidate, Powhatan Traffic Center, 3d Ward 619 North Columbus Street TS 6-3820 REV. WILLIAM H. THOMAS, Democratic Committee Candidate, Cameron Street Center, 3d Ward 9l6 Queen Street KI 9-0997 MRS. HAZEL L O M U Democratic Committee Candidate, Fioklin School District, 1st Ward 1020 North Fairfax Street KI 8-2992 LEONARD S. SECT®, Democratic Committee Candidate, Prince Street School, Iith 'Ward 127 South West Street TE 6-7003 �•1* • •** ^ I!)* -IrJ X CluLickj ]/l^u xc c- � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 "A Letter to Unregistered Negro Citizens of Alexandria Who have Paid Their Voting Tax," 1961 Description An account of the resource "A Letter to Unregistered Negro Citizens of Alexandria Who have Paid Their Voting Tax," dated April 28, 1961, is a call to action for African-Americans to register and then vote for African-American candidates and candidates friendly to civil rights. Mentions a shooting death in Alexandria, probably that of Emmet Chavis. Gives detailed instructions on how to register in Alexandria. Verso of second page has postmark, stamp, and E. B. Henderson address. Three 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Alexandria Branch, NAACP Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1961 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s 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 18_1_1_8_42 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/808319c9ea65ebe9a2acc7fae3add740.pdf 47c350b792a7a58f3f3de53d0b41a465 PDF Text Text ALEXANDRIA BRANCH, NAACP NEWSLETTER V o l . 1, No. 2 ( A u gust 1?, 1 9 61) R o b e r t I. T e rrell, President A. M e l v i n M i l l e r , V i c e P r e s i d e n t Geo. R T u r n e r , Jr,, T r e a s u r e r Miss M a r i o n E . Jones, S e c r e t a r y Miss B l o d g e t t Johnson, A s s t . S e c t y , 3 0 0 N„ P a y e t t e St. I. B r o u n , E d i t o r ,, A L E X A N D R I A BRANCH. N A A C P T A K E S V A C A T I O N - T h e A l e x a n d r i a B r a n c h d oes n o t m o o t t his month; t h i s is'lFacation m o n t h , Re g u l a r m o n t h l y m e e t i n g s w i l l rosutne in S e p t e m b e r tho same as u s u a l . Re p o r t s o n tho N A A C P N a t i o n a l C o n vention, m e e t i n g July uC - Lb. w e r e in o r d e r at the July meeting. B ut due to the l e n g t h of t h a t I n t e r e s t i n g m e e t i n g , it w a s a g r e e d t hat B r a n c h m e m b e r s w o u l d got a s y c o s i s C o n v e n t i o n a c t i o n t h r o u g h tho N E W S L E T T E R for A u g u s t . That s y n c s is f o l l o w s i n t h o n e x t section below. NA T I O N A L C O N V E N T I ON C A L L S F O R 'S T E P P E D U P " F I R -RE T C H I N G A C T I O N ’ ‘ ON THE L O C A L L E VELS - H Our C o n v e n t i o n this y e a r w a s a n A c t i o n C o n v e n ■ tion, E a c h b r a n c h of the A s s o c i a t i o n m u s t t r a n s l a t e the p r o g r a m as o u t l i n e d b y the C o n v e n t i o n i n t o a n a c t i o n p r o g r a m in its a r e a This is a q u ote f r o m Mr, Banks l e t t e r c o n v e y i n g to t h e B r a n c h the d i g e s t of C o n v e n t i o n action; it v e r y ^rell'gives the k o y n o t o of the C o n v e n t i o n a n d wha t w o m u s t do. Tho a c t i o n s of tho C o n v e n t i o n a n d w h a t m u s t be dono b y us a r e g r o u p e d a n d d i s c u s s e d as f o l l o w i n g ; (1) M e t h o d s and T e c h n i q u e s - a n e n d o r s e m e n t w a s g i v e n t o t h o c o n t i n u e d use of ""tested i n s t r u m e n t s of p r o g r e s s a n d reform" in tho forms of the M a s s M o o t i n g as s e m b l y , u se of the p e t i t i o n , a n d p u b l i c d e m o n stra t i o n s s u c h as sit-ins, w a d o - i n s , k n e o l - i n s , squa t - i n s , s t a n d - i n s ; (2) P o l i t i c a l A c t i o n - B r a n c h e s arc call e d u p o n to stop u p t h e i r v o t e r e g i s t r a t i o n drive s and b r i n g a bout as s o o n as p o s s i b l e i n c r e a s e d r e g i s t r a t i o n of a l l a v a i l a b l o c i tizens. N o t i n g that the N A A C P is a n o n p a r t i s a n or g a n i z a t i o n , it c a l l e d for p a s s a g e of the c i v i l r i g h t s b i l l s c a l l e d f o r i n Mr, K e n n e d y ’s a n d the D e m o c r a t i c P a r t y ’s p l a t f o r m . (3) E c o n o m i c P o l l c y -A d e m o n s t r a t i o n of p u r c h a s i n g p o w e r is c a l l e d f or in t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s o f " s e l e c t i v e b u y i n g , " boyco t t i n g , a n d p i c k e t ing to a c h i e v e d e m o c r a t i c h i r i n g polic i e s ; ( | j C o o p e r a t i o n W i t h O ther i. G r o u p s -The N A A C P w e l c o m e s the support, aid, a n d c o u n s e l of o t h e r s w i t h ^the same o b j e c t i v e s in m i n d a n d here t h e r e is n o ''conflict o f interest' a nd d i s a v o w i n g . It o p p o s e s s e p a r a t i s t g r o u p s , s u c h as tho " B l a c k M u s lims" a n d w i l l not c o o p e r a t e w i t h thorn. (5) M e m b e rship - A s p e e d u p is r e q u e s t e d i n tho a c q u i s i t i o n a n d p r o c e s s i n g of m e m b e r s h i p s ; (6 } E d u c a t i o n - O p p o s i t i o n m u s t be e x p r e s s e d to tho u s e of t a x m o n e y f o r s e g r e g a t e d s c h o o l s a n d to g r a d u a l d o s e g r o g a t i o m N e g r o pa r e n t s aro a s k e d to b e g i n n o w c a r r y i n g t heir c h i l d r e n to the " n e a r e s t school," (7) H e a l t h - A c t i o n m u s t b e t a k e n to o n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n h o s i p t a l r o o m a n d w a r d services, a d m i s s i o n of N o g r o p h y s i c i a n s to h o s p i t a l p o s i tions o n the staff, a n d m e d i c a l care c o d e r f e d e r a l p r o g r a m s ; ( 6 j B O O S I K G - C o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n m u s t b o sort f r o m t h o f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t to"'end. r a c i a l s e g r e g a t i o n in s u b s i d i z e d h o u s i n g d e v e l o p m e n t s , a t t e n t i o n m u s t be p a i d to u r b a n r e n e w a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n in t h e d i s p l a c e m e n t a n d r e l o c ating N e g r o e s - a n d the P r e s i d e n t m u s t b o u r g e d to issue a n E x e c u t i v e C rdor tc o n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n h o u s i n g b u i l d b y pr i v a t e i n d u s t r y w i t h fcd3ral guarantoos. (?) P ’ uivabo O r g a n i z a t i o n s - S h o r e m u s t be a n e n d i n g to t he u s o of g o v e r n m e n t f a c i l i t i e s for” s e g r e g a t e d r o c r o a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s o f a n y k i n d in s c a t o , c o u n t y a n d m u n i c i p a l govoramor.Ss a n d a w i t h d r a w a l cf r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h o r g a n i z a t i o n s that h a v e p o l i c i e s of r a c i a l e x c l u s i o n in r e c r e a t i o n ? (10) W h a t B l a n c h e s M ust D o To Put P r o g r a m I n t o E f f e c t D e v e l o p a t i m e t a b l e f o r a c t i o n , sot u p prrcrlisios, a n d ^ " e p ' ^ i o n w f e l n g p o p p i n g a l l tho time.," d o v e l o p a c a l e n d a r , a n d p r e s s u r e for jobs a nd h o u s i n g t h o y e a r round, i n v o l v e p e o p l e i n p i c k e t i n g a n d d e m o n s t r a t i o n s , t h i n k d r a m a t i c a l l y , a v o i d c o m p r o m i s e s , a n d uso c o l o b r i t i o s i n p r o g r a m ming,, �- 2 ALEXANDRIA BRANCH NEWSLETTERTho Branch, w as the r e c i p i e n t of two a w a r d s a t the 5 2 n d N a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n a n d m a d e a l i ttle h i s t o r y . It r e c e i v e d a p laque a n d a c h e c k f o r tho a m o u n t of : ; $ 2 f o r t h o t o p brachos (Class B), w i t h o u t p a i d p e r ''?5 s o n n o l — 250 to 5 0 0 uomborsj w i t h tho most L ifo M e m b e r s h i p s u b s c r i b e r s . U n d e r tho d i r e c t i o n of F a t h e r J o h n C. Davis, C h a i r m a n of the B r a n c h ' s L i f o M e m b e r s h i p C o mmi t t e o , A l e x a n d r i a has 18 L i f o M e m b e r s h i p s u b s c r i b e r s . F a t h e r D a v i s b e c a m e tho late s t p a i d - u p L i f o M e m b e r a n d R a b b i E m m o t t A. F r a n k , S p i r i t u a l L o a d e r of tho C i t y ' s J e w i s h B e t h E l C o n g r e g a t i o n b o c a m o tho latest L i f o M e m b e r s h i p s u b s c r i b e r . This Branch w e l c o m e s R a b b i F r a n k ' s m e m b e r s h i p and knows h i m as a true c i v i l righ t s fighter, l o c a l a n d n a t i o n a l . O u r J u l y m o o t i n g v o t o d to c o n d u c t a Lifo M e m b e r s h i p B a n d q u e t in O c t o b e r w i t h all s u b s c r i b e r s a n d t h o i r r e p r o s o n t a tivos p r o s o n t . A L E X A N D R I A B R A N C H B R I E F S - T wo of tho B r a n c h ' s l o n g t i m o m o m b o r s d i o d s e v e r a l days ago! W i l l i a m B i lly" W i l s o n , A l e x a n d r i a ' s t o p civic l o a d o r d i e d o n A u g u s t 5") H o ' T m 5 “ 5oo'n a niomSor of t h o D e m o c r a t i c C o m m i t t o o a n d a n y o r g a n i z a t i o n h o c o u l d join a n d w o r k f o r — to t h o e n d of b o t t o r i n g o u r p light. W a s tho r e c i p i e n t at o n o t i m o of tho N A A C P ' s C o r t i f i c a t e of A p p r e c i a t i o n f o r tho m a n y o f f i c e s ho h o l d in tho b r a n c h a n d for h i s l o n g yoars of d e v o t i o n , A d d i s o n , 8 «.do" B e c k h a m p a s s e d o n ! A u g u s t 9* A l o a d i n g f r a t e r n a l .citl^onsTELTs— wiro”lJGro m e m b e r s of the N A A C P together*The B r a n c h m o v o d i n t o the h o u s i n g f i e l d tho o t h e r n i g h t w i t h tho a p p e a r a n c e of tho p r e s i d e n t , R o b e r t I. T o r r o l l , b e f o r e the C i t y C o u n c il to p r e s e n t r e s o l u t i o n s o f the b r a n c h i n o p p o s i t i o n to imm e d i a t e c o n s t r u c t i o n of p u b l i c h o u s i n g , one c a l l i n g f o r m o r e m o d o r a t o - i n c o m e p r i v a t e h o m o s , ono a s k i n g f o r p r o p e r r e h o u s i n g in u r b a n r e n e w a l a nd o p p o s i t i o n to c o m m e r c i a l i n t r u s i o n u p o n a n a l r e a d y r e s t r i c t e d c o l o r e d com m u n i t y , T h o July m o o t i n g v o t e d to p u t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n i nto tho " ho u s i n g b u s i n e s s . " D o l e g a t o James M. T h o m s o n has b e e n d e c l a r e d b y a Court the w i n n e r of tho J u l y 13 p r i m a r y e l e c t i o n by o n l y (now g e t this) ono v o t e . This m eans t h a t e v e r y N e g r o i n A l e x a n d r i a m u s t r o g i s t o r to v ote, b y tho Oct. 7 d e a d l i n e , f o r the N o v . 7 e l e c t i o n so t h a t we c a n c a r r y some a c t i o n of our o w n o n N o v . 7. This B r a n c h h as t a k o n tho case o n a p p e a l of the N e g r o D e m o c r a t i c C o m m i t t e e m a n w h o w a s a r r o s t e d the d a y a f t e r h i s e l e c t i o n for " d i s o r d e r l y c o n d uct at K i n g a n d W a s h i n g t o n S t r e e t s . The p e r s o n was L e o n a r d S. B r o w n . R O Y WIL K I N S ANNIVERSARY THIS MONTH - R o y Wilkins, Executive S e c r e t a r y of t he NAACP, o o l o b r a t e s this m o n t h ( A u gust 15) h i s 3 0 t h y o a r w i t h tho w o r l d - r o n o w e d o r g a n i z a t i o n . Says tho s t a t e o f f i c e : " R o y W i l kins is n o t w i t h o u t honor, s a v e a m o n g his b e n e f a c t o r s . " This branch is r o q u o s t o d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the 3 0 - y e a r a n n i v e r s a r y w i t h e m p h a s i s on p r e s e n t i n g h i m (the n a t i o n a l office) w i t h m a n y n e w m e m b e r s h i p s . X M A S S E A L S A L E S COMMENCING- - This B r a n c h has r e q u e s t e d to indicato to the n a t i o n a l o f f i c e tho e xtent of its H o l i d a y S e a l C a m p a i g n p l a n n o d f o r t h i s year. E a c h m e m b e r of this b r a n c h is a s k e d to i n d i cate t o tho l o a d o r s h i p t h e i r d e s i r e to s e l l X m a s s eals a n d the a m o u n t . C O R E IS IN T H E A REA; I N V I T E S B R A N C H P A R T I C I P A T I O N - T h e C o n g r o s s Of R a c i a l E q u a l i t y (CORE) h a s arrived" i n tho N o r t h e r n V i r g i n i a a r e a a n d is c o n d u c t i n g in A l e x a n d r i a i n s t i t u t e s o n tho d e s t r u c t i o n o f r a c i al b a r r i e r s . N A A C P m e m b e r s h a v o b o o n i n v i t e d to p a r t i c i p a t e i n some of its p u b l i c f u n c t i o n s . A n O p e n H ouse w i l l b e h e l d o n S u n d a y , A u gust 20, f r o m 2 to l P, H,, a t the Mt, V o r n o n U n i t a r i a n C h u r c h , 1 275 y Fort Hunt Road, R e f r e s h m e n t s w i l l b o s e r v e d a n d all a rea i n t o r o s t o d p eople a r o in v i t e d . A p a n e l d i s c u s s i o n is s l a t o d at the D e p a r t m e n t a l P r o g r e s s i v e C l u b o n T u e s d a y , A u g u s t 22, at 9 ;0 0 P. M. Participants w i l l b e a r e a N o n v i o l e n t A c t i o n loaders g i v i n g tho goals of t h o m o v e m ent. C O R E w i l l c o n d u c t a p u b l i c w o r k s h o p o n Saturday, A u g u s t 2 6 for those i n t e r e s t e d in d i r e c t a c t i o n m e t h o d s a n d t h o i r a p p l i c a t i o n . I f you w o u l d l i k o to a t t e n d ( p a y i n g o n l y a d o l l a r f o r lunch) c o n t a c t M i s s G o n c v i o v o H u g h o s at tho C h u r c h or Mr, J ulius H o b s o n at L A 9 - 1 2 1 0 , Y O U R N A A C P M E M B E R S H IP IS N E EDED TOD A Y A N D Y O U R S U P P O R T T O M O R R O W Things a r o b o g i n n i n g to m o v e i n t b i 3 city,’ t h e r e is* a n o o d f o r m o r o " hou s i n g , d e c e n t jobs, m o r e v o t e r s , a n d f i r s t - c l a s s c i t i z o n s h i p in g e n eral. T he N A A C P horo h a s b o o n i n s t r u c t e d to s t e p - u p " your" f i g h t . It can do it, but it n e e d s y o u r m e m b e r s h i p today. It n e e d s y o u r s u p p ort a f t e r y o u b e c o m e a m e m b e r . N o w is tho t i me to stop b e i n g a f r a i d to f igh t f o r y o u r r i g h t s . Y o u h a v e g o t tho N A A C P to do it f o r you; it c a n n o t do it f o r y o u w i t h o u t you. Como o n now, join today, • ► 30 �Dra S * B. F a lls fjsndorson Church, Virgin! � 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 18: Personal Papers of Barbara Marx 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 Newsletter, Alexandria Branch, NAACP, August 1961 Description An account of the resource Newsletter for the Alexandria Branch, NAACP, dated August 15, 1961. Reviews actions at the NAACP National Convention, gives personal briefs on branch members, and notifies members that CORE has been established in Northern Virginia and NAACP members have been invited to join the group. Verso of second page has postmark, stamp, E. B. Henderson address typed on it, and "Mrs. Marx" written on the side. Three 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 18, Personal Papers of Barbara Marx Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Alexandria Branch, NAACP Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1961-08-15 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s 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 18_1_1_8_44